Concern within the Labour Party that Jeremy Corbyn is doing well

I support Jeremy Corbyn. I've never been that keen on Andy Burnham. He's fine "preaching to the converted" but when he's challenged he ties himself in knots trying to answer the question in such a way that will not alienate anyone. You can't please all the people all the time and I want someone who does not throw all his/her principles out of the window just to fit in with what the right wing press or some focus group or other says.

I'm not quite sure what Liz Kendall is doing in the Labour Party - I think she would make a fine Conservative Party candidate.

Anya have you decide who you will vote for. Currently I would be torn between two of them I must admit.

whitewave I have to agree. I would have liked to see a debate about the future. Maybe it's time for the unions to put up their own candidates not affiliated to the Labour Party if the Labour Party don't want them.

I thought HH was good this morning Jen. They have to decide what they really disagree with and what they don't or it will just be a repeat of the last government. However, the person who comes in as the new leader could turn everything she is saying on its head.

I wonder if splitting itself will happen to each of the parties in time. With the fast media, etc., it is difficult to show a party that all believes in the same thing when the distance between the right wing and the left wing of both the two main parties is so large.

Exactly dj none of this debate has taken place which is the reason I am so unhappy about the choices.

Just checked back Jen and HH did not say "the party will not oppose Osborne's welfare cuts". She did say there would be "no blanket opposition" to the Government welfare proposals. If you think about it would be odd if Labour did have blanket opposition as some of the Government proposals were Labour policies and her comment does not stop opposition to parts of the bill.

If they voted for Corbyn, if would be like turkeys voting for Christmas. because that would "destroy Labour's chances of electability", a view expressed in the link in the OP.

Wouldn't it be better for Labour to decide what it's priorities and policies really are, then proceed based on them, rather than try to fit themselves into whatever they think the British public might want?
In effect, Labour First is telling members that if they agree with Jeremy Corbyn's views and want to vote for him as leader, there is no place for them in the party any more.

Why would there be a need for an English Labour Party?
Scottish Labour is run by UK Labour. I expect Welsh Labour is also. So UK Labour is in charge of the whole shebang.

I think there have always been gaping chasms between Labour grassroots and Labour leaders. If Corbyn is popular with grassroots Labour supporters I don't find it surprising some Party with a capital P pressure group is agin him.

"A Labour spokeswoman said the party would vote against the budget on Tuesday in opposition to the overall cuts to tax credits, but would abstain on the welfare bill and would look for some changes such as dropping the proposed reduction in the employment support allowance to the level of jobseeker’s allowance."

They are going to abstain on the welfare bill, which I agree is not opposing it, but it means it gets through. They may as well vote with it.

The welfare bill is the whole bill. Later on she talks about the number of families who will be losing over a thousand pounds because of the cuts. She is not concerned about them if she is telling the party to abstain on the welfare bill.

One of the biggest issues that the Labour Party identified when in opposition in the late 1990 ' s was how to get over a hostile press, and I am not at all clear what the answer is now. Blair achieved it by courting Murdoch, but I hope this would not be considered as an option.

Sorry I went off piste as it were there

She may still care about them, dj, but have accepted that there's nothing the Opposition can do to help them right now while the Tories have a majority. Abstaining is an acceptance of this fact without actually supporting the bill.

FarNorth, those for whom there is no place in the Labour Party could always join Left Unity.

The Tories only have a majority of twelve. That's why I hoped they would be more careful, bags.
Did Harriet Harman mention the NHS? I never saw any mention of it.
The Tories seem to have got away with making people think it is safe, but only mentioned the £8 billion they are going to put into it, not the £22 billion they want it to save.

Abstaining simply makes them look indecisive, and weak. They could make it quite clear what parts they support but certainly not vote for such a nasty policy. They MUST get the policies and priorities sorted. Madness to not do so before a leadership vote.

Agreed, whitewave.
I think they balloted for potential leaders too soon. Whatever flack he got, Miliband should have stayed in charge until after the summer, so the party was not leaderless when they knew a budget would come.

I am not even aware that any debate is being carried out apart between the potential leaders and that hardly amounts to a functioning policy or future priorities. In any case the Labour Party is not the leader, it is all the membership and they need to feel consulted with regard to policy. The leader must fit with these and ensure they are implemented.

The other issue regarding the new leader is as I mentioned above. Remember what the press did to the last left wing leader? Foot was absolutely slaughtered by the press, and I am afraid that will happen to Corbyn. I like what he says but it is all for nothing once the press have him in their sight.

www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/eliane-glaser/postpolitics-and-future-of-left

The bit about ideology is very interesting.

The next article on opendemocracy is about the right wing and the press.
Very fortunate, whitewave.

FarNorth is right in that the Labour party should decide what it is about, instead of trying to figure out what the great British public wants....... But. If it wants to be elected In Five years, or even ten years, then it has to be electable . it lost the last election so badly because it was out of touch with people, the mass of people are not living on benefits, but are working and aspiring to a better lifestyle generally, and Labour did not appeal to them.
Old fashioned socialism is not going to be making a comeback anytime soon.

Just scanned the article thanks for that - it needs careful reading which is something I must do. Briefly though it seems to recognise the problems that we have identified(and a lot more) and this is just what the left now need to address

I'm a long way from deciding between the remaining four GG as I need to stike a balance between the person and their politics and who might actually be electable after this parliament.

I'm nothing if not a pragmatist.

I think that Jeremy Corbyn is gaining support because he is a politician with beliefs. The labour party is clinging on to the idea that image is still all important, but people are fed up with politicians who say what they think will win them votes. Will JC as leader make them unelectable? I think perhaps not. Look at Nicola Sturgeon and the landslide the SNP won, surely in part because she speaks so honestly and with conviction about the things she feels are important.

I had a telephone conversation with a member of Liz Kendalls team , he called to arrange a date when they could come and speak to our branch members, Liz Kendall wants to take the party to the right to appeal to the South and Middle England else we will be in opposition for decades, perhaps never to return to government .

Seems the choice is Jeremy and stand by our values or one of the others and possibly gain votes at the expense of betraying our socialist values and beliefs . In fifty years of membership I have never been in this position and I am quite in despair , I cannot turn from my socialist beliefs .

There is also the governments change of boundary lines looming, labour will lose more grass root seats than the Tories .

In which case if Labour are to lose whether they try to gain votes or not, they may as well stick to their values and beliefs.

It's a bit like the question of whether or not to have an ethical pension. Go with your beliefs if you are likely to lose money anyway. Let the ethical pension group lose your money rather than the one with false promises.

I'm with you, trisher.

I agree with Trisher too.