Labour Leadership watch

Ana We often don't know what the facts are - and only find out what was really going on thirty or so years later or if and when a whistleblower risks his/her freedom to let people know.

I asked before but didn't get an answer:

Do you think if Corbyn wins (which he could well do; adverse publicity from the rightwing press will help his cause without a doubt) do you think:
He will have trouble forming a Shadow Cabinet?
The present contenders and other Labour MPs will distance themselves from him, either forming a new party or perhaps defect to, say, the Lib Dems as they could be moving further left?
If he loses, do you think he may form a new party which includes disillusioned Labour MPs?
Are his ideals going back to the roots of the Labour movement? Has Britain (and its relationship with the wider world) moved on since then and, if he became PM, would his ideas be damaging to our relationships with other countries?

I think that is the gist of what I asked (i really don't have the time for extensive reading so a couple of views would be interesting)or perhaps you may think just wait and see.

Ps have to go out now, back later to read your views (if any), not throwing questions then ignoring the answers.

No idea what will happen rosesarered , I think Corbyn will remain in the Labour Party, he stayed with it with Blair as leader. He will have no problem forming a shadow cabinet . I would be surprised if Evette and Burnham left the party, Liz has said she will work with which ever candidate win.

Shirley Williams, David Owen and co left and formed a new party, it died .

I don't believe the beliefs of the Labour Party are outdated, there has always been greed and self interest . If the republicans win the next US election I think the close relationship - which means sucking up to - wouldn't work as the Regan/Thatcher close relationship did, or the Blair/Bush, which is a blessing

RQ, I will have a go at your questions
If he wins, and as you say all the adverse publicity from Right wing press and also Labour big guns,will no doubt help towards that,( although it's not a done deal yet) I think he will have problems forming a shadow cabinet( it will have to be done though!)
I don't think that the party will split up, if he wins, or if he loses.
His ideals are going back to the roots of the Labour movement( and then some) and yes, the world ,or our country and quite a few others have moved on since then, and yes if he ever became PM ( highly unlikely) I do think his ideas may well be damaging to our relationship with other countries both in Europ and the US.
Of course, I am not a Socialist, so no doubt there will be other, and differing answers.

X posts at the same time AB

And I mixed up Rosesarered and Rosequartz for which I apologise

Too many roses

I have no idea what will happen if Corbyn wins. It may well create many difficulties, and no doubt some people on the right will stomp off in a huff - as will some left wing people if the vote goes the other way.

Even though it has given those on the right an opportunity to deride the Labour Party, I still think that having a candidate who stands for the party's original values was necessary to counter the austerity argument which to date has had little opposition even from the Labour Party.

Trying to comply with the wishes of another country - the US - was what got us into the Iraq war - a disaster for the Iraqi people and a disaster for British democracy. If another European country believes that Trident is necessary for Europe's protection, then why don't they locate such a weapons system within their own territory and finance it themselves.

No, not too many roses

You can't have too many roses

Well, differing opinions so far, not surprisingly.

However, having JC on the back benches is one thing, having him as leader could cause a schism I would think.
I think the Labour Party did move too far from its roots but parties do have to change and modernise or fade away imo.

Perhaps a totally new approach is needed - distanced from New Labour but modern and fit for the 21st century, not backward looking?
And perhaps JC is too tainted with past associations to be the man for the job?

Did anyone see Channel4 news tonight? The 4 leadership candidates around the table with Krishna G-M, who kept a low profile for a change.
I got the impression that the others seem to have accepted the fact that JC will probably win, and have decided to provide a (fairly) united front. They didn't attack eachother anyway, and JC came out of it as a calm composed person with possible leadership qualities.
We can only hope and pray! We do so much need a united party to oppose those destructive Tories.

In addition - they discussed most of the main topics in the news and though not all in accord, it looked as if given time they could reach a concensus.

I watched it.

I didn't get the impression the 'other 3' gave a united front because they thought Corbyn had already won.

Corbyn stands more or less alone with his views on so many points whilst the other 3 have more or less the same/similar views, which is hardly a surprise . Hence they gave reasons why they don't agree with him.

It was interesting.

Well, it's self-preservation, isn't it? No one's going to go out on a limb at this stage. They're going to have the make the best of it...

Funny how we read/see things differently isn't it. I saw little consensus with Corbyn and the others . Not trying to be argumentative just calling it as I saw it.

As I said it was interesting.

It was good to see the 4 candidates but I wished Jon Snow had been the interviewer rather than Krishna GM.

I didn't think 'the other 3' presented a united front because they see Corbyn as already having won either. There is greater consensus or unity between the 3 candidates but I do feel all 4 present themselves as Labour politicians - thankfully. I won't vote for Jeremy but it's good he's a candidate because his involvement has shaken the thing up in a way that needed to happen. I feel we're all living in that Chinese curse "may you live in interesting times"

So who will you vote for?

Have most people received their ballot papers?
I'm getting e mails from the various contenders so suppose I've been accepted as a bona fide supporter but one said to take steps if you haven't yet got your ballot.
I will vote for Jeremy Corbyn but would vote for anyone who opposes Trident.

I saw the last half and found it very interesting. Liz Kendell, I feel, didn't come off very well and seemed light weight compared to the others. Yvette Cooper is a harridan although is good on the economy, perhaps due to Ed's main interest, I don't know. Andy Burnham always sounds plausible and not too far out to either the left or the right, which may be a good thing. Jeremy Corbyn came across as the candidate with the best leadership qualities. He is good at listening and good at putting across his own point of view in a measured and clear way. He made both women appear naïve at times. I don't agree with his views on immigration or on trident but I agree whole heartedly with his anti-war stance. On the whole, I reckon Andy Burnham should be the new leader but I also think Yvette Cooper could be the surprise winner.

I don't think the 'other three' did put on a united front apart from Liz and Andy, who did at times, as did the two women. I'm not sure any of them did themselves much of a favour apart from Jeremy who maintained his image as cool, calm and collected and so probably gained a bit more support from waverers.

dj - I don't have a vote but would probably vote for Burnham if I did. I'm guessing you would vote for Corbyn?

PS Why do AB, LK and YC keep saying they would 'solve'' a problem by 'having a debate'? Obviously, it's good to talk but, for goodness sake, we want to hear what they think about an issue, not just that they would 'open a debate' or 'start a conversation'. Grr.

You guessed right. If I had a vote.
Apricot, I've heard people say they got their vote by email. Have you checked? Had to remind my son about that as he was abroad for a fortnight.

Good job they weeded out those 1,900 Green Party members who tried to vote - I did think the Greens were supposed to be a Party of integrity, but perhaps all's fair in love and politics for some people...

They all claim 'integrity' I think, Ana.