Sensible discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls

I will give Jess Phillips her due she knows she is taking on the might of those in power of the Labour Party such as the Unions / Momentum from the NEC down and it will possibly be an uncomfortable time for her.

Thank you POGS, I left the Labour Party because of Corbyn’s leadership. Several posters have said they left the Labour Party because of Blairs’s leadership.

I am glad Jess Phillips has thrown her hat in.

Me to Galaxy , she is as POGS said, taking on the NEC,
Unions and Momentum , I admire her.

I dont think she will ever be PM but that is true for whoever wins the labour leadership. I think she may be able to direct them out of the mess they are in.

As did Kinnock

POGS most of your above post @20:46 I find, with every respect, total nonsense. When Jeremy Corbyn became the elected Leader of the Parliamentary Labour Party, those who had not polled for him were left with three choices.

There were those who resigned their membership of the party but in carrying out that demonstrated they did not accept the well demonstrated internal democracy of the organisation. In doing that they most definitely did not deserve the respect of anyone, for they show that they are nothing else but "very poor losers" who only support democracy when it fits there views. In short, like a spoilt child, they throw all their toys out the pram and not wish to play further.

There were those such as kier Starmer and many others who undoubtedly would have wished to see a different leader elected but have remained in the party and upheld its structures and democracy and who now have the opportunity once again to shape the party in the image they wish to see through that same structure and democracy. He and those of similar attitude deserve and command the highest respect. In that, they may not gain the party they wish to see, but the image they wish for will be put to the ballot.

We then have seen for more than four years those who never accepted the Corbyn Democratic election and remained in the party only to have carried out a highly destructive campaign against Corbyn. That has, I believe, now broken the Parliamentary Labour Party to the extent it can never be once again the "broad church" that they say they desire. MPs who covertly record private meetings with the labour leader and then sell that recording for personal gain to an extream right-wing newspaper are the lowest form of political life and of human beings in general, along with all who would support such action.

Lisa Nandy has declared she is standing

Is libel permitted on this forum ?

Just to add some further context to my post @21:46 today, those who do did not accept the democratic election of Jeremy Corbyn and resigned their membership of the Labour Party as a result should remember that party is funded by Britain's trade union movement.

In that, the activists in that movement on a daily basis fight for better and safer working conditions of their fellow workers while also often defending them in disciplinary and grievance hearings often with some of the worst employers in Britain. That very often are battles they do not win. However, those activists will come back time and time again to fight fresh battles which again they may not win.

Therefore does anyone really expect the above persons to have any respect for those in the same movement who "throw in their hand" just on the grounds of losing a battle that was carried out in a democratic and fair manner with the odds stacked the same for all.

In my book, those activists are quite right in not respecting such persons, and that's the way it should remain.

There are murmurs about Starmer’s work before becoming an
MP

And so Grandad you agree that those that left the party during the Blair leadership, but rejoined when Corbyn was elected leader are also deserving of condemnation and no respect at all? A straight yes or no will suffice, but no I won't hold my breath, past experience suggests there will be no reply to this post. You'd make a great politician, always side-skipping the actual question posed!

I don't think people did leave the party when Blair was elected. Every Labour supporter I knew was delighted when Blair won and were very supportive of him at the beginning. However, some felt they could not vote for Labour following the invasion of Iraq. I did continue to support Labour, but thought afterwards , given the enormous cost of Blair's inability to stand up to Bush, that I probably should not have done so.

The point is, many of those people who left because of Corbyn made their dislike of him quite obvious from the start. They were angry that he had been voted in at all and did everything possible to undermine him.

It is one thing deciding to leave a party because a decision was made, based on questionable advice, which had terrible consequences nationally and internationally - as happened with the invasion of Iraq. It is quite another to undermine and agitate because you don't like the person who was democratically elected as leader, and then to truly put the boot in when the mass media campaign against Corbyn was at its height.

I think Jess Phillips is straight talking and down to earth. She can also argue her case well but probably not left enough to get block union votes or Momentum backing. Angela Raynor is apparently going for deputy on a ticket with Long Bailey and used to be involved with unions in her former employment. I really think they will get roles but would prefer Jess.

She also appears strong enough to counter the misogyny within the labour party which has been a concern for many women.

Eloethan what in your view, went wrong and why did Labour do so very badly that they lost this last election?
Not just lost it, but by so many seats.

I think Long Bailey will win, she will have the unions and
Momentum support. They run the party now. Corbyn and
MacDonald will be still be in control.

janipat in response to your post @00:13 today, I am unaware that any number of members resigned their membership of the Labour Party when Tony Blair was elected as leader.

However, more than four hundred thousand joined the Labour Party when Jeremy Corbyn was elected as leader, and therefore those facts state it all.

If there were any members who resigned due to Blairs election, then I would condemn that action as the Labour movement was born out of the desire of working people to bring about change.

In that, if you do not get what you wish to see on the first attempt then you remain to continue the fight for that vision.

In the above, I respect the ERG group in the Tory Party. Many must have been the times when they felt they would never witness Britain leave the European Union. However, that grouping remained staunchly in support of what they wished to see, and in the end shaped the Tory Party and the British electorate to the image they so long had fought for.

I have never agreed with that vision, but I hold huge respect for the way the ERG group have unswervingly pursued their aims.

It doesn't really matter how the Labour Party was born, but where it is now.

Political Parties change over time, the most obvious example being the Republicans and Democrats in the US, which have almost completely swapped allegiance.

Agree growstuff , 120 years ago ? We have moved on ,

growstuff in regard to your post @13:15 today, I have to state that within the Labour movement it very much still matters how and why the movement was born.

Within the Trade union sector of the movement both the Lay activists and full time employed organisers still carry out the role of protecting persons in their places of work in the same manner as they have for well over one hundred years.

All that is expected and asked for is those in the Parliamentary Labour Party join with those who are in the wider movement in truly standing up for the protection and ambitions of working people and not look upon those in the trades unions as they would a lump of dog sh*t on their shoe.

Those in the Parliamentary party who do not wish to join that sole ambition should stop accepting the affiliation subscriptions of those often low paid trade union members to the Parliamentary Labour Party, and in that, go their own way outside of the Lsbour movement.

Any views on those who have put themselves forward for the
leadership?

I've not yet had a proper read of Lisa Nandy's leadership statement yet, so can't give a view about her.

I've already given my view of Jess Phillips, that she has done some good work about domestic violence but again, I will wait to hear her strategic view for the country before deciding who to vote for.

I think Caroline Flint has scuppered Emily Thornberry's chances of winning the leadership, but again, I would like to hear more about her pitch before making a decision.

Same with Clive Lewis.

As far as I am aware, Keir Starmer has not yet put himself forward.
Nor has Rebecca Long Bailey.
Nor has Ian Lavery
David Lammy has ruled himself out.

I also don't think that many people left the labour Party when Tony Blair was elected leader. But at that time, his policies were a lot more to the left than they became after he had been in power for a while, so I would have had no reason to leave.

I left the party when they started to sound like Conservatives, with their attitudes to single parents and those people who claim social security. When they voted for the Conservatives benefit policies ( two child policy etc.) I was very glad that I had left as they did not reflect my views at all.

I rejoined when Jeremy Corbyn became the leader because his policies seemed to be more like the ones I had agreed with when joined the party in the first place.

The wording should more accurately have been "while Tony Blair was leader" not "when he was elected". People did leave because of Blair's leadership, and have rejoined since the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader. Grandad only admires those that stay and fight from within, not those who leave and rejoin.