Sensible Discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls MK 2

Yehbutnobut Wed 18-Dec-19 07:54:43
Just read Kier Starmer’s leadership pitch and was impressed. He’s calling for a return to a broad-church Party, but warns not to lurch too far to the right as a knee-jerk reaction.

It appears he was not allowed to speak during the election campaign which is a shame as he is a powerful speaker and powerful advocate of socialist values.. He is not a fan of McCluskey so unlikely to get his nomination.

Could we perhaps open up a sensible discussion on the likely candidates from those interested, and no just one-sentence put downs?

Add comment | Report | Private message Ilovecheese Fri 14-Feb-20 14:25:29
I also agree with MaizieD The trans rights people do seem rather bullying.
Do these lobby groups really speak for as many people as they claim? I include groups with names like "The Taxpayers Alliance" "The Countryside Alliance" etc.

I don't think anyone has suggested this thread is for labour members only have they?

Add comment | Report | Private message suziewoozie Fri 14-Feb-20 14:22:14
differ that’s = differentiate

Add comment | Report | Private message suziewoozie Fri 14-Feb-20 14:20:31
Maizie the trans lobby is relatively small in number but huge in influence - for reasons I do not begin to understand. But for some reason, they are listened to and their ideas implemented into policy out of all proportion to their numbers. Stonewall are the ‘go to’ organisation now for a whole range of literature, online resources and training courses for organisations up and down the land. They have imo thrown lesbians under the bus in their over emphasis on trans rights ( by which they mean really self id TW). But gay men and binary people also feel very let down by Stonewall which is why the LGB Alliance was formed.
I have to disagree that the numbers affected are small - the pledge if implemented ( and the proposed changes to GRA ) would negatively affect potentially millions and millions of women and girls. The impact of any policy/ legislative change has to be assessed not just by those who benefit from it positively but those who are negatively impacted. Lemon is quite right to differ that’s between transsexuals and those who self id. Those of us battling the relentless march of self id have some amazing and very brave transexual colleagues fighting with us. So please don’t see this as a minority issue, at its core it’s about redefining the whole concept of what is a woman and of wanting to see women as a gender category not a sexual category. People like RLB and LN don’t want to debate this or consider its impact on natal women’s rights - they’ve gone for the ( and I have to use this word) Stalinist approach of expulsion.

Add comment | Report | Private message Callistemon Fri 14-Feb-20 14:09:36
Of course it is not just an issue for LP members; it is also an issue for those who may switch their allegiance from a Conservative Party which they may feel has gone too far to the right, a Liberal Democrat party which seems to be losing ground and disaffected Labour voters who felt unable to vote for a Corbyn/McDonnell led party.

All those combined would ensure a Labour victory at a GE with the right leader and the right policies.

MaizieD I too was wondering what proportion of the population it affects. Whilst even the smallest minorities should not be ignored, it should not be at the expense of the majority whom these issues may also affect imo.

Add comment | Report | Private message MaizieD Fri 14-Feb-20 13:58:04
The question I ask about the trans/self ID issue is just how much would the aspiring leaders' signing or not signing of the pledge affect their chances?

The number of people in the population to whom this is personally important must surely be very small?

I'm not saying that it should be ignored. In a democracy minorities have a right to be heard and considered but I can't help feeling that it's been blown up out of all proportion by some very determined (and often quite vicious) lobbying. Would the votes of this minority be so very significant to the leadership chances of the candidates?

Add comment | Report | Private message suziewoozie Fri 14-Feb-20 13:43:33
It’s also clear that Grandad whose posts have been pompous, patronising and ill-informed really doesn’t understand the basics of the issue and appears not to want to understand.

How did you do that POGS . I’ll just crappy across my post

Crappy ? Crappy? ?

Ilovecheese Fri 14-Feb-20 13:04:38

There have been a few threads discussing the trans rights issues, suziewoozie, when the idea of self identification was first suggested.

All the political parties were travelling in the same direction, that is, towards self id.

Whether or not each candidate signs this pledge will not be enough to make the pledge part of party policy.
If it becomes party policy in the next manifesto, and you don't agree, then fair enough, don't vote Labour.
But this thread is about electing the next leader of the party, not deciding policy.

I'm not trying to tell anyone what they are allowed to discuss, but I was enjoying this thread and am disapointed that there has now started to be some bickering between posters, instead of the reasoned discussion previously.
-

The first thread most certainly has been discussing the election of the next Labour Leader and that entails discussing what their personal views are. By signing upto the Campaign and promote the ' EXPULSION ' of Labour Members is little short of ' NO PLATFORMING'
or curtailing ' FREEDOM of SPEECH ' for many members who may well have voted for one of the candidates.

Nandy, Raynor, Butler and Long Bailey are in a position to be the next Labour Leader and Deputy Leader so I think it is perfectly reasonable to think it could well become a Labour Policy.

Your second post is incomprehensible, POGS. It would be so helpful if you could learn to format. It really isn't at all difficult.

Do you intend to repost everyone's posts from the first thread. I'll lose the will to live if I have to trawl through a load of unformatted words..

Sorry if this is rude, but it really is difficult to make head or tail of this lot.

@suziewoozie

From your last post on the other thread:

I have to disagree that the numbers affected are small - the pledge if implemented ( and the proposed changes to GRA ) would negatively affect potentially millions and millions of women and girls.

What I meant was that the numbers of trans/self ID people must be relatively small, so why go to such lengths to gain votes which may not be particularly critical when it comes to the ballot?

I absolutely agree with your stance on the rights of natal women.

Maizie yes I sort of realised that afterwards. Crossed wires. But it’s astonishing isn’t it how such a relatively small group of people have been so influential ? It’s as though they’ve cast a spell on otherwise sensible people.

OMG. Isn't this issue a bit 'woke metropolitan elite'? I really can't see many provincial Labour voters getting bothered about it.

(disclaimer again. I'm not trying to dismiss trans concerns as unimportant. Self ID is another matter...)

I think as well that speaking out in favour of natal women’s rights means they would be absolutely rubbished, attacked and vilified on social media.

High POGS and everybody. Apologies POGS for not replying earlier to your post of the 12/02/20 @16:03 but as stated in the now-expired thread in regard to this subject, work, celebration and the "clapped out feeling" that has followed combining those two put you at the back of my "happenings" for a period

However, to take up your thoughts in the above post, I do believe that anyone who is a member of the Labour Movement should be expelled if they should state hatred of those identifying with transgender activity or encourages others in the same by what they state. However, I equally believe that this Labour leadership election must be primary in it's regard to the future organisation of the parliamentary Labour Party and its relationship with the broader Labour movement in the country.

In the above, I feel that creating a unified Parliamentary Party must be paramount, and for me, it is the candidate who demonstrates that he or she can accomplish that to the better of the others will be the person who gets my first choice vote.

Minority groupings must be recognised and treated with respect in any just society. However, for those of us that can recollect back far enough will recall that the Parliamentary Labour party believed throughout the early 1980s that a majority could be built up in the electorate by way of the party encompassing a wide range minority groups.

The above was proven to be impossible and should not be repeated by attempting to direct policy discussion towards such groups within this leadership election campaign. The way forward over the forthcoming three to four years would be for a unified Labour Party to draw closer to the ambitions of the broader Labour movement and build a majority from within the working population of this country. Such matters as worker rights, inequality, employment insecurity, Gig Economy employment and minimum hours employment contracts must be centre stage polices within the new leadership. The forgoing should also include environmental issues which may well impact working families more than any other group in our society.

That way will lay success

Grandad

Thank you for your polite reply, pity it's not catching.

I see today Lisa Nandy has won the backing of the Jewish Labour Movement:-
Lisa Nandy 51%
Sir Keir Starmer 45%
Rebecca Long - Bailey 1.9%
Emiky Thornberry 1.4%

I think Emily Thornberry will struggle to reach the threshold to get through to the next round. Her time may well soon be over.

MaizieD Fri 14-Feb-20 17:03:35

' Your second post is incomprehensible, POGS. It would be so helpful if you could learn to format. It really isn't at all difficult.

Do you intend to repost everyone's posts from the first thread. I'll lose the will to live if I have to trawl through a load of unformatted words..

Sorry if this is rude, but it really is difficult to make head or tail of this lot.
----
Yes you are being rude but that's OK.

Sorry you cannot make head nor tail ' of this lot' but others probably realise that the word ' BUMP ' in this instance is a notification that the thread has been initiated on the back of another, it moved/shifted from another place.

Quite simple really and those engaged possibly more than you were in the other thread I hope accept I was trying to give a continuum to the discussion.

I can’t believe Labour won’t know their new leader until the beginning of April.

What a torturous process. For them.
And us.

Emily Thornberry fails to make it onto the ballot paper.

That's not good for Long -Bailey I wouldn't have thought.

Urmstongran, in regard to your post @21:03 today, it has to be remembered that Labour is not just the Parliamentary Labour Party. Therefore, the whole Labour movement is involved in this ballot which encompasses the entire trade union movement along with many other affiliated organisations.

Many trade union local branches, trade sector branches, district and reginal committees may wish to debate and recommend to their members on candidate selection and many of those bodies only meet once per month for their statutory meetings.

The Unite union branch that I am a member of has held two meetings during the course of this election and is due to meet again just prior to the ballot taking place which for us will be electronically. The branch officers have sent out much correspondence between meetings which have contained news and statements by the candidates and local Labour Party MPs.

In the above I hope you can see Urmstongran with your usual wide-ranging realistic vision of "how the world turns" that the leadership election process cannot be curtailed to any meaningful degree if all involved are to be allowed a chance to have a full say in who they feel should be leader.

I have to say that to this point I have found the whole process fascinating and full of interest, but that may come from actually being an affiliate member.

The most interesting event of this week has been the media reports of a number of Labour MPs resigning from the party if Rebbeca Long-Bailey is elected as leader.

The above I feel may have changed the whole tone and possible outcome of the campaign, but the importance of that does not seem to have been picked up on in this thread.

but others probably realise that the word ' BUMP '

I knew exactly what 'bump' means, POGS. It was your second post I was referring to. The one where you copied and pasted swathes of the previous thread.

Formatting is easy. It differentiates between your thoughts and those of the person or persons you are quoting. To get italics you type one of these ^ at each end of the passage (with no spaces between the ^ and the following or preceding word) and for bold you do the same thing with a * at the start and finish.

Please, please format...

Grandad

'The most interesting event of this week has been the media reports of a number of Labour MPs resigning from the party if Rebbeca Long-Bailey is elected as leader.

The above I feel may have changed the whole tone and possible outcome of the campaign, but the importance of that does not seem to have been picked up on in this thread.'
--

You mentioned this on the other thread and I said I had not heard this but the conversation went nowhere.

Can you expand on this, who for example has said it. I ask out of interest not to challenge the honesty of what you say which I doubt you would think was behind my asking, I would hope not.

Maizie d

Far too interested in debating the Leadership Contest to worry about how I come across if truth be known.

I shall have to just keep on upsetting you with my posts .

To those who participated throughout in the now-expired "sensible discussion on the Labour leadership hopefuls" thread, I would be interested in their views on the media reports that a number of Labour MPs are threatening to resign from the parliamentary party if Rebecca Long-Bailey is elected as leader.

my thoughts on the matter are, if these MPs wished to help Rebbeca Long-Bailey get chosen as leader they could not have stated anything of greater aid.

All members of parliament are elected to their position by democratic vote, and for such persons to state that they will not accept the outcome of such a democratic process outside of their own election beggars belief.

I believe that the above demonstrates the levels that some on the right of the Parliamentary Labour Party are prepared to sink to, and in doing that, they may have very much raised the prospects of Long-Bailey gaining the party leadership if only by way of members now voting for her just to see the back of these MPs.

The Labour movement is now once again a true socialist organisation, and the above MPs do not in any way reflect that and should have gone or been removed three years ago in the same way as Johnson removed the Brexit rebels in his party.

For me, Long-Bailey was no longer to be my first choice in the forthcoming ballot, but the threats from these so-called Labour MPs is now making me think again in polling for her as my first choice.

Blackmail must never be allowed to succeed.

It is not blackmail, the MP’s are being honest

That's OK, POGS, I just won't read your posts if you can't summon up the manners to make them more accessible to everyone.

It’s not a case of blackmailing Grandad it’s a case of throwing the towel in because “I’m wasting my time.” There is no point becoming an MP if you are constantly frustrated and your party have no chance of ever forming a government. To me RLB is every bit as left wing as Corbyn whereas KS is much more credible and likely to appeal to a far wider range of voters.
Your idea that you might support RLB because she is the underdog is just nuts, realistically KS has a much better chance of forming a government.

Grandad1943 Sat 15-Feb-20 08:03:08

'To those who participated throughout in the now-expired "sensible discussion on the Labour leadership hopefuls" thread, I would be interested in their views on the media reports that a number of Labour MPs are threatening to resign from the parliamentary party if Rebecca Long-Bailey is elected as leader.
---

Grandad be fair I have engaged with you over this matter more than once , see my post today 00.05 :-

' You mentioned this on the other thread and I said I had not heard this but the conversation went nowhere.

Can you expand on this, who for example has said it. I ask out of interest not to challenge the honesty of what you say which I doubt you would think was behind my asking, I would hope not.'
--

I am interested to know. ' who ' the MP' s are and also which '' media reports / papers ' have reported this. The information can be informative to be able engage in debate.