Page 100 of 102

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2025 10:53 pm
by Dalem Lake
Youngian wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 7:42 pm Labour has several convincing candidates for the London mayoralty but have the Tories? Can't believe Susan Hall won the candidacy as the best person available for the job. But on hard right culture war gibberish.
Maybe Johnson would be up for another run. Rehabilitate his reputation and image with a dollop of selfless public service?

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2025 8:34 pm
by mattomac
Watchman wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 9:15 pm I should imagine Deform will be eyeing a “serious” challenge in London
I guess with the changes in the system Rayner wants they will struggle. I like Khan mind, not sure if he will run again mind.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2025 9:35 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
London, like the richer Home Counties, still has some non-Farage Tories in it. Reform won't challenge.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2025 10:39 pm
by davidjay
Dalem Lake wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 10:53 pm
Youngian wrote: Tue Jul 15, 2025 7:42 pm Labour has several convincing candidates for the London mayoralty but have the Tories? Can't believe Susan Hall won the candidacy as the best person available for the job. But on hard right culture war gibberish.
Maybe Johnson would be up for another run. Rehabilitate his reputation and image with a dollop of selfless public service?
No chance. He might lose.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2025 10:44 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
I'm sad to see that Antonia Bance, MP for Tipton and Wednesbury, has left Bluesky after a not very good comment about migrant hotels. She's an MP in Powell-Land, and I'm sure that she meets lots of local voters who say much worse stuff, but she did go too far. I'll spare her blushes here but you can look up what she said.

It's a shame because she's one MP who has properly engaged with the government's. program on industry and how it can be made to work in her constituency. I've been pretty shocked that lots of the left, who are very keen on industry in the abstract, have barely acknowledged the efforts being made. Paul Mason made a good point about James Schneider's view of the new party's target voters. It didn't sound like it was going to be pulling up too many trees in Tipton. Somebody needs to take on Reform in these constituencies, and whatever her other flaws, Antonia has sought to do that on "proper" Labour territory of jobs and skills.

In the future, I hope she concentrates on what she's good at.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2025 5:59 pm
by Abernathy
So, there is to be an election to find a successor to Angie Rayner as Labour Deputy Leader.

Speculation so far is that Lou Haigh might want to have a crack, but I think she might fall short of the requirement for nominations from 20% of the PLP.

I wonder whether Jess might be interested or persuaded to run ?

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2025 6:42 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Why would she, seeing how Rayner has been treated?

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2025 6:47 pm
by davidjay
If Jess even stood she'd get slaughtered by the media, Corbyn's mob and the Tories. Besides which, I wouldn't be surprised if she stands down in 2029.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2025 6:48 pm
by Abernathy
Yeah, fair point. I was basing my wonderings on Jess’s previous bid for the leadership in 2015, which she aborted fairly quickly. But then again, she gets industrial quantities of flak as it is, so why not ?

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2025 9:42 pm
by The Weeping Angel
Good Lord.

https://labourlist.org/2025/09/letters- ... mber-2025/
And finally…
It seems very strange that such an intelligent politician as Angela Rayner should make a basic mistake and fail to “meet the highest standards” in relation to her recent house purchase. Obviously knowing herself to be the focus of attention of every right wing newspaper and media outlet in the country, she has to have a cunning plan.

Hopefully it’s the one which involves her leading a mass Labour MPs’ rebellion, probably post-budget, and forming the Green Labour party. This will grow in weeks, joined by the Sultana/Corbyn group and the Greens, filling the ideological vacuum created when Starmer reneged on his 10 Pledges. John McDonnell will be the chancellor in waiting, Corbyn will take a back seat, and the party will challenge the racist bigotry of Farage.
I can dream, can’t I?
Bernie Evans
Liverpool

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2025 10:39 pm
by Abernathy
Sounds like Bernie has been consuming dodgy mushrooms.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2025 10:18 pm
by Abernathy
Richard “Quarter-pounder” Burgon opines that if the May council elections go badly for Labour, then “Starmer will be gone”.

Two things :

First : Define doing badly. Corbyn had piss-poor local election results, and couldn’t be shifted. Why on earth would Starmer be ?

Second : exactly how will Starmer be gone ? What mechanism will operate to bring about his departure? Again, Corbyn massively lost a vote of confidence in his leadership by the PLP, and simply refused to go. He only conceded the inevitable and resigned when he had disastrously lost two general elections in two years. Why on earth would Keir Starmer resign because of a single round of below par local elections? There is no other mechanism to bring about the displacement of a Labour leader, particularly one who is the incumbent Prime Minister with a parliamentary majority of 148.

Like the rest of the Burnham fantasists, Burgon is full of crap.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2025 10:23 pm
by mattomac
To be honest I can’t really think of a replacement.

But I am starting to think there is no way back until that replacement has been implemented. And electing Lucy Powell will only make it worse.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2025 10:30 pm
by Abernathy
FWIW, I still think that Bridget Phillipson will be elected Dep. Leader, despite the recent Survation polling commisioned by Labour List.

Remind yourself that the general election is still 4 years off. Though it will be, to say the least, interesting as probably the first multi party election of modern times.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2025 10:37 pm
by Abernathy
This interactive tool, created by Labour List, is very interesting, and rather useful.

https://labourlist.org/2025/07/labour-t ... ctive-map/

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2025 10:26 am
by Youngian
Abernathy wrote: Mon Sep 15, 2025 10:18 pm Richard “Quarter-pounder” Burgon opines that if the May council elections go badly for Labour, then “Starmer will be gone”.

Two things :

First : Define doing badly. Corbyn had piss-poor local election results, and couldn’t be shifted. Why on earth would Starmer be ?

Second : exactly how will Starmer be gone ? What mechanism will operate to bring about his departure? Again, Corbyn massively lost a vote of confidence in his leadership by the PLP, and simply refused to go. He only conceded the inevitable and resigned when he had disastrously lost two general elections in two years. Why on earth would Keir Starmer resign because of a single round of below par local elections? There is no other mechanism to bring about the displacement of a Labour leader, particularly one who is the incumbent Prime Minister with a parliamentary majority of 148.

Like the rest of the Burnham fantasists, Burgon is full of crap.
If your leadership no longer has the support of the country and the PLP then you'd expect a leader to stand aside to put the party and power before personal vanity. That was what we consistently tried to explain to mutton headed Corbynistas.
Keir's nowhere near that point yet but have no problem with reading him the riot act if it becomes overwhelmingly clear Starmer's a dud.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2025 12:59 pm
by Abernathy
Yes, you would expect a leader in that position to stand down voluntarily. But Keir Starmer is nowhere close to those circumstances, nor is he likely to be, in my view.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2025 4:39 pm
by Youngian
Doubt a sunnier candidate who 'connects with the people' would want to handle this skip fire of a country at the moment. Let's say the economy improves by 2027 and so does Labour's ratings but not enough because Starmer's personally unpopular, then he may wish to hand over the top job in return for distinguished FS.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2025 5:32 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Yeah, I think that's true. If he were being "charismatic", he'd get killed like Jim Callaghan did. And the economy had grown by 4.2% in 1978.

Re: Labour, generally.

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2025 5:57 pm
by Abernathy
Anybody else wondering what, precisely, are the reasons why so many people apparently dislike Keir Starmer ? I mean, he’s a pleasant enough guy. I suspect that a big part of it is quite simply that he is the Prime Minister, and Prime Ministers, generally speaking, are just not well liked.