Who will be the new Labour leader?

[Halb]

Slaav said:

Do 'we' really believe that these type of Politicians/people would be happy to sit back for 5 years and play the longer game if they thought they could grab the top job?

The more erudite Labour types know I think, that they'll not get in next time, the question of fixing Scotland and England is too tricky. By then the Torys should be reaping the benefits of the economy?

[Miguel Alvarez]

Well that was a bit of anti-climax. I was anticipating it to be much worse.

[Timmy40]

Fantic SuperT said:

Regarding the dropout, I expected far worse: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3084677/Ex...
The proof Umunna is a condescending narcissistic hypocrite is par for the course.

Edited by Fantic SuperT on Sunday 17th May 00:35

Hmmm pretty bad I'd say. Given one of Labours key attacks against the Cons is to repeatedly refer to Cameron as a posh Eton boy, Chukka Chunks could hardly do that given he's a member of that club. I think Milli-gone lost a lot credibility just over his kitchen arrangements.

[iphonedyou]

Timmy40 said:

Hmmm pretty bad I'd say. Given one of Labours key attacks against the Cons is to repeatedly refer to Cameron as a posh Eton boy, Chukka Chunks could hardly do that given he's a member of that club. I think Milli-gone lost a lot credibility just over his kitchen arrangements.

Miliband. Not even 'Milliband', let alone 'Milli-gone'.

[MarshPhantom]

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

[Zod]

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

[Timmy40]

Zod said:

Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

They will be the electoral death of the Labour Party.

[MarshPhantom]

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

And McClusky isn't the only donor to Labour. Lord Ashcroft appears to hold a lot sway within the Tories.

[turbobloke]

MarshPhantom said:

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

And McClusky isn't the only donor to Labour. Lord Ashcroft appears to hold a lot sway within the Tories.

He's been a generous donor for sure (£10m) but is it not in the past tense these days as of Feb 2013?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283926/Lo...

Based on his dissatisfaction the money has gone in but the sway didn't come out.

[MarshPhantom]

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

And McClusky isn't the only donor to Labour. Lord Ashcroft appears to hold a lot sway within the Tories.

He's been a generous donor for sure (£10m) but is it not in the past tense these days as of Feb 2013?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283926/Lo...

Based on his dissatisfaction the money has gone in but the sway didn't come out.

Which kind of proves my point - Tory donor throws toys out of pram as not happy with Tory policy.

[Zod]

Unite is not Labour's only donor, but it is by far the biggest and it sponsored more than half Labour's candidates in target seats.

[turbobloke]

MarshPhantom said:

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

And McClusky isn't the only donor to Labour. Lord Ashcroft appears to hold a lot sway within the Tories.

He's been a generous donor for sure (£10m) but is it not in the past tense these days as of Feb 2013?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283926/Lo...

Based on his dissatisfaction the money has gone in but the sway didn't come out.

Which kind of proves my point - Tory donor throws toys out of pram as not happy with Tory policy.

What else would or should happen?

Should Lord Ashcroft fund the Labour Party because he's not happy with their policies or priorities?

It seems reasonable to me: help to fund a Party if you support its policies and priorities, but if these change and you disagree strongly enough, don't donate.

What the Unions do with money from their members is up to them, they're increasingly irrelevant in the bigger picture just as the Labour Party is.

[MarshPhantom]

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

And McClusky isn't the only donor to Labour. Lord Ashcroft appears to hold a lot sway within the Tories.

He's been a generous donor for sure (£10m) but is it not in the past tense these days as of Feb 2013?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283926/Lo...

Based on his dissatisfaction the money has gone in but the sway didn't come out.

Which kind of proves my point - Tory donor throws toys out of pram as not happy with Tory policy.

What else would or should happen?

Should Lord Ashcroft fund the Labour Party because he's not happy with their policies or priorities?

It seems reasonable to me: help to fund a Party if you support its policies and priorities, but if these change and you disagree strongly enough, don't donate.

What the Unions do with money from their members is up to them, they're increasingly irrelevant in the bigger picture just as the Labour Party is.

I was making the point to Cheese Mechanic that there is no difference between Tory and Labour donors.

[Zod]

MarshPhantom said:

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

And McClusky isn't the only donor to Labour. Lord Ashcroft appears to hold a lot sway within the Tories.

He's been a generous donor for sure (£10m) but is it not in the past tense these days as of Feb 2013?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283926/Lo...

Based on his dissatisfaction the money has gone in but the sway didn't come out.

Which kind of proves my point - Tory donor throws toys out of pram as not happy with Tory policy.

What else would or should happen?

Should Lord Ashcroft fund the Labour Party because he's not happy with their policies or priorities?

It seems reasonable to me: help to fund a Party if you support its policies and priorities, but if these change and you disagree strongly enough, don't donate.

What the Unions do with money from their members is up to them, they're increasingly irrelevant in the bigger picture just as the Labour Party is.

I was making the point to Cheese Mechanic that there is no difference between Tory and Labour donors.

Oh, but there is: the Tories survived just fine without Ashcroft's money; Labour is screwed without Unite's money.

[turbobloke]

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cheese Mechanic said:

Bully boy Mc Clusky threatening to take his ball home if the Labour chaos do not "elect" the "right " leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11...

Blimey,who'd a thunk it? Eh? Unions nothing like they were in the 70's,not extreme at all, eh?

Edited by Cheese Mechanic on Sunday 17th May 14:20

Do you not think Tory donors would do the same if they don't approve of a potential leader?

Tory donors are many and varied. Unite dominates and controls Labour. No donor dominates or controls the Conservatives.

And McClusky isn't the only donor to Labour. Lord Ashcroft appears to hold a lot sway within the Tories.

He's been a generous donor for sure (£10m) but is it not in the past tense these days as of Feb 2013?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2283926/Lo...

Based on his dissatisfaction the money has gone in but the sway didn't come out.

Which kind of proves my point - Tory donor throws toys out of pram as not happy with Tory policy.

What else would or should happen?

Should Lord Ashcroft fund the Labour Party because he's not happy with their policies or priorities?

It seems reasonable to me: help to fund a Party if you support its policies and priorities, but if these change and you disagree strongly enough, don't donate.

What the Unions do with money from their members is up to them, they're increasingly irrelevant in the bigger picture just as the Labour Party is.

I was making the point to Cheese Mechanic that there is no difference between Tory and Labour donors.

Oh, but there is: the Tories survived just fine without Ashcroft's money; Labour is screwed without Unite's money.

Precisely.

But then, the Labour Party is screwed anyway.

[bitchstewie]

MarshPhantom said:

I was making the point to Cheese Mechanic that there is no difference between Tory and Labour donors.

I actually think there is.

I may be about to eat humble pie here but when is the last time you saw a major donor to the Conservative party publicly making demands and giving interviews that they'd "better choose the right leader or else" essentially?

[MarshPhantom]

bhstewie said:

MarshPhantom said:

I was making the point to Cheese Mechanic that there is no difference between Tory and Labour donors.

I actually think there is.

I may be about to eat humble pie here but when is the last time you saw a major donor to the Conservative party publicly making demands and giving interviews that they'd "better choose the right leader or else" essentially?

Probably happens in private.

[johnxjsc1985]

Anyone of character turned up yet?.Thought not this is the product of a stratergy of selecting carbon copies of each other and parachuting them into places where the locals dont want them.
The Labour party more than any other party have moved away from having conviction Politicians to having Career politicians . having a strong opposition is essential to a strong parliament these next 5 years will interesting for Labour. If Andy Burnham is the best they can muster then they are in trouble

[bitchstewie]

MarshPhantom said:

Probably happens in private.

No doubt a lot of stuff happens in private.

The point is that it would happen in private with any party.

McClucky going on prime time TV with a list of demands seems a bit too much like political interference or undue influence or whatever you may want to call it.

[MGJohn]

johnxjsc1985 said:

Anyone of character turned up yet?. Thought not this is the product of a strategy of selecting carbon copies of each other and parachuting them into places where the locals dont want them.
The Labour party more than any other party have moved away from having conviction Politicians to having Career politicians . having a strong opposition is essential to a strong parliament these next 5 years will interesting for Labour. If Andy Burnham is the best they can muster then they are in trouble

Could not have put all that better myself. I bet Ed M. is still breathing big sighs ... of relief.

Now all eyes should focus closely on Dave and how he shapes up to the massive challenges which this Nation faced before the GE and most certainly will have to long after it. No mean task.