Who Will replace Jeremy Corbyn as Labour Leader

[AmitG]

techiedave said:

Short Grain said:

How much influence does Corbyn have in selecting a new leader?

IMMENSE
But as a spokesman for what momentum want. It's them that are in control

Yep. Corbyn has spent all his time at the top of the Labour party in getting complete control of it - hence the changes in the NEC, the leadership rules etc. He has tried very hard to ensure that his successor will be in his mould. He would consider it a failure if the party moved towards the right. Although in some ways he would probably like it, since it would allow him to be a rebel again, which is what he really enjoys doing.

That is one of the big issues with him. He was completely focussed on what was inside the party, not what was outside.

[jakesmith]

Steamer has said today that it is clear that people want more of a say, building consensus, devolve power out of Westminster and have a people powered system of government

Any of those catch phrases sound familiar?

And he’s wrong, Boris is bang on he said it is clear that people want a government to stay out of their way and let them live their lives free of interference. People do not want a say in the running of local services, they just want them to work. What does that look like anyway? A referendum on a new hospital wing? If people are that bothered they can run for council.

[anonymous-user]

And as if by magic grandpa pops up to confirm

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corby...

"he said: "It's an absolute pleasure to be here alongside Becky Long Bailey, our candidate for leader.
"I've known Becky since she came in to parliament and we've worked very well together. She has done the most to develop our trade union policies."

[Evercross]

jakesmith said:

Steamer has said today that it is clear that people want more of a say, building consensus, devolve power out of Westminster and have a people powered system of government.

It is bks! He's trying to win back the Scottish Labour voters who have switched to the SNP, thinking he can do that by offering more devolution. The floating voters who went for the SNP this time did so because they are ant-Tory and/or were conned by Sturgeon's 'Stop Brexit' on a big yellow bus campaign message, plus many more vote SNP knowing that independence for Scotland is absolutely not just around the corner.

Nobody listened to Gordon Brown when he was touting federalism so why does Starmer think people will listen to him saying the same thing (plus I can't help thinking that they just want to set up some more tiers of government to replace the stipends lost as a result of Brexit)?

[zygalski]

After the Tory MP's were expelled from Scotland, Labour were seen as the Unionist party in the early 2000's, and were also subsequently given a good kicking by the Scottish people, in favour of the SNP. That's the real problem for Labour in Scotland and always will be. All the rest is just smoke & mirrors.

[anonymous-user]

Do we know anymore about what happened to SKS's mum in law? All the secrecy about the nature of her accident was most bizarre!

[vaud]

Comstock said:

Do we know anymore about what happened to SKS's mum in law? All the secrecy about the nature of her accident was most bizarre!

Why is it bizarre? She had an accident. It was clearly serious. It has nothing to do with his policies or the leadership election and is private to the family - but I guess he had to say something given he stopped campaigning for four days to support his family - so has just shared the minimum?

[768]

vaud said:

Comstock said:

Do we know anymore about what happened to SKS's mum in law? All the secrecy about the nature of her accident was most bizarre!

Why is it bizarre? She had an accident.

I had similar thoughts to Comstock, it's not like the press are known for their discretion. Accident covers such a wide range, to include things some don't perceive as accidental, that it invites question.

There's a tweet that suggests it was a fall, not sure why they wouldn't just say that, but there you go.

[CoolHands]

Starmer is boring and also looks like a rabbit in the headlights when on telly

Do you reckon chuka umunna wishes he had not left labour so he could have been in this contest? Although I suppose he would have needed a safe seat he could win to become so

[anonymous-user]

768 said:

I had similar thoughts to Comstock, it's not like the press are known for their discretion. Accident covers such a wide range, to include things some don't perceive as accidental, that it invites question.

There's a tweet that suggests it was a fall, not sure why they wouldn't just say that, but there you go.

Well exactly. If they'd just said "she's had a fall" nobody would have said anymore. It does seem odd. Not a massive thing, and it doesn't affect my opinion of Starmer particularly, but it just seems odd

[Dont like rolls]

Such entitlement shown by some.

He has every right to withhold ANY information he wishes. WTF has it got to do with any of us ?

It is his wife's elderly mother ffs, have some fking respect.

[yellowjack]

Out of the candidates available, the only one I could possibly see myself voting for as an MP, let alone leader of the opposition, would be Emily Thornberry. Rightly or wrongly I think she's the least divisive of the candidates among the wider electorate and the one most ready to lead the Labour Party back to something resembling unity. I'm a natural Labour voter on paper, having grown up in a household largely funded by state benefits and living in a council house. But I'm a home owner now, with adult children who i want to see get a decent crack at having a good standard of living. And the current Labour Party politics of envy thing doesn't fill me with joy. I struggled with my conscience over voting at the recent GE, and found, upon looking closely at policies, that pretty much none of the candidates really represented me. So all I was left with was picking the least-worst option.

I just hope that the Labour party end up getting their st squared away pretty swiftly after they elect their new leader so that we can go some way toward having an effective opposition once again. It's not healthy for democracy for one party to hold too great a sway over legislation - we need the checks and balances provided by opposition sponsored amendments to Bills going through the House. They don't always result in the best of compromises, but at least it makes the ruling party consider the other point of view.

[Wombat3]

yellowjack said:

Out of the candidates available, the only one I could possibly see myself voting for as an MP, let alone leader of the opposition, would be Emily Thornberry. Rightly or wrongly I think she's the least divisive of the candidates among the wider electorate and the one most ready to lead the Labour Party back to something resembling unity. I'm a natural Labour voter on paper, having grown up in a household largely funded by state benefits and living in a council house. But I'm a home owner now, with adult children who i want to see get a decent crack at having a good standard of living. And the current Labour Party politics of envy thing doesn't fill me with joy. I struggled with my conscience over voting at the recent GE, and found, upon looking closely at policies, that pretty much none of the candidates really represented me. So all I was left with was picking the least-worst option.

I just hope that the Labour party end up getting their st squared away pretty swiftly after they elect their new leader so that we can go some way toward having an effective opposition once again. It's not healthy for democracy for one party to hold too great a sway over legislation - we need the checks and balances provided by opposition sponsored amendments to Bills going through the House. They don't always result in the best of compromises, but at least it makes the ruling party consider the other point of view.

Lady Nugee is a Champagne Socialist who wouldn't understand one end of constructive enterprise from another. An utterly clueless "Do as I say, not as I do" type.

A revolting and condescending individual of the worst kind with all the understanding, empathy and enthusiasm of a dead slug. Its all about POWER for her - all she ever talks about is winning POWER which, IMO, has little to do with forming good and balanced government. From her recent behaviour in respect of the whole Brexit debate she also is no respecter of democracy either.


AVOID!

Just my opinion YMMV

[yellowjack]

Probably for the best that I don't have a vote to cast if I've misjudged her on such a grand scale then!

[anonymous-user]

Dont like rolls said:

Such entitlement shown by some.

He has every right to withhold ANY information he wishes. WTF has it got to do with any of us ?

It is his wife's elderly mother ffs, have some fking respect.

I don't think anyone was after all the gory details!

It's just that saying "accident" and refusing to elaborate any further is bound to lead to speculation...

[kev1974]

jakesmith said:

Steamer has said today that it is clear that people want more of a say, building consensus, devolve power out of Westminster and have a people powered system of government

What "the people" probably want is a leadership contest that takes three weeks not three months! And then whoever wins getting straight down to business, keeping Boris etc in check.

[Dont like rolls]

Comstock said:

I don't think anyone was after all the gory details!

It's just that saying "accident" and refusing to elaborate any further is bound to lead to speculation...

Only if you are strange and feel the need to know about another persons mother-in-law. I advise you ignore those who are speculating because (see above).

[98elise]

768 said:

vaud said:

Comstock said:

Do we know anymore about what happened to SKS's mum in law? All the secrecy about the nature of her accident was most bizarre!

Why is it bizarre? She had an accident.

I had similar thoughts to Comstock, it's not like the press are known for their discretion. Accident covers such a wide range, to include things some don't perceive as accidental, that it invites question.

There's a tweet that suggests it was a fall, not sure why they wouldn't just say that, but there you go.

I would imagine it's because the nature of the accident was neither suspicious or newsworthy.

[anonymous-user]

Dont like rolls said:

Only if you are strange and feel the need to know about another persons mother-in-law. I advise you ignore those who are speculating because (see above).

Yes sir! Sorry sir. Won't do it again sir

[anonymous-user]

98elise said:

I would imagine it's because the nature of the accident was neither suspicious or newsworthy.

Sure. if he'd just said "my elderly MIL has had a fall, I'm suspending my campaign to support my wife and her mum", no further questions would have been asked.....