Who will be the new Labour leader?
Poll: Who will be the new Labour leader?
Total Members Polled: 378
Discussion
turbobloke said:
crankedup said:
The real loss to the electorate was the last coalition Government. It managed to steer down the middle of the political minefield whilst repairing the economy and create jobs.
It's not just the way you tell 'em.
Unions. United within the European Union we stand. Yeah right.
...
MGJohn said:
telling it like it was/is
As you wish; see below.crankedup said:
Continued reductions in benefits whilst maintaining a decent 'safety net' for those genuinely in short term need.
Agreed but the zero hours contracts thing is another cause that the illiberal left have taken up on behalf of others without asking first. The CIPD survey 'Myth and Reality' showed that 60% of zero-hours contract workers agree or strongly agree they are satisfied with their job with 19% disagreeing, compared with the overall workforce survey average of 59% agreeing and 20% disagreeing, so no difference at all in essence but a marginal win for zhw. It gets better (for zhw) though as the same research study found that 65% of zero-hours workers say they are satisfied with their work–life balance compared with 58% of all employees. Why would illiberals and socialists want to attack zhw and make working life less flexible with job satisfaction and work-life balance at risk . . because they know nowt except how to shout. It's not as though other forms of employment are so marvellous or even any better overall, as per the survey of actual zhw viewpoints.
crankedup said:
The real loss to the electorate was the last coalition Government. It managed to steer down the middle of the political minefield whilst repairing the economy and create jobs.
I hope to see the abuse of zero hours contracts curtailed along with further real job creation. Continued reductions in benefits whilst maintaining a decent 'safety net' for those genuinely in short term need.
Is that asking for too much?
Ideals some would prefer not to come about.I hope to see the abuse of zero hours contracts curtailed along with further real job creation. Continued reductions in benefits whilst maintaining a decent 'safety net' for those genuinely in short term need.
Is that asking for too much?
Zero hours. Whatever happened to things like "Casual Labour" ? Zero Hours/Casual Jobs suit some. Labour lost their way in many ways ..
... That was just one of the many. There are better ways. Trick is identifying them. Must try harder as indeed Dave C. and his newly formed team will now have to do. There are signs that he and his party have identified the real enemies .. without as well as those within.Many including Nigel "Must take a break" F and myself will be watching ... closely.
johnxjsc1985 said:
Can't see many names being put forward for this prestigeous positon. Is that because the labour party have simply created "clone" MP's and as such nobody stands out as nobody has been allowed to .
No "stand outs" even if allowed to be. All in current line up far too lightweight.
turbobloke said:
It's a poisoned chalice job in an office in the political wilderness with a line-up of 'who?' applicants that fit the vacancy well.
I think this is why Chuka quit the race. Up until last Friday, he had probably hoped for 5 years of a Labour minority with it inevitably going wrong at some point, or similarly a Tory led one doing the same, giving him the opportunity to step in and lead Labour to election victory.
After last Friday Labour's position looks like a pretty dire one, and it's not clear how they can win the 2020 election. Scotland is gone, UKIP are eating into their vote share in key marginals, and (whisper it) the Tories are actually quite popular, and they are doing popular stuff - welfare reform, sensible spending, EU referendum and so on.
He has probably been thinking 'how do I get out of this' since Friday morning.
An interesting piece from the ukpollingreport website about the mountain that faces Labour at the next election. Much like Hague and the Tories post 1997, the next Labour leader could be taking on a thankless task.
ukpollingreport said:
Looking at how the vote was distributed at the general election the Conservatives should, on a uniform swing, be able to secure a majority on a lead of about 6%. Labour would need a lead of almost thirteen points. On an equal amount of votes – 34.5% a piece – the Conservatives would have almost fifty seats more than Labour, Labour would need to have a lead of about four points over the Conservatives just to get the most seats in a hung Parliament. The way the cards have fallen, the system is now even more skewed against Labour than it was against the Conservatives.
How did this happen? It’s probably a mixture of three factors. One is the decline of the Liberal Democrats and tactical voting – one of the reasons the electoral system had worked against the Tories in recent decades was that Labour and Lib Dem voters had been prepared to vote tactically against the Tories, and the Lib Dems have held lots of seats in areas that would otherwise be Tory. Those factors have vanished. At the same time the new dominance of the SNP in an area that was a Labour heartland has tilted the system against Labour. Labour had a lead over the Conservatives of 9% in Scotland, but Labour and Conservative got the same number of Scottish seats because the SNP took them all.
How did this happen? It’s probably a mixture of three factors. One is the decline of the Liberal Democrats and tactical voting – one of the reasons the electoral system had worked against the Tories in recent decades was that Labour and Lib Dem voters had been prepared to vote tactically against the Tories, and the Lib Dems have held lots of seats in areas that would otherwise be Tory. Those factors have vanished. At the same time the new dominance of the SNP in an area that was a Labour heartland has tilted the system against Labour. Labour had a lead over the Conservatives of 9% in Scotland, but Labour and Conservative got the same number of Scottish seats because the SNP took them all.
ukpollingreport said:
And, of course, these are on current boundaries. Any boundary review is likely to follow the usual pattern of reducing the number in seats in northern cities where there is a relative decline in population and increasing the number of seats in the south where the population is growing… further shifting things in the Conservatives favour.
Link0a said:
turbobloke said:
It's a poisoned chalice job in an office in the political wilderness with a line-up of 'who?' applicants that fit the vacancy well.
I think this is why Chuka quit the race. Up until last Friday, he had probably hoped for 5 years of a Labour minority with it inevitably going wrong at some point, or similarly a Tory led one doing the same, giving him the opportunity to step in and lead Labour to election victory.
After last Friday Labour's position looks like a pretty dire one, and it's not clear how they can win the 2020 election. Scotland is gone, UKIP are eating into their vote share in key marginals, and (whisper it) the Tories are actually quite popular, and they are doing popular stuff - welfare reform, sensible spending, EU referendum and so on.
He has probably been thinking 'how do I get out of this' since Friday morning.
Don't forget to add on boundary changes into your list which could benefit the Tories by 20 seats or so. If the SNP continue their favour tot he Tories of pinching all the Scottish seats, that a huge hurdle to overcome.
turbobloke said:
It's a poisoned chalice job in an office in the political wilderness with a line-up of 'who?' applicants that fit the vacancy well.
Totally agree. If Chuka seriously had eyes on Labour's Top Job, he should have played his cards much closer to his chest and bidden his time. Even so, I cannot see him or anyone in the current line up shaking up the party in such a way that they again appear attractive to the Electorate in say the way Blair and his much more impressive team did back in the 1990s.That Umunna has since withdrawn is the right answer.
Mr_B said:
I don't think he believes his own line of why they can't rebound for 2020, probably think 2015 is there best chance and to sit it out for 5 year and let someone else have the hopeless task.
Don't forget to add on boundary changes into your list which could benefit the Tories by 20 seats or so. If the SNP continue their favour tot he Tories of pinching all the Scottish seats, that a huge hurdle to overcome.
Yes, very good points. It's very interesting that this situation seems to have 'crept up' on Labour. Don't forget to add on boundary changes into your list which could benefit the Tories by 20 seats or so. If the SNP continue their favour tot he Tories of pinching all the Scottish seats, that a huge hurdle to overcome.
The UK polling article above is also very informative, thankyou.
BlackLabel said:
ukpollingreport said:
Looking at how the vote was distributed at the general election the Conservatives should, on a uniform swing, be able to secure a majority on a lead of about 6%. Labour would need a lead of almost thirteen points. On an equal amount of votes – 34.5% a piece – the Conservatives would have almost fifty seats more than Labour, Labour would need to have a lead of about four points over the Conservatives just to get the most seats in a hung Parliament. The way the cards have fallen, the system is now even more skewed against Labour than it was against the Conservatives.
How did this happen? It’s probably a mixture of three factors. One is the decline of the Liberal Democrats and tactical voting – one of the reasons the electoral system had worked against the Tories in recent decades was that Labour and Lib Dem voters had been prepared to vote tactically against the Tories, and the Lib Dems have held lots of seats in areas that would otherwise be Tory. Those factors have vanished. At the same time the new dominance of the SNP in an area that was a Labour heartland has tilted the system against Labour. Labour had a lead over the Conservatives of 9% in Scotland, but Labour and Conservative got the same number of Scottish seats because the SNP took them all.
And, of course, these are on current boundaries. Any boundary review is likely to follow the usual pattern of reducing the number in seats in northern cities where there is a relative decline in population and increasing the number of seats in the south where the population is growing… further shifting things in the Conservatives favour.
LinkHow did this happen? It’s probably a mixture of three factors. One is the decline of the Liberal Democrats and tactical voting – one of the reasons the electoral system had worked against the Tories in recent decades was that Labour and Lib Dem voters had been prepared to vote tactically against the Tories, and the Lib Dems have held lots of seats in areas that would otherwise be Tory. Those factors have vanished. At the same time the new dominance of the SNP in an area that was a Labour heartland has tilted the system against Labour. Labour had a lead over the Conservatives of 9% in Scotland, but Labour and Conservative got the same number of Scottish seats because the SNP took them all.
And, of course, these are on current boundaries. Any boundary review is likely to follow the usual pattern of reducing the number in seats in northern cities where there is a relative decline in population and increasing the number of seats in the south where the population is growing… further shifting things in the Conservatives favour.
BlackLabel said:
Interesting to recall, that the immediate past election was fought on gerrymandered boundaries spectacularly in favour of the Labour Party, they did (labour) after all vote down the reforms via an "amendment". Post boundary reform and initiation of a fair electoral balance between parties , the Labour Party will struggle to get anywhere, and we could have the wonderful prospect of them never getting the reins to demolish our economy again.
We live in hope.
Zod said:
MarshPhantom said:
turbobloke said:
The comrades told everyone PH was "out of touch" in the election exit poll thread, remind us what the election result was.
Even a stopped clock is right two times a day.MarshPhantom said:
Zod said:
MarshPhantom said:
turbobloke said:
The comrades told everyone PH was "out of touch" in the election exit poll thread, remind us what the election result was.
Even a stopped clock is right two times a day.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff