Ah but it’s all about north London isn’t it? Last 3 leaders including Starmer.
To be fair, I don't think they need *many* seats in East Anglia.
They need some on the London fringe (e.g. Thurrock, majority, er, 11,000) and a few like Ipswich (maj 5,479).
However the number of seats where Labour is no longer even competitive is perhaps a greater sign of the lack of a voting constituency that would see them win a majority elsewhere.
Labour also need to win Peterborough and Norwich North and Colchester in East Anglia which are all in the 124 seats they need to gain for a majority (though not Thurrock which is 142nd now).
Yep. Every Democratic candidate who swings right, especially on the sacred totem of Medicare for All, gets punished by progressives, who then rally to Sanders the eternal purist. If his health holds out, he's got a very good chance of being the nominee.
Labour probably need to win some seats in all regions to win a majority. So you could make the same point if they missed ANY region from the schedule.
And he could have equally tweeted to say "To win a majority Labour need to win seats in the the North. So naturally the first two places with leadership hustings are... cue drumroll.... Liverpool and Durham".
Additionally, nobody in history has ever said "I wasn't going to vote Labour... but they had their hustings here in Ipswich several years ago, which is a massive show of confidence in East Anglia". The only point is to offer a reasonable number of hustings which are scattered about in such a way that quite a lot of members can attend.
I suspect labour might be back in the game quicker than many think.
Looking at the news on huawei, on veterans, on Europe, and the US trade deal, Boris might be in trouble with restive backbenchers sooner rather than later...
Labour probably need to win some seats in all regions to win a majority. So you could make the same point if they missed ANY region from the schedule.
And he could have equally tweeted to say "To win a majority Labour need to win seats in the the North. So naturally the first two places with leadership hustings are... cue drumroll.... Liverpool and Durham".
Additionally, nobody in history has ever said "I wasn't going to vote Labour... but they had their hustings here in Ipswich several years ago, which is a massive show of confidence in East Anglia". The only point is to offer a reasonable number of hustings which are scattered about in such a way that quite a lot of members can attend.
Dale does seem to be unable to make anything resembling a cogent point these days.
As opposed to Johnson who will have the guts and brass neck to say anything, beautiful or otherwise, even if it is contrary to what he thinks, just so long as it furthers his own personal ambitions.
I suspect labour might be back in the game quicker than many think.
Looking at the news on huawei, on veterans, on Europe, and the US trade deal, Boris might be in trouble with restive backbenchers sooner rather than later...
Agreed. Most of Johnson's apparent popularity at the recent GE was based on the extreme unpopularity and stupidity of his main opponent.
21st century socialism is an excellent slogan. It sums up pithily and perfectly what the Labour offering under Starmer or Nandy ought to be. "AI" revolution, green new deal, new forms of ownership and truly devolved democratic control. No room in this for old fossils in upstairs rooms of pubs with their misty-eyed nostalgia for Castro and the Austin Allegro.
Pidcock was a highly divisive and factional MP. As leader she could only have made the split in the party even worse than it was under Corbyn. And in an age of fluid political allegiances, her much quoted remark that she could never be friends with a Tory summed marked her out as an extremist to her electorate. The swing of over 10% against her was even worse when you consider that she should have had an incumbency advantage as a newly elected MP in 2017.
Too much is made of this IMO. It reminds me a little of the fuss about Andy Murray's "support anybody against England" remark.
No, there's a difference between "I don't want your football team to win" and I would never be friends with you". Andy Murray didn't say he could never be friends with anyine English, did he?
I suspect labour might be back in the game quicker than many think.
Looking at the news on huawei, on veterans, on Europe, and the US trade deal, Boris might be in trouble with restive backbenchers sooner rather than later...
If I remember correctly, the number of Conservative MPs in October 2019 hit a low of 291, a majority of -68. Two months later, that number became 365, a majority of 80.
Any 'restive' backbenchers need to sit down, and, in the nicest possible way, shut the **** up.
Yep. Every Democratic candidate who swings right, especially on the sacred totem of Medicare for All, gets punished by progressives, who then rally to Sanders the eternal purist. If his health holds out, he's got a very good chance of being the nominee.
As an outsider I've never been convinced that Warren was genuinely left-wing. Whether a genuinely left-wing candidate can win vs Trump is an interesting question, though.
Pidcock was a highly divisive and factional MP. As leader she could only have made the split in the party even worse than it was under Corbyn. And in an age of fluid political allegiances, her much quoted remark that she could never be friends with a Tory summed marked her out as an extremist to her electorate. The swing of over 10% against her was even worse when you consider that she should have had an incumbency advantage as a newly elected MP in 2017.
Too much is made of this IMO. It reminds me a little of the fuss about Andy Murray's "support anybody against England" remark.
You may be right, but Andy Murray isn't a valid comparison. He was having a bit of fun with Tim Henman, as any one of us does with fans of rival teams. Any criticism of him whatsoever for that was absurd.
I suspect labour might be back in the game quicker than many think.
Looking at the news on huawei, on veterans, on Europe, and the US trade deal, Boris might be in trouble with restive backbenchers sooner rather than later...
It remains to be seen.
Anyone but Long-Bailey would be a good start although that is a big ask.The rest is down to Boris. I thought his Stormont speech was somewhat rambling, however voters seem to like that sort of thing.
Apart from the the YouGov poll of Labour members, the only other polling we have that gives an indication of the outcome of the Labour leadership contest is I believe that of late December published by BMG.
They asked the public who they would most like to replace Corbyn, from a list of 12 candidates. The answers from 2019 Labour voters only are as follows:
Starmer 59 Phillips 41 Nandy 18 RLB 12 Other named non-Corbynites 77 (Thornberry, Ashworth, Cooper, Lammy) Other named Corbynites 38 (Rayner, Gardiner, Burgon, Lewis) Other or NOTA 25 Dont Know 113
That's a ratio of more than 3 to 1 for non-Corbynites over Corbynites so it tends to reinforce the result of the YouGov Labour members poll. The difference is too stark to conclude anything but that the far left was trailing badly, even after allowing for members to be more in the Corbyn camp than Labour voters generally. I can't see that anything has happened over the past 3 weeks to change that.
21st century socialism is an excellent slogan. It sums up pithily and perfectly what the Labour offering under Starmer or Nandy ought to be. "AI" revolution, green new deal, new forms of ownership and truly devolved democratic control. No room in this for old fossils in upstairs rooms of pubs with their misty-eyed nostalgia for Castro and the Austin Allegro.
Not sure on that one. 21st century socialism sounds as oxymoronic as compassionate fascism.
Socialism is a highly outdated and discredited creed. It is a word that Labour politicians would best remember was greatly favoured by the team that brought them the worst ever defeat against a highly flawed and divided Tory Party. They should quietly drop it again.
Bedford and Canterbury show that Labour don't need to be afraid of the east and the south east. There are plenty of commuter towns filling up with professional emigrés from London. They may well be a lot easier to take or retake than northern towns.
Pidcock was a highly divisive and factional MP. As leader she could only have made the split in the party even worse than it was under Corbyn. And in an age of fluid political allegiances, her much quoted remark that she could never be friends with a Tory summed marked her out as an extremist to her electorate. The swing of over 10% against her was even worse when you consider that she should have had an incumbency advantage as a newly elected MP in 2017.
Too much is made of this IMO. It reminds me a little of the fuss about Andy Murray's "support anybody against England" remark.
Pidcock was a highly divisive and factional MP. As leader she could only have made the split in the party even worse than it was under Corbyn. And in an age of fluid political allegiances, her much quoted remark that she could never be friends with a Tory summed marked her out as an extremist to her electorate. The swing of over 10% against her was even worse when you consider that she should have had an incumbency advantage as a newly elected MP in 2017.
Too much is made of this IMO. It reminds me a little of the fuss about Andy Murray's "support anybody against England" remark.
Indeed. There is much that marks Pidcock as an extremist, chiefly the fact that every policy position of hers is compatible with her being a raging Trot.
The comment about being friends with a Tory was small beer.
You may be right, but Andy Murray isn't a valid comparison. He was having a bit of fun with Tim Henman, as any one of us does with fans of rival teams. Any criticism of him whatsoever for that was absurd.
No, you're right. I didn't mean that it's objectively an equivalent remark. Just that the Pidcock thing reminds me a little of it in the sense of people (and I sense many of them the same people) really rather going to town with it and failing to show any signs of letting it drop after a decent period.
Bedford and Canterbury show that Labour don't need to be afraid of the east and the south east. There are plenty of commuter towns filling up with professional emigrés from London. They may well be a lot easier to take or retake than northern towns.
You may be right, but Andy Murray isn't a valid comparison. He was having a bit of fun with Tim Henman, as any one of us does with fans of rival teams. Any criticism of him whatsoever for that was absurd.
No, you're right. I didn't mean that it's objectively an equivalent remark. Just that the Pidcock thing reminds me a little of it in the sense of people (and I sense many of them the same people) really rather going to town with it and failing to show any signs of letting it drop after a decent period.
You mean the way one side of politics continues to blame everything on Thatcher and digs up old Boris articles from decades ago? The left never lets _anything_ drop, so why should we?
No, there's a difference between "I don't want your football team to win" and I would never be friends with you". Andy Murray didn't say he could never be friends with anyine English, did he?
There is a difference, yes. But there is also a similarity (to me at least) in the OTTness and prolonged lifespan of the reaction.
Apart from the the YouGov poll of Labour members, the only other polling we have that gives an indication of the outcome of the Labour leadership contest is I believe that of late December published by BMG.
They asked the public who they would most like to replace Corbyn, from a list of 12 candidates. The answers from 2019 Labour voters only are as follows:
Starmer 59 Phillips 41 Nandy 18 RLB 12 Other named non-Corbynites 77 (Thornberry, Ashworth, Cooper, Lammy) Other named Corbynites 38 (Rayner, Gardiner, Burgon, Lewis) Other or NOTA 25 Dont Know 113
That's a ratio of more than 3 to 1 for non-Corbynites over Corbynites so it tends to reinforce the result of the YouGov Labour members poll. The difference is too stark to conclude anything but that the far left was trailing badly, even after allowing for members to be more in the Corbyn camp than Labour voters generally. I can't see that anything has happened over the past 3 weeks to change that.
Deltapoll did a poll on the recognition of the candidates. Only 1 in 5 Labour voters recognised Starmer, lower even than the average of the public.
Do not expect even many of those who have a vote in this election to be that familiar with any of the candidates. Remember at this stage in 2015 Corbyn was preferenced by only a handful of people in polls of leadership contenders.
It is unsurprising the narrative has swung behind Starmer, but when the voters get around to make their decision and look at the candidates don't be surprised if they're not interested in the anointed favourite.
No, there's a difference between "I don't want your football team to win" and I would never be friends with you". Andy Murray didn't say he could never be friends with anyine English, did he?
There is a difference, yes. But there is also a similarity (to me at least) in the OTTness and prolonged lifespan of the reaction.
I apologise for contributing to the longevity of the reaction. Unfortunately it was new to me, and I didn't know how much people had been going on about it.
You may be right, but Andy Murray isn't a valid comparison. He was having a bit of fun with Tim Henman, as any one of us does with fans of rival teams. Any criticism of him whatsoever for that was absurd.
No, you're right. I didn't mean that it's objectively an equivalent remark. Just that the Pidcock thing reminds me a little of it in the sense of people (and I sense many of them the same people) really rather going to town with it and failing to show any signs of letting it drop after a decent period.
Momentum has acted as a divisive faction within the Labour Party and Pidcock has been one of their most prominent cheerleaders in that. The comment just sums her up her divisiveness generally, whether it be towards members of her own party or members of the general public that MPs should really have been trying to court rather than going out of their way to offend.
As for letting it drop, I am quite happy to if you stop singing her praises.
Clive Lewis has pulled out. The fact that he has done so means that his nominees (including him) now have 30 mins to nominate another candidate. I don't think that will help Thornberry.
You may be right, but Andy Murray isn't a valid comparison. He was having a bit of fun with Tim Henman, as any one of us does with fans of rival teams. Any criticism of him whatsoever for that was absurd.
No, you're right. I didn't mean that it's objectively an equivalent remark. Just that the Pidcock thing reminds me a little of it in the sense of people (and I sense many of them the same people) really rather going to town with it and failing to show any signs of letting it drop after a decent period.
Momentum has acted as a divisive faction within the Labour Party and Pidcock has been one of their most prominent cheerleaders in that. The comment just sums her up her divisiveness generally, whether it be towards members of her own party or members of the general public that MPs should really have been trying to court rather than going out of their way to offend.
As for letting it drop, I am quite happy to if you stop singing her praises.
Divisive? Isn't the whole Jeremy idea to bring people together?
Not sure on that one. 21st century socialism sounds as oxymoronic as compassionate fascism.
Socialism is a highly outdated and discredited creed. It is a word that Labour politicians would best remember was greatly favoured by the team that brought them the worst ever defeat against a highly flawed and divided Tory Party. They should quietly drop it again.
The single biggest determinant of life outcome is birth circumstances. This has always been true and will forever be true. Of all the roles of government the most important is to enact policy which mitigates against this. Makes it less true than it otherwise would be - even though still true. Such policy to reflect the times we live in not times gone by. This is "socialism" and as such it will never be outdated.
Not sure on that one. 21st century socialism sounds as oxymoronic as compassionate fascism.
Socialism is a highly outdated and discredited creed. It is a word that Labour politicians would best remember was greatly favoured by the team that brought them the worst ever defeat against a highly flawed and divided Tory Party. They should quietly drop it again.
The single biggest determinant of life outcome is birth circumstances. This has always been true and will forever be true. Of all the roles of government the most important is to enact policy which mitigates against this. Makes it less true than it otherwise would be - even though still true. Such policy to reflect the times we live in not times gone by. This is "socialism" and as such it will never be outdated.
Removal of a child from their parents and into the loving arms of a state nursery then school seems the logical way to ensure absolute fairness. Not sure that would lead to the most well-adjusted generation, however.
Clive Lewis has pulled out. The fact that he has done so means that his nominees (including him) now have 30 mins to nominate another candidate. I don't think that will help Thornberry.
Although she's now up to 21 with 15 minutes left to get 1 more.
I hope she doesn't, the more vying for CLP nominations, the less we are likely to get on the ballot paper. It might be just a choice between Starmer and RLB.
Not sure on that one. 21st century socialism sounds as oxymoronic as compassionate fascism.
Socialism is a highly outdated and discredited creed. It is a word that Labour politicians would best remember was greatly favoured by the team that brought them the worst ever defeat against a highly flawed and divided Tory Party. They should quietly drop it again.
The single biggest determinant of life outcome is birth circumstances. This has always been true and will forever be true. Of all the roles of government the most important is to enact policy which mitigates against this. Makes it less true than it otherwise would be - even though still true. Such policy to reflect the times we live in not times gone by. This is "socialism" and as such it will never be outdated.
Removal of a child from their parents and into the loving arms of a state nursery then school seems the logical way to ensure absolute fairness. Not sure that would lead to the most well-adjusted generation, however.
Many parents know that they can do better for their children which is why the loss of Surestart is such a big problem. Now by the time the children reach school some problems are set in.
Although having female leaders is not a panacea, sure there is Thatcher but there is also May. Internationally the sample is large enough to say there is no electoral benefit to having a female party leader.
Thornberry still on 21 with 2 minutes to go. If I was running the Labour site I'd not update it until 2:40pm even if more people nominated just for the drama, but that may not be their view.
NEW: Rebecca Long-Bailey, Lisa Nandy, Jess Phillips, Keir Starmer, Emily Thornberry are through the first stage. Rosena Allin Khan, Richard Burgon, Dawn Butler, Ian Murray, Angela Rayner have made it through for deputy. From Wednesday, they'll be seeking CLP/affiliate noms.
Interesting how Jess Phillips raced to the line and stopped dead, whereas RLB has had a constant if slow dribble of noms, ending up with a much higher number. Perhaps to do with the is-he-isn't-he shenanigans around Lavery. The 'true socialists' were keeping their powder dry.
Bad news for Nandy and Phillips. The chances of either of them getting on the ballot paper after securing enough CLP nominations must now be appreciably less.
Interesting how Jess Phillips raced to the line and stopped dead, whereas RLB has had a constant if slow dribble of noms, ending up with a much higher number. Perhaps to do with the is-he-isn't-he shenanigans around Lavery. The 'true socialists' were keeping their powder dry.
RLB has added most of her "extra" in the last 24 hours.
Which suggests to me they were keeping an eye on the field.
Bad news for Nandy and Phillips. The chances of either of them getting on the ballot paper after securing enough CLP nominations must now be appreciably less.
Looking like Starmer and Long-Face. Becky coming up on the rails to guarantee another ten years of Boris?
Bad news for Nandy and Phillips. The chances of either of them getting on the ballot paper after securing enough CLP nominations must now be appreciably less.
Be a poor show if Nandy doesn't get through, given she is the only BAME representative remaining, and the amount of times I've heard that the broadest possible selection of candidates must be put to the members.
Interesting how Jess Phillips raced to the line and stopped dead, whereas RLB has had a constant if slow dribble of noms, ending up with a much higher number. Perhaps to do with the is-he-isn't-he shenanigans around Lavery. The 'true socialists' were keeping their powder dry.
I heard that from someone last week... RLB will gain ground as the contest goes on
Momentum has acted as a divisive faction within the Labour Party and Pidcock has been one of their most prominent cheerleaders in that. The comment just sums her up her divisiveness generally, whether it be towards members of her own party or members of the general public that MPs should really have been trying to court rather than going out of their way to offend.
As for letting it drop, I am quite happy to if you stop singing her praises.
Fine. I won't mention her again until she is next validly in the news.
Apart from on this thread which (rather like me) is devoted to her.
Interesting how Jess Phillips raced to the line and stopped dead, whereas RLB has had a constant if slow dribble of noms, ending up with a much higher number. Perhaps to do with the is-he-isn't-he shenanigans around Lavery. The 'true socialists' were keeping their powder dry.
I heard that from someone last week... RLB will gain ground as the contest goes on
I think that's right, but she will have to up her activity and profile a lot.
I apologise for contributing to the longevity of the reaction. Unfortunately it was new to me, and I didn't know how much people had been going on about it.
No problem at all. But, yes, they have been "going on about it" forever. Whenever Pidcock is mentioned that remark of hers - "I won't be friends with a tory" - crops up with the same inevitability as the featured couple on Escape To The Country saying that they don't want a separate dining room ,they want a large kitchen diner which will be the "heart of the home" where everyone can sit and chat.
I apologise for contributing to the longevity of the reaction. Unfortunately it was new to me, and I didn't know how much people had been going on about it.
No problem at all. But, yes, they have been "going on about it" forever. Whenever Pidcock is mentioned that remark of hers - "I won't be friends with a tory" - crops up with the same inevitability as the featured couple on Escape To The Country saying that they don't want a separate dining room ,they want a large kitchen diner which will be the "heart of the home" where everyone can sit and chat.
Or indeed The Sainted Margaret's no such thing as society quote taken out of context as it usually is by leftist types; I'm delighted we can put that behind us and no longer use it to prove any kind of point.
Interesting how Jess Phillips raced to the line and stopped dead, whereas RLB has had a constant if slow dribble of noms, ending up with a much higher number. Perhaps to do with the is-he-isn't-he shenanigans around Lavery. The 'true socialists' were keeping their powder dry.
I heard that from someone last week... RLB will gain ground as the contest goes on
I think that's right, but she will have to up her activity and profile a lot.
The more Labour members see her, the more they will like her. The more normal people see her the more they will dislike her.
Interesting how Jess Phillips raced to the line and stopped dead, whereas RLB has had a constant if slow dribble of noms, ending up with a much higher number. Perhaps to do with the is-he-isn't-he shenanigans around Lavery. The 'true socialists' were keeping their powder dry.
I think because Phillips is quite a distinctive backbench choice, who was very openly critical of Corbyn, it was probably fairly obvious to her who her MP supporters were going in.
With RLB, she is one of a number of fairly loyal frontbenchers who could have a shot at it. MPs looking for that kind of candidate probably wanted to see who came forward and how the numbers looked before committing to one of them. Some probably also expected to be nominating Pidcock a few weeks ago.
I suspect also that Phillips' focus moved pretty firmly to CLP nominations the moment she'd got the required number of MPs on board (as I assume she'll struggle with unions). This is a major hurdle for Phillips, whereas I would guess RLB is safer in that respect and will be able to get in via the unions.
You mean the way one side of politics continues to blame everything on Thatcher and digs up old Boris articles from decades ago? The left never lets _anything_ drop, so why should we?
Apols for delay in replying. Had to get to Waitrose before Storm Brendan.
This could one day be an apt comparison - when Pidcock has won elections and been PM for a decade and has transformed Britain according to her core beliefs her "never friends with a tory" remark can take its rightful place with such chestnuts as "no such thing as society" - but right now it really isn't.
I apologise for contributing to the longevity of the reaction. Unfortunately it was new to me, and I didn't know how much people had been going on about it.
No problem at all. But, yes, they have been "going on about it" forever. Whenever Pidcock is mentioned that remark of hers - "I won't be friends with a tory" - crops up with the same inevitability as the featured couple on Escape To The Country saying that they don't want a separate dining room ,they want a large kitchen diner which will be the "heart of the home" where everyone can sit and chat.
Or indeed The Sainted Margaret's no such thing as society quote taken out of context as it usually is by leftist types; I'm delighted we can put that behind us and no longer use it to prove any kind of point.
What context was it it taken out of as a matter of interest?
Removal of a child from their parents and into the loving arms of a state nursery then school seems the logical way to ensure absolute fairness. Not sure that would lead to the most well-adjusted generation, however.
Given the outrage at the "class war" notion of private schools being not charities, I would give this proposal very little chance indeed.
Indeed. There is much that marks Pidcock as an extremist, chiefly the fact that every policy position of hers is compatible with her being a raging Trot.
The comment about being friends with a Tory was small beer.
I googled "Pidcock raging Trot" and nothing came up other than the (surprising?) fact that she opposes self ID for transgender women.
I apologise for contributing to the longevity of the reaction. Unfortunately it was new to me, and I didn't know how much people had been going on about it.
No problem at all. But, yes, they have been "going on about it" forever. Whenever Pidcock is mentioned that remark of hers - "I won't be friends with a tory" - crops up with the same inevitability as the featured couple on Escape To The Country saying that they don't want a separate dining room ,they want a large kitchen diner which will be the "heart of the home" where everyone can sit and chat.
Or indeed The Sainted Margaret's no such thing as society quote taken out of context as it usually is by leftist types; I'm delighted we can put that behind us and no longer use it to prove any kind of point.
What context was it it taken out of as a matter of interest?
“they never quoted the rest. I went on to say: There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then to look after our neighbour. My meaning, clear at the time but subsequently distorted beyond recognition, was that society was not an abstraction, separate from the men and women who composed it, but a living structure of individuals, families, neighbours and voluntary associations.“
Comments
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
What happens to the 12 & 5 ?
Do they have to nominate one of the four people left?
Are there more nomination's today, as it's suppose to add up to 203 or something.
Labour probably need to win some seats in all regions to win a majority. So you could make the same point if they missed ANY region from the schedule.
And he could have equally tweeted to say "To win a majority Labour need to win seats in the the North. So naturally the first two places with leadership hustings are... cue drumroll.... Liverpool and Durham".
Additionally, nobody in history has ever said "I wasn't going to vote Labour... but they had their hustings here in Ipswich several years ago, which is a massive show of confidence in East Anglia". The only point is to offer a reasonable number of hustings which are scattered about in such a way that quite a lot of members can attend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4Mg8fDaKN4
4 years late, but it might happen.
Will there be another update at 5.30pm for labour leader election?
Looking at the news on huawei, on veterans, on Europe, and the US trade deal, Boris might be in trouble with restive backbenchers sooner rather than later...
I do hope that lefty c*nt Geo Eaton, who hounded Sir Roger to an early grave, is getting his just deserts on social media
Any 'restive' backbenchers need to sit down, and, in the nicest possible way, shut the **** up.
Anyone but Long-Bailey would be a good start although that is a big ask.The rest is down to Boris. I thought his Stormont speech was somewhat rambling, however voters seem to like that sort of thing.
https://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/labour-leadership/
They asked the public who they would most like to replace Corbyn, from a list of 12 candidates. The answers from 2019 Labour voters only are as follows:
Starmer 59
Phillips 41
Nandy 18
RLB 12
Other named non-Corbynites 77 (Thornberry, Ashworth, Cooper, Lammy)
Other named Corbynites 38 (Rayner, Gardiner, Burgon, Lewis)
Other or NOTA 25
Dont Know 113
That's a ratio of more than 3 to 1 for non-Corbynites over Corbynites so it tends to reinforce the result of the YouGov Labour members poll. The difference is too stark to conclude anything but that the far left was trailing badly, even after allowing for members to be more in the Corbyn camp than Labour voters generally. I can't see that anything has happened over the past 3 weeks to change that.
Socialism is a highly outdated and discredited creed. It is a word that Labour politicians would best remember was greatly favoured by the team that brought them the worst ever defeat against a highly flawed and divided Tory Party. They should quietly drop it again.
The comment about being friends with a Tory was small beer.
Mark Allen is a very fair price.
Not to mention...
https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/1116017433008070656
https://twitter.com/guardianheather/status/1216719083812671489?s=21
http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/labour-leadership-candidates
Do not expect even many of those who have a vote in this election to be that familiar with any of the candidates. Remember at this stage in 2015 Corbyn was preferenced by only a handful of people in polls of leadership contenders.
It is unsurprising the narrative has swung behind Starmer, but when the voters get around to make their decision and look at the candidates don't be surprised if they're not interested in the anointed favourite.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1216720273946349569
As for letting it drop, I am quite happy to if you stop singing her praises.
No, it doesn't get any better does it?
Because that worked out so well at broadening the field when they did it for Corbyn....
I hope she doesn't, the more vying for CLP nominations, the less we are likely to get on the ballot paper. It might be just a choice between Starmer and RLB.
https://labour.org.uk/people/leadership-2020-nominations/deputy-leadership-2020/
Best bet, Corbyn 80/1
Worst bet, lay Corbyn, 140/1
(I think I lost a fiver, no violins required!)
Although having female leaders is not a panacea, sure there is Thatcher but there is also May.
Internationally the sample is large enough to say there is no electoral benefit to having a female party leader.
...by being quick when the YouGov members poll came out getting on at evens. Proof that not all good bets need to be smart bets.
Which suggests to me they were keeping an eye on the field.
*singing*
"Should have been me........"
Apart from on this thread which (rather like me) is devoted to her.
With RLB, she is one of a number of fairly loyal frontbenchers who could have a shot at it. MPs looking for that kind of candidate probably wanted to see who came forward and how the numbers looked before committing to one of them. Some probably also expected to be nominating Pidcock a few weeks ago.
I suspect also that Phillips' focus moved pretty firmly to CLP nominations the moment she'd got the required number of MPs on board (as I assume she'll struggle with unions). This is a major hurdle for Phillips, whereas I would guess RLB is safer in that respect and will be able to get in via the unions.
This could one day be an apt comparison - when Pidcock has won elections and been PM for a decade and has transformed Britain according to her core beliefs her "never friends with a tory" remark can take its rightful place with such chestnuts as "no such thing as society" - but right now it really isn't.
https://twitter.com/BBCParliament/status/1216732883815161856?s=20
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/LE20-Guidelines-for-CLP-Nomination-Meetings.pdf
Warms the cockles....
He'll have to start his own party. I'm sure thousands will flock to his standard.
https://iea.org.uk/blog/there-is-no-such-thing-as-society