Next Leader of the Opposition

[Guest MattP]

Because you are a member of another party. You made your decision to leave and you should stick by that. I don't see you any better than a Tory voting to change the Labour party.

The more I see of Corbyn it's hard not to see him as a hypocrite, if he opposes austerity, wants out of NATO, to scrap trident etc why is he still in the Labour party? He should have resigned on principle numerous times during the Blair years and joined the Greens.

[johnny the fox]

listened to the radio 5 live debate this morning.............the whole thing is a car crash........if this is the best this country can come up with, we are in big fookin trouble.

[bmt]

Because you are a member of another party. You made your decision to leave and you should stick by that. I don't see you any better than a Tory voting to change the Labour party.

The more I see of Corbyn it's hard not to see him as a hypocrite, if he opposes austerity, wants out of NATO, to scrap trident etc why is he still in the Labour party? He should have resigned on principle numerous times during the Blair years and joined the Greens.

 

For the record I haven't actually joined and voted for Corbyn, I just think those that have shouldn't be chalked off if they are genuinely voting for someone they believe in. But in my case I never 'left' as I am a student. I think viewing people as lifetime members of another opposition party with similar aims is stupid and short-sighted, and will not win Labour any elections. They have immediately alienated people they should be looking at as targets for next election, people who see the promising development of another party should not be precluded from jumping on the bandwagon- that is politics after all.

 

For the other part, if it wasn't for the old left wing guard like Corbyn there wouldn't be any difference between Labour and the Conservative party after the last few elections.

[Webbo]

For the record I haven't actually joined and voted for Corbyn, I just think those that have shouldn't be chalked off if they are genuinely voting for someone they believe in. But in my case I never 'left' as I am a student. I think viewing people as lifetime members of another opposition party with similar aims is stupid and short-sighted, and will not win Labour any elections. They have immediately alienated people they should be looking at as targets for next election, people who see the promising development of another party should not be precluded from jumping on the bandwagon- that is politics after all.

 

For the other part, if it wasn't for the old left wing guard like Corbyn there wouldn't be any difference between Labour and the Conservative party after the last few elections.

If that were true then Labour wouldn't have made such a balls up of the economy.

[Guest Bilo]

For the record I haven't actually joined and voted for Corbyn, I just think those that have shouldn't be chalked off if they are genuinely voting for someone they believe in. But in my case I never 'left' as I am a student. I think viewing people as lifetime members of another opposition party with similar aims is stupid and short-sighted, and will not win Labour any elections. They have immediately alienated people they should be looking at as targets for next election, people who see the promising development of another party should not be precluded from jumping on the bandwagon- that is politics after all.

 

For the other part, if it wasn't for the old left wing guard like Corbyn there wouldn't be any difference between Labour and the Conservative party after the last few elections.

 

Sorry, but that's simply not the case at all.

 

The idea that any of the three leadership candidates who aren't called Jeremy Corbyn would lead a Labour Party that's anything like the Tories is simply not the case, and is a myth exploded by five minutes' research into what they stand for.

 

The closest we've had to a Red Tory Party was that led by Tony Blair, and even that was significantly more left-wing than the current Tory government. 

[bmt]

Sorry, but that's simply not the case at all.

 

The idea that any of the three leadership candidates who aren't called Jeremy Corbyn would lead a Labour Party that's anything like the Tories is simply not the case, and is a myth exploded by five minutes' research into what they stand for.

 

The closest we've had to a Red Tory Party was that led by Tony Blair, and even that was significantly more left-wing than the current Tory government. 

 

Admittedly I was just being facetious. Nonetheless it's still important to have old Labour left-wing MPs alongside the post-Blair ones, to reflect the varied views of members of the Labour party old and new.

[Guest Bilo]

Quite simply, if you're an active member of another party then you have no business voting in this election and you can have no complaints if your vote is thrown in the bin. These are the rules of the contest and they equally apply if you're UKIP, Tory, Green or BNP. 

 

It's not particularly expensive to join the Labour Party either.

 

Students can join for £1 a year, as can people aged between 14 and 19. If you're 26 or under, it's £1 a month. It's less than £2 a month if you're retired, unemployed or work less than 16 hours a week and less than £4 a month if you work full-time. These differing rates are set up for a reason, so financial concerns make as little impact as possible. If you want a vote in a Labour Party election, join the Labour Party.

[Guest MattP]

If they managed to actually shed the old left wing guard they might become electable again. They could sweep middle England again like Blair did, it's nonsense to suggest Labour are anywhere near the Tories in terms of policy, that's a standard cliché from people who don't follow politics or read manifestos.

I dread to think how many centrerist votes people like Diane Abbott, Jeremy Corbyn etc cost them.

[Guest Bilo]

Admittedly I was just being facetious. Nonetheless it's still important to have old Labour left-wing MPs alongside the post-Blair ones, to reflect the varied views of members of the Labour party old and new.

 

That's the thing, varied views. We need a candidate who can reflect this, not one whose supporters seem bent on forcing out anyone whose views are in line with anything Labour has done post-1994.

[Guest MattP]

Let's be honest Labour needs to split into two.

It's going to be impossible to reconcile the policies of Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn supporters into the same policy documents, it's mile apart.

It's good to have a broad church but this is far too broad.

[Guest Bilo]

If they managed to actually shed the old left wing guard they might become electable again. They could sweep middle England again like Blair did, it's nonsense to suggest Labour are anywhere near the Tories in terms of policy, that's a standard cliché from people who don't follow politics or read manifestos.

I dread to think how many centrerist votes people like Diane Abbott, Jeremy Corbyn etc cost them.

 

It's such a lazy cliche, it's untrue.

 

This is probably the most socially liberal Tory government for decades, and Blair's government probably the most centrist Labour government ever, and they're still poles apart in terms of policy when the 'they're all the same' brigade would have you thinking they're the same mob in different colour ties.

[bmt]

If they managed to actually shed the old left wing guard they might become electable again. They could sweep middle England again like Blair did, it's nonsense to suggest Labour are anywhere near the Tories in terms of policy, that's a standard cliché from people who don't follow politics or read manifestos.

I dread to think how many centrerist votes people like Diane Abbott, Jeremy Corbyn etc cost them.

 

I read all parties manifestos and do follow politics. Why did Labour lose most seats it had before and where did they happen? In Scotland, a place which had turned down independence shortly before, because the voice of New Labour doesn't appeal to them. I don't understand this unelectable jargon, austerity has only took its bite over the past 5 or 6 years, why should the left be rejected when they are the most appealing to a large amount of people suffering during austerity..

[Guest Bilo]

Let's be honest Labour needs to split into two.

It's going to be impossible to reconcile the policies of Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn supporters into the same policy documents, it's mile apart.

It's good to have a broad church but this is far too broad.

 

I honestly think that a significant number of the Corbynites will only see that their brand of socialism has failed when it has become undeniable. If he is dumped by the party after we're at a stage when Labour are 20 or more points behind in the polls time after time and/or we have a horror showing at local elections, the penny might begin to drop that 1980s style policies that weren't electable then aren't electable now.

 

The issue with that is that it takes genuinely electable centre-left politicians with 21st century policies down by association.

[Guest Bilo]

I read all parties manifestos and do follow politics. Why did Labour lose most seats it had before and where did they happen? In Scotland, a place which had turned down independence shortly before, because the voice of New Labour doesn't appeal to them. I don't understand this unelectable jargon, austerity has only took its bite over the past 5 or 6 years, why should the left be rejected when they are the most appealing to a large amount of people suffering during austerity..

 

The rise of the SNP at the expense of Labour had far more to do with nationalist fervour, as far removed from left-wing politics as it is possible to get, than it did with anti-austerity politics.

 

Public spending in a country where Labour representation in Westminster was dominant and representation in Holyrood was far from insignificant was still far higher than south of the border, thanks largely to devolution put in place by a Labour government. 

 

The fact that the SNP still enjoy a high approval rating despite many of their voters openly admitting that they're not delivering on their promises should tell you all you need to know.

[bmt]

Quite simply, if you're an active member of another party then you have no business voting in this election and you can have no complaints if your vote is thrown in the bin. These are the rules of the contest and they equally apply if you're UKIP, Tory, Green or BNP. 

 

It's not particularly expensive to join the Labour Party either.

 

Students can join for £1 a year, as can people aged between 14 and 19. If you're 26 or under, it's £1 a month. It's less than £2 a month if you're retired, unemployed or work less than 16 hours a week and less than £4 a month if you work full-time. These differing rates are set up for a reason, so financial concerns make as little impact as possible. If you want a vote in a Labour Party election, join the Labour Party.

 

I agree completely with your last statement, I just dont think you can discriminate between people who are non-members wanting to vote for what they believe and people who are non-members and happen to be a member of another party, and want to vote for someone they can believe in.

[Guest MattP]

New Labour didn't appeal to Scotland? Under Blair Labour had its best EVER results in Scotland.

They lost because of fervent nationalism, not because of anything else, had Miliband started banging on about austerity it wouldn't have made a difference.

I'd give up with them Bilo, if they haven't learnt by now that there is no appetite for his sort of politics across the wider population they never will.

[Guest Bilo]

Let's be honest Labour needs to split into two.

It's going to be impossible to reconcile the policies of Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn supporters into the same policy documents, it's mile apart.

It's good to have a broad church but this is far too broad.

 

The last thing we need is the vote splitting as it did in 1983, it'd be disastrous.

 

Neil Kinnock worked very hard to rebuild the party in the 1980s, so it's very disappointing to see people within the party setting in motion similar problems.

[bmt]

The rise of the SNP at the expense of Labour had far more to do with nationalist fervour, as far removed from left-wing politics as it is possible to get, than it did with anti-austerity politics.

 

Public spending in a country where Labour representation in Westminster was dominant and representation in Holyrood was far from insignificant was still far higher than south of the border, thanks largely to devolution put in place by a Labour government. 

 

The fact that the SNP still enjoy a high approval rating despite many of their voters openly admitting that they're not delivering on their promises should tell you all you need to know.

How can you say that when the only evidence for nationalism, ie the vote on independence, was a clear no?!

 

Mhairi Black even said that in her first speech. 

[Guest MattP]

Because the no vote was 45% - enough to comfortably win in FPTP elections.

[bmt]

New Labour didn't appeal to Scotland? Under Blair Labour had its best EVER results in Scotland.

They lost because of fervent nationalism, not because of anything else, had Miliband started banging on about austerity it wouldn't have made a difference.

I'd give up with them Bilo, if they haven't learnt by now that there is no appetite for his sort of politics across the wider population they never will.

 

Yes but I am talking once again about post-austerity politics as in the last election. How can you say that when there is no evidence to back you up? 

 

Sure everyone voted for Labour when the economy was doing well, the vote tends to follow that.

[Guest MattP]

Out of interest what austerity are you even talking about?

Last time I checked the country still spends 90 billion more a year than it raises, I don't know how anyone can justify that sort of public spending as "austerity".

[Guest Bilo]

I agree completely with your last statement, I just dont think you can discriminate between people who are non-members wanting to vote for what they believe and people who are non-members and happen to be a member of another party, and want to vote for someone they can believe in.

 

No, you can't. How can you possibly differentiate between Dave Angel, a Green voter who'd join Labour if we went more left-wing, and Joe Bloggs, a UKIPper who is voting for Corbyn purely because he believes that UKIP will clean up disgruntled Labour voters if we go more left-wing?

 

It's impossible to do so. At least signing up for membership for 12 months at least shows some form of commitment. If you scrap the £3 voter idea completely, you'll get rid of any half-arsed e-activists (who unfortunately look like dictating the outcome of this election) and Tory/UKIP interlopers seeking to hamstring the party, replacing them with people who are actually making a form of commitment to the party in the form of membership.

 

The solution therefore is to say that if you want a vote, join the party. 

[Buce]

The last thing we need is the vote splitting as it did in 1983, it'd be disastrous.

Neil Kinnock worked very hard to rebuild the party in the 1980s, so it's very disappointing to see people within the party setting in motion similar problems.

If it makes you feel better, Bilo, I put Burnham as my second preference.

[Guest Bilo]

Because the no vote was 45% - enough to comfortably win in FPTP elections.

 

The Yes vote has grown even more now it appears that Westminster has broken promises on further devolution and funding, a referendum held now would probably result in independence.

[bmt]

Out of interest what austerity are you even talking about?

Last time I checked the country still spends 90 billion more a year than it raises, I don't know how anyone can justify that sort of public spending as "austerity".

 

"In economics, austerity is a set of policies with the aim of reducing government budget deficits. Austerity policies may include spending cuts, tax increases, or a mixture of both."

 

As it's a stupid question, I will just give you the definition. Are we aiming to reduce the budget deficit through large spending cuts? Yes.

 

For a more intelligent answer, look at food bank usage, deaths related to removal of benefits, and other indicators of lower public spending on the people of this country.