Who will be the next Labour leader?

[killer b]

I'm not sure how much attention most people pay to the shadow cabinet tbf. But yeah, it's wonks as far as the eye can see. They must be glad to get their chair back.

 

[fakeplasticgirl]

Who would have been urban’s choice as shadow chancellor?

 

[killer b]

stalin

 

[Mr Moose]

Who would have been urban’s choice as shadow chancellor?

Ian Bone.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

I'm not sure how much attention most people pay to the shadow cabinet tbf. But yeah, it's wonks as far as the eye can see. They must be glad to get their chair back.

Who do political wonks, forensics detail junkies, policy bores appeal to anymore?

How is the ‘red wall’ going to rebuilt by a group of Oxbridge PPE’s?

I can’t even work our who Starmer is pitching to here. It’s the political equivalent of the flat earthers. I almost admire the staggering level of stupidity to look at America, Europe, the march of the populists, the comprehensive evisceration of the bland technocratic management of neo-liberalism and the defeat of the end of history peddlers and then pretend none of it happened

 

[killer b]

You don't appeal to anyone by who's in your cabinet, you appeal to them with policies.

 

[Proper Tidy]

It's mad isn't it, whole foundation of this type of politics rests on not looking at political trends over last decade, except maybe a one eyed glance at france while ignoring the before, the after, and the two horse race with a fascist. They're fucked.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

You don't appeal to anyone by who's in your cabinet, you appeal to them with policies.

And, in your judgement, what policies are this shadow cabinet team likely to settle upon?

 

[killer b]

shit ones.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

It's mad isn't it, whole foundation of this type of politics rests on not looking at political trends over last decade, except maybe a one eyed glance at france while ignoring the before, the after, and the two horse race with a fascist. They're fucked.

Starmer is clearly off his fucking head.

I’m genuinely excited by this Shadow Cabinet. It’s barking mad. It’s a flick of the V’s. It’s the footballing equivalent of insisting on playing total football every week even though you are losing every game 10-0. It’s a solo charge into a thousand guns with your bayonet fixed. It’s the last stand....

 

[Smokeandsteam]

shit ones.

Cant argue with that....

 

[Proper Tidy]

Look at starmer's (successful) campaign which robbed momentum branding and paid lots of vague lip service and obama like fluff slogans without any tangible substance. I mean tbf it worked, lots of liberal left (as opposed to soft left) types in hook line and sinker, but it's illustrative of the technocratic we know better way labour will be under him and how labour will campaign. Every policy will be underwhelming.

 

[chilango]

And, in your judgement, what policies are this shadow cabinet team likely to settle upon?

Looking Primeministerial in broadsheet photos?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Who would have been urban’s choice as shadow chancellor?

Stafford Cripps or Francis Jourde.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[redsquirrel]

Like killer b I think this is less about appealing the to electorate and more about shoring up his power in the party.

On the wider point while I would certainly agree that populism is challenging liberalism I would not write off liberalism totally. After all Macron did win in France and I'd not be that surprised if he won again in 2022. The CDU and SPD are bleeding votes but it's not unlikely that some sort of liberal coalition (probably including the Greens) will remain in power in Germany. It's too early to say how the effects of COVID-19 are going to play in the US but I always thought that whatever the result of the US presidential election the Democrats would probably win the popular vote. In short while liberalism is being challenged, in fact because it is being challenged, there is a significant electoral body that centrist politics appeals to.

For Starmer and co that body has to be the basis of their support, it is inconceivable to them for anything else.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Ever diminishing returns though isn't it. There is a reason why liberalism (although never convinced that's the right term for it) is on the back foot the world over and the right of liberalism (again its an imperfect term) understands this and is adapting. I remain of the view its mad to do a canute in defence of left liberalism and expect results

 

[Shechemite]

stalin

I was reading about his welfare policies the other day. All about work capacity. Ironically.

 

[Shechemite]

I was reading about his welfare policies the other day. All about work capacity. Ironically.

And extremely grim. Obviously.

 

[redsquirrel]

Ever diminishing returns though isn't it. There is a reason why liberalism (although never convinced that's the right term for it) is on the back foot the world over and the right of liberalism (again its an imperfect term) understands this and is adapting. I remain of the view its mad to do a canute in defence of left liberalism and expect results

Well as I say I'm not sure it is possible for Starmer to do otherwise, taking the old Talleyrand quote "They have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing"

Regarding ever diminishing returns, hmmm. I subscribe to the theory that populism is a reaction to liberalism, there have been populists movements that have sprung up and challenged liberalism for a time only to fall back again.

 

[Proper Tidy]

Well as I say I'm not sure it is possible for Starmer to do otherwise, taking the old Talleyrand quote "They have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing"

Regarding ever diminishing returns, hmmm. I subscribe to the theory that populism is a reaction to liberalism, there have been populists movements that have sprung up and challenged liberalism for a time only to fall back again.

Yeah, but liberalism in response adapts. And plenty of it is adapting. Just apparently not the left liberalism of the labour party.

 

[Shechemite]

Do we reckon they’ll be any good at the opposing/challenging/holding to account aspect of things?

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Like killer b I think this is less about appealing the to electorate and more about shoring up his power in the party.

On the wider point while I would certainly agree that populism is challenging liberalism I would not write off liberalism totally. After all Macron did win in France and I'd not be that surprised if he won again in 2022. The CDU and SPD are bleeding votes but it's not unlikely that some sort of liberal coalition (probably including the Greens) will remain in power in Germany. It's too early to say how the effects of COVID-19 are going to play in the US but I always thought that whatever the result of the US presidential election the Democrats would probably win the popular vote. In short while liberalism is being challenged, in fact because it is being challenged, there is a significant electoral body that centrist politics appeals to.

For Starmer and co that body has to be the basis of their support, it is inconceivable to them for anything else.

But the problem is that Labour/other non Tory Party has parties have got that vote boxed off. Labour needs to win in Scotland, Wales and the deindustrialised places of the English north and Midlands. If Starmer believes these areas are hankering for a return to competent middle class liberalism then he’s in for a shock.

I can see the point about the internals given Labour’s endless drama. Other than that I think you are guilty of giving him far too much credit

 

[agricola]

But the problem is that Labour/other non Tory Party has parties have got that vote boxed off. Labour needs to win in Scotland, Wales and the deindustrialised places of the English north and Midlands. If Starmer believes these areas are hankering for a return to competent middle class liberalism then he’s in for a shock.

I can see the point about the internals given Labour’s endless drama. Other than that I think you are guilty of giving him far too much credit

That is true, but there is a lot that could be done still to get that vote back - it was a scandal that a government with as bad a record as May's (and Johnson's) were able to go on about anyone else being a threat to national security, for example. Yet that record was never seriously questioned.

 

[gosub]

Rebecca Long-Bailey wins the argument

There were jubilant scenes on the Corbynite wing of the Labour party after the results of the leadership election appeared to confirm that Rebecca Long-Bailey had won the argument.

newsthump.com

 

[Smokeandsteam]

That is true, but there is a lot that could be done still to get that vote back - it was a scandal that a government with as bad a record as May's (and Johnson's) were able to go on about anyone else being a threat to national security, for example. Yet that record was never seriously questioned.

No doubt. A return to effective management and presentation of centrist norms will bring some back to the fold. But a) doesn’t it risk driving away new supporters especially the young? and b) it will at best only improve Labour’s position. It will not be enough, nowhere near, to win an election.

 

[William of Walworth]

No doubt. A return to effective management and presentation of centrist norms will bring some back to the fold. But a) doesn’t it risk driving away new supporters especially the young? and b) it will at best only improve Labour’s position. It will not be enough, nowhere near, to win an election.

By the time of the next GE, I expect the big shiny offer from the LP will be some version of their Green New Deal, which might? appeal to younger supporters (at least to an extent).
And tbh that's not necessarily a bad policy in itself (IMO).

That's not to contradict your point (b) though .

 

[fakeplasticgirl]

On one hand Waitrose has gone up on my estimation. Despite the protestation of ‘balance’ he’s ripped out Corbyn supporters - especially those who supported Leave - and he’s packed the Shadow Cabinet with technocratic drones built in his own image. He’s also added two more NEC votes to his account. Nandy is both promoted and sidelined.

On the other hand who exactly does he imagine this faceless band of technocrats going to appeal to?

Scotland is gone. The Midlands, Wales and North largely gone. I may be wrong but are Rachel Reeves, Annalese Dodds and that Welsh barrister whose name I’ve already forgotten the politicians required to even begin to claw back some of this territory?

Put another way what social base does Starmer think this group of faceless technocrats is meant to energise? Bar that segment of the urban liberal middle class they all come from? And which already vote Labour?

Bizarre stuff

Oh god. I know I’m going to regret this. Even assuming your argument here is correct (and I don’t agree with it, but I’m not going to get into that) he’s announced the five big names so far

•Angela Rayner, Deputy Leader and Chair of the Labour Party •Anneliese Dodds, Shadow Chancellor •Lisa Nandy, Shadow Foreign Secretary •Nick Thomas-Symonds, Shadow Home Secretary •Rachel Reeves, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster

And two of the five (nandy and rayner) are not technocrats.

SNP doing pretty well in Scotland under former lawyer Nicola sturgeon.

who would have been your pick for shadow chancellor if not Dodds btw?

 

[William of Walworth]

who would have been your pick for shadow chancellor if not Dodds btw?

John McDonnell

 

[brogdale]

Mrs B tells me that Dodds was on R4 this am talking about how much debt will result from the actions to 'save the economy'.
Here we fucking go.

 

[Shechemite]

Burg-out