1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Labour Leadership Contest

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Truronian, Aug 31, 2010.

?

Who do you favour in the Labour leadership election?

Poll closed Sep 26, 2010.
  1. Diane Abbott

    29.4%
  2. Ed Balls

    29.4%
  3. Andy Burnham

    2.9%
  4. David Miliband

    14.7%
  5. Ed Miliband

    23.5%
  1. Truronian

    Truronian Quite unfamiliar Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    9,857
    Location:
    Near Cornwall
    So CFC, who do you favour?



    I'm a Diane Abbott man (though I'm not over keen on her stance on AV); Labour under her leadership would steal me away from the Lib Dems. Out of the two Milibands I prefer Ed, though David might make a better leader of the opposition.
     
  2. ParadigmShifter

    ParadigmShifter Random Nonsense Generator

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    21,810
    Location:
    Liverpool, home of Everton FC
    Andy Burnham supports Everton!

    But I favour Ed Milliband myself. David Milliband will probably win.

    It would be good if Diane Abbott did win but really she has no chance.
     
  3. Mise

    Mise isle of lucy

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    28,601
    Location:
    London, UK
    Out of the two Millibands, I prefer David. Out of the two Eds, I prefer Balls. I don't like Diane Abbott or Andy Burnham.

    I'll be voting David.

    In order of good to bad:

    David Milliband: Pros - has by far the best policies, and already has an air of prime ministeriality that the others seem to lack (and that gets votes)
    Cons - he's a bit of a wimp, having flip flopped before over the leadership, and whether to oust Brown or not. Not a great trait for an opposition leader.

    Ed Balls: Pros - feisty, sharp, and appeals to the grass roots. Also has interesting policy ideas. Would be an amazing opposition leader.
    Cons - Disgustingly tribal; I blame him more than anyone else for scuppering a potential Lib/Lab deal in May. Also, too left wing.

    Ed Milliband: Pros - can't think of one. Probably the most likeable of the three I suppose...
    Cons - too left wing.
     
  4. Babbler

    Babbler Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2002
    Messages:
    5,399
    I don't really know anybody about this, so I choose the guy with the funny name.

    Balls for PM!
     
  5. azzaman333

    azzaman333 meh

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    22,877
    Location:
    Melbourne, AUS Reputation:131^(9/2)
    Balls, solely for the name.
     
  6. Munch

    Munch Benevolent Despot

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    2,081
    David Miliband is too far towards the right of the party, and, being favoured by Mandelson et al., represents business as usual (he has also received a huge amount of donations to his campaign from wealthy individuals). Nevertheless, he is the most 'prime-ministerial' at present. Andy Burnham has stated that he is guided by "narrow party interest". Ed Balls, among the teachers I know, is almost universally despised.

    I'll be voting Diane Abbott -> Ed Miliband. Ed Miliband seems to get every issue pretty much spot on. I'd be very happy if he became leader, although I agree more broadly with Diane Abbott.
     
  7. Quackers

    Quackers The Frog

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    Messages:
    10,282
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Even through I don't support the labour party I have a few opinions:

    David Miliband - Most likely winner and the best hope for Labour to get into power again.
    Ed Miliband - Comprimise candidate, he is not as left as Burnham or Abbot but he is further left then "new labour".
    Andy Burnham - i don't know enough :lol:
    Ed Balls - Everytime I see him on TV he creeps me out. Why does he keep on staring? Ed Balls was too involved with Brown to get a look in.
    Diana Abbot - An idiot. Has anybody seen her performance on "this week"? When she was grilled by a proper journalist. In fact I'll link it here:
    LOL at portillo's face

    Link to video.

    EDIT: Why didn't John Cruddas run? He is good!
     
  8. Ayn Rand

    Ayn Rand Deity

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,348
    Location:
    UK
    Had to turn that video off after a few minutes, I can't stand people like her. Typical racist, I hope she wins so British people see the true face of the PC brigade that pulls Liebours strings.
     
  9. Quackers

    Quackers The Frog

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    Messages:
    10,282
    Location:
    Great Britain
    I agree.
    I just checked her Wikipedia entry too:

    This woman is unbelievable.
     
  10. Tani Coyote

    Tani Coyote Billions and Billions

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    14,971
    Gender:
    Male
    It's easy: anybody who's qualified to be in the medical field won't have prejudices when they're dispensing care.

    Sure, they've never seen a black person, but that doesn't mean they're going to automatically be racist towards them. That's like assuming someone from a tiny, all-white community will suddenly be super-racist towards Hispanics they've never seen before. It's just a false generalisation.

    If anything, I'd think they'd be curious. Indeed, one of my Mexican friends told me that when he went to a mall in a rural part of Michigan, there was a little boy who pointed to him and said, "Mommy, what is that?" :lol: Maybe he was a bit offended, but hey, it was just curiosity about something never seen before, and the boy wasn't flinging racial remarks, so.

    Why does color have to be the only thing they'd discriminate against? What about those nifty things called nationality and social class? At least look at those, see how the candidate's performed with those differences, and then come to a conclusion, rather than ignorantly pulling a "risk" out of your butt.

    Maybe if it was discovered she was seemingly anti-Swedish or anti-Russian during her time in Finland, they'd have a point of a "risk." Otherwise, nonsense. Pure nonsense.

    ---

    On-topic, I'm not British, so I can't really decide between these people, but, I'll certainly hope this Abbott woman doesn't make it, simply from those comments.

    Which one is the most socially progressive? That's generally where I vote since I can't win on economics or foreign policy.
     
  11. Moggy

    Moggy Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Messages:
    223
    Location:
    Bristol, England
    Abbott is not only racist but also an amazing hypocrite (sending her son to a private school).

    I do not support the Labour party but voted for Ed Balls above. Just because he has the funny name, isn’t racist and is not related to the Millibands.
     
  12. Winston Hughes

    Winston Hughes Wrathful Warlock Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,433
    Location:
    A state of unquenchable rage
    David Miliband is right out of the Blair/Cameron/Clegg mold. However, it seems to me that he lacks both the political guile and the spine to ride in that company, as demonstrated by the fact that there's still any real contest over the leadership. From his position, over the last couple of years, you'd think that a genuinely top-class political operator would have sealed the deal by now (maybe even while Labour were still in office).

    It seems like Ed Miliband might be better equipped, though. The mere fact he's putting up a serious challenge to his brother - who looked to be the frontrunner for the job this time last year, while Ed was barely in the picture at all - suggests that he's got something about him, at least. Moreover, he seems to have grasped that the left's not going to get energized by a bland continuation of the New Labour project. That said, I'm not convinced that he'd be enough of a departure to revitalise the party in the way that's needed, or that he's got the maturity to go head-to-head with Cameron just yet.

    To my mind, Ed Balls is probably the smartest of the candidates, and, thus far, has been one of the most effective critics of the coalition government. But he's got all kinds of other question marks around him. The paper-thin majority in his constituency, for example, is hardly reassuring. His judgement also has to be questioned in the wake of the expenses scandal, and after that fine for talking on his mobile whilst driving.

    Andy Burnham has come on a lot in the past few months, and given a few more years of polishing, he might be a viable candidate in the future. But, right now, he still seems rather edgy and lacking in the kind of smooth confidence required to lead. He's also been playing the 'working class' card too strongly, though I wonder if that's because he doesn't expect to win this time, and is looking to his future prospects.

    Diane Abbott is probably the least likely of the candidates ever to become Prime Minister. But, to my mind, she'd be the most likely to help the Labour Party rediscover its soul and lead a meaningful opposition. She's very confident in front of the cameras, and has the credentials as a leftist and a political outsider to really lay into the coalition government without making it look like mere politicking. And while a clear break from the Blair-clone model of party leader currently in vogue might not be the most promising route back to power for Labour, it would certainly be a positive development in British politics.
     
  13. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    49,785
    Location:
    Salisbury Plain
    The one with the white tie.
     
  14. ParadigmShifter

    ParadigmShifter Random Nonsense Generator

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    21,810
    Location:
    Liverpool, home of Everton FC
    Perfection is a Balls man too then.
     
  15. Azale

    Azale Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Messages:
    18,723
    Location:
    Texas
    If Quackers and Ayn Rand hate Abbott, that's good enough for me!
     
  16. Cutlass

    Cutlass The Man Who Wasn't There.

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    45,335
    Location:
    US of A
    How can you not vote for a guy named Ed Balls?


    Please:


    Think of the comedians. :sad:
     
  17. Dachs

    Dachs Hero of the Soviet Union

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    32,588
    Location:
    Moscow
    Exactly. Give em an easy target like Balls and they'll go soft from all the cheap shots they can make. Better keep the saw sharp
     
  18. EnglishEdward

    EnglishEdward Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Messages:
    3,687
    Location:
    England
    I favour Ed Miliband.

    This is because he seems to best understand that it is necessary for
    the labour party to recognise new labour mistakes and to move on.

    I suspect that both David Miliband and Ed Balls would be prisoners to
    the past, while Diane Abbott and Andy Burnham represent minority
    (ethnic) and (party) interests and would not win widespread support.
     
  19. Truronian

    Truronian Quite unfamiliar Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    9,857
    Location:
    Near Cornwall
    I don't think that is hypocritical in and of it's self. I opposed private schools on principal but I wouldn't force my child into an inferior education because of something I believe.
     
  20. Tani Coyote

    Tani Coyote Billions and Billions

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    14,971
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not a fan of this Abbott woman, but... where do you come up with because you represent a minority, you cannot garner widespread support? I mean, look at the 2008 US election. I know the UK has its differences, but I doubt it's THAT different.

    Then again, perhaps you meant she'd be too in favor of minority issues to garner support, which I'd say is very different from Obama, who had a lot of appeal and didn't tackle racial issues that much as part of his candidacy(I remember anti-Iraq and healthcare reform, but not much racial remarks except from some idiots on the opposition), making his race irrelevant to most people.

    In which case, yes, there'd be no argument there. If you solely use the race card or some such, chances are you won't win widespread support.

    If that was the case - you were arguing she was too centered on racial issues and thus wouldn't have much appeal to people outside that race - then disregard this. :) My main beef would be with if you implied that since she was a minority ethnic group, she couldn't have a chance automatically, but I most likely misinterpreted.
     

Share This Page