Labour Leadership Race

[IC1967]

The bookies are wising up. Jeremy is now the favourite with William Hill at 11/8. Its about time they got this right. 11/8 is still a cracking bet. If you haven't already got on at the better odds I advised only a few days ago lump on now before he goes odds on.

It just goes to show how incompetent Labour are. He wouldn't have even been in the race if MPs who didn't support him hadn't put him forward. You couldn't make it up. Thank the heavens this lot didn't win the election.



IC1967

[The Red Baron]

A good point about how Corbyn came to be nominated. He didn't have the support of enough MPs so if he becomes leader he will immediately find himself at odds with a lot of the PLP. Will be interesting to see who will agree to be in his Shadow Cabinet.

Good news for the Tories, of course, but also for the Lib Dems. Farron is to the Left of Clegg and they have an opportunity to pitch for centre-left votes while Labour lurches to the left.

[jonrover]

I can see an establishment forced stitch up before this is all over. Expect either Burnham or Cooper to stand aside and support the other. I can see it coming a mile off. The establishment cannot risk a coherent and very electable anti austerity alternative.

[BobG]

It's all opinions but I really van't see Corbyn ever being electable. We may agree with bhis politics and ideas (they're hardly 'policies' at the moment) and we may yearn for a change from bland neo blue alternatives, but the Murdoch boys are going to have an absolute field day with Jeremy. They crucified Neil Kinnock and he was waaay more electable than Corbyn is ever going to be. Another comparrsion? Michael Foot. Corbyn is going to look like him. Bumbling well meaning, pointless affability. History doesn't often lie. if Corbyn wins the Labour party will be doomed for a generation at least. The press will make sure of it.

BobG

[IC1967]

I can see an establishment forced stitch up before this is all over. Expect either Burnham or Cooper to stand aside and support the other. I can see it coming a mile off. The establishment cannot risk a coherent and very electable anti austerity alternative.

Hahahahahahahahaha! That's the best laugh I've had for ages.

Us right wingers have got nothing to worry about if you lefties think Corbyn presents a coherent and very electable anti austerity alternative. Unbelievable crass stupidity.

You lefties never learn. If you lose you always conclude that you weren't left wing enough. The penny hasn't yet dropped that the further left Labour goes the less electable they become. Ed Milliband was mild left and you lost by 100 seats to a Tory party that was massively unpopular because of all the cuts they had to make. Now the economy is well on the mend do you really think a hard left leader is going to win the next election? If you do, then you are totally crazy.

Keep it up though. I'm really enjoying watching Labour fall apart. Mark my words. UKIP will be the opposition after the next election if Corbyn wins. Labour will be finished (if they're not already).

Please, please, please all vote for him. It only costs £3. Money well spent.

IC1967

[BillyStubbsTears]

Bob

Corbyn is NOTHING like Foot. Foot was an intellectual giant with a 50 year track record of driving progressive politics, stretching back to his opposition to Hitler in the 1930s when the Establishment were all for peace at all costs.

Corbyn is a perfect example of how watered down our politics has become on all sides. There used to be great thinkers across the spectrum from left to right. You might have disagreed with them, but they had a combination of passionate zeal and an intellectually coherent platform. Everyone from Tony Benn through Tony Crosland, Roy Jenkins, through to Keith Joseph. They had fire in their bellies and were also first rank politicians with experience of taking hard decisions in the front line.

Corbyn is like a liberal studies teacher by comparison.

[BobG]

I know that Billy!! Foot was unrique. But the press won't see it that way will they?!! My comments are all from the point of view of what the press will do if and when Corbyn gets elected. They screwed over Foot. Made him politically irrelevant. They demonised Kinnock. Even though he was made of sterner stuff they ended up losing the election for him. They'll do the same to Corbyn. Whata's your choice? Demon? Or irrelevancy?

Bob

[BillyStubbsTears]

Bob

I fully agree with you. If you're going for a strongly left-wing candidate, it needs to be someone who is an absolutely brilliant media operator. Any chinks and they'll be slaughtered. AND they need to have a coherent message to push.  Corbyn doesn't show either. He'd be a disastrous choice.

That said, the alternatives are not exactly inspiring...

[jonrover]

As the saying goes, you can only shag with the cock you've got. I disagree with you about Corbyn. I thought he dealt with Marr quite brilliantly on Sunday. And much of what he says is supported right across the political spectrum, whether it be renationalisation of railway, a stronger model of regulation in the energy market or not wasting a hundred billion on a weapon we would never dare use. Foot also came at a completely different age with completely different circumstances. The young could educate themselves for free and get reasonable housing. Or they could go to tech school and get a decent apprenticeship in a trade that meant something. What have they now? £60k of debt with no job at the end with a degree or zero hours, minimum wage at poundland if their lucky or workfare and homelessness if they're not. It's this generation that is fuelling the fire behind Corbyn. It's not Corbyn that's important, it could be anyone, it's the message that people are interested in. People have had enough with the shit spun about no alternative to austerity and there being no money. It's a big lie. They can always find £800k a missile to drop on foreign lands. The lie is being exposed and it no longer washes.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Jon

I agree with every word you say, but it's not good enough.

You're going to have a period over the next few years where enough people will get better off enough to feel that they have got a stake in the status quo. Appealing to the Labour base, which is what Corbyn will do, will be enough to secure a 25-28% vote share, but no more than that.

If a left-leaning Labour Govt is to return, it needs to do so on a different programme. It needs a coherent philosophical basis that explains the problems in the neo-lib model, but doesn't replace them with 1970s corporatism. It needs a basis that comes from Picketty's approach. Free markets, yes, but with the state playing an increased role to tax wealth and redistribute.

And THEN, it needs a dynamic figurehead to distill that message down to something that will inspire 40% of the population.

Corbyn isn't that man on either count. He's a throwback to Bennite corporatism and he will not inspire anyone who isn't already a believer.

[IC1967]

The more of this leftie drivel I read the more my piss boils. Marr is a pushover. He asks easy questions and lets the politician give whatever answer they want regardless of whether it answers the question or not. He wouldn't do so well if Andrew Neil got stuck into him. He'd soon be exposed.

Lets get some facts straight. You lefties do nothing but try and put people going off to university by claiming they will have massive debts if they do. Totally wrong. Its estimated that 75% of students won't pay it back because they won't earn enough. So you are talking complete b*llocks. University education was never free. The taxpayer paid for it. Student numbers are at a record high since charges were brought in. Explain that one away. Graduates don't all end up on zero hours contracts at Poundland. There is only a tiny percentage of the workforce on these contracts and most of these are happy with the arrangement.

Workfare and homelessness? Talk about going well over the top. In this country we have created more jobs than the rest of the EU put together. We have full employment or we would have if you socialists hadn't let so many Eastern Europeans in. Even so, anyone can get a job if they want to (excluding people who are disabled etc).

Austerity. Lets deal with that one. There is no austerity. The last government spent more than all the previous Labour governments put together! We are still living well beyond our means. We are still living a higher standard of living than we should be doing because we are using the nation's credit card still. We spend more on debt interest repayments than we do on education. That's what happens when socialists are in charge. We need to get a grip on our finances before we go bust. Then you'd know what austerity really felt like. Austerity my arse. You haven't got a clue what you're on about.

Nothing is more certain than a left wing government putting up taxes and borrowing money and ending up ruining the economy.

Tory press! Blaming them is pathetic. Newspapers are in decline. Most people get their news and form a lot of their opinions from the BBC either on the internet or by watching the news. I support the BBC and feel it is impartial. If anything it is a bit left wing but not enough to bother me. If it was rabidly right wing you might have a point but as usual you don't.

Anyway, it looks like there are enough gullible fools out there to ensure a Corbyn win. I hope I haven't put any of you off from voting for him.

Get in.


IC1967

[IC1967]

Jon

I agree with every word you say, but it's not good enough.

You're going to have a period over the next few years where enough people will get better off enough to feel that they have got a stake in the status quo. Appealing to the Labour base, which is what Corbyn will do, will be enough to secure a 25-28% vote share, but no more than that.

If a left-leaning Labour Govt is to return, it needs to do so on a different programme. It needs a coherent philosophical basis that explains the problems in the neo-lib model, but doesn't replace them with 1970s corporatism. It needs a basis that comes from Picketty's approach. Free markets, yes, but with the state playing an increased role to tax wealth and redistribute.

And THEN, it needs a dynamic figurehead to distill that message down to something that will inspire 40% of the population.

Corbyn isn't that man on either count. He's a throwback to Bennite corporatism and he will not inspire anyone who isn't already a believer.

If that's the case then you've lost what little credibility you had left around here. You say you agree with every word and then blithely go on to contradict yourself. Typical.

May I refer you to my previous post where I completely dismantle his drivel so you may come into the real world.


IC1967

[The Red Baron]

I can see an establishment forced stitch up before this is all over. Expect either Burnham or Cooper to stand aside and support the other. I can see it coming a mile off. The establishment cannot risk a coherent and very electable anti austerity alternative.

Not sure about the Establishment, Jon. There are a lot in the Labour party who don't share Corbyn's views. I can see Kendall and either Burnham and Cooper being pressured to stand aside, though it will come from within the party. Particularly from the MPs.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Jon

I agree with every word you say, but it's not good enough.

You're going to have a period over the next few years where enough people will get better off enough to feel that they have got a stake in the status quo. Appealing to the Labour base, which is what Corbyn will do, will be enough to secure a 25-28% vote share, but no more than that.

If a left-leaning Labour Govt is to return, it needs to do so on a different programme. It needs a coherent philosophical basis that explains the problems in the neo-lib model, but doesn't replace them with 1970s corporatism. It needs a basis that comes from Picketty's approach. Free markets, yes, but with the state playing an increased role to tax wealth and redistribute.

And THEN, it needs a dynamic figurehead to distill that message down to something that will inspire 40% of the population.

Corbyn isn't that man on either count. He's a throwback to Bennite corporatism and he will not inspire anyone who isn't already a believer.

I tend to agree with you in terms of what Labour have to do, but further to that there is a real problem in that they also have to be different and how can Labour be different when the Tories have actually positioned themselves quite well?  What can Labour do that is different and appeals?  That's quite tough actually.  What is sure is that none of the candidates are that exciting are they?

[BillyStubbsTears]

BFYP

Bang on. Osborne has wrong footed Labour every step of the way. He bluffed them into accepting Austerity at exactly the moment that he was giving up on it in 2012/13. He halted deficit reduction then and effectively went on the Keynesian approach that Labour had been proposing. But because Labour had given up on that policy, they couldn't criticise him.

Then before the Election, he proposed that 2015-20 would see the biggest reduction in Govt spending in history. He forced Labour to go some way to matching him and STILL accused them of being profligate for not matching him. Having win the Election, this month's Budget basically reneged on the manifesto spending reduction plans (and the media and a navel-gazing Labour Party didn't challenge him).

And to top it all, he then cherry picked a whole bunch of left-wing policies from raising the minimum wage (a genius idea - there is a pile of evidence that higher minimum wages leads to greatly increased productivity) to housing.

It's genius politics. He has skewered Labour every which way and they are floundering, looking for a philosophy to hang their hat on.

Not sure what it means in terms of political philosophy mind. I have no idea what sort of society Osborne wants, other than one with him in charge.

[IC1967]

Corbyn now even money favourite. He was 3/1 only a few days ago. Evens is still a cracking price. Lump on. He will definitely win.

IC1967

[jonrover]

 

Jon

I agree with every word you say, but it's not good enough.

You're going to have a period over the next few years where enough people will get better off enough to feel that they have got a stake in the status quo. Appealing to the Labour base, which is what Corbyn will do, will be enough to secure a 25-28% vote share, but no more than that.

If a left-leaning Labour Govt is to return, it needs to do so on a different programme. It needs a coherent philosophical basis that explains the problems in the neo-lib model, but doesn't replace them with 1970s corporatism. It needs a basis that comes from Picketty's approach. Free markets, yes, but with the state playing an increased role to tax wealth and redistribute.

And THEN, it needs a dynamic figurehead to distill that message down to something that will inspire 40% of the population.

Corbyn isn't that man on either count. He's a throwback to Bennite corporatism and he will not inspire anyone who isn't already a believer.

I tend to agree with you in terms of what Labour have to do, but further to that there is a real problem in that they also have to be different and how can Labour be different when the Tories have actually positioned themselves quite well?  What can Labour do that is different and appeals?  That's quite tough actually.  What is sure is that none of the candidates are that exciting are they?

Sorry Billy, its not often I disagree with you but I have to on this one.

I think Corbyn has gained a lot of support outside the confines of New Labour and I think he has the policies to bring back a lot of Scottish votes and the UKIP protest vote in the North of which there was masses (I personally door knocked in 8 marginals during the 12 month  up to the election with the organisation I work for). The amount of people, especially middle aged, who no longer identified with Labour being the party for the working class and therefore voted UKIP as they would never vote Tory, was shocking. The meek rancid twaddle coming out of Burnham, Cooper and Kendall will not inspire anyone to vote Labour again.

I do however agree with you and BFYP re. Osborne. I agree, his budget will make some people feel a bit better off which is why Labour HAVE to come up with something more radical and inspiring to Tory voters too. A bit like this.....

 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-jeremy-corbyn-policies-that-most-people-actually-agree-with-10407148.html

[BobG]

Unless Labour can find a philosophy, a leader and a set of policies that delivers a minimum of 40% of the vote, they will continue to be the irrelevancy they are today. Can you seriously see Corbyn delivering that level of  vote share Jon? And when you think about it. please don't forget the impact that the press will have on his standing in the country. The press make or break the Labour Party at election time. They've done it for decades. The last Labour leader to win an election without the party bribing the press first was Harold Wilson. Why on Earth do you think Tony Blair got in bed with Rupert Murdoch? The press have crucified every single credible leader since Wilson - and most of the not credible ones too. Tony Blair's right wing approach worked. None of the left wing approaches have ever done so in the last 50 years.

So just how is Corbyn going to win an election? I hope he would. But he's not ever going to is he? He will marginalise the Labour Party for more than a generation.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Jon

Genuine question. Were you an adult in 1981?

We in the Labour Party had this debate then. We called it catastrophically wrong. We convinced ourselves that the arguments that you are putting forward would convince enough people to put Labour into power.

They didn't.

What they did was to split the Left and give Labour an unelectable platform. And the result of that was to unleash Thatcherism, red in tooth and claw.

There's a historical lesson for you. Thatcherism was created by self-indulgent left-of-centre people who assumed that, because THEY knew that they had the right arguments (and they DID) the rest of the country would follow them (they didn't).

A wise man once said that if you do not know your history, you are doomed to repeat it. I fear a repeat of 1980/81 is on the way because of a Labour Party that does not know its history. If it is, then the consequences of Osborne-unleashed will be due to the likes of you.

Sorry to be so blunt, but it is THAT important.

[jonrover]

Ok, Bob & BST. Assuming both of you are correct, and I do agree with you both on some aspects of your arguments like the media aspect (even though the advent of social media is changing the game - exactly why Cameron wants to monitor it), do you see any of the others, or anyone else in the party for that matter, as being a voice of real change that the youth of this country want? That is really why my age in 1981 is irrelevant (i was 7 btw), it's people who have  hit 40 and below who have lived through thatcherite shit all my life in both Tory and Labour governments who demand something better for my kid. I have been incredibly lucky to be where I am today, a very good job, decent pay and will get a pension that is ranked in the top 5 schemes in the country and plan to hang my boots up at 60 with a third of my final salary in my pocket a month. And I didn't do particularly well at school with no university education until my union sent me as a shop steward which led to where I am today. I have fallen on my feet. Unless my daughter is as lucky as me, to get even close she will be riddled with debt all her life. Does she not deserve the same free university education you and I assume Bob both got? That is why Labour lost the last election. Miliband fiddled round the edges on this and many other policies, offering no real alternative to the foul shit the Tories were offering. Corbyn will offer a real alternative and I think he can bring the "Middle England" votes with him, if he offers radical policy changes on transport (privatisation of rail costs tax payers TWELVE TIMES more in subsidies than when nationalised, savings which could reduce commuter fairs and improve services) housing (rent controls to stop landlords creaming off another tax payer subsidy in housing benefit) and tax avoidance and evasion which is the biggest scandal for a generation. Blair and New Labour are as much to blame for all of these things as the Tories for embracing them. That's why they weren't elected. That's why they are terminal in Scotland. And that's why if Corbyn doesn't win, I will chop my card up and post it to Iain McNeil. Because if someone cannot offer something better than a reinflated neoliberal bubble, we might as well start putting kids down mines and sent people like me to Australia on a one way ticket because that is what my daughter's future will look like.

[IC1967]

Ok, Bob & BST. Assuming both of you are correct, and I do agree with you both on some aspects of your arguments like the media aspect (even though the advent of social media is changing the game - exactly why Cameron wants to monitor it), do you see any of the others, or anyone else in the party for that matter, as being a voice of real change that the youth of this country want? That is really why my age in 1981 is irrelevant (i was 7 btw), it's people who have  hit 40 and below who have lived through thatcherite shit all my life in both Tory and Labour governments who demand something better for my kid. I have been incredibly lucky to be where I am today, a very good job, decent pay and will get a pension that is ranked in the top 5 schemes in the country and plan to hang my boots up at 60 with a third of my final salary in my pocket a month. And I didn't do particularly well at school with no university education until my union sent me as a shop steward which led to where I am today. I have fallen on my feet. Unless my daughter is as lucky as me, to get even close she will be riddled with debt all her life. Does she not deserve the same free university education you and I assume Bob both got? That is why Labour lost the last election. Miliband fiddled round the edges on this and many other policies, offering no real alternative to the foul shit the Tories were offering. Corbyn will offer a real alternative and I think he can bring the "Middle England" votes with him, if he offers radical policy changes on transport (privatisation of rail costs tax payers TWELVE TIMES more in subsidies than when nationalised, savings which could reduce commuter fairs and improve services) housing (rent controls to stop landlords creaming off another tax payer subsidy in housing benefit) and tax avoidance and evasion which is the biggest scandal for a generation. Blair and New Labour are as much to blame for all of these things as the Tories for embracing them. That's why they weren't elected. That's why they are terminal in Scotland. And that's why if Corbyn doesn't win, I will chop my card up and post it to Iain McNeil. Because if someone cannot offer something better than a reinflated neoliberal bubble, we might as well start putting kids down mines and sent people like me to Australia on a one way ticket because that is what my daughter's future will look like.

Don't let BST and Bob put you off voting for Jeremy. It's the 'right' thing to do. You hardcore lefties need a voice. Claim your party back from the right wingers. Tell them to go and join the Tories.

I do hope you are going to send your daughter to university. It is still free for a lot of people who will never earn enough to pay the debt back. Currently it is estimated that 75% of graduates won't pay the debt back because they won't earn enough money. You say you've done alright for yourself. No doubt this was in the public sector by the sounds of it. Sounds to me like you can afford to help her anyway. If you can't then why on earth are you retiring early?

I've got 2 children. It never entered my head not to send them to university. One of them has already bought a house aged 22 for £150,000. The other one spent 5 years at university and now has a Masters and can speak fluent French. He is going to earn a lot of money. He doesn't mind paying his loan back because his life chances have improved dramatically with the education he's received.  My daughter doesn't yet earn enough to pay anything back but she will do when she becomes a teacher in about a years time. She's quite happy to start paying the loan back and they are both extremely glad they were encouraged to go to university. I pray to God that your hard left dogma that your body is riddled with doesn't stop her going to university. If it does, shame on you.

IC1967

[BillyStubbsTears]

Jon

I understand your grievances and I share them.

But we went through this in the 1980s. EXACTLY the same arguments.

Labour doesn't stand up for the ordinary people
Labour has gone too far to the right
The country wants a genuinely and strongly left wing alternative
Middle England will come with us if we go that way.

You don't need me to tell you the outcome.

You bemoan the fact that you have lived your life in Thatcherite or quasi-Thatcherite times. You know who was responsible for Thatcher? The idiotic and self-indulgent Labour left who convinced themselves that they were right and who made Labour unelectable for a generation.

Don't do it again.

[The Red Baron]

Jon- you talk about "Middle England," which is actually a pretty meaningless phrase. However, if by that you mean the sort of people whom Labour needs to attract in order to win elections, then consider this. Since Attlee, only two Labour leaders have overturned incumbent Tory governments. They were Wilson and Blair. Both achieved it by making Labour attractive to more affluent voters. Both were - and are- condemned by ideological purists in the Labour ranks for being too right-wing, "selling out" even.

Having said all that and leaving Corbyn to one side, there are no Wilsons or Blairs amongst the other candidates. I suspect it will be difficult for any of them to win in 2020. But at least Burnham or Cooper won't cause the party to go to war with itself.

[BillyStubbsTears]

TRB

I'm of the belief that no Opposition wins an Election. Govts lose them.

Labour lost 2010 because of the 207-09 calamity
Tories lost 1997 because the person who was supposed to put a kind face on Thatcherism presided over Black Weds and a clusterf**k Govt
Labour lost 1979 because of a combination of the economic conditions and the WoD
Tories lost 1974 because they lost control of being able to run the country.
Labour lost 1970 because the humiliation of devaluation was still raw.

Etc, etc.

The hagiography of Blair misses the fact that he was lucky to be where he was, when he was. It wasn't Blair wot won it. It was the Tories wot lost it. John Smith would have won a 100+ seat majority on 1997.

That said, Oppositions can lose elections that they ought to win. 1992 is a classic example, and perhaps 2015. Labour CAN win in 2020, but only if the economy seriously goes off the rails. And then only if Labour has someone who won't scare the midlle class horses. Burnham and Cooper are bland and passionless, but they could win in 2020 IF and only IF the Tories screw up. Corbyn won't. Regardless of how bad the Tories are. Period.

[The Red Baron]

I agree about John Smith, but of course he was a decent man and politically a centre-left moderate. It would be wrong to say that anyone could have won in 1997, but circumstances favoured Labour and to be fair they had a decent array of talent to choose from. It is worth comparing Blair's first cabinet with the current shadow cabinet, for instance.

If Labour had moved left from Kinnock, history might have been very different, of course.

[BillyStubbsTears]

TRB

I'm not saying ANYONE could have won in 97. I'm saying that it didn't need a Blair moving so far to the right to win.

[IC1967]

I'm finding it hilarious watching Labour fall apart. It's obvious what policies they should espouse if they ever want a chance to be elected. Here are a few:

1 Out of Europe.
2 Nationalisation of the railways and utilities.
3 Living within the country's means.
4 Public sector to never be more than 35% of the economy.
5 Less welfare spending.
6 Tax rates to fall every year in office.
7 Abolish Trident.

(Don't assume these are all policies that I agree with).

I could go on. They need to differentiate themselves from the Tories. They need to realise that no-one is  going to vote for a watered down version of the Tory party when they can have the real thing.

I also notice that UKIP are being completely ignored in this debate. This is a very foolish thing to do. Labour should be nicking most of their policies and that would get them a huge shot in the arm. The way it's going I fully expect UKIP to become the main opposition to the Tories after the next election.

IC1967

[The Red Baron]

TRB

I'm not saying ANYONE could have won in 97. I'm saying that it didn't need a Blair moving so far to the right to win.

Neither am I, but the fact is Blair won.

Maybe better to look at how Harold Wilson got Labour to win.

[The Red Baron]

I'm finding it hilarious watching Labour fall apart. It's obvious what policies they should espouse if they ever want a chance to be elected. Here are a few:

1 Out of Europe.
2 Nationalisation of the railways and utilities.
3 Living within the country's means.
4 Public sector to never be more than 35% of the economy.
5 Less welfare spending.
6 Tax rates to fall every year in office.
7 Abolish Trident.

(Don't assume these are all policies that I agree with).

I could go on. They need to differentiate themselves from the Tories. They need to realise that no-one is  going to vote for a watered down version of the Tory party when they can have the real thing.

I also notice that UKIP are being completely ignored in this debate. This is a very foolish thing to do. Labour should be nicking most of their policies and that would get them a huge shot in the arm. The way it's going I fully expect UKIP to become the main opposition to the Tories after the next election.

IC1967

Interesting that you don't mention strict immigration controls. I realise that to an extent it goes hand in hand with the European issue. But I am sure that is the main reason for people switching from Labour to UKIP.

[IC1967]

I'm finding it hilarious watching Labour fall apart. It's obvious what policies they should espouse if they ever want a chance to be elected. Here are a few:

1 Out of Europe.
2 Nationalisation of the railways and utilities.
3 Living within the country's means.
4 Public sector to never be more than 35% of the economy.
5 Less welfare spending.
6 Tax rates to fall every year in office.
7 Abolish Trident.

(Don't assume these are all policies that I agree with).

I could go on. They need to differentiate themselves from the Tories. They need to realise that no-one is  going to vote for a watered down version of the Tory party when they can have the real thing.

I also notice that UKIP are being completely ignored in this debate. This is a very foolish thing to do. Labour should be nicking most of their policies and that would get them a huge shot in the arm. The way it's going I fully expect UKIP to become the main opposition to the Tories after the next election.

IC1967

Interesting that you don't mention strict immigration controls. I realise that to an extent it goes hand in hand with the European issue. But I am sure that is the main reason for people switching from Labour to UKIP.

You're right. I do include it as out of Europe but it should be a separate topic. What makes the public's piss boil is that they (and the Tories) only ever bang on about restricting benefits to control immigration. They take the public to be fools as only a tiny percentage of immigrants come for benefits. The public know this won't sort the problem out but that's all they get offered except from UKIP and look how popular they are becoming.

I have come to the conclusion that Labour are run by a bunch of incompetent fools as they only seem to be offering 2 alternatives to the electorate. Tory lite or hard left. Any fool knows that's not going to get them elected.

I am available to sort the party out. They just need to contact me. All I ask is that I am allowed to act like a dictator and have all my policy ideas approved. I'm convinced I could get them elected.


IC1967