Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
What about Dan Jarvis?
What about Dan Jarvis?
What about Dan Jarvis?
Really? It was a very low consideration in voters' minds until it was put right in front of them....
Whilst you are right, it is currently a stick for the other parties to beat them with. Labour is supposed to be the inclusive party who push for equal opportunities. Yet they are also the only one that has never elected a woman as leader. When the Conservatives, Lib Dems, the Nationalists and increasingly the Greens, can use that perception of a lack of diversity over you, then you need to do something to neutralise it. If Labour had gone into an election in it's past with a female leader, then I think it wouldn't be as big a problem, and the 'best candidate' would be appropriate. However I think Labour need to solve this problem and on this occasion I think being female would be a requirement to be the best candidate.Of course there’s been two female party leaders (one blue one orange) in recent memory who have been resounding success stories...
I really object to the idea that a female leader should be chosen simply because of that. Best candidate for job does it for me, female or male.
Labour has a far bigger problem than what sex the leader is. For starters there’s actually accepting the election result, and it seems the momentum types are currently in sheer denial about that. Every time we see or read on social media some hippy youngster denigrating the result as “disgusting” or bleating on about how “if we all pull together it can be reversed” that’s a further drop down the slope to oblivion (IMO).
The remain side simply didn’t and don’t get just how much latent anti-EU feeling existed.
I might have to rejoin and vote for someone sensible. Nandy seems to be being pushed by sensible people but she is a bit of unknown to me so i will have to do some research on her posistion.
I just don’t buy that. If it was such very low consideration then we wouldn’t have seen UKIP representing such a threat to the major parties.
ExactlyWhilst you are right, it is currently a stick for the other parties to beat them with. Labour is supposed to be the inclusive party who push for equal opportunities. Yet they are also the only one that has never elected a woman as leader. When the Conservatives, Lib Dems, the Nationalists and increasingly the Greens, can use that perception of a lack of diversity over you, then you need to do something to neutralise it. If Labour had gone into an election in it's past with a female leader, then I think it wouldn't be as big a problem, and the 'best candidate' would be appropriate. However I think Labour need to solve this problem and on this occasion I think being female would be a requirement to be the best candidate.
Equally, whilst I'm all for men standing up and calling out misogyny where ever they see it, calling out Johnson's misogyny will be so much more effective if it comes from a woman.
Whilst you are right, it is currently a stick for the other parties to beat them with. Labour is supposed to be the inclusive party who push for equal opportunities. Yet they are also the only one that has never elected a woman as leader. When the Conservatives, Lib Dems, the Nationalists and increasingly the Greens, can use that perception of a lack of diversity over you, then you need to do something to neutralise it. If Labour had gone into an election in it's past with a female leader, then I think it wouldn't be as big a problem, and the 'best candidate' would be appropriate. However I think Labour need to solve this problem and on this occasion I think being female would be a requirement to be the best candidate.
Equally, whilst I'm all for men standing up and calling out misogyny where ever they see it, calling out Johnson's misogyny will be so much more effective if it comes from a woman.
They wont do that. This is an at least 2 term ( and perhaps 2 leader ) project and it needs to start now with the right leader to clean out the stable.
Looking at the data from Lord Ashcroft's polls, it shows that men chose Conservatives over Labour by a 19 point margin, 48% vs 29%. Labour also have more female MPs than male, 53% vs 47%, and operate sexist no men shortlist, I'm not convinced that appointing someone because of their sex is the right choice. Labour already have a big problem attracting the male vote, let's not make that more difficult.
But Farage is the complete antithesis of everything else you called for: a (paid for) education at Dulwich College in the leafiest part of S.E. London and then into the City of London, having grown up in the grittiest part of the London Borough of Bromley, Farnborough/Downe. So why shouldn't Labour appoint a pretend 'man/woman of the people' to try to con people in the same way as Farage and his hero Trump?I think they need a real "Northern" MP to try to regain the lost Northern heartlands. Not a Londoner parachuted in to a Northern constituency, or a Northerner by birth who now lives their life in London - a proper Northerner who still lives and works in the North. They need someone credible to take the problems of the regions seriously and who understands what needs to be done to start to break down the North/South divide. If they could find someone it could be an easy sell to regain the Northern constituencies with Boris being a Londoner himself. But it also needs to be a "man/woman of the people" - heaven forbid, but someone with the persona of Farage who can come across as a believable bloke in the pub.
Mmm, yes, there's nothing wrong with lying about WMD's to destabilize a country.Come back tony blair, all is forgiven.
Indeed.Mmm, yes, there's nothing wrong with lying about WMD's to destabilize a country.
Yes please! That should secure the next couple of GEs for the Conservatives.Supposed dream ticket of Rebecca Long-Bailey as leader and Angela Raynor as deputy...
https://order-order.com/2019/12/16/rayner-long-bailey-dream-ticket-rumours/
Looking at the data from Lord Ashcroft's polls, it shows that men chose Conservatives over Labour by a 19 point margin, 48% vs 29%. Labour also have more female MPs than male, 53% vs 47%, and operate sexist no men shortlists, I'm not convinced that appointing someone because of their sex is the right choice. Labour already have a big problem attracting the male vote, let's not make that more difficult.
[snip]
As for all women shortlists... the results speak for themselves.
Are you really saying that Labour lost those elections because of women-only shortlists?Vividly. 4 straight election losses on the bounce. 2010, 2015, 2017 & 2019. And almost certainly 2024.
The focus has to be on skills and ability, not sex (or skin colour, religion, sexuality, or some other irrelevant factor). All woman shortlists hasn't improved the quality of Labour MPs.
How does Labour attract talent, and voters, of both sexes?
Supposed dream ticket of Rebecca Long-Bailey as leader and Angela Raynor as deputy...
https://order-order.com/2019/12/16/rayner-long-bailey-dream-ticket-rumours/
Are you really saying that Labour lost those elections because of women-only shortlists?
Vividly. 4 straight election losses on the bounce. 2010, 2015, 2017 & 2019. And almost certainly 2024.
The focus has to be on skills and ability, not sex (or skin colour, religion, sexuality, or some other irrelevant factor). All woman shortlists hasn't improved the quality of Labour MPs.
How does Labour attract talent, and voters, of both sexes?
Ipsos MORI's issues index shows that the EU wasn't a particularly big concern until late 2015 at which point it suddenly became of great interest to the public. I should point out of course that this doesn't show the feeling towards it, just how important the topic is perceived to be.
Are you really saying that Labour lost those elections because of women-only shortlists?
It's just another one of many factors. In my constituency, Labour had a female MP for 13 years, but that was because she was a local woman who was well know as she'd been a local councillor for years.
In the last 4 elections, potential male candidates who were likewise local and local councillors who were locally popular didn't get a look in because of all female short lists, which has resulted in, 4 times, a woman from outside the area being parachuted in, no local knowledge, no local reputation, etc. All 4 have been the same "kind" of people - trotting out the official Labour line, exceptionally patronising, zero local knowledge, etc. Same result every time - losing to a local, well known, popular Tory, despite the area being a run down Northern town with lots of social problems (i.e. what should be an easy Labour win).
The big hallucination about all women shortlists is we are supposed to believe women bring something special or unique to the table. Yet, at the same time, Labour’s manifesto essentially claims there’s no difference between men and women, that men can identify as women and fully claim all the privileges and societal protections of womanhood, and that being a woman merely depends on whether you feel like one and not whether you actually are one.
I’m not opposed to a woman being the next leader of the party, but I can’t think of one that would appeal to me. Phillips is the only one with a big enough personality to square up to Johnson, but she’s annoying and lacks some credibility. She’d need a few of her rough edges knocked off to be seriously considered PM material.
Labour must challenge Boris and the Tories. Many of the problems with the country today have arisen because the government has been poor and the opposition to utterly feckless that they’ve been unable to hold them to account. I don’t agree Labour have two terms; I think with the right approach they could challenge Boris in 2024, and even get a majority. He’s a poor administrator and will get many things wrong.