Bollitics The new leader of the Labour Party

[Richard]

I wonder why this thread has appeared?

I'll answer that for you, as it is my thread. It has appeared because it is obvious that Edward is doing a spectacularly shite job as leader of the opposition and fairly obvious that many many people from his own side actually would like to see him replaced.All my opinion obviously

In addition, in my opinion, there will be a leadership change in that party before the GE

That is why the thread has appeard. It is not as a result of some party line, which I guess is what you ae thinking Ian. I know some points are made on VT which look like they have come straight from a party dictat, this is not one of them so sorry about that if that is what you are thinking you are worng again.

[drat01]

of Cameron and the cabinet, I wonder why this thread has appeared?

As for Cameron's so called joke, it was crass and awful, and showed more about him as a person and a totally and utterly incompetent PM. I wonder if he will ever actually answer a point in PMQ other than those that are pre-arranged from his own back benchers?

He had exactly the same for about 2 years when he was shadow leader.

and the joke was pretty good, although jokes shouldn't really be used in the house too often.

Ed seems to enjoy using them though.

Eh? That is not the point.

PMQ is supposedly a time when the whole HoC can ask questions and expect answers from the PM. Cameron it seems can and will only answer pre-aranged questions from fawning back benchers. Tony claimed the other day he was statesmanlike, but as we have seen on numerous occasions he is nothing like that. His so called "joke" avoided answering the point raised and we have seen lots of times when cornered he resorts to the typical "flashman" bullying style, again not something that we should see from a PM, or anyone in fact.

And for the record the "joke" was not good or funny. Its a real shame that a leader of a party one who is on record as saying he wanted to get rid of Punch and Judy politics actually does more to encourage that style than anyone before him.

[thetrees]

I can sniff a cut and paste job from 50 paces.

And to think, I was about to give him some credit for a well reasoned post.

Was it the lack of personal insults and any references to "Scamron" that gave him away?

If a Tory will do anything for money, a Labourite will do anything for credibility :winkold:

[Richard]

though i like this one much better from Cameron "He [Miliband] has completely united his party. Every single one of them has asked Santa for the same thing: a new leader for Christmas.”

I actually prefered the line where he referenced Edward saying that fightback began in Scotland.

[snowychap]

...and the joke was pretty good...

It was slightly amusing a couple of months ago when Osborne gave it an outing at the Tory conference.

[tonyh29]

though i like this one much better from Cameron "He [Miliband] has completely united his party. Every single one of them has asked Santa for the same thing: a new leader for Christmas.”

I actually prefered the line where he referenced Edward saying that fightback began in Scotland.

oh yeah I'd forgotten that gem

can't wait for "best of" montage when Ed walks

[drat01]

i think you need to check back to the economic thread where your very good self brought up personalities (i even sent you a "H" for it Smile )

Tony - you really are getting desperate now. That point, as you well know, was in response to Gideon's frankly homophobic comment, and his track record of other crass remarks such as his "autistic" joke. That is not personality politics, or likening a politician to a "monkey". Come on you are better than that. Admit it you are wrong (again)

tbf it shows more that absolutely anything Cameron says is wrong in your eyes , rather than anything about Cameron

As stated above if you are happy for "punch and judy" politics then great. I look forward to you saying Cameron is statesmanlike again in the future plus your defence of his previous stance about getting away from Punch and Judy politics style

poor effort , the Unions WERE /ARE responsible for Ed being leader of the labour party so AWOl (and myself) are correct

Pete stated a fair point that Unite didn't unfairly try and sway him but end of the day 49 per cent of voters did follow their union’s recommendation when choosing who to vote for....David was clearly ahead in terms of support from the party establishment and from members of the Labour party.... so removing those from the equation , that leaves you with ...... the Unions

... simples

Tony - are you actually reading all of the quotes now, it does not appear to be that way. Give yourself a few minutes and read them again. To save a bit of time I will recap. AWOL said that the Labour leader was voted for by Union leaders. Pete B rightly pointed that out to be wrong as the union vote is decided by members. I added to that by saying that there is no "rule" that says you have to be a Labour supporter to participate in that vote.

I am struggling to see which bit of that you can't / wont understand.

So you are not correct at all because the point AWOL said was that the leaders of the Unions decided. Also the Union vote, as you well know, is not the only part of the electoral procedure. Again nothing but attempted deflection and / or misunderstanding on your part.

[Richard]

Also the Union vote, as you well know, is not the only part of the electoral procedure.

Seems to be the main part though considering that David "won" the other sections but Edward "won" the union one and voila (see a Tory using a French word, and we are all supposed to hate Europe) Edward is leader.

How does that happen then?

[tonyh29]

As for Cameron's so called joke, it was crass and awful, and showed more about him as a person

does this extend to

"The Chancellor of the Exchequer has lashed himself to the mast ... not for the first time, perhaps." ©Eds gag writer before she got sacked for not being funny

[snowychap]

though i like this one much better from Cameron...

I actually prefered the line ...

So, what was the point of the thread, Richard?

Was it actually to discuss whether people think Miliband may not have much time as Labour leader and who might replace him if he were to stand down?

Or was it just as another vehicle for tribalistic commenting?

[kidlewis]

Eh? That is not the point.

PMQ is supposedly a time when the whole HoC can ask questions and expect answers from the PM.

If that is the case then why was Flash Gordon using his question deflector shield for the last 12 months of his "reign" as PM?

he was terrible when it came to answering questions directly in PMQs.

[Richard]

As for Cameron's so called joke, it was crass and awful, and showed more about him as a person

does this extend to

"The Chancellor of the Exchequer has lashed himself to the mast ... not for the first time, perhaps." ©Eds gag writer before she got sacked for not being funny

Does that even make sense?

[tonyh29]

As for Cameron's so called joke, it was crass and awful, and showed more about him as a person

does this extend to

"The Chancellor of the Exchequer has lashed himself to the mast ... not for the first time, perhaps." ©Eds gag writer before she got sacked for not being funny

Does that even make sense?

it was some S&M joke but also probably explains why Ed sacked her in the long run

[Richard]

though i like this one much better from Cameron...

I actually prefered the line ...

So, what was the point of the thread, Richard?

Was it actually to discuss whether people think Miliband may not have much time as Labour leader and who might replace him if he were to stand down?

Or was it just as another vehicle for tribalistic commenting?

Point was the first one chap. See my reply to Ian's question as to why this thread has appeared

My quoting and referencing to comments used by Cameron was specifically referencing a point made by Tony in his post. Tis allowed methinks.

[snowychap]

Eh? That is not the point.

PMQ is supposedly a time when the whole HoC can ask questions and expect answers from the PM.

If that is the case then why was Flash Gordon using his question deflector shield for the last 12 months of his "reign" as PM?

he was terrible when it came to answering questions directly in PMQs.

Indeed (though I'm not sure it was limited to the last year of Gordo or whether it wasn't just the same under Blair, Major and Thatch).

PMQs generally continues in the same vein as before with most of the opposition leader's questions being answered by the PM either asking for the opposition to put forward a policy or pointing out that they haven't got a fully costed, detailed policy - Gordo played that hand and Cameron is doing the same. It was silly before and it's silly now.

[Richard]

As for Cameron's so called joke, it was crass and awful, and showed more about him as a person

does this extend to

"The Chancellor of the Exchequer has lashed himself to the mast ... not for the first time, perhaps." ©Eds gag writer before she got sacked for not being funny

Does that even make sense?

it was some S&M joke but also probably explains why Ed sacked her in the long run

Follow up was probably going to be a question as to where Osbourne gets his ready meals from, as some form of M&S joke.

[drat01]

As for Cameron's so called joke, it was crass and awful, and showed more about him as a person

does this extend to

"The Chancellor of the Exchequer has lashed himself to the mast ... not for the first time, perhaps." ©Eds gag writer before she got sacked for not being funny

as the saying says when you play with fire etc. and how that applies to what I wrote and you try and claim is hypocrisy is way beyond me. Again I think you are not actually reading the posts

Gideon has a track record of being a nasty piece of work, I prefer to call him odious.

The point is still there that you are again conveniently missing the point re Cameron and PMQ especially. You claim he acts statesmanlike, but the evidence proves that not to be the case. You have said before under the last Gvmt that you prefer that the PM acts like a leader of the country, again that "rule" of your no longer applies.

[drat01]

Eh? That is not the point.

PMQ is supposedly a time when the whole HoC can ask questions and expect answers from the PM.

If that is the case then why was Flash Gordon using his question deflector shield for the last 12 months of his "reign" as PM?

he was terrible when it came to answering questions directly in PMQs.

KL you are not making any sort of sense now, sorry.

I am assuming you are talking about Brown there. There was a often used argument especially from Cameron et al and his supporters on here that followed that same view. How then is it OK for Cameron to do the same if not more so?

As pointed out Cameron is on record about not wanting to play that game, but as we all know he is on record saying a lot of things and not meaning them?

Tory supporters cannot claim that their leader is statesmanlike and then be happy that he refuses to answer any questions that are not pre-arranged. Nor can they make the same claim and then be happy that he enters into something that would be considered lame in a sixth form end of term revue.

It's quite simple, what rules do you want to play under?

[blandy]

Pete stated a fair point that Unite didn't unfairly try and sway him but end of the day 49 per cent of voters did follow their union’s recommendation when choosing who to vote for....David was clearly ahead in terms of support from the party establishment and from members of the Labour party.... so removing those from the equation , that leaves you with ...... the Unions

... simples

Just a bit more on this. Because 49% of Union members voted for the same person (EM) as their Union leader also supported doesn't mean they simply followed recommendation. It tends to suggest that the ordinary members and the leaders had, to a significant degree, the same view.

Secondly, this thing about Labour being sort of under the thumb of the Unions as if the Unions were some sort of ogre exercising dark control - Each union member can voluntarily contribute a small amount each month to their unions political fund. This money goes (mostly) to Labour (some to other political campaign costs). We choose to give it. We choose, as individuals, to support labour in this way. And as labour supporters, we get a vote.

It seems pretty open and above board, to me.

[tonyh29]

anyway enough of the Punch and Judy stuff

Ian , Who would you like to be the next leader ? or indeed are you happy with Ed ?

would be interesting to hear the views form a labour voter on the subject