Saturday 16th, and Sunday 17th. May Weekend Edition.

[rebeccariots2]

I freely admit I don't understand the Scotland scenario - the visceral hatred that seems to be very much aimed at Labour. I have no idea how it will go in the future ... all very unknown ... but probably best that nothing re Scotland is relied upon and let Labour in Scotland try to do what it thinks it needs to.

I keep meaning to get back in touch with some friends who live and work in Scotland - in the countryside outside Glasgow - to see where they are with it all. I have absolutely no idea what their politics might be now - should be interesting.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Or more accurately, the SNP has to lose Scotland rather than Labour "winning it back". It looks unlikely right now I know, but a look at Quebec shows what can happen.

Though I think the Scottish Labour party is very likely to go fully independent now - that may help a bit.

Back on the topic of the "London" leadership - no Chuka muck-raking in today's papers it seems, so why *did* he withdraw?

Why bother running it if he has withdrawn? It goes back into the filing cabinet for the next time it is needed.

Aah - you're even more cynical than I am TGS - and probably right. That would make the eel skin lined room of the members club he frequents story the plan B substitute then. No wonder it's so limp.

My cynicism has been carefully nurtured over time, and is now finely honed. But in this instance I wouldn't take any bet that said I was wrong; if just the threat of it was enough to get him to back down then there is no point in wasting it. It also suggests that he was not the right man for the job anyway if he crumbles under the first threat, especially when you compare it with what Ed was subjected to.

[SpinningHugo]

I freely admit I don't understand the Scotland scenario - the visceral hatred that seems to be very much aimed at Labour. I have no idea how it will go in the future ... all very unknown ... but probably best that nothing re Scotland is relied upon and let Labour in Scotland try to do what it thinks it needs to.

I keep meaning to get back in touch with some friends who live and work in Scotland - in the countryside outside Glasgow - to see where they are with it all. I have absolutely no idea what their politics might be now - should be interesting.

We are now so far behind in the large majority of Scottish seats that it would take an earthquake to win back more than 2 or 3.


We have to think about how to win Nuneaton.

[rebeccariots2]

Keir Starmer ‏@Keir_Starmer 32m32 minutes ago
V flattered by #keirforleader initiative and thanks for so many supportive messages but Labour needs s/one with more political experience.

[Swarthlander]

The SNP, like the Tories, will have to deal with problems of their own making.
The SNP electorate, whether Nat or not, now expect paradise on a plate.
Westminster will allow them devolution/FFA and when the SNP government have to raise taxes and bring in their own austerity, being virtually the only political party in Scotland, the SNP will have no-one to blame/argue with when things start to go wrong.

It's very early days yet. In 12 to 18 months both the Tories and the SNP could have big problems to deal with. Unfortunately, it's always the innocent that are the casualties.

[rebeccariots2]

Chris Bryant MP ‏@RhonddaBryant 1m1 minute ago
It's perplexing to have had emails asking me to stand! If you honestly think Chris Bryant is the answer you're asking the wrong question.

[utopiandreams]

Chris Bryant MP ‏@RhonddaBryant 1m1 minute ago
It's perplexing to have had emails asking me to stand! If you honestly think Chris Bryant is the answer you're asking the wrong question.

I don't see him as leadership material quite frankly, rebecca, but have liked the way he challenges members in the House. Apparently however it is unparliamentary to call a liar one to their face.

[rebeccariots2]

The SNP, like the Tories, will have to deal with problems of their own making.
The SNP electorate, whether Nat or not, now expect paradise on a plate.
Westminster will allow them devolution/FFA and when the SNP government have to raise taxes and bring in their own austerity, being virtually the only political party in Scotland, the SNP will have no-one to blame/argue with when things start to go wrong.

It's very early days yet. In 12 to 18 months both the Tories and the SNP could have big problems to deal with. Unfortunately, it's always the innocent that are the casualties.

I don't think Cameron will go as far as FFA though - he wants to keep the SNP strong with as it makes it harder for Labour to start regrouping and building towards any small gains. And the SNP don't really want FFA now ... it would make it difficult for them - and they want to get the next Holyrood election under their belt without that being a big part of the equation for voters. So not sure about the 12 - 18 months timetable for cracks to become evident.

[tinyclanger2]

The SNP phenomenon, the people who would rather have no payrise than a smaller payrise than a colleague, and the lack of political literacy all suggest that a rational approach will not be enough. I'm with (Robert?) on the whole narrative thing, but nevertheless it's what wins it for the Tories. Trouble is we need both the right stories and a vehicle to compete with the Mail, Sun, Times, Telegraph. We have to reclaim the BBC - that will require sustained pressure, but we need to be very careful not to give the Tories the means to close it down.

[rebeccariots2]

Chris Bryant MP ‏@RhonddaBryant 1m1 minute ago
It's perplexing to have had emails asking me to stand! If you honestly think Chris Bryant is the answer you're asking the wrong question.

I don't see him as leadership material quite frankly, rebecca, but have liked the way he challenges members in the House. Apparently however it is unparliamentary to call a liar one to their face.

No me neither - and he obviously doesn't see himself as that either. I liked the way he basically called out the suggestions as preposterous.

[tinyclanger2]

Chris Bryant MP ‏@RhonddaBryant 1m1 minute ago
It's perplexing to have had emails asking me to stand! If you honestly think Chris Bryant is the answer you're asking the wrong question.

I don't see him as leadership material quite frankly, rebecca, but have liked the way he challenges members in the House. Apparently however it is unparliamentary to call a liar one to their face.

One would hope that it might be considered unparliamentary to lie.

[utopiandreams]

The SNP phenomenon, the people who would rather have no payrise than a smaller payrise than a colleague, and the lack of political literacy all suggest that a rational approach will not be enough. I'm with (Robert?) on the whole narrative thing, but nevertheless it's what wins it for the Tories. Trouble is we need both the right stories and a vehicle to compete with the Mail, Sun, Times, Telegraph. We have to reclaim the BBC - that will require sustained pressure, but we need to be very careful not to give the Tories the means to close it down.

I'm largely in agreement, tinyclanger (alright without the 2 or has it significance?), but the media thing is another issue. Take the Guardian for example, many of the contributors here think ill of it for having moved further right, whereas right leaning individuals simply dismiss it as a lefty publication to be mocked. Can't really win against the majority direction of flow. Diminishing the power of the press to spread lies and propaganda is what's required but I don't mean censorship. Which then begs the question, whose pov is the truth?

Wasn't there an inquiry into this? I wonder what happened to that!

Edit: stopped questioning my exclamation.

[ohsocynical]

I'll report an observation I've made this morning. For some reason after a Firefox update FTN is not loading up, neither was my bank so probably an issue with Firefox. Anyway having come here using Chrome i find than when I thank someone I'm automatically returned to the post I thanked after a few seconds without clicking my way back. Anybody else?

I've only ever used Chrome...That's what it does.

[AnatolyKasparov]

I freely admit I don't understand the Scotland scenario - the visceral hatred that seems to be very much aimed at Labour. I have no idea how it will go in the future ... all very unknown ... but probably best that nothing re Scotland is relied upon and let Labour in Scotland try to do what it thinks it needs to.

I keep meaning to get back in touch with some friends who live and work in Scotland - in the countryside outside Glasgow - to see where they are with it all. I have absolutely no idea what their politics might be now - should be interesting.

We are now so far behind in the large majority of Scottish seats that it would take an earthquake to win back more than 2 or 3.


We have to think about how to win Nuneaton.

Scotland is sui generis, any eventual move against the SNP is likely to be big not piecemeal.

But yes, "London" Labour needs to leave the Scottish party to its own devices now and worry about England *and* Wales (where our results were notably poor, but few noticed)

[ephemerid]

King, Richard I – “I would have sold London if I could find a buyer”

Bearing in mind our leaders' distant royal origins.

Royal my arse.

All the aristocracy are who they are and where they are thanks to the appropriation of land from common ownership - it might have happened a very long time ago, but nevertheless our royalty and aristos are living on the proceeds of theft.

There have been some interesting posts here about origins and accents. My daughter was born in Gloucester, and has a slight West Country accent - she has white skin, blonde hair, and one blue eye and another half blue and half hazel. She considers herself to be British, but has a lot of foreign antecedents.
On her fathers' side: she has Cornish mining engineers, Cornish miners, Breton fisherfolk, Devonian farmers, and a few landed Cornish gentry from her paternal grandfathers; she has Scottish doctors, Scottish army officers, at least one French person way back, a few hill farmers, and the entire Clan Armstrong from her paternal grandmother.
On my side: she has Geordie engineers, Geordie Miners, Yorkshire farmers, and someone Dutch a bit further back from my father; she's also got German, Dutch, Belgians and Italians from my mother's side, and, it was alleged but constantly denied by my Oma, some gypsies too, probably from Hungary.
She's a little European and British melting pot - as I am, and as so many of us are.

There are not that many families who can trace their lineage with accuracy back to the vikings or whatever - I get sick to death of all this "Britishness" because there really isn't such a thing if you think about it.
But there's no prejudice if the accent is considered intelligent and the skin colour is not black, brown, or anything other than pinkish.

I also get pissed off with the various nations being allocated skills or attributes that aren't actually there - I live with someone who is living breathing evidence that not all Welsh people can sing. Some of them just think they can. To my frequent pain.

[tinyclanger2]

Hmmm. You've been CONned does have the potential to stir fury among the duped and affected alike - providing we tell the right stories in the right way.
Perhaps our blog - once we get it started - could have a regular column to that effect.
Given how bad journalism is, and the extent to which they just use press releases they receive, we could also potentially consider building a list of journos to alert in due course.

[rebeccariots2]

Interesting blog on the FFA and devolution for Scotland ...

With Great Fiscal Power Comes Great Fiscal Responsibility
http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/0 ... great.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Has a nice turn of phrase and humour running though it. Particularly like this:

The very fact that the meeting took place in Scotland may have been relevant; was this a conciliatory decision on Cameron's part? Of course he may just have been wary of holding the meeting at Number 10 in case Sturgeon attempted to deliver on her promise to lock him out.

[tinyclanger2]

King, Richard I – “I would have sold London if I could find a buyer”

Bearing in mind our leaders' distant royal origins.

Royal my arse.

All the aristocracy are who they are and where they are thanks to the appropriation of land from common ownership - it might have happened a very long time ago, but nevertheless our royalty and aristos are living on the proceeds of theft.

There have been some interesting posts here about origins and accents. My daughter was born in Gloucester, and has a slight West Country accent - she has white skin, blonde hair, and one blue eye and another half blue and half hazel. She considers herself to be British, but has a lot of foreign antecedents.
On her fathers' side: she has Cornish mining engineers, Cornish miners, Breton fisherfolk, Devonian farmers, and a few landed Cornish gentry from her paternal grandfathers; she has Scottish doctors, Scottish army officers, at least one French person way back, a few hill farmers, and the entire Clan Armstrong from her paternal grandmother.
On my side: she has Geordie engineers, Geordie Miners, Yorkshire farmers, and someone Dutch a bit further back from my father; she's also got German, Dutch, Belgians and Italians from my mother's side, and, it was alleged but constantly denied by my Oma, some gypsies too, probably from Hungary.
She's a little European and British melting pot - as I am, and as so many of us are.

There are not that many families who can trace their lineage with accuracy back to the vikings or whatever - I get sick to death of all this "Britishness" because there really isn't such a thing if you think about it.
But there's no prejudice if the accent is considered intelligent and the skin colour is not black, brown, or anything other than pinkish.

I also get pissed off with the various nations being allocated skills or attributes that aren't actually there - I live with someone who is living breathing evidence that not all Welsh people can sing. Some of them just think they can. To my frequent pain.

Indeed. William the C and his 200 closest pals. 1/3 to the church 1/3 to the Bastard and 1/3 to the 200 men. All conveniently handed down through the guys in the HoL.

[rebeccariots2]

I freely admit I don't understand the Scotland scenario - the visceral hatred that seems to be very much aimed at Labour. I have no idea how it will go in the future ... all very unknown ... but probably best that nothing re Scotland is relied upon and let Labour in Scotland try to do what it thinks it needs to.

I keep meaning to get back in touch with some friends who live and work in Scotland - in the countryside outside Glasgow - to see where they are with it all. I have absolutely no idea what their politics might be now - should be interesting.

We are now so far behind in the large majority of Scottish seats that it would take an earthquake to win back more than 2 or 3.


We have to think about how to win Nuneaton.

Scotland is sui generis, any eventual move against the SNP is likely to be big not piecemeal.

But yes, "London" Labour needs to leave the Scottish party to its own devices now and worry about England *and* Wales (where our results were notably poor, but few noticed)

Wales is a real worry. Labour really needs to address itself to several issues right now in preparation for the Assembly elections - in just one year's time.

[ohsocynical]

The SNP phenomenon, the people who would rather have no payrise than a smaller payrise than a colleague, and the lack of political literacy all suggest that a rational approach will not be enough. I'm with (Robert?) on the whole narrative thing, but nevertheless it's what wins it for the Tories. Trouble is we need both the right stories and a vehicle to compete with the Mail, Sun, Times, Telegraph. We have to reclaim the BBC - that will require sustained pressure, but we need to be very careful not to give the Tories the means to close it down.

I stated a few days ago, that we're on a winner if Dave has some sex scandals...The electorate understand that. They can buy the tabloids, be deliciously titillated and will quite happily vote the dirty, two timing sods out.

I laugh but I'm serious. Major lost a lot of support because of that. They were pushing home and family down our throats but playing away.

If Labour tries talking to them about the economy, they're toast.

[AnatolyKasparov]

We are now so far behind in the large majority of Scottish seats that it would take an earthquake to win back more than 2 or 3.


We have to think about how to win Nuneaton.

Scotland is sui generis, any eventual move against the SNP is likely to be big not piecemeal.

But yes, "London" Labour needs to leave the Scottish party to its own devices now and worry about England *and* Wales (where our results were notably poor, but few noticed)

Wales is a real worry. Labour really needs to address itself to several issues right now in preparation for the Assembly elections - in just one year's time.

It is widely agreed that Owen Smith bombed in the Welsh "leaders debate" - that can hardly have helped. Why was he there and not Carwyn anyway?

[Willow904]

I freely admit I don't understand the Scotland scenario - the visceral hatred that seems to be very much aimed at Labour. I have no idea how it will go in the future ... all very unknown ... but probably best that nothing re Scotland is relied upon and let Labour in Scotland try to do what it thinks it needs to.

I keep meaning to get back in touch with some friends who live and work in Scotland - in the countryside outside Glasgow - to see where they are with it all. I have absolutely no idea what their politics might be now - should be interesting.

We are now so far behind in the large majority of Scottish seats that it would take an earthquake to win back more than 2 or 3.


We have to think about how to win Nuneaton.

These are new voters, though, who haven't voted until recently, who gave the SNP all these seats. There is no way of knowing if they will maintain their voting zeal in the face of the tawdry realities and compromises of politics. They're expecting their vote to cause seismic change. What if nothing in their lives really changes? Will they still keep voting SNP in similar numbers? I have no idea.

[ohsocynical]

Bearing in mind our leaders' distant royal origins.

Royal my arse.

All the aristocracy are who they are and where they are thanks to the appropriation of land from common ownership - it might have happened a very long time ago, but nevertheless our royalty and aristos are living on the proceeds of theft.

There have been some interesting posts here about origins and accents. My daughter was born in Gloucester, and has a slight West Country accent - she has white skin, blonde hair, and one blue eye and another half blue and half hazel. She considers herself to be British, but has a lot of foreign antecedents.
On her fathers' side: she has Cornish mining engineers, Cornish miners, Breton fisherfolk, Devonian farmers, and a few landed Cornish gentry from her paternal grandfathers; she has Scottish doctors, Scottish army officers, at least one French person way back, a few hill farmers, and the entire Clan Armstrong from her paternal grandmother.
On my side: she has Geordie engineers, Geordie Miners, Yorkshire farmers, and someone Dutch a bit further back from my father; she's also got German, Dutch, Belgians and Italians from my mother's side, and, it was alleged but constantly denied by my Oma, some gypsies too, probably from Hungary.
She's a little European and British melting pot - as I am, and as so many of us are.

There are not that many families who can trace their lineage with accuracy back to the vikings or whatever - I get sick to death of all this "Britishness" because there really isn't such a thing if you think about it.
But there's no prejudice if the accent is considered intelligent and the skin colour is not black, brown, or anything other than pinkish.

I also get pissed off with the various nations being allocated skills or attributes that aren't actually there - I live with someone who is living breathing evidence that not all Welsh people can sing. Some of them just think they can. To my frequent pain.

Indeed. William the C and his 200 closest pals. 1/3 to the church 1/3 to the Bastard and 1/3 to the 200 men. All conveniently handed down through the guys in the HoL.

There is prejudice though even if you are the right 'colour'. It's just that it's so ingrained and long standing that most of the time we don't notice it, but it's always been there. From schooling, to accents, to what we eat, how we eat it, where we live.

Hard to explain the upper's attitudes. The nearest I can get to it is they just 'are'.

[rebeccariots2]

Scotland is sui generis, any eventual move against the SNP is likely to be big not piecemeal.

But yes, "London" Labour needs to leave the Scottish party to its own devices now and worry about England *and* Wales (where our results were notably poor, but few noticed)

Wales is a real worry. Labour really needs to address itself to several issues right now in preparation for the Assembly elections - in just one year's time.

It is widely agreed that Owen Smith bombed in the Welsh "leaders debate" - that can hardly have helped. Why was he there and not Carwyn anyway?

The only explanation I can try out for that is perhaps Carwyn wanted to keep a degree of distance from the Westminster message and image. One of the things we hear on the doorsteps from people supporting Plaid in particular is that they perceive Labour as controlling from the centre and don't like it ... they want to know their representative and the local party understands and is controlled by local issues and communities. People are also already confused by the two parliaments and which is responsible for what - very evident when we were out listening and talking to people. That is possibly another reason ... to make sure the Assembly elections and Welsh Labour are seen as distinct entities for next year.

Editing to add: Mr Riots would agree with the verdict re Owen Smith though. He watched the debate and was very underwhelmed by him - thought he was flat and didn't point out the obvious flaws in the others' arguments.

[tinyclanger2]

I freely admit I don't understand the Scotland scenario - the visceral hatred that seems to be very much aimed at Labour. I have no idea how it will go in the future ... all very unknown ... but probably best that nothing re Scotland is relied upon and let Labour in Scotland try to do what it thinks it needs to.

I keep meaning to get back in touch with some friends who live and work in Scotland - in the countryside outside Glasgow - to see where they are with it all. I have absolutely no idea what their politics might be now - should be interesting.

We are now so far behind in the large majority of Scottish seats that it would take an earthquake to win back more than 2 or 3.


We have to think about how to win Nuneaton.

These are new voters, though, who haven't voted until recently, who gave the SNP all these seats. There is no way of knowing if they will maintain their voting zeal in the face of the tawdry realities and compromises of politics. They're expecting their vote to cause seismic change. What if nothing in their lives really changes? Will they still keep voting SNP in similar numbers? I have no idea.

Didn't work out too well for the LibDems anyway.

[rebeccariots2]

Stephen McCabe ‏@kilmacolm1 11m11 minutes ago
Angus Roberston struggling badly on #murnaghan to explain where @theSNP stand on fox hunting...

[Eric_WLothian]

Stephen McCabe ‏@kilmacolm1 11m11 minutes ago
Angus Roberston struggling badly on #murnaghan to explain where @theSNP stand on fox hunting...

Probably hasn't had his instructions from Nicky/Alex yet.

[citizenJA]

Or more accurately, the SNP has to lose Scotland rather than Labour "winning it back". It looks unlikely right now I know, but a look at Quebec shows what can happen.

Though I think the Scottish Labour party is very likely to go fully independent now - that may help a bit.

Back on the topic of the "London" leadership - no Chuka muck-raking in today's papers it seems, so why *did* he withdraw?

Good morning, everyone, excellent posts from everyone since last night - I'm still catching up.

"I...thought I understood the scrutiny and attention a leadership contest would bring.
As a member of the Shadow Cabinet, I am used to a level of attention which is part and parcel of the job.
I witnessed the 2010 leadership election process close up and thought I would be comfortable with what it involved.
However, since the night of our defeat last week I have been subject to the added level of pressure that comes with being a leadership candidate.
I have not found it to be a comfortable experience.
One can imagine what running for leader can be like, understand its demands and the attention but nothing compares to actually doing it and the impact on the rest of one's life.
Consequently after further reflection I am withdrawing my candidacy."

- an extract from Chuka Umunna's statement published on the BBC website
15 May 2015

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32751988" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[PorFavor]

Goodmorfternoon.

[quote] One-nation Conservatism? Not under George Osborne
William Keegan[quote] (Guardian)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ge-osborne

(Apologies for yesterday's unceremonious departure.)

[citizenJA]

Even more turmoil than having just lost all but one MP?

I find that difficult to believe...

Agreed. Sorry about including the hyperactive subtitle from the G. I don't like manipulative narratives so absurdly apparent. Murphy's resignation is not unexpected & will probably ease down chaos. I don't know. I don't know a lot of things. I don't know a lot about Murphy - only that he was disliked by people who's stories made it into headlines a lot. Maybe that's because the man was a disaster. Again, I don't know.

One thing - Jim Murphy's arrived immediately to assist in a low-key, effective way after that fatality accident in Glasgow last year involving the lorry driver. I like leaders who show up fast to do good work without making it into a photo opportunity. I like responsible public service administrators.

Was Murphy involved with that lorry accident? He did help out in the aftermath of that tragic accident where the helicopter crashed into the Clutha Bar, going into the pub and helping bring the injured out to safety; to their eternal shame some of the Cybernats tried to use that against him in all sorts of ways, including a totally false claim that he had taken money from the victim's fund.

Thank you, TGS, for asking me. I'd forgotten about the helicopter crash incident. I may have misunderstood a news report below. I might have mixed the two incidents.

Jim Murphy: on the scene of another Glasgow tragedy
Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy looked stunned when he heard about the crash as he walked down Buchanan Street, arms laden with Christmas shopping.

Mr Murphy, who was one of the first on the scene after the Clutha helicopter accident just over a year ago, said:
"I walked across George Square about an hour ago. I'm just hearing what people are saying, obviously it has been a major incident with very serious casualties. Multiple emergency services are on the scene. It is just awful."
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/u/ji ... 1419263661" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

I've yet to read anything convincing from anyone about what Labour have wrong in their policies, leader or manifesto in 2015.

Well I did write quite extensively about what was wrong with Labour's policy prescriptions on here.

I know most (all) will have disagreed but we would have done better in Nuneaton and Swindon with a different mix.

On Scotland, I am reluctantly coming to the view that there is little to be done.

Apologies, SH, I don't remember reading your analysis. I'll look for your posts on the subject here.

[citizenJA]

Murphy can't be mostly blamed for the Scottish Labour calamity (it has been decades in the making) but he still had to go. His not realising that right away showed his flaws.

I hope that after taking time to recuperate, he finds some way to contribute usefully to public life.

Agreed.

[Swarthlander]

These are new voters, though, who haven't voted until recently, who gave the SNP all these seats. There is no way of knowing if they will maintain their voting zeal in the face of the tawdry realities and compromises of politics. They're expecting their vote to cause seismic change. What if nothing in their lives really changes? Will they still keep voting SNP in similar numbers? I have no idea.

That's where the SNP will have problems. They did extremely well but it could be their downfall. All those 'new' voters will now expect milk and honey, and they will expect it rather soon.

How much the vote was anti-Labour or anti-Westminster is debatable but it can also be seen as an anti-English vote and that will lead to problems. Westminster could pacify the SNP (will not go down well in the shires though) or give them the full autonomy they want and see the SNP stew in their own utopian rhetoric.
How the 56 cope in Parliament will determine what happens. Also, the pure Nationalists have not gone away, an independent Scotland is still on the cards.

[citizenJA]

....Back on the topic of the "London" leadership - no Chuka muck-raking in today's papers it seems, so why *did* he withdraw?

Saving his powder? Keeping fresh for 2017/18? The next Labour leader may not last five years?

Good morning.

Umunna candidly confessed he couldn't handle the pressures of increased media scrutiny into his & his family's lives.

[Eric_WLothian]

Murphy can't be mostly blamed for the Scottish Labour calamity (it has been decades in the making) but he still had to go. His not realising that right away showed his flaws.

I hope that after taking time to recuperate, he finds some way to contribute usefully to public life.

True, he can't be blamed - the decline was firmly in the hands of the woefully weak Gray and Lamont. However, whether this was the right time to resign rather depends on his successor. If they elect somebody like his predecessors, the SLP may as well resign themselves to oblivion.

Looking on the bright side, I suppose they now have 40 potential candidates with the real political experience that Holyrood is lacking.

[citizenJA]

Or more accurately, the SNP has to lose Scotland rather than Labour "winning it back". It looks unlikely right now I know, but a look at Quebec shows what can happen.

Though I think the Scottish Labour party is very likely to go fully independent now - that may help a bit.

Back on the topic of the "London" leadership - no Chuka muck-raking in today's papers it seems, so why *did* he withdraw?

Why bother running it if he has withdrawn? It goes back into the filing cabinet for the next time it is needed.

For clarity, Umunna's statement seemed straight-forward & uncontroversial to me. I thought it was an honest explanation.
Here are my own words summing up what I read from Umunna.

"Look, people, no joke, Labour party candidates for leadership positions get taken apart along with their friends & family...it doesn't matter what you've done or not done...it's the rack."

[AngryAsWell]

If Andy is the candidate of the Left we are shot
Economy, business and immigration – the three areas Burnham says Labour must regain credibility

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/economy-b ... edibility/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

I freely admit I don't understand the Scotland scenario - the visceral hatred that seems to be very much aimed at Labour. I have no idea how it will go in the future ... all very unknown ... but probably best that nothing re Scotland is relied upon and let Labour in Scotland try to do what it thinks it needs to.

I keep meaning to get back in touch with some friends who live and work in Scotland - in the countryside outside Glasgow - to see where they are with it all. I have absolutely no idea what their politics might be now - should be interesting.

(my bold)
You & I both.
There is so much I don't understand, everyone.
I wonder if people in the UK understand why they've voted or not voted the way they have done.
I'm not angry asking that question.
Just look at the results of the GE.
Is this what you wanted, people?
Will this work for the benefit of the UK?
I want to hear the answers to the questions from everyone while we sit together around a large circular table with plenty of chocolate rolls, Welsh cakes & other refreshments available at all times.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Murphy can't be mostly blamed for the Scottish Labour calamity (it has been decades in the making) but he still had to go. His not realising that right away showed his flaws.

I hope that after taking time to recuperate, he finds some way to contribute usefully to public life.

True, he can't be blamed - the decline was firmly in the hands of the woefully weak Gray and Lamont. However, whether this was the right time to resign rather depends on his successor. If they elect somebody like his predecessors, the SLP may as well resign themselves to oblivion.

Looking on the bright side, I suppose they now have 40 potential candidates with the real political experience that Holyrood is lacking.

Would choosing somebody who has just been resoundingly rejected by the voters really be such a wise move, though?

(and lets be honest, quite a few Labour *MPs* in Scotland were "woeful" too - its part of the reason for what has happened)

Kezia Dugdale surely looks likely in the short term, and she is actually quite good anyway (or so many seem to think, at least) Rumour is she was sidelined by Murphy during the "campaign from hell" too, so can be considered relatively untainted. Anyway, things can only get better?

[Eric_WLothian]

These are new voters, though, who haven't voted until recently, who gave the SNP all these seats. There is no way of knowing if they will maintain their voting zeal in the face of the tawdry realities and compromises of politics. They're expecting their vote to cause seismic change. What if nothing in their lives really changes? Will they still keep voting SNP in similar numbers? I have no idea.

That's where the SNP will have problems. They did extremely well but it could be their downfall. All those 'new' voters will now expect milk and honey, and they will expect it rather soon.

How much the vote was anti-Labour or anti-Westminster is debatable but it can also be seen as an anti-English vote and that will lead to problems. Westminster could pacify the SNP (will not go down well in the shires though) or give them the full autonomy they want and see the SNP stew in their own utopian rhetoric.
How the 56 cope in Parliament will determine what happens. Also, the pure Nationalists have not gone away, an independent Scotland is still on the cards.

I wonder how long some of the 56 will last once they realise that being at Westminster isn't some sort of school outing. And how long will it be before the first one is suspended.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3773405

[ohsocynical]

These are new voters, though, who haven't voted until recently, who gave the SNP all these seats. There is no way of knowing if they will maintain their voting zeal in the face of the tawdry realities and compromises of politics. They're expecting their vote to cause seismic change. What if nothing in their lives really changes? Will they still keep voting SNP in similar numbers? I have no idea.

That's where the SNP will have problems. They did extremely well but it could be their downfall. All those 'new' voters will now expect milk and honey, and they will expect it rather soon.

How much the vote was anti-Labour or anti-Westminster is debatable but it can also be seen as an anti-English vote and that will lead to problems. Westminster could pacify the SNP (will not go down well in the shires though) or give them the full autonomy they want and see the SNP stew in their own utopian rhetoric.
How the 56 cope in Parliament will determine what happens. Also, the pure Nationalists have not gone away, an independent Scotland is still on the cards.

One thing I'd stake my life on. SNP will soon be sampling Conservative duplicity. They do nothing unless it's going to benefit them. What's best for a country or its people means nowt.

[PorFavor]

These are new voters, though, who haven't voted until recently, who gave the SNP all these seats. There is no way of knowing if they will maintain their voting zeal in the face of the tawdry realities and compromises of politics. They're expecting their vote to cause seismic change. What if nothing in their lives really changes? Will they still keep voting SNP in similar numbers? I have no idea.

That's where the SNP will have problems. They did extremely well but it could be their downfall. All those 'new' voters will now expect milk and honey, and they will expect it rather soon.

How much the vote was anti-Labour or anti-Westminster is debatable but it can also be seen as an anti-English vote and that will lead to problems. Westminster could pacify the SNP (will not go down well in the shires though) or give them the full autonomy they want and see the SNP stew in their own utopian rhetoric.
How the 56 cope in Parliament will determine what happens. Also, the pure Nationalists have not gone away, an independent Scotland is still on the cards.

I wonder how long some of the 56 will last once they realise that being at Westminster isn't some sort of school outing. And how long will it be before the first one is suspended.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3773405

I await with interest the first big dust-up between Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond.

[citizenJA]

If Andy is the candidate of the Left we are shot
Economy, business and immigration – the three areas Burnham says Labour must regain credibility

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/economy-b ... edibility/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh, Mr. Burnham. He wants a referendum on the EU though he wants us to remain in the EU. This isn't a strong, correct action to choose for a leader of the UK at this time. Too expensive, too much upheaval - it's cajoling people who'd not like the result regardless of that result. EU referendum (at this time) is an expensive distraction. Nothing more. I appreciated Ed Miliband recognising this & will support another who does too.

[Eric_WLothian]

Murphy can't be mostly blamed for the Scottish Labour calamity (it has been decades in the making) but he still had to go. His not realising that right away showed his flaws.

I hope that after taking time to recuperate, he finds some way to contribute usefully to public life.

True, he can't be blamed - the decline was firmly in the hands of the woefully weak Gray and Lamont. However, whether this was the right time to resign rather depends on his successor. If they elect somebody like his predecessors, the SLP may as well resign themselves to oblivion.

Looking on the bright side, I suppose they now have 40 potential candidates with the real political experience that Holyrood is lacking.

Would choosing somebody who has just been resoundingly rejected by the voters really be such a wise move, though?

(and lets be honest, quite a few Labour *MPs* in Scotland were "woeful" too - its part of the reason for what has happened)

Kezia Dugdale surely looks likely in the short term, and she is actually quite good anyway (or so many seem to think, at least) Rumour is she was sidelined by Murphy during the "campaign from hell" too, so can be considered relatively untainted. Anyway, things can only get better?

As long as she can stand up to the SNP thugs who will inevitably turn up during the campaigning (definitely one of Jim Murphy's strong points).

[Eric_WLothian]

One thing I'd stake my life on. SNP will soon be sampling Conservative duplicity. They do nothing unless it's going to benefit them. What's best for a country or its people means nowt.

Birds of a feather.

[ohsocynical]

If Andy is the candidate of the Left we are shot
Economy, business and immigration – the three areas Burnham says Labour must regain credibility

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/economy-b ... edibility/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have a sneaking suspicion he's right. It depends though on where he aims his message though because that's a broad palette. No good talking to Kippers about the economy and business, although I saw a small business owner that said she was voting UKIP because of immigration. Go figure.

I'm more interested in where all the hopefuls stand on the NHS because that's the life changer.

[utopiandreams]

Or more accurately, the SNP has to lose Scotland rather than Labour "winning it back". It looks unlikely right now I know, but a look at Quebec shows what can happen.

Though I think the Scottish Labour party is very likely to go fully independent now - that may help a bit.

Back on the topic of the "London" leadership - no Chuka muck-raking in today's papers it seems, so why *did* he withdraw?

Why bother running it if he has withdrawn? It goes back into the filing cabinet for the next time it is needed.

For clarity, Umunna's statement seemed straight-forward & uncontroversial to me. I thought it was an honest explanation.
Here are my own words summing up what I read from Umunna.

"Look, people, no joke, Labour party candidates for leadership positions get taken apart along with their friends & family...it doesn't matter what you've done or not done...it's the rack."

I nearly responded to your earlier post on this, гражданка, but shall do so now. Regardless of any skeletons in cupboards I wouldn't choose a life of politics. We're all as guilty as any red-top for sometimes unhealthy scrutiny of politicians, deserved or not. Having said that there is a world of difference between comment and being chased by a rabid pack of hounds that are the paparazzi.

[tinyclanger2]

But potentially leaving Europe would be a life-changer. Given the lack of political literacy some of you have described here, I'm very nervous about a referendum. Like the SNP voting to leave in order to gain independence to rejoin; and a potential anti-Cameron backlash which would be a serious cutting off nose to spite face scenario.

[AngryAsWell]

If Andy is the candidate of the Left we are shot
Economy, business and immigration – the three areas Burnham says Labour must regain credibility

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/economy-b ... edibility/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh, Mr. Burnham. He wants a referendum on the EU though he wants us to remain in the EU. This isn't a strong, correct action to choose for a leader of the UK at this time. Too expensive, too much upheaval - it's cajoling people who'd not like the result regardless of that result. EU referendum (at this time) is an expensive distraction. Nothing more. I appreciated Ed Miliband recognising this & will support another who does too.

Well, we can't stop the referendum now so no point in still opposing it. What I don't like is instead of saying "right we are in this position so lets get on with it" he is back tracking and saying he's been in favour of one for the last half of the parliament. I find that duplicitous.
His three main key areas are

I see those issues as our economic credibility, our relationship with business – which is linked to that – and, thirdly, immigration

Not a word about the disenfranchised or inequality.
Yes, there is time to express more ideas as the election progresses, but I'm not impressed with his priorities.

[citizenJA]

Why bother running it if he has withdrawn? It goes back into the filing cabinet for the next time it is needed.

For clarity, Umunna's statement seemed straight-forward & uncontroversial to me. I thought it was an honest explanation.
Here are my own words summing up what I read from Umunna.

"Look, people, no joke, Labour party candidates for leadership positions get taken apart along with their friends & family...it doesn't matter what you've done or not done...it's the rack."

I nearly responded to your earlier post on this, гражданка, but shall do so now. Regardless of any skeletons in cupboards I wouldn't choose a life of politics. We're all as guilty as any red-top for sometimes unhealthy scrutiny of politicians, deserved or not. Having said that there is a world of difference between comment and being chased by a rabid pack of hounds that are the paparazzi.

Exactly.
The paparazzi is a vile, intimidating, undemocratic thing.