Posts
Labour Leadership and Guardian Sophistry: Tell Me Nominations are Secret Please
There is a classic episode of Regency Blackadder called Dish and Dishonesty involving manipulation of a very rotten borough to save the Prince and spite Pitt the Younger, his tormentor. Baldrick MP is too stupid to vote for the Prince. In a desperate last throw of the dice, Baldrick is sent to the House of Lords and Blackadder is left with nothing but a catskin windcheater and a broken turnip.
Today's Guardian has been briefed that Gordon Brown is applying his great clunking fist to his own party.
Word is that GB has 217, firm refusals from 35, and 93 are yet to decide. Brown's people are starting to name names of the recalcitrant. 35+93 = almost enough for three more candidates but not quite.
Meacher is rated to have THREE and McDonnell FORTY. This last figure doesn't quite tally with the arithmetic. But anyway, contrary to his assurances that he wants a contest, Brown's people are hoping to claw back TEN of those.
Meanwhile elsewhere in the paper Blairite Martin Kettle bollocks Miliband for wimping out and claims New Labour is dead because of this wimpery.
LOL view of that twaddle:Really New Labour was mortally wounded long ago. In March 2003 in fact. Possibly even died then. But like a headless chicken has been continuing to rattle round the kitchen cabinet, no longer squawking perhaps, but covering lots of ground and frightening the horses. I'd say with this and Michael White's blog-for-Brown the Guardian's credibility as a judge of Labour politics is also in intensive care. Let's pray for some double-effect medication to make the end swift and painless.
Still elsewhere Blair thinks Tories are unelectable and a wall is being built. This is the length of Pi and presumably has a diameter of one mile: Baghdad's Sunni Ghetto is built.
Susan seems surprised by all this. My comment there:Just a thought ... why are the nominations of PLP members NOT a secret ballot. If they are then the 217 is slightly meaningless. If they aren't then please tell me why the Leadership Vote is actually the least democratic of any selection process in our party - and goodness knows there is plenty of competition for that accolade.
Most important decision. Least democratic protection and by the sounds of it the most opportunity for intimidation. Please tell me that nominations are secret.
GRAPHIC: Brownadder and Ballsdrick from Tory pornster Theo Spark.
16 comments:
"This last figure doesn't quite tally with the arithmetic"
yup, the numbers don't add up. Even if McD has less than 40 (the most optimistic suggestion they mention), 35 is too low to include both McD/MM backers and the ultra blairites they mention.
Blair thinks that the Tories are unelectable. He also thinks he was right to invade Iraq. He also thinks that no peerages have been bought and sold.
And, this is the problem. It's no longer 1997. The Tories should have been unelectable. However, this is Blair's legacy. He has made them electable again.
"Meacher is rated to have THREE and McDonnell FORTY. This last figure doesn't quite tally with the arithmetic..."
Chris - wrong. There are some MPs they'd never bother asking - for example, they'd never waste their time asking Jeremy Corbyn or Alan Simpson.
Given McD voted against Manchester's casino I think he has lost any support he might have had around here.
Owen. I'm not suggesting John doesn't have 40. You will know better than any of us what the true number of promises is. I'm suggesting either Brown's mob or the Guardian cannot add up. Their sums *don't* add up.
Why are you always so fucking argumentative Owen when I am essentially supporting your man?
On the casino: It didn't matter. The 12 Labour placemen in the other place - some of whom didn't even pay to go, in fact they get paid - and the loads that abstained have more to answer for.
For John Leech it does matter though. He is MP for places up here that need the jobs. And he is supposed to be a Liberal. You know John, let people decide for themselves what to do.
"Given McD voted against Manchester's casino I think he has lost any support he might have had around here."
As a Mancunian, I'm personally extremely glad that John didn't vote for the casino. Its result would have been to encourage thousands of the most desperately poor people into the trap of gambling. That's what happens elsewhere.
If anyone is planning to create a Socialists4Gambling group, then no, I don't think that John will join.
Meacher is in the Sunday Telegraph saying he has "25 supporters, [John] McDonnell has 15 and the overwhelming majority of those will switch to me if John realises that he can't make it and drops out."
I'm not sure why you posted that once, never mind twive Owen. Social socialist was winding you up. No need to rise to it. They may think that as there are thousands of casinos, tens of thousands of lottery machines, a prize poker match in every second pub, bookmakers everywhere - even covering McDonnell's chances, the cheek of it, plus the damned t'internet, the Hon Members are shutting door after etc. Then again it may just be innocent trolling.
Still waiting for an apology.
Dark room, lie down, go, in, and.
Meacher is coming across as a bit of a fibber here isn't he? He said he had thirty firm supporters in the famous Labour Home interview with Alex.
Repeating something does not make it true and I do not believe for one minute that Mecaher has more than three never mind more than 10 or 25.
Credibility taking a further nosedive.
"Repeating something does not make it true and I do not believe for one minute that Mecaher has more than three never mind more than 10 or 25"
The worrying thing is that if he goes on repeating it, he can start to believe it himself...but maybe he just meant 25 supporters in the whole Labour Party :wink:
Chris, give Owen a break. He wasn't being argumentative. Just pointing something out......or did I miss something???
On Alan Simpson, the MP for Nottingham South really does have to do something fast about Meacher .....men/white coats spring to mind......
Er, Owen was accusing me of questionning his figures, because he is over-excited ...
He really does need to calm down. There are still a few weeks to go. Doesn't do to peak with unnecessary rebuttals too soon.
I think the chances are that the Brown camp's 'undecided' lump of MPs will actually include some who are quite decided but decided not to tell Jack Straw about it. Certainly most of those who might be persuaded to support an uber-Blairite are unlikely to say they've made a firm decision in favour of an unidentified candidate. And others are likely to play their cards close their chest for a bit...
Agreed.
How do Balls and Mili get on? Are they the new Brown and Blair, next time?
Post a Comment