Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Can't stand Sadiq myself. If Labour were to tempt me (i would have actually voted Blair in 01) then i think you'd need to be looking at Chucka or Hunt. I did like Murphy and David Miliband.

    If they wanted to be led by somebody on the left then Burnham would do better than Miliband although i still think even somebody as soft-left as Ed would lose.
    You can't seriously suggest that Tristam Hunt would be able to win a Labour leadership election? If you want a Blairite then D. Miliband is your only choice.

    Out of interest what's wrong with Sadiq?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Can't stand Sadiq myself. If Labour were to tempt me (i would have actually voted Blair in 01) then i think you'd need to be looking at Chucka or Hunt. I did like Murphy and David Miliband.

    If they wanted to be led by somebody on the left then Burnham would do better than Miliband although i still think even somebody as soft-left as Ed would lose.
    Chuka drives me nuts, whenever I've seen him he doesn't answer questions personally as he just rambles on about whatever his part want him too. I'll check out Burham but so far I do quite like David Miliband's stance to particular issues.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by St. Brynjar)
    You can't seriously suggest that Tristam Hunt would be able to win a Labour leadership election? If you want a Blairite then D. Miliband is your only choice.

    Out of interest what's wrong with Sadiq?
    Possibly not but who knows. He's not even in parliament.

    I just think that what he says is often waffle and his manner of speaking annoys me. Can't imagine he'd be very telegenic in a campaign.
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrJAKEE)
    I would like to know what people in this Labour Party think of Miliband? Personally I would vote Labour at the next GE if they got rid of him and I know many others would too.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I want either Johnson or Burnham, otherwise Millband is fine, if he got this far with his speaking/looks, it means he's a fine MP.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    None of the Labour frontbenchers seems particularly awe-inspiring. The party has some great backbenchers and activists, it's just a shame none of them seem to make it to the top.

    While we're talking about leaders, who would TSR Labour back in the Scottish Labour leadership contest?
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blue Meltwater)
    None of the Labour frontbenchers seems particularly awe-inspiring. The party has some great backbenchers and activists, it's just a shame none of them seem to make it to the top.

    While we're talking about leaders, who would TSR Labour back in the Scottish Labour leadership contest?
    I would have gone for brown in a heartbeat
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Green_Pink)
    Out of interest, what do you think of Andy Burnham? I read one interesting article here in the Independent arguing that after White Van Man-gate he's got a good chance as a more working class-esque character, but I don't know what kind of reaction he gets on your doorsteps.
    I don't actively oppose him. But I also don't particularly like him. He would probably be a vote winner, and great Labour leader, but I'm not sure if I'd like to see him as PM. I'd support him, but I wouldn't vote for him unless the other candidates are like Dianne Abbott.
    I try not to discuss leadership much when canvassing, but I think he'd be liked. From the problems people tell me about, I think it would turn those angry, working class UKIP voters to Labour - those voters being UKIP voters due to their anger at the Establishment.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrJAKEE)
    I'm going to probably be joining the Youth Labour Party for the next election and I'm seriously concerned with Miliband. He seems like he can't make decent speeches and show charismatic authority to people (something which the Tories I think are quite renowned for - image), and seems to be taking the Labour Party further to the left of the spectrum (I'm a bit of a Blairite/Thatcherite myself). I would fully support Douglas getting in charge, I think Labour need a major shake-up in leadership from the riot feminist-Harman to Milibland (who seems inept at forming his policies - despite the election being in 6 months) and to start taking up the immigration issue more seriously. Labour are losing votes from the working class themselves (for UKIP), and they are not really addressing this (which I feel is a shame).
    I think Tory economic policy is good in areas (in essence the economy is on the up) but they do seem heartless in the way they present their plans to many.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Brilliant news! I agree, he seems like a wet-rag. I don't really think he's moving that much to the left. Yep! At this moment, we could form a coalition government, but no outright majority - by far the preferred scenario. We need someone with substance to show what Labour stands for. Immigration - tough one. We need to do something, but there are problems: do nothing, and be accused of complacency; or do something, and be accused of being pressured by UKIP. But, something is better than nothing, I suppose. The economy is still foaming at the mouth; austerity has failed, and hasn't really ever worked; people seriously aren't feeling the apparent recovery. Yet the rich get tax cuts, and the poor get the bedroom tax.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by St. Brynjar)
    1) Alexander is a wet fish. He would out-Miliband Miliband. If Miliband hasn't the gravitas to be PM, neither does Alexander.
    2) Prescott's obviously long gone.
    3) Not someone I know enough about to cast judgement.
    4) Reeves is probably my least favourite Labour front-bencher.
    5) Agreed. Big fan of his.
    6) He would suffer from similar presentational issues as Miliband. I think he'd do a great job personally.
    7) Relic of the past. Time for her to go.

    My list, in order, would be:

    1) Sadiq Khan
    2) Stella Creasy
    3) Alan Johnson (I'm acutely aware this won't ever be the case)
    4) Yvette Cooper
    5) David Miliband
    6) Andy Burnham

    Sadly, Alexander has never 'shown' himself. Shame really.
    Unfortunately, I agree. He's, in a way, the Labour equivalent of Ken Clarke.
    Bryant is Shadow Welfare Minister. He's one of the very few people I make sure I watch and listen when he speaks in the Commons; I'd like to see him go further!
    Internally, she's definitely showing signs of a potential Labour leader, but I agree.
    I'd like to see him a bit more. But he definitely has potential. If he stood, I'd vote for him.
    He's got a danger of being too right, but he'd still do a brilliant job!
    She's been a good DL, and was good as Acting Leader, but I agree. I think she'll go in the next couple of elections. I don't see her there much longer.

    I mostly agree with your list. Cooper - maybe Deputy, but not leader. DMiliband - Tony Blair mk. II. And slightly disagree with Burnham.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by MrJAKEE)
    I'm going to probably be joining the Youth Labour Party for the next election and I'm seriously concerned with Miliband. He seems like he can't make decent speeches and show charismatic authority to people (something which the Tories I think are quite renowned for - image), and seems to be taking the Labour Party further to the left of the spectrum (I'm a bit of a Blairite/Thatcherite myself). I would fully support Douglas getting in charge, I think Labour need a major shake-up in leadership from the riot feminist-Harman to Milibland (who seems inept at forming his policies - despite the election being in 6 months) and to start taking up the immigration issue more seriously. Labour are losing votes from the working class themselves (for UKIP), and they are not really addressing this (which I feel is a shame).
    I think Tory economic policy is good in areas (in essence the economy is on the up) but they do seem heartless in the way they present their plans to many.
    Thatcherite? Really?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Legal Eagle)
    Brilliant news! I agree, he seems like a wet-rag. I don't really think he's moving that much to the left. Yep! At this moment, we could form a coalition government, but no outright majority - by far the preferred scenario. We need someone with substance to show what Labour stands for. Immigration - tough one. We need to do something, but there are problems: do nothing, and be accused of complacency; or do something, and be accused of being pressured by UKIP. But, something is better than nothing, I suppose. The economy is still foaming at the mouth; austerity has failed, and hasn't really ever worked; people seriously aren't feeling the apparent recovery. Yet the rich get tax cuts, and the poor get the bedroom tax.
    Labour definitely need to represent the working classes more, immigration was a hot topic for many even before the rise of UKIP but Labour failed to acknowledge it's importance.. I think Labour in general has a serious problem with representation. The Tories seem (no offence) to have better speakers and I think that's part of their charismatic authority which they hold over many of their supporters.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Thatcherite? Really?
    Well I agree with the crux of it yes, I didn't agree with poll tax though.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by MrJAKEE)
    Well I agree with the crux of it yes, I didn't agree with poll tax though.
    Surely debunked neo-classicism, trickle-down economics, a legacy of privatisation and deregulation and an anti-union, anti-working class mentality is very, very far from the Labour Party philosophy. Heck, there are Tories who wouldn't consider themselves 'thatcherite'.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Surely debunked neo-classicism, trickle-down economics, a legacy of privatisation and deregulation and an anti-union, anti-working class mentality is very, very far from the Labour Party philosophy. Heck, there are Tories who wouldn't consider themselves 'thatcherite'.
    Well that's false - Blair was effectively a Thatcherite because he maintained the economic policies of Thatcher. I have quite independent views where I like elements of both Tory & Labour, I hate the party system because of it, because I become a swing voter :/ When I say I like Thatcherite policies I mean I think at the time they were necessary, along with her stance on Foreign Policy and individualism. A lot of Tories kind of try to be like Thatcher, to prove they are "worth it" and a "pure Tory" via supporting things (like privatising the NHS). Thatcher would have went nuts over this, she increased spending dramatically on the NHS under her tenure.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by MrJAKEE)
    Well that's false - Blair was effectively a Thatcherite because he maintained the economic policies of Thatcher. I have quite independent views where I like elements of both Tory & Labour, I hate the party system because of it, because I become a swing voter :/ When I say I like Thatcherite policies I mean I think at the time they were necessary, along with her stance on Foreign Policy and individualism. A lot of Tories kind of try to be like Thatcher, to prove they are "worth it" and a "pure Tory" via supporting things (like privatising the NHS). Thatcher would have went nuts over this, she increased spending dramatically on the NHS under her tenure.
    Not reversing 18 years of the previous party's policies doesn't make Blair a Thatcherite. Blair was different to Thatcher in many, very specific ways wether it be Foreign Policy or Socio-economic policy (child poverty comes to mind).

    Ultimately, the 80s are over. So wether Thatcherite policies where necessary at the time is a matter for historians (the benefit of hindsight shows us that squandering the North Sea Oil and the profits of privatisation as well as deregulating the banks was economic idiocy), it is still very strange to see a 'Thatcherite' talk of joining the Labour Party.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Not reversing 18 years of the previous party's policies doesn't make Blair a Thatcherite. Blair was different to Thatcher in many, very specific ways wether it be Foreign Policy or Socio-economic policy (child poverty comes to mind).

    Ultimately, the 80s are over. So wether Thatcherite policies where necessary at the time is a matter for historians (the benefit of hindsight shows us that squandering the North Sea Oil and the profits of privatisation as well as deregulating the banks was economic idiocy), it is still very strange to see a 'Thatcherite' talk of joining the Labour Party.
    Again, Blair maintained the elements of Thatcherism meaning effectively he is a Thatcherite (how things currently are in society), and to be honest there are tonnes in the Labour Party who support elements of Thatcherism. I'm not saying I'm a full blooded Thatcherite - but she did what needed doing. Reducing the role of the state (something I believe is the moral thing to do) & preventing companies government-funded from being funded, as they were non-profitable and costing the ordinary person a hell of a lot of people (the mines in particular), in addition to the prevalence of trade unions at the time. I would consider myself a Blairite (I do care about social policies) but I like a lot of right-wing policies too.

    Don't forget also, it was the Labour Party during the Blair government that deregulated the banks further. While I dislike the Tories at the moment it's important to note that they are not all bad.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrJAKEE)
    Again, Blair maintained the elements of Thatcherism meaning effectively he is a Thatcherite (how things currently are in society), and to be honest there are tonnes in the Labour Party who support elements of Thatcherism. I'm not saying I'm a full blooded Thatcherite - but she did what needed doing. Reducing the role of the state (something I believe is the moral thing to do) & preventing companies government-funded from being funded, as they were non-profitable and costing the ordinary person a hell of a lot of people (the mines in particular), in addition to the prevalence of trade unions at the time. I would consider myself a Blairite (I do care about social policies) but I like a lot of right-wing policies too.

    Don't forget also, it was the Labour Party during the Blair government that deregulated the banks further. While I dislike the Tories at the moment it's important to note that they are not all bad.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Good to see a Blairite here. I know a couple in RL.

    Labour on here are much further left though.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Surely debunked neo-classicism, trickle-down economics, a legacy of privatisation and deregulation and an anti-union, anti-working class mentality is very, very far from the Labour Party philosophy. Heck, there are Tories who wouldn't consider themselves 'thatcherite'.
    Which aspects of neo-classical economics do you consider debunked? Which school of thought do you agree with?

    When talking about cutting IT for rich individuals i agree, while there is an optimal point in which we maximise revenue (with current thresholds it seems to be between 45% and 50% IT) providing tax cuts above that to people with a high marginal propensity to save (or consume abroad - Vegas perhaps) seems folly and tax cuts for those on low to middle incomes will probably be of greater short term benefit (more consumption>more VAT, jobs and IT). When talking about tax cuts for businesses then actually i disagree, with massive economies like China and India in the future having multi-nationals that will want to export to the European market from a regional base in the future than actually tax competition means that trickle down is much more likely to be effective here in terms of jobs, growth and in turn tax revenues though personally i'd scrap business rates rather than always going after corporation tax.

    It's interesting that people on the left often lament privatisation when most don't know just how many pies the government had its fingers in after the war. I'd wager that for all the talk of failed privatisation, you probably only actually have issues with less than 10% of the companies privatised meaning that on the whole, it was enormously successful.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...United_Kingdom

    Very subjective working class point, the right to buy is probably the single biggest policy in terms of people taking a step up the social ladder.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Which aspects of neo-classical economics do you consider debunked? Which school of thought do you agree with?

    When talking about cutting IT for rich individuals i agree, while there is an optimal point in which we maximise revenue (with current thresholds it seems to be between 45% and 50% IT) providing tax cuts above that to people with a high marginal propensity to save (or consume abroad - Vegas perhaps) seems folly and tax cuts for those on low to middle incomes will probably be of greater short term benefit (more consumption>more VAT, jobs and IT). When talking about tax cuts for businesses then actually i disagree, with massive economies like China and India in the future having multi-nationals that will want to export to the European market from a regional base in the future than actually tax competition means that trickle down is much more likely to be effective here in terms of jobs, growth and in turn tax revenues though personally i'd scrap business rates rather than always going after corporation tax.

    It's interesting that people on the left often lament privatisation when most don't know just how many pies the government had its fingers in after the war. I'd wager that for all the talk of failed privatisation, you probably only actually have issues with less than 10% of the companies privatised meaning that on the whole, it was enormously successful.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...United_Kingdom

    Very subjective working class point, the right to buy is probably the single biggest policy in terms of people taking a step up the social ladder.
    The principle that Government should reduce its expenditure during a recession (Keynes demonstrates that and increase expenditure is needed to increase aggregate demand yadda yadda) is the most pertinent and also the general theory that the free market will sort itself out.

    I was taking about the wealth of individuals rather than businesses. Though regarding your point about India and China (China especially) with average wages the way they are I would be very, very cautious about calling their's an economic success story. It depends on how you measure success.

    My problem with privatisation is (in this instance) the wasting of the proceeds on tax cuts.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Good to see a Blairite here. I know a couple in RL.

    Labour on here are much further left though.
    You, and of course Jake, will also find the RL Student Labour body to be more left than the main face of the party.

    Now I'm all for the politics of moderation and hate the idea of blind partisanship - I even think there should be more 'Blairites/Brownites' in the party just to make things more interesting, to diversify and to better reflect the RL party - 'Thatcherite' however is not a term I can associate with a party built on socialism and built for the working class.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 17, 2018
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.