Over the next few days we will almost certainly see a boost in Labour’s poll ratings under a new leader, and a bunch of whinging, whining tossers complaining that Ed Miliband only won because the the votes of trade union members (who actually pay their trade union levy to support the Party).
We have already had mouthful’s of bile from gobshite ‘experts’ like Adam Boulton and Nick Robinson, once again embarrassed because their predictions had gone tits up, moaning that Ed Miliband only won because tens of thousands of trade unionists supported him (as opposed to a handful of MPs, which they carefully ignore). In addition to which they make sure that they tell everyone that Ed has “little experience” at ministerial level and that he is young. Yes, boys, just two words for you… “David” and “Cameron”. Perhaps you will reflect back to the days when you ‘experts’ were predicting a David Davis victory?
This isn’t a short haul. We’re stuck with this disastrous Tory coalition for another four years and more. The Labour leadership contest has been conducted with little bile and spite, much to the chagrin of our media commentators. The fight against the coalition cuts is likely to be drawn out and bloody. Their massacre of local government services and privatisation of the health service need to be fought by a war of attrition from a united labour movement. All sections of the party will have a role to play, and gaining the support and confidence of the electorate in that struggle will be the major task for Ed Miliband in the years ahead. I wish him the best of luck.
Your usual less than elegant literary style combined with political ignorance, Councillor!
“and a bunch of whinging, whining tossers complaining that Ed Miliband only won because the the votes of trade union members” plus, of course, the little matter of £128k donated by the ‘Bruvvers’, or to be precise by the ‘Boss Bruvvers’ using their
suckers’members dosh.Mind you, Councillor, I’m absolutely behind you in hoping, nay, praying that ‘Red Ed’ the Marxists’s son declares “a war of attrition from a united labour movement.” Should keep you out of government for a couple of terms at least. MInd you, I’m not holding my breath. ‘Ed’ is a Cain not an Abel with all the killer instincts that implies and he’ll soon drop his union comrades when he sees them for the dead liability they are when it comes to appealing to the electorate in general elections. And he’ll find that out in the next 6 months when one by one the unions come out on the streets. Can’t wait!
Hey, nice to get a real live whinging whining tosser to reply… particularly one with all the subtle political analysis of the bastard son of a Sun reader mating with a Daily Mail reader. Please, please, duffers, do hold your breath. We’ll call you when it’s time to start again.
I am already bored of ‘journalists’ spinning that there’s some intense psychodrama between Ed and David Milliband. Substantiated by interviews with either of them in which the same journalists ask leading questions and the brother answers neutrally. I wasn’t too worried about whether either of them were the ‘best’ leader, and would have stood by either. But we’ve got a load more of this drivel to put up with.
“Their massacre of local government services and privatisation of the health service”
Yeah, neither of those things are happening.
The problem the far left fails to address is that the current spending is unsustainable. Labour was lucky enough to rule during a period of world plenty started by the repeal of Glass-Stegall by Bill Clinton in the 90′s.
During this period they threw money at everything, even borrowing heavily on top so they could plough more money in.
I don’t dispute the benefits of this for a second, and as a Lib Dem I supported it fully.
Now however, the world has changed. We are far from a time of plenty, the country has MASSIVE debts, and the recovery looks shakey.
How exactly do we maintain budgets at their current levels? Do we really keep up the massive borrowing in the hope that easy credit will once again flow, people will spend it, and tax revenues will pour in allowing the defecit to be paid off double quick?
What about the debt levels of the population in those circumstances? You are effectively passing the debt onto the people of this country directly!
Cuts aren’t a choice in the times we find ourselves in, they have been forced upon us, and this is something the Labour Party was going to do, and this is something the more moderate David Miliband was gearing up for.
Campaigning against them is just bizzare. The most populust thing the Government could do is not cut and keep borrowing. They aren’t stupid. They’re not, not doing it because they like having lower poll ratings, it’s because they haven’t got any bloody choice!
I will continue to hope for a more mature economic policy from the Labour Party, given that I have more in common with you than the far right turds Cameron’s trying ignore/silence on the Tory benches.
John, if you don’t think this coalition is going to privatised the NHS you either haven’t read the White Paper, or you are truly delusional. That is exactly what they are planning to do. And, I’ll be honest with you, it is nothing more than a continuation of the policies of Tony Blair and Alan Milburn. At the end of this coalition the whole of the NHS, commissioning and provision of services, will either be in private hands, or in readiness for privatisation.
Yes, David Miliband (and Gordon Brown) has accepted the need for cuts, as has Ed Miliband.but, like Vince Cable and Nick Clegg, before they got their feet in to the Ministerial limo. Read the Chris Mullin piece I refer to in the next post for a coherent explanation.
Typical liberal analysis: mistaking the froth on the surface for the underlying causes.
The current crisis is a foreshock in the ongoing realignment of the global capitalist economy: the relative decline of the USA (and Western Europe) in comparison to China, India, Brazil, etc.. For years China and others have been financing the US trade and budget deficit buy buying dollars and bonds. The collapse of Lehman’s exposed some of the corrupt financial instruments (like collateralised debt obligations) used by bankers and financiers to, on the one hand perpetuate the property bubble drawing in foreign money, and on the other make as much profit from this ludicrous casino as possible.
The credit crunch was essentially a rather big wobble in the confidence cash-rich investors had in the future value of the US dollar and US treasury bonds. If Glass-Steagall had not been repealed US financial institutions would have found other ways to gamble away other people’s livelihoods – that is simply part of the inhumane logic of capitalism.
Likewise a progressive Labour government does not have to operate according to the froth generated by the capitalist economy: the propaganda that states the market is king and we must obey its every whim. The failed banks should have been nationalised with no compensation to shareholders as they were worthless, the only protection to those individuals and businesses in the real economy whose future depended on the banks existence. Going on from there the list of progressive cuts & measures is very long: ending our imperialist adventures in the Middle-East, scrapping Trident and its replacement, genuinely clamping down on tax evasion and avoidance by wealthy individuals and companies, a higher top rate of tax and a shift from VAT to income tax generally, just off the top of my head – I’m sure Bob has many more practical suggestions.
Those will do for a start Ian.
John: “Their massacre of local government services and privatisation of the health service”
Yeah, neither of those things are happening.
Yet. The key word you missed out at the end there. When you see what the results of the new SSA is for your local (probably Tory) council, just wait and see.
A Good Result.
Bob.I’m Not So Sure It will be a 4 years wait.The next 6 Months will make or break Labour’s Hopes.Hang On Tight Folks!
Just the best option on offer Tony, that’s all. I said, vote Ed, with no illusions. All this drivel about “Red Ed” is just so much Tory froth peddled by their media mates.
well as an ordinary union member,i had a vote and voted for EM,it’s drivel to suggest that somehow he is in hock to the unions,the block vote was abolished in 93?
I wish him the best of luck,but like you Bob Im under no illusions.
I’m cautiously optimistic for you guys that are ‘real’ Labour. My take on the result is here…
http://haringeygreens.blogspot.com/2010/09/ed-miliband-elected-leader-of-labour.html
Getting you to face the realities of life, Councillor, is like getting an old Victorian lady to take a quick look at a table leg! You remain adamant that the unions did not fix it. This from Jonathan Freedland in ‘The Graun’, so it must be true!
“The former spokesman for Gordon Brown [Charlie Whelan] told me in the Radisson hotel how the ‘Big Four’ union leaders had sat together in the summer working out who was best placed to be the ‘stop David’ candidate. Their own personal preference would probably have been Ed Balls, but a lack of initial support among MPs suggested his chances were limited. “I’m pragmatic,” Whelan said, explaining that the union men then came to the swift, unsentimental view that Ed Miliband was the likeliest to thwart his older brother, whom they regarded as too Blairite.
…
The effort reached its climax at the Trade Union Congress earlier this month. Whelan targeted a dozen union-backed MPs who were at the TUC, putting pressure on them to switch their second preference to Ed Miliband. He had, he says, a 50 percent success rate, converting six of the 12. Run the maths and, under Labour’s weighted electoral college system, the votes of those six MPs may have been just enough to have given the younger Miliband his one-point margin of victory.”
Charlie Whelan! Such a nice man. I’m sure young ‘Cain’ Miliband will know how to handle him!
I have to say this whole imagery of you and old Victorian lady’s legs is far too graphic for a delicate disposition like mine.
Your rehash of the tiresome Freedland (frustrated that his boy did not win) shows that you have mastered the art of cut and paste, if not quite got a grasp on logic. So… trade union leaders favoured one of the candidates and recommended that candidate to their members! Shock horror! Then one of their cronies attempts to badger MPs into voting for him too. I am staggered beyond belief. How can these dreadful acts of persuasion be allowed to take place in a modern democracy!
Duffers, you have finally lost the plot altogether. Gather up that old smelly blanket, fill the hot water bottle, and suck a Fisherman’s Friend (I’m sure it will be appreciated).
From Piper’s Dictionary:
persuasion: Vote for our guy or we’ll cut off the Trade Union donation to your election fund.
What a vivid imagination you have, Duffers. Where on earth, even in Freedland’s world, was that said.
It also makes no sense. If there was this threat to cut off funding it wasn’t public. And if it wasn’t public how did the party members and trade unionists know that this threat was hanging over their heads. It is no good issuing threats if you don’t tell the people deciding the thing. Besides the two sections that you would expect to be most opposed to the loss of trade union funding gave more votes to David Miliband. Many trade unionists who voted were not members themselves so why would they kotow to the threat when members/MPs didn’t.