[Archived] Jack Straw For Pm?

[philipl]

Some of the papers are tipping Jack Straw as the man to replace Gordon Brown.

Whether Jack would go for it is a moot point but one thing is far certain, the electorate will rout Labour under Brown's leadership if he remains as PM up to tyhe election.

Straw would probably go down to an honourable defeat.

Interesting suggestion also of Frank Field to lead Labour. He alone on the Labour benches would stand any chance of actually winning the next election wearing a red rosette but would probably need to take over within six months of any election date.

[thenodrog]

Some of the papers are tipping Jack Straw as the man to replace Gordon Brown.

Old news. Ken Clarke was reported as saying that 2-3 weeks ago.

Safe pair of hands but he'd make the most wishy washy pm in history.

Frank Field deserves it, he is a man of principle....... Probably the same reason that he wont get it!

[yoda]

I think you will find that Jack Straw does not want the job

[RibbleValleyRover]

Labour MPs and their supporters are deluded if they think a new leader will save them come the next election. I know a lot can happen in a year or more, but I believe the general consensus is that the public want a change and a new Labour leader won't change that.

[Frisky Jim]

Frank Field deserves it, he is a man of principle....... Probably the same reason that he wont get it!

Quite right.

Cameron will win the next election by a landslide, spend the next decade in power, will then hand over the reigns to his Chancellor, who will be PM for a couple of years before a bright shiny 'new' Labour Party regains power.

Sound familiar?

[blue phil]

Interesting suggestion also of Frank Field to lead Labour. He alone on the Labour benches would stand any chance of actually winning the next election wearing a red rosette but would probably need to take over within six months of any election date.

....as propsed by myself months ago on this very forum .

Blue Phil - man of the people

[philipl]

I suggested Frank Field purely because Labour are so far gone electorally that their only hope of winning is throwing the sort of gamble Frank would represent.

The truth sadly is that Frank couldn't manage his way out of a paperbag but swap him into position immediately before an election and Labour might... just might, have a chance of being re-elected. Purely on the basis of having a genuine man of principle leading the so-called progressive force in British politics after the ten years of successful but non-principled Blair and the bit since of the utterly unsuccessful Brown.

[blue phil]

The way I look at it , Philip , is that the country is crying out for leadership from someone with a proven record of honesty and integrity .

I honestly believe that if Field was handed the leadership and simply carried on telling the truth as he always has the public would cut the government a lot of slack . His main problem though would be to find enough MP'S of a similar mentality to form a government ......

The other leadership contenders are beneath contempt . Cameron is only the "next PM" through default - nobody really believes he has any answers .

[RibbleValleyRover]

I can't see anyone overthrowing Brown as the next election barring an absolute miracle is going to be lost by Labour and a new leader won't change that.

Labour are going to face a huge rebuilding job thats going to take at least a decade.

[Billy Castell]

It is amazing what a pickle Labour are in. If they ditch Brown, they may seem devisive, backstabbing sods who are in a mess, but if they keep him, he'll plod on like a 3 legged donkey that's been shot in the face and Labour will grind to a halt. Damned if they do and damned if they don't. Maybe after Cameron spanks everyone in the next election, Field (if he's sill an MP) will be handed the task of reuilding Labour.

Can't decide who I'd vote for, but I urge everone to vote Lib Dem/Plaid Cymru/SNP for a laugh. Both the Tories and Labour are pretty crap right now so what the hell.

[thenodrog]

Can't decide who I'd vote for, but I urge everone to vote Lib Dem/Plaid Cymru/SNP for a laugh. Both the Tories and Labour are pretty crap right now so what the hell.

The thing that phases em most is if no fecker votes. If you feel strongly then rather than encourage a bunch of no- marks who don't stand for what you want then simply don't vote and discourage the lot of em.

[broadsword]

Yeah, I'm not interested in politics any more. Stuff the lot of them, they're only in it for themselves. In any case, my vote would only be a dead vote anyway.

As Red Ken once said: "If voting changed anything, they'd ban it."

Labour will get pummelled at the next election, but only because voters want regime change. By the time of teh election after teh next one, they may be able to get back into power.

With the global economy in such a mess, it would be a very good time to lose an election.

I'll never vote for them, that's for sure.

[joey_big_nose]

Don't understand Bryan's attitude to be honest. The country is minted, people have civil liberties, we are the wealthiest we have ever been, we have Welfare and Public health.

None of that would exist if we couldn't bloody vote. It's the only possible way the countries views can be heard.

The democratic system as a whole, if you choose to compare it to the other alternative (dictatorship, communism, anarchism, corporatism), works astonishingly well. You will, God willing, live into your nineties, , earn an astonishing amount of money on a global standard, and have your liberties and rights protected by a largely fair legal system.

Why urinate on what makes that possible. If the majority take your position on this the whole thing really will fall apart - and through completely unjustified apathy.

[BiggusLaddus]

I personally think that it is time for both our legal and political systems to be brought up to date. Neither serve their current purposes very efficiently and we don't want them to do the jobs that they were originally designed to do.

The legal system as we have it was brought about to protect the rich and their property from the masses. But it now only serves as a deterrent for the hard working, and can largely be ignored by the very rich or those with nothing to lose.

The voting system that we currently have is a nonsense with the majority of peoples votes being almost ignored by the canvassers as meaningless. At the last election my vote could barely have been more useless. I live in a shoe-in Tory constituancy (big majority even in '97) and I wanted to vote against Labour (who were always going to the election anyway).

Unfortunately I don't think anyone with the power to change has the stomach for it, and I'd probably be skeptical of the motives of any politician who did want change. thats their fault for turning me into a cynic

As an aside, IMO the 'best' system for a country is a bengin dictatorship, as making decisions by comittee leads to lots of talking and nothing actually getting done. Trouble is that good, bengin dictators are not usually the type of people who take control of countries and have to inherit control from the previous dictator who was probably not so benign. And then they are either suceeded by someone else less benign, or they give power 'back to the people' and nothing gets done again.

[BiggusLaddus]

Why urinate on what makes that possible. If the majority take your position on this the whole thing really will fall apart - and through completely unjustified apathy.

As you say voting is the only way to make your voice heard (especially now that protesting anywhere that a politician might see you makes you a terrorist ), but if you feel that your vote is worthless (as I do) then why is the apathy unjustified?

[broadsword]

Why urinate on what makes that possible. If the majority take your position on this the whole thing really will fall apart - and through completely unjustified apathy.

I don't like the current system of voting, and I don't like politicians who lie, and are only in it for themselves.

I won't validate this abberation by continuing to prop it up.

Perhaps if more people abstained they'd bloody sit up and take notice.

[thenodrog]

As Red Ken once said: "If voting changed anything, they'd ban it."

Excellent quote. I'll rem that. You sure it originated from Ken Bryan.... only cos voting certainly changed his immediate future did'nt it?

[colin]

I'm with Bryan on this one now, if only because the two major parties have very little to differentiate between them any more.

Biggus Laddus makes a good point that so many votes are wasted. I'm in a pretty solid Labour constituency so anything but a real swing means that a vote is pointless.

It's only really in the marginal constituancies that a vote counts for anything. You can probably line them up with the most marginal at the top and after the top 50-75 you can pretty much ignore the rest.

You could probably stick a red rosette on a dog here and it would get in.

The SNP in Scotland are doing interesting things though. Come the next general election it could have enough to start a push for independence which will maybe start a few boulders rolling.

I suppose the problem is that any party which gets in will defend the status quo as far as the electoral system goes.

[JAL]

Some of the papers are tipping Jack Straw as the man to replace Gordon Brown.

Whether Jack would go for it is a moot point but one thing is far certain, the electorate will rout Labour under Brown's leadership if he remains as PM up to tyhe election.

Straw would probably go down to an honourable defeat.

Interesting suggestion also of Frank Field to lead Labour. He alone on the Labour benches would stand any chance of actually winning the next election wearing a red rosette but would probably need to take over within six months of any election date.

It would be an embarassment for Jack to become PM, Jacks all talk the wrong action or unsustainable action.

Hes an highly articulate guy, but a nightmare for focusing the country on taking it in the right direction you only have to look at Blackburn to look at his legacy.

[joey_big_nose]

I don't like the current system of voting, and I don't like politicians who lie, and are only in it for themselves.

I won't validate this abberation by continuing to prop it up.

Perhaps if more people abstained they'd bloody sit up and take notice.

Thats the most bizarre piece of logic ever. If hyou don't vote you become politically irrellevent.

If you are that peed off by it by far the most effective solution is to go out and campaign for something you do believe in and win votes for it. Then you do become politically relevent.

It's not an abbaration, it's a system which has supplied and guarantees everything we have. It is a consensus of 60 million people so the fact that you do not agree with everything it does, indeed destest a lot of what it does, is not entirely suprising.

And while you bang on about the injustice of it ask three questions

1) What are the alternatives

2) What has the system given you

3) What have you given the system

You want perfection without having to lift your finger to do anything about it. That is not just lazy, its complete lunacy.

[joey_big_nose]

As you say voting is the only way to make your voice heard (especially now that protesting anywhere that a politician might see you makes you a terrorist ), but if you feel that your vote is worthless (as I do) then why is the apathy unjustified?

I take the point about PR, first past the post is outdated.

But clearly your vote is not worthless, but it is only worth one sixty millionth (or I should say twenty seven millionth as thats roughly how many vote) which is vanishingly small. However unless you excercise it you have nothing at all.

To be honest to me it is clear that much more at fault than the politicians, who largely are trying to do their jobs in good concience, many of the problems the country face are created by a population who just don't give a flying one at all to the point where they won't even vote. Despite having a standard of living, guaranteed rights, guaranteed safety and access to facilities and institutions that 99% of human beings who have ever lived could not even dream about, fewer and fewer actually care or even really appreciate it.

Its breath takingly sad. The words for it are awesome complacency.

[broadsword]

Thats the most bizarre piece of logic ever. If hyou don't vote you become politically irrellevent.

If you are that peed off by it by far the most effective solution is to go out and campaign for something you do believe in and win votes for it. Then you do become politically relevent.

It's not an abbaration, it's a system which has supplied and guarantees everything we have. It is a consensus of 60 million people so the fact that you do not agree with everything it does, indeed destest a lot of what it does, is not entirely suprising.

And while you bang on about the injustice of it ask three questions

1) What are the alternatives

2) What has the system given you

3) What have you given the system

You want perfection without having to lift your finger to do anything about it. That is not just lazy, its complete lunacy.

Do i become "politically irrelevant", what is this new buzz phrase, please tell?

I'm really sorry, but I have other things to do with my life than campaign to get into Westminster.

What on earth are you going on about "supplied and guranteed everything we have"? Without qualification, this is just meaningless waffle.

If you think it's a consensus of 60 million people, then I think you should stop smoking bananas, they're bad for you. Only 2 in 3 people vote for a start, and most of those votes are dead ones.

If enough people abstain from voting they might actually stand up and take notice, and we might end up with politicians who'll do what they say and elections that are actually democratic. It's my decision not to vote, if you're so deluded that you think voting changes anything, I won't stand in your way.

The "system" (you mean our system of democracy?) has given us mendacious double-dealing, machiavellian politicians who need a corkscrew in teh morning to put their trousers on. Fantastic. They like to keep us scared so we'll know our place.

What have I given the "system"? What are you blathering on about? Do you expect me to say I was on the beaches at D-Day or something?

Go on, go and vote for "new" Labour or the Tories if it makes you feel better, makes you feel like you're doing something.

[joey_big_nose]

Do i become "politically irrelevant", what is this new buzz phrase, please tell?

It means you have no voice, that you choose to to just let the world pass you by. No one gives a toss about you because you simply don't have any value. It's not a buzz phrase, it is straightforward simple english.

I'm really sorry, but I have other things to do with my life than campaign to get into Westminster.

Oh really? So you are ###### off but just going to let everybody walk over you because you haven't got the guts to do anything about it? All this injustice that is so ovverwhelming (which frankly I find it hard to see you have been touched by beyond a mention of "twisted politicians".) your going to deal with it by venting your spleen in the pub and on a messageboard but other than that meekly accept it? Nice.

What on earth are you going on about "supplied and guranteed everything we have"? Without qualification, this is just meaningless waffle.

How is this bit hard to understand? To give you a list I mean: the armed forces, habeaus corpus, due process in court, planning and building regulations, the education system, the emergency services, the NHS, the right to protest, freedom of the press, Civil Liberties, consumer rights, advertising standards. Ie. everything you take for granted as just "existing". Everything required for you to live your modern, stable, wealthy, westernised life.

It doesn't just exist. It has been built up by our disgusting degenerate democratic system over 400 years which your deciding to opt out of because it is not entirely perfect and plainly because you cant be bothered.

If you think it's a consensus of 60 million people, then I think you should stop smoking bananas, they're bad for you. Only 2 in 3 people vote for a start, and most of those votes are dead ones.

Isn't that an argument for why more people should vote? I do agree it should be PR, but it is a bloody consensus of 60 million, or at least the 27 million who vote. What else is it? Politicians need the votes to be elected, people cast those votes.

If the majority of people decided they wanted something to happen tomorrow it would happen. Thing is no one really has a concrete idea about what they want in a realistic sense, and the status quo is currently pretty good.

If enough people abstain from voting they might actually stand up and take notice, and we might end up with politicians who'll do what they say and elections that are actually democratic. It's my decision not to vote, if you're so deluded that you think voting changes anything, I won't stand in your way.

Don't you think it would be more of a statement if loads of people voted for someone else? If you don't vote, even if the turnout is down to 10%, then all those who choose can easily be ignored on the quite righteous grounds of being ignorant of the politcal system and lazy. There is absolutely no indication that you are making a 'protest', just that you don't care.

If on the other hand you voted for someone protesting about politician 'sleaze', or whatever, then you would be rapidly noticed.

Not rocket science.

The "system" (you mean our system of democracy?) has given us mendacious double-dealing, machiavellian politicians who need a corkscrew in teh morning to put their trousers on. Fantastic. They like to keep us scared so we'll know our place.[/b]

I refer you again to: the armed forces, habeaus corpus, due process in court, planning regulations, the education system, the emergency services, the NHS, the right to protest, freedom of the press, civil liberties....

What are you scared of?

What have I given the "system"? What are you blathering on about? Do you expect me to say I was on the beaches at D-Day or something?

Maybe I have go this wrong but it seems reading what you have written that essentially you view yourself as a victim of a conspiracy you choose not to fight. You want everything provided for you. And your reaction is when it does not meet your requirements that you want to take your ball home with you and not play. Pretty childish.

Why do you think the country should give a crap about you when you don't give a crap about it?

Go on, go and vote for "new" Labour or the Tories if it makes you feel better, makes you feel like you're doing something.

I personally have big issues with both parties in certain areas of policy, but I will vote whnen the time comes.

I don't think you grasp the way it works. The reason there is a not a lot of difference between the two parties is because broadly speaking what the country wants. They have both pitched up in an area which finds the medium between the 27 million voters. That nothing radical is happening is not suprising because the majority do not want anything radical to happen. They want stability ensured with steady improvement. And stability has been largely ensured since the late seventies, and real incomes, and standard of living, have massively improved since then.

The wranglings of politicans are largely small matters at the moment because these are the areas that concern the people. 1% up or down on income tax, mild reform of the NHS, mild reform of education. No one wants to change anything much. If they did the electorate will give them a kicking. If you don't believe me try and think of one radical reform that the majority of the people would accept and pay for?

However if people stop voting despite this appearence of inactivity the need to find the happy medium will be reduced, and more and more extreme elements will get more and more of a voice and the politics will be skewed towards those individuals.

A vote is as much about maintaining what already exists as it is about change.

[broadsword]

For crying out loud, did you have to write an essay about it?

I'm not bloody voting for a mainstream party, OK? Most of the votes are dead votes, understand? If I voted, my vote wouldn't result in my wishes being represented in parliament.

I am registering my disenchantment with the political process by not voting, if sufficient numbers of people didn't vote then it would be brought home to these complacent poiliticians that they have to get back in touch with the people, rather than going to Westminster as a meal ticket.

I'm not scared of anything, I don't buy into their War on Terror nonsense. As for civil liberties (gradually being eroded) and teh armed forces (going on jaunts to the Middle East to secure a Western presence there), I don't see anything to crow about.

[Billy Castell]

Think I'm still registered in Bridlington, so I'll be voting for the SDP if they put up a candidate. And yes, Bridlington is so utterly retarded that the SDP exist there, and have 1 or 2 local councilors. If I change to down here to Devon, I think I may vote for the Belinda's Big Tits Party or some other daft candidate as my vote won't change anything, so let's have some fun with it. Now, if everyone here votes for these parties, some may get their deposit back, and the stats for the 'other' parties may increase.

Surely that'll be better than not voting.