the wrong bro?

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

did the brothers and sisters of labour in their agonisingly democratic election get the wrong brother as leader?

david's speech in reply to the Autumn Statement is a clear and concise rebuttal of the Chancellor that many might admire and envy the capacity to articulate so cogently ... no fluffed punch lines here!

[Mr Pee]

They undoubtedly elected the wrong brother...but what do you expect when the Unions still have so much power over the process? They went for the Milliband that was best for them, not the one who would have been best for the Labour Party.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

Gotcha! I claim £3!

[amateur51]

Gotcha! I claim £3!

[Mr Pee]

Hilarious.

[teamsaint]

it would have been more use if they had elected a leader who would actually support workers who are striking to protect their terms and conditions.

Incidentally, the shadow chancellor in the peoples party has an interesting family connection. His brother is head of the european arm of the worlds biggest bond dealer...the very people bringing Europe to the edge of economic calamity.
Labour is on the side of the banks ...They bailed them out and they have bank insiders on the front benches.
I would present this more positively as really smart work by the financial sector...get all the parties working for you, and you get what you want every time !!
(check out tony's current list of directorships and consultancies).

[Serial_Apologist]

it would have been more use if they had elected a leader who would actually support workers who are striking to protect their terms and conditions.

Incidentally, the shadow chancellor in the peoples party has an interesting family connection. His brother is head of the european arm of the worlds biggest bond dealer...the very people bringing Europe to the edge of economic calamity.

Agree with the first paragraph teamsaint. But the Balls family connection could as easily be one of fraternal schism as of indirect nepotism, or whatever might be a more accurate term.

[aeolium]

As someone who won a bet on MiliE being elected (having put it on at the start of the campaign when MiliD was hot favourite) I wasn't surprised that the Labour party chose MiliE. His brother was too Blairite and, as former foreign secretary, too associated with bad foreign policy to be chosen as the leader.

I don't think Labour would be doing any better with MiliD in charge. He would simply be far too close to the position of the Coalition government to represent any kind of alternative. You could argue that MiliE is too close himself. It would be interesting to see just one senior Labour politician argue for a much more redistributive and egalitarian programme but there are still too many Blairites there, and no-one has the courage (even though it might go down quite well in a country that is to a large extent suffering for the failures of the financial system).

[Serial_Apologist]

As someone who won a bet on MiliE being elected (having put it on at the start of the campaign when MiliD was hot favourite) I wasn't surprised that the Labour party chose MiliE. His brother was too Blairite and, as former foreign secretary, too associated with bad foreign policy to be chosen as the leader.

I don't think Labour would be doing any better with MiliD in charge. He would simply be far too close to the position of the Coalition government to represent any kind of alternative. You could argue that MiliE is too close himself. It would be interesting to see just one senior Labour politician argue for a much more redistributive and egalitarian programme but there are still too many Blairites there, and no-one has the courage (even though it might go down quite well in a country that is to a large extent suffering for the failures of the financial system).

Interesting too that no one from the Opposition Front Bench spoke out at the time against Hutton taking on the role that has inevitably led to his becoming apologist for the Coalition's policies on debt reduction.

[Lateralthinking1]

I don't think the other brother would have been right at all. For a while, he seemed to be. But post banana gate, he has made Heath's reaction to the election of Thatcher look magnanimous by comparison. Of course, their father was quoted as saying about the fact that they were both "New" Labour "what was it that I did wrong?".

I am afraid that I don't think they have anyone. The big Labour wins were 1945, 1966 and 1997. Stand by for another then in 2038. It is in the arithmetic. Women will vote for them next time but not in enough numbers. I fear that we will have majority Conservative Governments from 2015 and for the remainder of our lives.

[teamsaint]

Agree with the first paragraph teamsaint. But the Balls family connection could as easily be one of fraternal schism as of indirect nepotism, or whatever might be a more accurate term.

yes, perhaps.
Still, interesting how to see how these things go. And the blair bit is very telling, i think.

[VodkaDilc]

I fear that we will have majority Conservative Governments from 2015 and for the remainder of our lives.

Just when it seemed that things could not get any worse..................!

[ahinton]

I can't for some reason (or none) seem to decide whether the answer should be "what difference would it have made?" or "who cares?" or indeed both.

[ahinton]

I am afraid that I don't think they have anyone. The big Labour wins were 1945, 1966 and 1997. Stand by for another then in 2038. It is in the arithmetic. Women will vote for them next time but not in enough numbers. I fear that we will have majority Conservative Governments from 2015 and for the remainder of our lives.

Leaving aside that the age group here is probably quite wide and that, in any case, none of us can know how long "the remainder of our lives" is likely to be, what makes you so sure that we'll have a majority Tory government from 2015 (assuming that there's no General Election called before then) for the next 20, 30, 40 or more years, especially when we don't even have one now? I'm not necessarily suggesting that you're wrong - just curious as to the basis upon which you arrive at this very specific assumption.