Labour Party Leadership

Various unconvincing people are putting themselves forward as potential leaders of the labour party. This process is slightly depressing, but perhaps something can be learned by observing the wreckage.

The Labour party must be one of the biggest and most comprehensive failures we have seen in British politics. Not exactly spectacular to see it disintegrate and crash, a bit like watching a documentary about dad dancing at wedding receptions.

So, of what interest could the events of the 'political morning' after be? The Labour party lasted quite a long time, and involved a wide ranging selection of failures, failure to govern usefully, failure in foreign policy, just general failures in every aspect of politics you can think of really.

Could this record of failure be turned to advantage? Can the Labour party learn a great deal from these multiple failures over many years? There has been something of a tradition in British history of great failures being presented as successes.

The world moves on though, and times change. In our consumer society, people are now much more used to throwing away things that don't work or have become obsolete.

Labour Party formed as a bulwark against bad practices by employers. From Unions and funded by them to a greater extent. Biggest failure to stay with their grass roots and not become 'likened' to pig-troughers at the members (and the rest of us) expense and 'power-grabbers' for personal political advantages.
The 1970/80s saw the battle of 'who will govern' play out before the world's press. The unions lost it and consequently their standing with their members (and the rest of us). Left wing extremes or right wing extremes are not palatable with the British culture. Labour will need to satisfy the 'middle' if they are to ever again regain respect (votes). First and foremost they mustn't elect a 'Muppet' to lead them. It matters not the respectability or qualifications - if the man/woman looks and acts like a 'muppet' - he/she is a muppet. Secondly they will need to listen to the general public's feelings and take on board that which appeals to the majority. Dogma and neolithic attitudes will not cut it. Thirdly - get away from union funding and influences - gives and leaves a bad taste. Fourthly, plan properly and repair fallen bridges 'before' launching into the attack - not halfway through.

Simple really. But only if you care, want to spend your life waffling and consequently end up disheartened by the whole charade.

Of course they can always name the potential candidates and before a vote go round the country with the names set in stone. That is if they got £30,000 to spare.

Being all from the same mould I am not so sure they are the right people to be making the decision in the first place. To be successful in picking their next 'leader' they should go 'outside' the party machine and get some proper advice. Their 'visions' are clouded in the melange that is party politics and their own 'set in stone' ideologies. If they don't get it right the only saving grace will be that the ruling party have made a complete balls up over the preceding five year tenure and the public are totally pissed off.

The Labour party seem to be pinning hopes on a cosmetic makeover for Andy Burnham. The eyebrow dye and definition has gone well, nasal hair well trimmed, shaving stubble well calculated, a bit too calculated perhaps. Looking fairly promising, but sadly the hair lets it down badly, dye is a bit too heavy, and the tidy-up leaves it looking rather helmet-like. It would have been better to leave a few grey hairs showing. Much depends on the studio lighting of course. Goes to show, training as a political hairdresser could be a good career move.

He hasn't the charisma to pull it off. He, like others, will be a standing target for the present until another comes along with the 'right' credentials when he (Burnham) will be ousted and the ball put back into play. The Labour Party needs to re-brand itself if it is ever to regain its popularity - notwithstanding some massive catastrophe on behalf of the Tories.

The charisma is rather unconvincing, Andy Burnham has a sort of 'cheeky boy' appeal, perhaps more suited to light entertainment than heavy politics.

Interesting to see the Labour Party attempt at fluffing up a candidate. They are trying, but failing, actually re-inforcing the reputation for incompetence.

A gradual makeover would have been more credible. Skin and teeth are good, posture ok, mannerisms lack gravitas. Leaving him realistically unkempt for now, with some tuition in stage presence might help. The hair dye is a definite mistake, a refund might be in order on that. Some experimental work on the right sort of hair gel is needed.

Not meaning to be over-critical, make up/personal trainers for aspiring politicians is a tedious and specialist job, anyone really skilled at it could be in high demand.

The school-boy image and impish charm can always be used in certain circumstances - but not for a Prime Minister. He needs to come across as honest and caring. He needs desperately to have feminine appeal - i.e. the ladies think he's the personification of a Sean Connery/Beckham/ and that American film star guy who lives over here and he needs to be good at oration. Blair was always good at that. He isn't likely to come from within the ranks which is the main problem. Politics these days is an 'art' and should be treated as such when looking for the main chance. Sincerity can be added artificially as for the amount of time that is needed is limited to gaining the posts for a maximum of two terms. The leadership should always be changed after that time has elapsed in order to appeal to the new voters and so as to avoid the 'absolute power' syndrome our species seems shackled with. But who will take that tack - not the socialists.

The labour party is a bit like microsoft windows, each new version is worse than the last.

That depends upon where you are coming from in the first place. I would say that the Labour Party evolved at the same pace as the rest only the Whigs and the Tories had longer at it. What was absolutely necessary for to gain power in the 1920s has no bearing on the same aspiration today.
Blair's idea of Labour was far more realistic than Milliband's with today's electorate. The aspirational 'left' are baying at the moon. Times have changed. Only the idiot doesn't realise that. Where they go from here is where the problem lies. Small right is in my opinion the way forward. Push the Tories into far 'right' and allow the people the 'vision' to see the difference. And re-brand into the DL's (Democratic Labour). But ---- they need desperately a 'new' champion to fly the 'new' flag.

Can't see any future in it myself. But then that's what Decca records said about the Beatles.

Cycles. And I don't mean those with wheels. History shows that nothing really changes - just the applications. The Labour Party can rebuild but needs realistic common-sense people behind it to get there within a generation, unlike the Liberals who thought and still think it can be left to evolutionary trends. It's not rocket science. It really isn't.

Not all things go in cycles, as things evolve, many species fail to adapt and become extinct.

Only because they fail to adapt. If all the prerequisites are still around any species, with the will and intelligence, can re-adapt. Unless of course you are a Liberal then - well - hopeless really isn't it?

A potential Labour party leader with willpower, intelligence and charisma might be Simon Danczuk, is he in the mood to do the job?

I don't think he would say NO. However - he does tend to be a bit of a romantic which I am not sure would serve him well in the lion's cage. He likes to be all things to all men. Laudable - but dangerous. Shame about the name. Not that there is anything wrong with eastern European but it hasn't got a good Anglo-Saxon ring to it. Could be detrimental. And he hasn't quite got the look. But then none of the above have, so to speak. Simon makes an ideal 'gun' for the 'right' bullets and in that he is indispensable.

You would need a metal detector to find an anglo-saxon ring. Failing that, it would be difficult to find anyone better qualified to lead the Labour party than Mr. Danczuk. Whether he would take on the job is a different matter.

I don't disagree - but as leader he would have to put up for PM in a General Election and I don't think he could win it for the reasons already stated. I think he would make a better foreign secretary and for that the Labour Party need to find the 'ONE' who has the attributes to win the elections with the 'Simon's' as back-up to the cabinet etc etc.

The idea of the Labour party winning an election hadn't occurred to me. Choosing a leader for that intent would be back to the hairstylist and beauty salon. Someone to lead a useful opposition would be more realistic.

Mr. Danczuk's latest letter from parliament is on the subject of leadership.
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/96742/letter-from-parliament-simon-danczuk-mp
Whether he would be interested in, or considered for, the job of leading the labour party remains unknown. The recent tabloid publicity may not be helpful.

When asked 'have you any designs on becoming the Leader of your Party'? The usual answer is - "Not at all. However should the other members of my party feel that I should put myself forward for the mantle of leadership then I would be duty bound to consider it."

And the Letter from Parliament, which seems to come at a very opportune moment, smacks of 'Leadership' filibustering in a 'none attributable way'.

I refer to my previous posting on the matter -. Come the moment cometh the man. But that man is not Simon. The Labour Party should look outside the present incumbent MP's for the most suitable candidate as none of them, presently seated, qualify for what is required.

It's time the Labour Party realised that the 'game' has changed. Power is no longer who has the most 'friends' in the 'Executive' or 'the Union', it's who can sway the public with the biggest and best lies. They need a 'Man for all Seasons'. Wherever he comes from.

Sounds a pretty tedious job, swaying the public with ever bigger and better lies, but perhaps someone will want to do it.

There are always those who would seek position and power -. Be careful it's not you.

I am constantly seeking the ideal position for a garden chair, and seeking power for the MP3 player. It's mostly a matter of remembering to re-charge it. It's all something of a struggle given the changeable weather.

I rarely venture forth to test the trials and tribulations of the Anglo-Saxon tundras and its traumatic terrors. My chair is before my flicker-box, my eyes wander the world and all its ludicrous meanderings and my lips caress the clay-pot rim of my personal mug en-scribed - I choose to smoke so fuck off -.

Beyond that, for the present, the rest of the world barely exists.

What a cheerful chappie I am.