miscsoc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-07-10 03:39 AM
Original message |
| Poll question: If you have actually voted in the Labour leadership election, who did you go for? |
|
I voted yesterday, for Abbott, then Ed M, then Balls.
|
T_i_B
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-07-10 06:36 AM
Response to Original message |
| 1. It's made me glad I'm not Labour. |
|
Just 4 empty suits and Diane Abbot (who does not stand a chance of getting elected leader).
The Milibands, Burnham and Balls are essentially just career politicians with careers politicians priorities. :-(
|
non sociopath skin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-07-10 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 2. So who would you say was the last PM who wasn't a career politician? |
Ken Burch
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-12-10 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Edited on Sun Sep-12-10 07:55 PM by Ken Burch
His main career was as a writer and speaker...and he had long periods where his political career was on the verge of complete extinction.
|
non sociopath skin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-29-10 03:55 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
| 12. I'd say that Churchill was very ambitious in his early days ... |
|
... but his Late Flowering was probably as much a surprise to him as to everyone else.
The Skin
|
T_i_B
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-29-10 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
He had a career in banking prior to politics. Blair's a bit more difficult as he was a successful Lawyer but it's difficult to work out if this was simply a way of getting into politics for Blair.
|
Jeneral2885
(598 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Sep-07-10 11:40 PM
Response to Original message |
| 3. I'll tell you who i would not have gone for |
non sociopath skin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-08-10 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 4. Weren't they a famous Vaudeville turn? |
miscsoc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-10-10 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 7. why them specifically? |
|
Edited on Fri Sep-10-10 01:28 PM by miscsoc
it's true that abbott is unelectable but she's not going to win and voting for her is the only way to send a message that the left has to be paid attention to, whatever her deficiencies as a left wing leader. i think ed m. is the best overall candidate.
i don't see the problem with balls, he's also not a convincing leader, but is at least as much one as andy burnham.
|
Ken Burch
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-12-10 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Aren't the others basically "more of the same" candidates?
|
craigmatic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-08-10 09:43 PM
Response to Original message |
| 5. D. Miliband is probably the likely winner. |
non sociopath skin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-09-10 04:35 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
| 6. Probably likely ... bit of hedging there friend .... |
|
I will be very surprised if Older Brother isn't in first place but equally surprised if Younger Brother isn't relatively close. Then it all comes down to second preferences ...
But I have been surprised before, of course.
The Skin
|
Ken Burch
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-12-10 07:47 PM
Response to Original message |
| 8. I'm glad you voted for Diane Abbott |
|
I agree that she doesn't like she's got much of a chance, but every first-preference vote for her is a vote against the Blairites(and you can't say that for sure about any of the others, even Miliband the Younger).
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon Dec 15th 2025, 08:29 PM
Response to Original message |