what do we think of diane abbot's bid to be Labour leader?

moondog I agree that Diane is smug and hypocritical, but all successful politicians are. She also has a nasty streak.

But she doesn't seem thick at all to me. She went to Cambridge, speaks very passionately and intelligently in the House of Commons, and makes very salient points every week on that sofa with Michael Portillo!

Who is DB? Do you mean DA?

DB is appalling.
Thick, smug and hypocritical.

What an unpleasant mix.

Ha ha, true. He does seem to get away with a lot!

I vair vair much like Iain Duncan Smith. Not for labour leader, obviously, but I like him.

And William Hague. Would like to have him and Ffion round for dinner. I think he'd be a right laff.

Diane Abbott looks like my best freind, which is odd because she's not black.

Being rude and racist hasn't dented the popularity of Prince Philip at all

She is rude and racist, I am told.

they are all in unison about the talented Mr. Integrity. To be honest, I prefer Balls.

Redwood is excellent, which is why the socialists targetted him as an out-of-date Vulcan. Anyone they all heap praise on, such as Clegg, is best avoided.

I haven't heard of that, but you are more up-to-date in what goes on in politics. I tend not to believe what the media says. They often try to denigrate capable opponents. They made a laughing stock of Prescott, but I thought he was good. He was a battler and used to hold his own against any Tory minister such as two brains Willets on Newsnight. He wasn't as educated as the rest of them, but they hardly ever got the better of him. They denigrated Tebbit, who was very capable and they were frightened of him. They denigrated Red Ken, but he was an extremely talented politician. If they are attacking Balls, it means he is a danger to them. When they all praise Miliband, you know that he is no threat at all.

claig Being a fighter isn't enough. Balls repels voters - especially Middle England swing voters - more effectively than any other politician I can think of.

yes but as you say he is a fighter, and he half believes what he says. We do need a good opposition who will fight their corner and who do believe in some sort of ideals. Democracy needs people like Balls. He was targetted by Ashcroft money by the Tories who hoped to topple him on the back of boundary changes. The media criticised his defiant speech and said he was ungracious when he thanked his constituency voters who had re-elected him. I liked his speech, even if it was ungracious. It showed that he cared, he was pleased that he had fought the Tories off, it really meant something to him. He had convinction and it wasn't a game. I would rather have people of principle and conviction, even if they are misguided, than have Blairites who constantly ask which way the wind is blowing.

Prolesworth Do you agree that she would be a good Labour candidate for Mayor of London?

She has more name recognition than most Labour politicians, because she is on TV so much. And she isn't tainted by her voting record because she has always voted in accordance with her principles.

Yes, I too get the impression that David Miliband has all the momentum and will probably win - but he seems so boring.

He is meant to be "Blairite" but Cameron is much more like Blair than David Miliband could ever be.

I agree that Ed Balls is the only one of the lot, apart from Diane Abbott, who really has fighting spirit. His main problem is that his style, like his mentor Gordon Brown, is to smear, spin and obfuscate - a strategy which has made him too many enemies within the Labour party, and is very unappealing. His constituency results speak for themselves - he almost lost his seat despite his huge media profile, and the whopping great majority he had last time!

I think Balls is the best of the lot of them. It's only his staring eyes look that I don't like. He sounds like he half believes what he says unlike the rest of the card sharks. Balls is the only one who could offer any sort of challenge to the Tories. David Miliband was boosted by the BBC today as they put him on with Marr. He was dire, but it is as plain as day that he is the anointed one and will win the charade. Burnham is like a keen schoolboy running for election as prefect, no one takes his claims of how much he cares seriously.

I think Diane Abbott might be using the Labour leadership bid as a launching pad to become Mayor of London.

She would fit the bill as a good Labour mayoral candidate. She is very independent from her Party, as all mayors must be; she has been a London MP for ages; she is a "character", and doesn't come with all the baggage of Ken.

She would definitely be a million times better than Oona King!

She has a natural connection with the electorate - even those of us whose politics are completely different.

The Milibands only appeal to middle class Guardian readers - people who bandy about policy wonk words in everyday conversation.

They could never reach the white working class voters who have defected to the Tories.

Ed Balls is utterly voter repellent. I would dearly love for him to win the Labour party leadership. I can only hope his connections in the UNITE union swing it for him - but surely even Labour couldn't be that stupid?

I think Labour's best choice would be Andy Burnham. He isn't too close to either Blair or Brown, speaks "normal" instead of think-tank, and hasn't had any major ministerial cockups that I can remember, and no-one knows what he really stands for - which is a good thing because it gives him political space to set out his stall. But for some reason he doesn't seem to have enough MP nominations - maybe the Parliamentary Labour Party just don't like him?

"mad as a box of frogs"
that's the most apt description of the Labour shadow cabinet that I've heard yet.

Sorry, 33 MP nominations, not votes.

She is a hypocrite when it comes to the private school, but all politicians are hypocrites.

However, her hypocrisy really hurts her with her natural constituency - the left of the Labour party - so I don't think she will muster up the 33 votes.

A shame. She wouldn't win the contest but bring a lot of interest to it, and force the mainstream contenders to confront some awkward questions.

Mad as a box of frogs and ever so slightly dim? Perfect then. Fits the brief!

She's as mad as a box of frogs and ever so slightly dim.

That said, I kinda like her!

I like her. And I think it is less hypocritical to pay to send your child to a private school than to use your house-buying power to manipulate the state system.