Any Labour members care to start a discussion regarding the leadership election?

[MarionCole]

Firstly, the email from Ray Collins which says "we have to make sure that those who share our values and beliefs are invited to have their say. That?s why we?ll shortly be taking out an advert in a national newspaper to invite them to join and to play their part." Does that mean they have changed the rules so that new members can vote?

I had a dream about Ed Miliband last night, I think it may be clouding my judgment.

Interesting - though that poll is unscientific. Actually I don't believe that the LabourList readership is a good reflection of the broader Labour membership.

I suspect most people who write for it are middle class Guardian reading lefties rather than working class trade union members.

Highlander See you tomoroow at the GNM [waving]

How can anyone describe Dianne Abbot as honorable i just don't get it . She is all mouth and does not put her principles into action . Yes i am talking about the private school issue.As someone on the OMG thread pointed out she comes into the i am alright jack school of thought !

Back from Newcastle Leadership Hustings. I finally managed to make up my mind.

what have you decided and why?

Seeing them in real life is very different from what I thought about them based on their media image.

Diane Abbott got biggest appaluses and laughs by a mile. She is great fun and a great ambassador for the cause, but she is no leader IMHO.
I did not think Ed Balls would be electable.
Ed Miliband I really like, but for me he only came third in this debate, as he never offered any action, just values. Values are important BTW, but we need to know a bit more than that.
Andy Burnham is fab. I like his voice, accent and hair, etc. He is also very brave talking about cuts in the NHS. But similarly to Diane his experience seems very limited. (That is how it came across anyway.) If he had slightly more experience, I would definitely vote for him.
David Miliband was so well prepared and relaxed, and sort of ready, that for me he is the future leader. I have many issues with him, but I was just amazed how he could talk about any subject quoting facts and figures with such ease. He could also rally people. I am converted.
Unfortunately though his campaign is a little bit too professional for this particular Labour stronghold. I think people were shocked by all the leaflets, canvassing, etc. all coming just from him. My view would be that he is serious about it and wants the job, which is fine by me.

I might still change my mind though.

Oh, and David Miliband always offered some action as well, how he would hope to achieve certain outcomes.

yes I think he will be the winner

Went to Birmingham hustings yesterday.

Generally confirmed what I already thought although DM definitely went up in my estimations, he came across as a man of principles and full of integrity. At times I felt as though the other men were only saying what they thought we wanted to say.

Agree with ginger also about EM being full of values but not entirely convincing about actions. He gave an incredibly rousing final speech though, I would never of thought of him as a great orator. I really felt he could pull people together.

Today on R4 this morning made an observation which seemed to fit me - it's a head vs heart issue. Go to the hustings, you realise DM comes across very well, head says to vote for him. But the heart tells you to go with someone else with more left wing values.

My view is that now is the time to go with the heart. The last few years all seem to have been about the head and look where that has got us.

And actually I think Diane Abbott might win if people went with their hearts. Sadly most of the people I know are convinced that she can't win because of the media and rights portrayal of her so will probably vote for someone else, making it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

My fear is that, by voting for her, I will be allowing David Milliband to win, and that will further alienate a huge swathe of the traditional labour vote who are fed up with New Labour/Blairism and want a return to a semblance of socialism.

Malkuth I think you are getting the voting system wrong (though I am not a Labour member, and may be wrong).

If you put Diane Abbott as your first choice and she is knocked out early on, then your second choice will count. If your second choice gets knocked out, then your third choice will count. And so on, until one candidate has 50% of the vote.

I don't think voting Diane Abbott can "let David Miliband in" though I might be wrong. It isn't a FPTP election.

Thanks for starting this discussion, it makes really interesting reading. I am so unsure which candidate to vote for. None of the candidates really stand out and grab me. Labour need to return to its core values and not alienate too much of the country. I'm not sure if any of the candidates offer what I'm looking for. The head v heart observation gives me something to think about.

Longfingernails, they do use a transferable eliminating ballot which is definitely preferable to FPTP. As with any voting system if enough votes get split between two candidates there is a real possibility of a third person getting in instead. Sorry, am not at my most coherent either just before bed or first thing in the morning. Will gather my thoughts today and try to explain myself better later!

Felinehappy, sadly I agree with you. At the moment I am trying to decide how to vote to ensure that the people who I consider the worst don't win. Now is the time for Labour, as you say, to return to its core values and my gut feeling is that only Ed Milliband or Diane Abbott actually have any belief in those values. Should one of the others get in, for me that will be the end of the Labour Party I support.

Personally I am fed up of being told that you can't have so and so because the country wouldn't support them or they wouldn't win the next election. I know I am oversimplifying but Tony Blair was great at getting disillusioned Tories but I feel he alienated a lot of his core supporters. The party needs to get its house in order before it looks to lead the country. I always wanted a Tony Benn/Ken Livingstone type leader but there you go!

So say your true order of preference was:

Diane Abbott
Ed Miliband
Andy Burnham
Ed Balls
David Miliband

but you were more concerned with voting anti-DM than pro-any other - (a flawed premise, in my opinion, but anyway).

I can't think of a scenario under the AV voting system where voting your true preferences could let David Miliband in - but maybe I just don't understand?

I want a re-open nominations option as my third choice as there are people I don't want in and I don't just not want to list the others. Don't know if that makes sense. (Actually there may be that option-have yet to check!)We had RON as an option at an NUS conference I once went to and it was good as it gave you the chance to show that you really didn't like certain people.

There are a couple of people I don't like at all and it may be a flawed premise but often it seems that the choices are "best of a bad lot" these days. With leadership contests you have to choose from existing MPs and our national voting system means that good people don't necessarily get to Parliament in the first place.

Can I hijack a bit? I'm going to some hustings in early Sept, and may have the opportunity to ask a question. I want to ask about Graduate Tax - I don't really understand why all the candidates bar DM (ironically my least preferred candidate until now) are in favour of the proposals.

I don't believe the Universities would necessarily benefit from the increased revenue - as this article says, there is history of issues with hypothecated taxes not reaching the destination. Graduates could conceivably repay well in excess of the actual cost of their degree, and I'm also worried about the brain drain that might result from a Graduate Tax - those who can will study and work elsewhere. And effectively graduates who earn above the average wage by whatever amount effectively pay a premium already, via the existing higher tax thresholds.

How can I make this into a short, pithy question?

longfingernails - if everyone puts first preference first and DM second, in that scenario DM would likely get elected. Not quite the scenario you are proposing but a possibility.

I am still confused.

The only advantage of AV, it seemed to me, was to eliminate tactical voting - it allowed you to vote your true preferences.

Now you are all saying tactical voting is still possible under AV?

Birmingham hustings here, in particular listen to EM's closing speech at about 1:12:30. It was really rousing and he got a very solid ovation at the end. It really made me feel that he could bring the party together. I think I will go with my heart.

Just to leap from nowhere into this thread (v interesting!) - just wondering if anyone who's been to the hustings noticed tension / animosity between Miliband D and Miliband E?

Big piece in today's Times saying that the leadership contest is having a very negative effect on their relationship as brothers and on their family as a whole. In particular that DM is doing a bit of patronising big-brother eye-rolling when EM speaks. Could just be a load of old journo-bollox of course, so wondering what others think?

Also interesting that EM has got the support of the unions. I think that speaks volumes.

I don't know lfn, I'm confused myself.

I didn't see that at all Belleville, quite the opposite, everyone was overly courteous to everyone else. Just the Murdoch press stirring up trouble.

Belle As MarionCole suggested as well the candidates have spent all their time together lately. They all seem to be getting along fine. I read the article in The Times as well, as I can never resist a bit of gossip. The bit about how DM and EB always raise their eyebrows at EM's speech was particularly risible. They are like a troupe knowing each other's lines. While the others were talking they all relaxed / had a bit of a daydream. They must be bored out of their minds listening to each other and themselves.