Why the Labour Party will not elect a woman

[PersonaNonGarter]

Just seen the Britain Elects poll of Labour members. Keir Starmer ahead on 31% with Rebecca Long Bailey on 20% and Jess Philips on 11%.

The Labour Party is too male. Even though women desperately need representation, Labour continue to romanticise heavy industry (manly) over the needs of eg retail workers (woman’s work). And even the recent Woke intake are steeped in this rose tinted Marxist Down Pit crap that lauds traditionally male roles.

So yeah the candidates might look like the women are putting on a good show. But a man will win.

Labour has only ever had one person elected prime minister in the last 45 yrs - Blair. This means that the issue isn't Labour, but the country.

When will the LP stop blaming the voters for its own failings?

There are strong female candidates-RLB isn't one of them. She's tainted as a Corbynite.
Nandy, Cooper - both good candidates.

@Namechangednorth No, I thought Corbyn was terrible and voted against him both times. I don’t think RLB is an electable leader. But she’s not stupid and nor are the other female Labour politicians you’ve conveniently decided are too stupid for you. TBH that casual dismissal of Diane Abbott is always a massive red flag for women hating racists.

TBH that casual dismissal of Diane Abbott is always a massive red flag for women hating racists.

So no criticism of the woeful Abbott is allowed because that is automatically women hating and racist? Seriously?

My reluctant conclusion as to why the Tories won and why Labour lost is that, however much we can argue about the veracity of the claims - the Tory campaign was in possession of more vision and positive thought about the future.

Seems to me, we make much of the demonization of immigrants by the right wing (and that is certainly true), but we don't take any notice of the demonization of other groups by the left wing, or we think that particular bit of divisiveness if justified. So we accept the ire directed at business owners or landlords or the media, and some Labour bods think that kind of campaigning will stir the resentment of the people they clearly think are too stupid to have independent thought about the way their lives work without having an enemy to blame.

One person blames the immigrants for their difficulties, another person blames the media. Round and round we go and whoever capitalizes on the fear is the winner.

What a shitty way to run a railroad. I want Labour to step up and listen to what people want from their lives, and I don't care what sex the new leader is if they can't do that and turn it into policies that come from the bulk of the country who work hard and want good things for their families and neighbours and just want to impose a diktat onto the stupid sheep who don't know what's best for them.

Personally think it is more important to get the right person.......doesn't matter what sex. Personally, though, do prefer Yvette Cooper...think she comes across as more approachable and less courtroom barrister than Starmer. She could have more general appeal.

@claireskimono Is that what I said? No, it isn’t.

I live in Liverpool. The old hard left have re-entered the grass roots party and local constituencies. They can be bullies, and are utterly intolerant.
Bullying and the weeding out of long standing MPs and councillors just because they don't follow the exact letter of the law has to stop.

Local Labour groups have inserted very young inexperienced Momentum members - who cannot possibly speak up for all of their constituents. Only interested in furthering the cause.

The intolerance and woke'ism also needs to stop.

Labour has only ever had one person elected prime minister in the last 45 yrs - Blair. This means that the issue isn't Labour, but the country I’d say this means the opposite, the issue IS Labour.

I quite agree notmoresheep - but they are incapable of seeing it. Tragic for those of us who used to and want to vote Labour again.

Moonlight then I am not sure what your point actually was.

People talking about Labour needing to select a female leader are no friends of Labour or of such a leader, IMO.

I think it's fine to think of it privately as a good and long overdue thing, if it happens to happen, but any hint of it being something that should be actively pushed for or engineered simply removes (in advance) credibility from any woman elected as leader.

Talking in advance about how a woman 'should' be chosen will also make the party look like it has just made a 'PC' choice, if it does select a woman.

For that reason I find myself really wishing the people saying Labour 'ought' to have a woman leader this time would be quiet about it! By all means hope for it to happen and campaign for female candidates you like, but please don't go round implying it's something that should be chosen deliberately, as right now that will just harm any woman elected, and the party as a whole.

Abbott is unelectable. Not because she's a black woman but because she's rubbish.

I think that makes you both racist and sexist then bellini

That Labour is unelectable is on the Labour Party and its current leader

That no strong women leadership candidates have been able to get to a position of prominence in recent years within the Labour Party is on the Labour Party and its current leader

In this case I think Kier Starmer has more universal appeal than the other two candidates. I think Yvette Cooper would be a better option. It’s nothing to do with them being women. RLB is very far left and Jess Philips is too outspoken to be a leader, she’s not got the diplomacy required. She is a brilliant back bencher constantly challenging and upsetting the status quo.

Labour clearly needs a leader with wider appeal who will bring them back to the centre left

We have never lived in a left-leaning country. It's just fact. And that's a fact that isn't about to change any time soon, so 'blaming the electorate' is just about the most stupid thing you can do.

Starmer presents as electable and esp so as RLB is the 'Corbyn continuity of failure' candidate. The college politics of 'protest group' is a direction of unelectability.

Labour has only ever had one person elected prime minister in the last 45 yrs - Blair. This means that the issue isn't Labour, but the country

I’d say this means the opposite, the issue IS Labour

I think the problem with some of the left is they don't really understand the real significance of the 1945 election.

The 1945 election result was inevitable and necessary - a complete game changer for everyone. Everyone's life was improved- even the very rich benefited from the NHS and welfare care.
Few suffered although in later years some people were subjected to excessive death duties - no one should be forced to sell their home to pay a tax which wasn't even caused by an event they were responsible for. There is no moral justification for taking what a person has built up over their lifetime just because they are dead.

However that election having effected a huge sea change did what it was meant to- society as a whole was immeasurably improved. Poor and working class people were given hope and opportunities and allowed to aspire to a better life.

And of course the Allies owed a huge debt to the Soviet Union for the victory in WWII but it didn't take long to realise that Communism does not work - at best it's bureaucratic and inefficient and at worst as bad as the Nazis.

Hence Corbynism, effectively Marxism, although obviously without labour camps, isn't going to appeal. Corbyn is a big fan of Latin American communists but he fails to understand no-one wants to be Venezuela.

Abbott is unelectable. I think most people in the country would be reluctant to vote for somebody who wears mis-matched shoes.

Yes to Y Cooper. And yes to admiring Jess P but no to her ever gaining a Parliamentary majority.

We have never lived in a left-leaning country. It's just fact

We did in 1945 but that was utterly unique and necessary in that time and circumstances.

1945 was never left-leaning. As you say it was necessity and after that it returned Churchill in '51, I think.

Well we will have to disagree on what is considered "left leaning". In a UK context it was.

But anyone banging on about how the UK isn't socialist enough is on a hiding to nothing.

I'm not a Labour supporter but, regarding the criticisms of Diane Abbott, does a woman's ability to present herself 'correctly' in interviews and/or ensure they're wearing matching shoes at all times really matter when it comes to effectively leading a political party? Imagine if David Blunkett had been passed over for a cabinet position because he 'couldn't hold eye contact'.

or Ian Duncan-Smith was refused a knighthood because he was caught eating his own bogeys in the HoC?
IDS gets away with a disgusting act, and yet Abbott gets attacked because of her skin colour.