Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Who the hell are we supposed to vote for in the Labour leadership?

125 replies

Polynerd · 14/02/2020 00:17

I was really enthusiastic about voting for Lisa Nandy before she took this ridiculously authoritarian stance on the trans issue. But all the others seem to have signed similar pledges. Should I just not vote?

OP posts:
Original poster
Polynerd · 14/02/2020 10:56

I'm actually really distressed about this. I've always been of the left and I feel that my political underpinnings are shaking.

OP posts:
Thelnebriati · 14/02/2020 16:47

Left and right are still in the same place, they haven't changed.
People who believe that 'left = good and right = bad'' often go on to believe that if they are doing it, it must be left wing and therefore good. They lose the ability to critique their own beliefs and behaviour.

People who place their need to be in with the in crowd over the public interest have no place in politics.

timetest · 14/02/2020 19:43

I can’t vote for people who don’t believe I exist.

Cwenthryth · 14/02/2020 19:57

Before all the competitive ridiculousness this week, I was going for Nandy with Starmer second. Now? I really don’t know. I think RLB is the absolute worst option for the long term future of the party. So I think I may have to still vote 1.Starmer 2.Nandy just to guard against RLB; but I really, really object to Nandy’s disgraceful behaviour this week.

Deputy - yes Murray put in a reasonable performance on QT and hasn’t upset me yet so is the default ‘front runner’.... I’d previously assumed that RAK as a bloody doctor would have been a safe-ish bet, I liked her ‘grassroots’ plans and I’d love a WOC to be elected, but I am astounded at her TWAWing! Dawn Butler - obviously not, Rayner or Burgon - continuity candidates so no...... it is really, really slim pickings isn’t it.

I will vote though, one way or the other; abstaining or spoiling votes in this won’t help at all. I’ll be really disappointed if I end up having to vote for 2 white men though. What a waste of an opportunity.

boatyardblues · 14/02/2020 20:04

As an aside, there are more female candidates in this leadership/deputy election than in the entire history of Labour leadership elections to date. Not that that's any consolation.

Ever heard of the ‘glass cliff’? The party’s fooked. That’s why most of the chaps are sitting it out.

Glass cliff

user1471453601 · 14/02/2020 20:06

I will be voting for the person I think is best placed to get Labour re-elected asap. I suggest you do the same.

If I wanted to join an organisation that campaigned on one issue only, I would have joined such a campaign.

Ididnt. I joined the Labour party, because I want them to be in charge of the country.

If there was one single issue I felt very strongly about, i d join an organisation that campaigned around that issue.

As it is, I joined a party that i d prefer to rule the country.

CaptainKirksSpikeyGhost · 14/02/2020 20:08

I wish that people would join the dots and understand that it's not a COINCIDENCE that the same factions are threatening/bullying/endangering both women and Jews.

I will say that people posting and connecting these two things together have their posts deleted.
The connection has been made here.
But it's now not allowed to be expressed.

Lumene · 14/02/2020 20:10

I will be voting for the person I think is best placed to get Labour re-elected asap. I suggest you do the same.

No one politically naive enough to sign that insane pledge is going to have a hope in hell of getting Labour elected.

Cwenthryth · 14/02/2020 20:35

I get your point, user, and many of us are networking and supporting many organisations that campaign on specific issues (for me, that’s women’s rights/healthcare, environmental and animal welfare issues), however, this particular discussion of the Labour leadership candidates is on a women’s rights discussion forum, so I think it’s fair enough we consider the most appropriate (or least inappropriate!) candidate(s) from a feminist perspective.

PronounssheRa · 14/02/2020 20:46

I will be voting for the person I think is best placed to get Labour re-elected asap. I suggest you do the same

I'm not going to vote for anyone who actively campaign against my rights as a women.

Labour needs to raise their game. Now.

donquixotedelamancha · 14/02/2020 22:39

I don't have a vote but what I take from this debacle is that none of them will lift a finger to support women but that Starmer is the most mentally agile and understands the laws of defamation best. So him but only if you held a gun to my head.

This. I think Stamer knows how stupid it all is but calculates it will torpedo him with momentum if he speaks up. Same reason he's been saying Corbyn wasn't that bad.

I think there is a least worst option but, dear god, that's damning with faint praise. I wouldn't vote for the coward but I still hope he wins.

GiantKitten · 14/02/2020 22:47

I wouldn’t call him a coward. He’s smart and cagey and covering his back. This isn’t the time to be brazen.

Assuming he wins he can then start standing up for common sense & normality but get him in first!

(I have no vote btw, I left 2 years ago over AWS & Brexit fudging Hmm)

donquixotedelamancha · 14/02/2020 22:51

I wouldn’t call him a coward. He’s smart and cagey and covering his back. This isn’t the time to be brazen.

I could accept not being brazen but, when leadership candidates are calling for purging feminists out of Labour, I think to say nothing is cowardice.

He could have stressed the 'treat trans people decently' line (which is correct) and avoided saying anything GC, while challenging the use of 'hate groups' and the threat to expel dissidents.

GiantKitten · 14/02/2020 23:40

I suspect that in the current atmosphere even challenging the ‘hate group’ thing would be derided as transphobia. Safer to say as little as possible & give no hostages to fortune.

MetaWhat · 15/02/2020 08:03

I'm voting for Keir and Ian Murray.
I think Keir gets the issues and is sympathetic. He's done lots of work on women's rights previously. Given the make up of the membership it would be suicidal for his campaign to vocally support women at this point. He's the only one not to sign the Stalinist pledge. However it's utterly depressing that in a contest with loads of women I'm having to vote for two men to be the best bet for women's rights.

dianebrewster · 15/02/2020 08:43

I'm with Meta on this one - Starmer and Murray. Electable and haven't drunk the kool aid.

Floisme · 15/02/2020 10:28

If just one of them had refused to sign either pledge - and stood up to explain why - I am sure they would have been vilified in some quarters but they would also have started a conversation in the party. GC members would have drawn courage and confidence from seeing a candidate argue their corner. Some might have stood up themselves and asked questions. The TWAW lobby might have been forced to actually join the debate, thereby exposing the craziness. And many voters would have heard the arguments for the first time.

Do I think they might have gone on to win? No. I think Momentum would have seen them off this time. But I don't think Momentum would have been able to stop the conversation once it had started.

This week I think they each had an opportunity to help make the Labour Party a safer place for women and take it a bit further down the road towards being electable - but at some personal cost. They've all made their choice and I hope whoever wins finds the job is worth it. Pity Shakespeare's not around any more - it would make a cracking play,

Mockersisrightasusual · 15/02/2020 10:38

Go with Starmer. He's committing to nothing of substance. He can say he 'believes' in unicorns, and how could they disprove this?

Deputy Leader's job isn't worth wank.

PermanentTemporary · 15/02/2020 10:39

I have just found out that Dr Khan went to Lucy Cavendish, the only Cambridge women's college that hasn't yet embraced self-id for admissions. Weren't Long-Bailey and Nandy originally selected from AWS?

Shame on you all.

Hulo · 15/02/2020 11:57

So sad. I really wanted to vote for a woman but it looks like Starmer and Murray.

And it's more than just a 'single issue'. I can't trust someone who supports something so anti-science and illogical and takes a position so basically incoherent and extreme they can only defend it with waffle, who can so casually dismiss a whole cohort of people as hateful without engagement or thought.

How can I trust them to lead a party yet alone lead a country?

PermanentTemporary · 15/02/2020 13:41

Absolutely Hulo.

Michelleoftheresistance · 15/02/2020 14:18

Women are socialised to meet male needs, and men are socialised to regard any women who deviate from that as abhorrent.

And Labour regard any women who deviate from that, or even get together to talk about doing that as illegal.

I wouldn't vote for Starmer if he was the only choice; at least the women have had the guts to be honest about their anti women misogyny and stand openly on that platform giving the voters a fair choice.

Going with Wrong-Daily, let's put the batshit front and centre in the public eye. Sunshine. At least she'll be honest about it.

Micaela64 · 15/02/2020 14:45

Stop worrying about Labour and focus on contacting Tory MPs! Labour are likely to be out of power for a generation at this point.

Original poster
Polynerd · 15/02/2020 15:49

@Micaela64 that is a very good point. I wonder if we should do some sort of letter to Liz Truss?

OP posts:
KimikosDreamHouse · 15/02/2020 16:02

I’ll be really disappointed if I end up having to vote for 2 white men though. What a waste of an opportunity

Purity politics at its worst in that statement. I'm past caring what the Labour party does but voting for a woman just because has always seemed a ridiculous concept.