Thought it started off well last night with Gobsh**e Galloway and Aaronovitch (-ish) having a go at each other.

What was apparent though, presumably even to all those (including on here) who have suggested Yvette Cooper as a potential Labour leader was just how weak she is. She could not possibly ever get elected as a PM. She seems like the sort of female middle manager you get in local authorities and not a credible political heavyweight. Galloway tore her to shreds and her voice seemed to be trembling at times. For all his faults he hit the nail on the head by trying to ascertain what Labour stands for and who it represents. She didn't seem to know or care but was just trying to perpetuate the weasly, meaningless words of Labour's recent past. By far the weakest member of the panel - even including the Baroness herself. Quite some achievement that, Yvette! When will Labour next produce a credible leader if her and two Ed's are the best they can field? Unless they change their ways they are a party destined for the dustbin of history just like the Liberals.

Is that why they have a double digit lead in the opinion polls?

I wouldn't pay any attention to polls, I'll do a poll for you this afternoon that will carry as much weight as anyone elses poll if you like - the Labour Party as it stands are perfectly capable of losing the next election, christ knows how, but they are.

They have a double digit lead in polls because people aren't happy with the current mob and are too thick to grasp that there are options outside of Labour.

You'll find very few Labour leaders who'll have much confidence in Miliband and Cooper, even if they might be confident of Labours chances as a party.

It's British politics. You could put the 2 most pathetic candidates in the history of the world at the head of Labour, Tories and, recently, Lib Dems, and someone will vote for the party just because it's their party.

You're right, sadly, Labour, Tories and all the other establishment scum political elites will continue.

In general elections, like it or not, alot of floating voters appear to be very heavily swayed by the party leaders, what they say and how they say it. (People talk of voting for "Cameron" or "Brown" rather than their local MP). There is no way that a majority of such voters will vote for with either of the two Eds or Yvette Cooper. No matter how unpopular the Tories are until Labour have a leader that looks like a leader they will not win outright. They haven't got far to go as to me Cameron is pathetic BUT they don't seem to have anyone on the pipeline who is even that good. As time goes on Cameron gains experience and will start to look less out of his depth and he was also have familiarity on his side.

Quite right. For all we pride ourselves as a much more open country politically that the US, at the end of the day we have only as many real parties as the US.

Joys of FPTP voting.

In my opinion coming from Doncaster where we have Milliband, Flint, and Winterton, as Labour MPS, there is only one person I like to hear having a good go at the Coalition and that is John Mann who represents Bassetlaw in Derbyshire. He even spoke up against MPS expenses when Flint didnt want them published. Round here I would bet no one know who their MPS were called.

Mine is Flint and she's as much use as tits on a fish.

Ours is Peter Lilley. Actually a good constituency MP, although since the Tories are back in power he's happily boasting about being a right wing Conservative. That contrasts somewhat to the cuddly - touchy - feeling persona that came into being after they were slaughtered a few years back and branded the nasty party.

Dont like saying it but just down the road at Goole, the Tory MP Piercy is in the local papers every week because he puts his name to every cause going., where our lot in Donny are never to be seen , except getting mulled over at PMQS

She lives, when it suits, on New Lane, Sprotbrough behind a massive hedge.
I have passed her house regularly and I still have a pint in the Ivanhoe regularly. I have been in the Country Club at the end of her road a few times.
I have never seen her around the village.

I have seen her on the TV many times.
I have not liked what I have seen.

A self-serving, opportunist.
No, not me.



Are you from near Sprotbrough?

I live in Tickhill.

Sadly agree with most of that assessment.
Cooper seemed to show some potential when she first came on the scene but that now seems to have dissipated.

Just admit you disagreed with the Iraqi war when Georgie boy asked the question Yvette?
We all know she really wanted too.

As with most politicians, Ms Cooper has to toe the party line, which is unfortunately Miliband's party line.
Galloway, however, doesn't have that restriction and can wander wherever he likes in terms of policy-on-the-hoof, knowing that he will never have to put any of it into action. His sole purpose is as an irritant. Which is fine as far as it goes.

Yup. A fine definition of why our elected representatives credibility is at an all time low.
The Lib-Dem chappie came out of the programme quite well.
Basically admitting that they have shafted themselves, and he's the party chairman, isn't he?

This is typically sloppy criticism of Galloway. Whether you like his policy or not there is no way it can be described as 'on the hoof'. Right or wrong, he is at least very consistent.

I had to smirk when Mrs Balls said she agreed with the ongoing campaign in Afghanistan.
By not being able to say the same about the Iraqi conflict she basically answered Galloways question.

You are correct that it's a lot easier for GG.
He never agreed with it so it's not too difficult for him.

Apparently that's opportunism to some.

That one never worked for the Nuremberg defendants.

Galloway - 'Well just admit the killing of a million people was wrong'?

A deafening silence.

I think the accusation of opportunism isn't linked to his opposition of the war in Iraq but whether he hangs his coat on some cause in an opportunistic way. He can be as consistent as he likes on that but it is whether or not you believe he is sincere about the causes he claims to support.

If he was a good MP he'd have kept the Bethnal Green seat which he didn't.

Your last but one Labour Prime Minister must have taught him all he knows.

1. Galloway gave away a cushy career in the Labour Party because he stuck by his principles. He fought to stay in the LP but lost and was expelled. As the LP's campaign manager he was guaranteed a safe seat wherever he wanted. His decision to risk his political career and reputation was a massive risk...quite the opposite of opportunist.

2. He didn't lose his seat in Bethnal. He chose not to contest it, preferring (wrongly as it turns out) to try and expand his base into neighbouring Poplar & Limehouse.
In any case it's simply not true that 'good' MPs don't always keep their seats, and it's certainly true that some pretty rotten ones stay in for decades.

It is simply ridiculous to assert that Galloway's unbending adherence to causes that he has championed for decades, both in and out of the Labour Party can be construed as either insincere or opportunistic.

Yes, sloppy is right, it wasn't "on the hoof" about policy at all.
What I meant was that he only has to toe his own line so he has much more freedom of expression.

True, but he had to follow the courage of his convictions and risk his career to earn that right.

The sad shame is that there aren't more principled and outspoken politicians in the mainstream parties. They all toe the party line over war and austerity. None of them therefore have anything to say other than following the leadership governed concensus.

It is this sad indictment of the major parties that, IMO, led to the mass disillusionment that allowed Galloway to win so easily...even in predominantly white middle-class wards in Bradford.

He IS an opportunist because he campaigns in one way only and that is as a protest against the incumbent Labour MP or as he did in Bradford in a vacant usually Labour seat. IMO the issues he uses to fuel his protest campaigns have a happy knack of appealing to certain sections of the voters in the kind of constituencies he [uchooses[/u to contest. I doubt we will ever see him test himself in anything other than a Labour area. He picks his fights in any area he thinks he can win which to me is as opportunistic as you care to get.

If he swans off abroad like he did when MP for Bethnal Green he won't remain popular in Bradford for long either.

As an aside one of the things I can't stand is when [iany[/i party parachutes an MP into an area they have never lived in. Galloway looking for seats up and down the country to contest is no different.

Anyone would choose the ground they stand on if possible. Do you think the Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet don't carefully select the seats in which they stand. In this sense they are all every bit as opportunist as Galloway.

Although he frequently attacks the Tories and LibDems Galloway stands for what he believes are old Labour values, It is natural therefore that he choose to fight on Labour ground, but you clearly haven't seen anything of his Bradford campaign which took up not just the war and austerity but also the bankers, the media, NHS, student and local issues.

Certain sections of voters? This is just plain ridiculous. Galloway won hands down, even in predominantly white middle-class wards, and got 95% in the very diverse 'University' ward.

Where would you have wanted him to stand...Exeter perhaps, maybe Ripon...trouble is he wouldn't have got many votes there. They didn't have an election to stand in.