British Democracy Forum - View Single Post

Britannist · 03-11-2006, 06:15 PM

Blair's Lie-bour Party don't have a heavyweight to stand against Brown.

I think that many people in the Lie-bour Party are afraid of backing someone in standing in a leadership contest against Gordon Brown because they fear it will anger Gordon Brown and reduce their chances of getting a job in a Cabinet led by him.

He would obviously have to offer his defeated opponent a job (the status of the job being linked to how well his opponent did) - but would be less likely to promote those who had backed the loser.

On the question of if Labour would do better in England if it had an English leader. BBC 2 Television's Newsnight did a poll of a panel of Labour voters on this two or three weeks ago. There was a sizeable minority who said that Gordon Brown being Scottish was "a problem" for them.

I've always said Labour (Lie-bour) is anti-English as a party and stand by that view. When did they last have an English leader representing an English constituency? The answer is over FOURTY YEARS AGO (Wilson in 1963).

Labour's appalling record for NOT picking English leaders goes like this:

1976 James Callaghan (Welsh constituency)
1980 Michael Foot (Welsh constituency)
1983 Neil Kinnock (claimed to be Welsh but the name is of Scottish origin - Welsh constituency)
1992 John Smith (Scottish and Scottish constituency)
1994 'Tony' Blair (Scottish ancestry but pretends to be English to get the south-east of England vote - English constituency)

And the next one will almost certainly be Scottish to (Brown - Reid if Brown unexpectedly failed to win Labour leadership).

03-11-2006, 06:15 PM	#5 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	Anti-English Labour Blair's Lie-bour Party don't have a heavyweight to stand against Brown. I think that many people in the Lie-bour Party are afraid of backing someone in standing in a leadership contest against Gordon Brown because they fear it will anger Gordon Brown and reduce their chances of getting a job in a Cabinet led by him. He would obviously have to offer his defeated opponent a job (the status of the job being linked to how well his opponent did) - but would be less likely to promote those who had backed the loser. On the question of if Labour would do better in England if it had an English leader. BBC 2 Television's Newsnight did a poll of a panel of Labour voters on this two or three weeks ago. There was a sizeable minority who said that Gordon Brown being Scottish was "a problem" for them. I've always said Labour (Lie-bour) is anti-English as a party and stand by that view. When did they last have an English leader representing an English constituency? The answer is over FOURTY YEARS AGO (Wilson in 1963). Labour's appalling record for NOT picking English leaders goes like this: 1976 James Callaghan (Welsh constituency) 1980 Michael Foot (Welsh constituency) 1983 Neil Kinnock (claimed to be Welsh but the name is of Scottish origin - Welsh constituency) 1992 John Smith (Scottish and Scottish constituency) 1994 'Tony' Blair (Scottish ancestry but pretends to be English to get the south-east of England vote - English constituency) And the next one will almost certainly be Scottish to (Brown - Reid if Brown unexpectedly failed to win Labour leadership).