Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochdale Pioneers
Look at it like this - had MilliD won for Continuity New Labour, the abuse (rightly) would have been aimed at the Iraq war, his involvement in torture etc. Having lost an election nothing would have changed. MilliE at least offers a fresh perspective of someone not tainted by the Blair era.
None of the three leaders were the obvious candidates. Cameron was losing badly to David Davis right up to the conference that year. Clegg beat Who-He by a dodgy 500 votes. And Ed beat his brother whose campaign was " vote for me I will win".
What will change? Lets see. The cuts need to be attacked as the ideological smashing they are. We have a not excessive deficit created mainly by the drop in tax receipts from the recession. We can cut the deficit much quicker by growing the economy - as witnessed by the £20bn drop before the election - than by killing growth and cutting services and benefits. Are there scroungers out there? Yes. Can we cut the flab off various things? Yes. But thats not the current plan - evisceration is.
If Ed can combat Oik with some basic economics then he's onto a winner. If.
|
bit confused by all this! i think diane abbott would have made a much better labour leader