Is Red Ed On His Way Out?

[naomi24]

//Mr Miliband has faced criticism over his leadership strategy from the Labour ranks amid concerns over Labour's falling poll lead. //

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/another-poll-shocker-for-ed-miliband-and-labour-as-41-of-voters-say-hes-weird-9214770.html

[Gromit]

Ymb

It is probably futile to try to dispel the myth that Ed was elected by the Unions, but here goes. Labour's electoral system, voting power is divided equally between three sections: MPs and MEPs, affiliated organisations including trade unions and ordinary party members.

After four rounds of voting Ed Miliband won with 175,519 votes, while David Miliband received 147,220 votes.

Unions and party members were a third of the vote. So they cannot elect him. To get past 50% he got votes across the board.

[ladybirder]

I think you look like him Gromit.

[naomi24]

^^ Cute, eh? ;o)

[emmie]

Gromit is, but not Ed, he looks odd from every angle

[Gromit]

The similarity is Ed Miliband and Wallace.

[jim360]

My understanding of the myth Gromit is that David was ahead of Ed based on the votes from MPs/ Party Members, so that it was Ed's substantial support from the Unions that overturned this. Perhaps it's an exaggeration to say that the Unions voted Ed in -- but they certainly helped!

[LazyGun]

It was the union and associated societies vote, coupled with 2nd and 3rd preference votes from the other candidates as they were eliminated that got him in ahead of his brother.

There is a round by round breakdown of the voting here, together with the relative percentages of votes from MPs, members and unions/associated societies.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-11412544

[ludwig]

// It is extremely stupid to call Miliband 'Red Ed'. //

No it isn't.

[naomi24]

Ludwig, :o)

//Mr Miliband has faced criticism over his leadership strategy from the Labour ranks.... //

If these people see fit to criticise him with an election looming, how can Labour expect the electorate to have confidence in him?

[LazyGun]

Tory backbenchers have criticised David Cameron and the coalition over the tone of their comments on immigration - If these people see fit to criticize him in the run- up to an election, how can the Conservatives expect the electorate to have any confidence in him?

All political leaders of all party hues, whether in power or in opposition will get criticism from those "inside" their party, urging them to do one thing or another. It is a fact of political life.

[atalanta]

The Labour Party seems to have the following unenviable choices:
1) wait until they lose the next election, then throw him out and find someone better. If there is anyone that much better. But that means years without even a remote chance of power.
2) chuck him out now ( how ? - vote of no confidence ? ) and look badly divided - and they know voters will never elect a divided party.
3) persuade him to resign - health reasons ? After all, Wilson did so, and very suddenly, too. His successor, Callaghan, wasn't too bad.

[emmie]

they won't get rid of him, not now.

[naomi24]

LG, but Ed isn't in the same situation as Cameron.

[emmie]

we are just over a year away from a general election, if they get rid of him, who can take up the cudgel?

[naomi24]

No idea, but this won’t instil confidence in the electorate. Labour are hardly presenting a strong, capable, and united image.

[LazyGun]

Well, that is your opinion on the issue, Naomi, but for myself I doubt this latest commentary is not likely to perturb the electorate that much.

The fact that some supporters wish Labour to, effectively, go on the offensive is the issue as far as these critics are concerned, and I would share their opinion. But we are still 14 months or so away from the GE - that is still some way away.

These public pronouncements from party activists urging a change in strategy or modification of a policy happens all the time in politics, but especially in the run up to an election.

It happens to Cameron. It happens to Clegg. It happens to Farage. It happens to all political parties, all the time, but especially in the run up to the election. They are all publicly doing what they can to shape the manifestos and policies of their respective parties in the run up to the election.

[naomi24]

Of course it's my opinion. If it wasn't I wouldn't have written it. I just don't think that an opposition party who have high hopes for an election victory should be presenting what could be perceived to be a disjointed front. It doesn't seem terribly sensible to me.

[DTCwordfan]

Bring back Tony and Gordon, the true socialists that they are.

[naomi24]

^^ Haaa! Always the wag. :o))

[LazyGun]

"Of course it's your opinion". Well, quite. Opinion being the operative word. And, lest your opinion be taken as untrammelled fact, I presented an alternative opinion, one at variance with yours.

Once again. These disagreements happen all the time, to every single political party, whether in power or in opposition. No political party is a monolithic entity, there will always be differences of opinion within. And this is an example of that.

In your opinion, you view this as damaging. In my opinion, I disagree. Such rumblings can get damaging,that's true, were it to be a serious split in opinion - like the backbench "bastards" of John Majors government, where the media and the rebels were creating stories and agitating for dissent almost daily, but this is nothing like that, at least on what I can see.

What you have here is a bunch of talking heads within the Labour party urging their Leader to come out with policy initiatives that they favour; big deal. In the overall scheme of things, seeing this as an event that weakens the electability of Labour is a long way down the list of what peoples concerns are.