I agree
Of all the names mentioned so far, there is only Starmer and Cooper who should be anywhere near the position of leader.
Thornbury is just awful and although Long Baily and Angela Raynor may well be political heavyweights of the future, they are nowhere near ready yet and will be seen as being too close to Corbyn's politics to make any significant change to the direction of the party and change is something that Labour must do.

I dont see them getting anywhere near No 10 at the next election and they probably need to be looking at the following election.

The very small silver lining to the cloud of another 5/10 years of Tory rule is that they wont be able to dodge responsibility for the state of the country and the ecconomy and the fall out from Brexit. Although, I suppose that they will most likely blame the EU, if we dont get a free trade deal, something that I dont think the EU can actually afford to give, as it would massively weaken the future of the Union.

He claimed that he had negotiated a new and much improved withdrawal agreement with the EU when in fact all he did was relocate the border from land to the sea. It did not change the fact that a border would be in place but as per usual it was portrayed as a great new deal that only he could have negotiated. He and his friends in the press continued to push this line despite it being disproved as per usual.
I expect that whatever he agrees with the E.U. on trade if he does it will be handled the same but this time he does not have an existing agreement to work on.
They won the election therefore it is our responsibility to point out when they do not live up to the few promises he made, no more hiding in fridges but I expect a lot of dodging of interviews other than through the right wing press just like Trump and Fox.

Yvette Cooper has no chance - a bully when she was in Brown's inner-sanctum now she is out of the chosen few. She was an arch remainer who tried to overthrow the democratic vote on Brexit. She also has a slender majority - she would have gone had it not been for the Brexit party

You may be right but, she is someone who at least isn't seen as being part of the Corbyn shadow cabinet who, let's face it, didn't come out of the election with too much credibility and Labour has to change direction or they could be done, for a very, very long time.

Regardless of the fact that they have picked up seats "up North", without any serious opposition, the Tories will cause some real harm to certain parts of the electorate.
Despite his flying visit to Lancashire and the North East, Boris is true blue and doesn't give a tinkers toss about those outside his inner circle and at some point you would expect a gaffe that will prove terminal to his political ambitions.

I agree with wrencat that the best two would be Starmer or Cooper, based on capability to actually do good governance. Long Bailey will not be PM and the people supporting her know that, her candidacy is about the hard left holding on to control of the party institutions. Karie Murphy, Seamus Milne will stay involved at the top, RLB knows that her position owes a lot to them because she's been chosen and promoted by them and so will be easy to control.

I think the strategy of the hard left is basically hold control of the party for long enough and eventually they will obtain power by default. The Conservatives cannot win forever. Economic crashes have a way of sweeping governments out of power in a way that the long slog of austerity hasn't - look at how New Labour - who were sitting pretty after the 'Brown bounce' in 2007, melted away over the next two years. When people lose their jobs and houses they turn on the government. I think privately a number in the left feared a situation where Corbyn became PM, inherited this Brexit mess, had to keep together a coalition of Lib Dems and SNP, and the country fell into recession straight after Brexit, it would have been the ultimate validation both for Tories to say - "see, when Labour come in power you get an economic crisis" and for Blairites to say, "see, the left ruin the economy". So the RLB strategy is about keeping control of the party and waiting. If a crisis did happen and the Tories lost, then Seamus Milne would be in No10 running things, like Dominic Cummings is really running things not Boris.

But that won't happen if Starmer or Cooper are there. Although the Tories would scoff at either of those being chosen - "remainer elite", they would fear either of them much more than Long Bailey or the others. They would fear that if the economy tanks after Brexit, the disaffected remainers would have a rallying point, and that could see a coalescence of 'middle England' and the business community around a centre-left Labour, which is the position that checkmated them during the Blair era. They would remove Labour's association with the hard left, antisemites etc, in a way that I don't think the other leaders would.

I do think both Starmer and Cooper face a difficult task in winning the leadership though. Probably only one of them at best can get through the MPs ballot. If they get through to the members though, it will be interesting. Starmer in particular would pick up a lot of the youth vote that rallied behind Corbyn last time.

RLB has been quiet recently. Her team is probably keeping her out of the media using the strategy that Boris did - when you are the favourite, say as little as possible to avoid gaffes, and just get through till the vote. But if the polls of members started to suggest the race was close or she slipped behind Starmer, then she'd have to come out and show what she was about, and I'm not sure she will come across very well. Her big ticket will be 'Green New Deal' but she isn't a charismatic figure like AOC in the USA. When I have seen her she has seemed more suited to just loyally repeating party lines. Starmer is more of an independent thinker and although he's a quiet and understated character, he will beat her for clarity of argument and intellect.

The challenge for Starmer down the track is he lacks charisma in terms of big speeches, and he isn't a Blair who can give good pithy sound bites. He is more like the classical lawyer, who will make a lengthy and well researched argument, but that doesn't always work well in modern political comms. Still, he'd be much better than RLB.

Cooper...I think she's good, but I think she will find a struggle given that she's been around a long time. She'd face similar problems that Hilary did in the US. The press would give her a hard time as a woman, and also she has been on the scene too long to be a credible 'change' candidate.

5
YAWN, YOU LOST, get over it, you'll get an ulcer.

One of Labour's issues has been internal squabbling it did for Kinnock/Brown and Milleband. It is no surprise that Labour were successful when Blair ruled the party and the hard left were quelled. With an infrastructure that is controlled by the likes of Lansman/Corbyn/McDonald/Nichols and McClusky a candidate from the right has no chance of bringing the party together it would not a complete destruction of the current infrastructure. I could see two parties emerging from this. It could lead to centre left party including the lib dems and a hard left Labour party with its current infrastructure.

I agree with you RLB has no chance of taking Labour into power - I don't think there is a suitable candidate on the hard left that can win an election. There tactics during the last election does not show them in a good light - all the lies and desperate attempts to smear Boris rather than focus on why their policies were more beneficial. The desperate attempts towards the end - Waspi women, reduced rail fairs etc looked ridiculous.

Both Starmer - who presentable but buckles under pressure, Cooper is too wishy/washy that leaves Thornberry who is feisty and is one of the left's strongest critics. Whilst I don't like her I do respect her spirit - can she bring Labour together - tough one. Would she give Boris a run for his money without a doubt.

The problem with RLB she suffers from what a lot of young Labour suffer - they shout the argument, it is not considered debate - this is a legacy of the Momentum influence - you see in RLB, Laura Pidcock, Ash Sakar, Grace Blakely, Angela Rayner etc. This arrogance is an issue for Labour - the idea that Labour believe they won the argument - is stunningly stupid. Everybody loves free stuff but nobody believed it all could be funded just from companies and rich people.

People like the idea of public ownership because they think their bills will be reduced - doubt they think it will so great when this doesn't happen. Why should road users subsidise reduce rich people in London using the train? The green issue was over played and the reality is like tax unless its a global endeavour the impact would be limited - 250bn was a bonkers strategy especially when considering its limited impact and the issues in other areas such as the NHS/Police/Education. Free broadband - why? it goes on and on. Something has to change with Labour's approach or they will cease to be a mainstream party

Roll back under your stone, this discussion is some way above your level of intellect

Still trying to use patronising emoticons, how very intellectual.

labour have proven that the hard left is not wanted in the UK, Corbyn's idealogy is as morally bankrupt as is his support for terrorism and hatred of success.

Unless Labour shift back to a more central position they will remain unelectable. No amount of online bleating about how "bad" Boris is will change that.

I know that you find it difficult to understand but, we were discussing, Labours need for a new leader and who may be the best candidate.
However, instead of contributing ANYTHING to this subject, you decide to throw in the "you lost" boll***S.
If that'really is the best that you can muster, you really should consider leaving the discussion to the grown ups