There is no harm in examining his fathers opinions as long as you keep them in the context of their times, the world was a totally different place socially and politically when his father was a 17 year old, whole European countries were under the control of right wing dictators with no hope of just waiting around for five years and electing them out - in my own lifetime there have still been European countries ruled by right wing dictators and army colonels, I even went on holiday to one of them and they wouldn't let you pass through customs if they thought your hair was too long (Greece).

Keeping Milliband Senior's political beliefs in context is what the DM should have done, what they would have done if they had any serious journalistic purpose, but like most newspapers, they don't, they simply serve to feed a limited number of eager followers with more propaganda, left or right.

And I'll repeat, Ed Milliband could not sell his fathers version of Socialism to his own party let alone the country even if he sincerely believed it was the way forward, which I doubt.

He does seem to be shifting his party to the left. This is all before the election too. What happens if he were to secure a majority? He would have free reign to to as he likes. I could hardly see Labour politicians lining up to disagree with any of his policies especially immediately after Milliband became the man who brought Labour back into office. He would even be able to argue he has a mandate for socialist policies.

Its never going to happen.

You will never sell a Labour Party of the flavour of, say, Kinnock to the public and he in turn was quite diluted compared to Foot, and those are just the ones within your lifetime, go back further and you have no chance of marketing that sort of Labour party - the Labour party of 2015 will have policies similar to Blairs, or be dead in the water.

You will not see any party with anything more than the narrowest of working margins unless its a coalition after the 2015 election and at the moment the party who are lining all of their ducks up are the Tory party, the bringing forward of the first time buyer guarantee to kick in immediately could be a master stroke that costs very little in hard cash terms, will be a crowd pleaser and could accelerate a pick up in consumer confidence - its been much easier to obtain credit this year than at any time since 2007.

What is so wrong with socialist policies?

He couldn't sell anything.

So what? If it gives the electorate a bit of a choice for the first time in years that would be a good thing, surely? The electorate will then decide one way or the other.

You would but that is because you are either thick or to ready to be spoon fed want you wish to believe.

You didn't "say" anything, you merely quoted some un-named source.
Yes, we've read that and it's froth.

As for being Miliband influenced by his father, I am influenced by Marx but am way off being a Marxist, I'm influenced by Jesus but am atheist and definitely not a Christian.
That's not how it works, influence does not mean swallowing a philosophy whole.

You really are young aren't you?

So, back to the question in the thread title "When will Labour ditch Ed M?".
The conference season has more-or-less signalled the start of the election campaign and Labour won't ditch Ed M in an election run-up, especially as he has come out of the conference season looking more lively than Cameron and Osborne who have been shiftily knitting fog to show that they are really, really against borrowing (despite doing lots and lots of it) and not mentioning their total failure to do what they said they'd do (eliminate the deficit) and doing what they said they would absolutely not do (top-down reorganisation of the NHS).
Also, the shabby deliberate misinterpretation of Ralph Miliband by the [iDaily Wail[/i has unintentionally (and ironically) shone a light on Ed being a normal human being with whom people can empathise, something that neither Cameron or Osborne have managed to do.
In conclusion, unless the Tories win the next election (bearing in mind they didn't win the last one), Ed Miliband will stay as Labour leader.

rlYou might enjoy this one from the [iFT[/i (registration required, but limited number of articles are free).rl

rlYouGuv poll for the [iSun[/i, conducted between 30 September and 1 October, suggests that Miliband E is benefitting from, presumably, his conference performance and this row.rl [PDF]

Seems the Mail on Sunday (there's a link to the DM there somewhere) gatecrashed a memorial service for Ed's uncle (at which he was speaking) to try and get comments on the original story about RM for publication this weekend

Why am I reminded of the Spitting Image pigs?

Just when you think the Mail group of Newspapers couldn't be any more stupid or stoop any lower they do thishttps://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/03/nick-cleggs-lbc-phone-in-and-reaction-to-david-camerons-conference-speech-politics-live-blogrl

Look at the entry at 11:48.

I wonder if Hague and Cameron etc can still avoid a direct criticism of the Mail now?

Oh, given their predilection for publishing pictures of underage girls, with sexualised copy online, while portraying itself as a defender of children against sexualisation and 'pornification', I personally have no illusions about how Dacre and his rabble will go.

Rumour has it that Rothermere is furious. Having just given Dacre a new, year-long contract.

For Clegg that's a remarkably sensible thing to say.

Seems like the Mail has got itself in a mess here. Even senior Tories (other than the pillocks on the front bench) are disgusted.