Could somebody explain why Corbyn shouldn't be voted for as Labour party leader?

[Myturnnow4]

I've listened to people argue this, but haven't heard a reasoned argument yet. The main criticism appears to be, "he's on the left" but don't go on to explain why that in itself is a bad thing.

[didyouwritethe]

I could give you ten million reasons why he should be...

[didyouwritethe]

...beginning with: Alastair Campbell says "Anyone But Corbyn"....

[Awholelottanosy]

One argument has been that it will make Labour unelectable, citing previous leaders such as Michael Foot. However, these are different times and a lot of young people have no memory of those days and to them, his ideas seem pretty radical!

[Pneumometer]

Because the chances of Prime Minister Corbyn in 2020 are approximately zero. An election campaign fought by a 71 year old man whose politics have been repeatedly rejected at the ballot box by the UK electorate, with five years of age shift meaning that the electoral influence of the baby boomers, who are mostly fairly comfortably off, will be at its absolute peak.

A focused, united Tory Party, led by a 49 year old George Osborne (most likely), versus a grey-haired pensioner who gets rattled by being chucked soft ones on C4 News? C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre: c'est de la folie.

Corbyn is wildly popular on twitter, amongst people of whom there aren't many and they don't vote anyway. Examples of campaigns that were wildly popular on twitter: AV and Scottish Independence. Remind me how those votes turned out?

The best Corbyn could do would be to stack up larger majorities in what are already safe Labour seats, plus (possibly) winning a few Lab/Tory marginals. That's not enough to form a government, assuming (as is likely) that the SNP don't implode in fratricidal killings in the next five years.

I have some sympathy with Corbyn's policies in the abstract, I voted Labour in 1983 so I'm one of the people that a similar set of policies didn't alienate and I don't necessarily see policies of the left as inherently impossible. But the reality of an Osborne/Corbyn general election in 2020 will be five more years of Tory misrule, and if you really care about the vulnerable, rather than wanting Labour as a talking shop, a compromised Labour government that can do some good is infinitely preferable to a pure Labour opposition that can do nothing.

[TendonQueen]

It is the 'won't win an election' thing. I think he seems like a decent bloke. Lots of people think he'll bring out all the non voters who want a more left wing alternative. I'm doubtful that that's the reason why all the non voters haven't been voting.

[Charis1]

He needs to make it crystal clear that he does not support Hamas before he can be considered to have any sort of place in British politics.

Hamas are a terrorist organisation dedicated to the death of every Jew on the planet, and their definition of " Jew" includes almost the entire world population including Corbyn himself.

It would be inconceivable for the labour party to be lead by someone who calls Hamas "friends", or who refuses to not support the IRA.

[Isitmebut]

Why don't you read all the other Mumsnet posts/threads on here and the News Board, or are you hoping for different answers?

[squidzin]

He could and should win an election.

[Myturnnow4]

...beginning with: Alastair Campbell says "Anyone But Corbyn". I heard an interview with him and thought exactly the same thing.

One argument has been that it will make Labour unelectable Yes, this would seem a valid argument. However, the interest and support that he's generated would appear to argue against that.

Because the chances of Prime Minister Corbyn in 2020 are approximately zero. Another good argument, but perhaps the influence of him just as a leader for a year or two would be good reason enough. Him as leader is the first reason I've had to even reconsider voting Labour again. It makes me think, "hmm, perhaps the party does represent my views?".

[squidzin]

Jeezus Christ supporter of Hamas??

[ihatethecold]

Does he actually call Hamas friends?

[Myturnnow4]

Lots of people think he'll bring out all the non voters who want a more left wing alternative. I'm doubtful that that's the reason why all the non voters haven't been voting.

I disagree tendon but only because I'm one of those voters bemoaning the lack of a left wing choice.

[squidzin]

He has already explained this and explained he is not a supporter of the entire of Hamas

[Pneumometer]

However, these are different times and a lot of young people have no memory of those days

Current 18 year olds: 855k.

Current 14 year olds (ie, voting in 2020 for the first time): 670k

Current 50 year olds (voted for the first time in 1983): 941k.

The over 50s vote at a rate of about 75%.

The under 25s vote at a rate of less than 45%.

So in 2020, there will be about 3.5m 55-60 year olds actually showing up at the ballot box, and there will be about 1.5m 18-23 year olds actually showing up at the ballot box.

Labour under Milliband absolutely haemorrhaged votes amongst over-60s (down to less than 25%). They're a massively dominant part of the electorate, in raw numbers and in turnout. They remember the 1980s. A load of non-voting twenty-somethings won't overturn that.

[Lottapianos]

'I could give you ten million reasons why he should be'

Ditto didyouwritethe. I'm sick and tired of the endless repetition of the line that Labour must stick to the centre (right) ground in order to win elections. I'm sick and tired of focus-grouped, steam-cleaned politico robots who don't seem to have any personality, repeating bland lines that have been fed to them by spin doctors. Corbyn seems like a proper person and heaven knows that's what we need right now.

I do have concerns about whether he's leadership material and how the party would be expected to remain coherent and cohesive under his leadership. All I've heard all week is Labour big wigs and MPs on the radio giving chapter and verse about why he would be disaster blahblahblah. But I can't imagine a decent Labour party led by any of the other three so hey - why the hell not give Corbyn a chance?

[Bubblesinthesummer]

He is indirectly 'attracting' people like Nellist and Galloway et al who are no longer members of the Labour party for a reason.

[Lottapianos]

'However, the interest and support that he's generated would appear to argue against that.'

Absolutely. Labour need to get in touch with what a lot of people are crying out for, and stop recycling the same old crap

[Charis1]

Does he actually call Hamas friends?

apparently, so it is reported.

If not, then he needs to say so loudly and clearly NOW, and he doesn't seem to be doing so.

[Pneumometer]

Another good argument, but perhaps the influence of him just as a leader for a year or two would be good reason enough.

Divided parties don't win elections. The time for that sort of navel-gazing (or perhaps naval-gazing, as it'll be sinking while it happens) was 2010-2015. If Labour don't have a clear set of policies and a clear narrative soon, but leave it until 2017/8, they will be annihilated. We allowed the Tories to win on the "Labour caused the recession" because after the last GE there was six months of introspection which left the Tories to their own devices. Now it's much, much worse and after a shambolic election campaign, we are leaving the Tories twelve months to set the political weather. Which they are very, very happy to do.

Is Corbyn going to campaign for leaving the EU, by the way? He did in 1983.

[Myturnnow4]

Divided parties don't win elections. But neither is the current centre-positioned Labour party.

Lotta you wrote pretty much what I'm thinking.

[Binit]

Both conservative and labour gain votes by moving closer to the centre.

For labour to win, they need to pick up some conservative voters. The way to do that is to move towards the centre, not further left.

Tony Blair won some Tory voters over by going less left wing.
David Cameron won some labour voters over by going less right wing.

I hate politics, but it seems pretty basic to me.

Labour electing heavy left winger = lose election
Tories electing heavy right winger = lose election

Also there is something to be said about huge chunks of the electorate voting for someone who "looks the part" and commands respect. Corbyn doesn't. Ed Milliband didn't. William Hague didn't. Blair and Cameron did. Don't take my word for it, look what happened at the ballot box!

[Lottapianos]

'Blair and Cameron did. Don't take my word for it, look what happened at the ballot box!'

You're right Binit, and its unspeakably bloody depressing. It's not the flipping X Factor!

[Finola1step]

I am still undecided on who I will vote for. But if you had said, 2 months ago that I would be seriously considering Corbyn, I would have laughed.

Yes, he is very much to the left. Yes, voting for Corbyn may well hand the 2020 election to the Tories. But I do wonder if any of the 4 candidates could win the next General Election. Indeed, if Burnham, Cooper or Kendall win it, then I think its a given Labour will lose the next election. They are IMO, a weak field of candidates. None of them inspire.

So it then comes down to whether any of the candidates can be the catalyst for change that many people in the country are looking for.

Once you start asking that question, then there is only one candidate. So despite my fear that this election may split the party, JC is likely to get my vote.

[Pneumometer]

Labour need to get in touch with what a lot of people are crying out for

You're making the AV mistake: "lots of people like me, who read similar newspapers to me and converge on similar social-media hubs to me agree with me, and they're all nice and decent, and therefore everyone else does too and we are sure to win this".

How in tune are you with the current political thinking of the over-60s? Do you think they're screaming out for the nationalisation of the means of production and unilateral nuclear disarmament? Currently just 1 in 4 of them votes Labour; in 2020 28% of the population will be over 55, while only 16% of the population will be aged 18-30.

The Tories understand this. They're fantastic at the votes of the retired and the soon to be retired. Those two demographics ties up everyone over 50; co-incidentally, the people most likely to own houses, have at least some pension provision and be past caring about schools.

You can run around Hoxton getting as many votes from Nathan Barley as you like: the grey electorate kills you every time. It's a boomer election. Labour have to understand this.

[Pneumometer]

But neither is the current centre-positioned Labour party.

It isn't centre-positioned. It's pursuing a 35% strategy based on the idea that if you add up everyone who isn't a comfortably off Mondeo Man you win an election. Hence the endless banging on about stuff that is electorally unimportant, like the bedroom tax (everyone affected votes Labour already, if they vote at all, because the Tories cunningly excluded people past retirement age from it). This is a losing strategy now, and even more of a losing strategy in 2020.