Excited about the Labour leadership announcement

Just heard an interesting anecdote which speaks very much to Corbyn's own lack of understanding of his current role as Leader of the Opposition (and poss future PM)

On election as leader MOD offered Jeremy Corbyn a briefing on our defence capability. He refused to go for weeks.

Now I am very much of the left (anti Trident etc) but still see the absolute necessity to skill up on the issue of defence

The country is generally right wing, but that is because they have never been offered a real left wing alternative that upends the Establishment and scraps tuition fees, renationalises rail, invests massively in housing and education and health, ends wars, taxes the corporations and Paname Papers types etc etc

I would say the country is generally centre right. Put very simply, most people strongly buy into the culture of aspiration and object to paying taxes. They are - certainly outside metropolitan areas - pretty socially conservative as well. People accept taxes in return for investment in education and health but, ultimately, are not prepared to sacrifice their own job security or standard of living to achieve that. So - politics ends up in the centre because, ultimately, it all falls out around where the money comes from. The classic Tory stereotype? I want a policeman on every corner but I don't want to pay any tax. The classic Labour stereotype? I want to tax the rich where rich is someone with more money than I have. Equally I'd argue they have been offered a proper left wing alternative - Corbyn is the real deal - the problem is he is unelectable because he isn't in step with the majority of the country.

Those mass rallies by which Jeremy Corbyn sets such store could be the first stirrings of a social movement, some of which may play a part in an eventual left renaissance.

Exactly. UKIP started in the early 90s so it's taken them 25 years to shift public opinion and dictate the political agenda in this country. (And they still only have 1 MP). It's going to take at least as long to shift it back to the centre never mind further left. By doing it within the party, you're making the party an unappealing protest party at the moment. Serious parties have to be pragmatic and compromise in the centre-ish. Too far left or right means they don't address the range of opinions across a country.

'Don't forget how he came to be leader - he was the trade union's candidate - and a lot more left wing than any of the others in the running.'

Because the trade unions had been neutered, they had bought int Balirism, part from the legendary Bob Crow, and they believed the Establishment that this was the only way to win elections and therefore they let their own members down in pursuit of theor £100,000 salaries and their Lordships and baubles that the Establishment threw them. Some of them even now support the 172's Owen Smith. But Len McCluskey has said enough is enough and is backing a real socialist rather than Tom Watson and the rest of the 172.

That John Peel anecdote is spot on justicewomen.

Corbyn still leader? Confirmed?
Labour will not get elected. I'll bet quite a lot of money on it.

'Foot went down really well.'

Different times. We had just come out of a decade of the "Winter of Discontent", lots of strikes and union militancy etc etc that was bringing the country and taxpayers to their knees. It couldn't continue like that, the pendulum had swung too far, and that is why Thatcher won at that time.

But now times are different. We have had the Iraq War and Blairism and Establishment rule that has eroded job security and prospects and increased debt with tuition fees and put buying homes out of the reach of millions, and it is time for a change which is why the people defeated the Establishment over Brexit.

Corbyn is that change. It won't be easy for him because he has some stupid politically correct policies that the majority will never buy and he has to defeat his own Establihment 172 etc, but if he offers the people enough good policies, they will ignore the politically correct ones and they will vote Labour in and get real change for the country.

No, Ed was Establishment, Tory-lite, austerity-lite. That is why he lost.

Completely disagree with this. This is the way Corbyn supporters like to portray him, but, if anything, he was "Socialist-lite". Don't forget how he came to be leader - he was the trade union's candidate - and a lot more left wing than any of the others in the running.

I really don't think "the Establishment" - whoever they are - need to worry about Corbyn. His chances of getting his hands on any power are less than my ageing cat's.

But I agree with others that the lack of effective opposition is not good for parliamentary democracy.

There needs to be a breakaway party - like the SDP did (only they'd have to do it more successfully!). There's too much uniformity in politics as a result of the two party system. If the rise of UKIP has done anything, it's been to show that new political parties can emerge as a voice (if not necessarily, because of FPTP, as a serious threat to the balance of power). Arguably, there should be a Socialist party in this country. That is what Corbyn stands for and those arguments should be heard and people should have the opportunity to vote for them. You could then have a Social Democratic, centre left party (which is what the Labour Party became over the past few decades), which would likely garner much greater support...but would be an effective opposition (and, importantly, would allow the centre right Tories to bat off some of the more extremist right wing pressures in their own ranks).

The country is generally right wing, but that is because they have never been offered a real left wing alternative

Foot went down really well.

He also had thousands attending rallies.

That ended well.....

"I'm a floating voter who is bloody depressed by the whole thing. At this time - more than any other in my adult life I think - we need a strong opposition. And Labour seem unprepared or incapable to provide it."

This ^^
Many many people agree with this. I do too.
Can't you see that Labour is in serious trouble here?

This article by John Harris is very illuminating, in its criticism of all factions of the current Labour Party. The people who support Corbyn overestimate wider voter support because all the people they know support Corbyn. But they are the only ones

www.newstatesman.com/politics/2016/09/new-times-john-harris-why-labour-losing-its-heartland

"Now, support for Labour has dropped another couple of percentage points towards the dreaded mid-20s. Those mass rallies by which Jeremy Corbyn sets such store could be the first stirrings of a social movement, some of which may play a part in an eventual left renaissance. But for now, they say nothing about Labour and the left’s basic predicament. (In its own way, in fact, the idea that they augur well for Corbyn’s electoral prospects is reminiscent of what I call the John Peel mistake. Circa 1969, the DJ wondered why one of his favourite albums was not in the charts: “Everyone I know’s got a copy,” he said. Back came the reply: “No – you know everyone who’s got a copy.”)

'Ed M was just too left wing for the majority of the country'

No, Ed was Establishment, Tory-lite, austerity-lite. That is why he lost.

The country is generally right wing, but that is because they have never been offered a real left wing alternative that upends the Establishment and scraps tuition fees, renationalises rail, invests massively in housing and education and health, ends wars, taxes the corporations and Paname Papers types etc etc

Corbyn will do that which is why the Establishment are desperate to stop him and "Momentum Kids".

Claig, any evidence for either of those assertions? A copy of the NEC letter banning someone for calling Blair a name, for example?

All this is bad for labour. Corbyn is a good man, but he's no good at leader now.
The Labour Party is in a right mess. Joe public doesn't want anyone too extreme, too left wing. The only way for labour to get ejected is to bring in someone completely middle of the road.
And how boring would that be?

'the issue that is different from last time is that people are crying 'conspiracy', they also banned people from voting who where going to vote for Smith'

Of course they cried conspiracy when people were barred from voting if they called Blair a name on twitter. The whole country calls him names, most of which are unprintable.

'they also banned people from voting who where going to vote for Smith''

One or two votes had no effect on the outcome compared to the thousands of Corbyn voters who were not allowed to participate.

...do you know what, I think the reason that Ed Milliband lost the last election was a less extreme version of this (Labour party lost in its own bubble and lauding some new zeitgeist (to use a word much beloved of the Grauniad!). I know people involved in professional politics who were genuinely and utterly shocked that so many could swing to the Tories. But there's just as much of a "Labour bubble" as there is, say, a Tory Home Counties one. If you look at recent political history, the success of
Margaret Thatcher was based on being able to persuade centrist people to move much further right; conversely, Tony Blair persuaded some of the centrist/centre right types to swing to the centre left. Ed M was just too left wing for the majority of the country. For all this is sad for many people, I think the PLP has realised this...and so they see that their best chance of getting any sort of leftish agenda into the mainstream of politics is to be at the table. Corbyn keeps them outside the room!

'I think you'll find some of those that can't work with him are of the left.'

Momentum members don't seem to think so. They are probably about as left as Kenneth Clarke. They proposed ending secured tenancy for council house tenants, something that had existed for decades, even under Thatcher. No wonder left wing voters have had enough of the Establishment's "left wingers".

And the polls showed the GE would be close. They were slightly out in the the tories got a small majority rather than a hung parliament. The current polls would have to be massively out for the next GE to deliver anything other than a greatly increased tory majority, unless something changes.

They succeeded in removing lots of Labour members from the vote, disbarring them from participating, some because they had tweeted that the Greens were good or some who had called Blair a name in a tweet and who had failed to profusely apologise for that. But it looks like they will still lose

The rules haven't changed and it has happened before, the issue that is different from last time is that people are crying 'conspiracy', they also banned people from voting who where going to vote for Smith, it is not as one sided as you like to point out.

'No, he lost the support of the MP's because he's a bloody nightmare'

Of course he is a nightmare to the Establishment. That's why he is so popular among members and not the 172.

As much as it is hard to believe, the world doesn't revolve around members.

No - that's quite right. It revolves around voters. And the 172 know that.

No, they didn't ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/.

Six 22 June polls listed - one showed a ten point lead, two showed a Leave lead, the rest showed a small Remain lead. Polls on 19, 17, 15, 14, 13th june etc all showed Leave winning by a small margin. The overall picture was it would be close. Which it was.

'If all the votes are rigged then surely this one must be too. Shall we get our demands in for a recount?'

They succeeded in removing lots of Labour members from the vote, disbarring them from participating, some because they had tweeted that the Greens were good or some who had called Blair a name in a tweet and who had failed to profusely apologise for that. But it looks like they will still lose.

They won't be asking for a recount because the recount would probably end up with an even bigger majority for Corbyn. They have been defeated by ordinary Labour members and all their media help couldn't prevent it.