Well, there we have it: Jeremy Corbyn has just been announced the next Labour Leader

[InTheBox]

With 59% of the vote (first round).

I've just been following the live BBC broadcast and just wanted them to get on with it.

No doubt people on both sides of the political spectrum will be overjoyed with the result.

LightningOnlyStrikesOnce

He's said himself that the economics part is for much smarter people to figure out. I have yet to see him explain his economic stratagy in workable terms. I don't agree with the Tories taking from the poor, leaving people with the bare minimum. However, if Corbyn wishes to reverse that, I really want to know how he means to implicate it. I think he owes both Labour and non-Labour voters an explanation as to how he thinks his ideas will actually work and be paid for, instead of just telling people what they want to hear.

MrsGently, surely the reason that the Greens haven't been more popular isn't due to the lack of left wing voters, but because our first past the post system means that for the vast majority of people it's a wasted vote?

I'm delighted that Labour no longer has to be Tory-lite.

Gently Benevolent I disagree with you. Gaitskell didn't become p.m. but lead the party well and changed some thinking. As did Smith.
The Greens haven't been elected because their thinking doesn't cross boundaries well, yes they're left wing but many still see them as bearded sandal wearing etc. Corbyn's policies are more appealing across the board and do cross the boundaries.

I loved Liz. Deserved more than 4.5%. The media shouldn't have questioned her reproductive choices so terribly.

Oh, and Gently there are many economists stating that actually, the economic policies mooted so far are sound and workable.

Boo Hiss. :( Thanks a lot Labour for delivering us a Tory govt until 2025. I won't rejoin the Labour Party next year.

I'm using the payout to buy a buy to let in London, just for irony factor.

I can't see how he can command loyalty from the parliamentary party given his track record of defying the whip. I think there will be several years of infighting amongst the MPs which will result in another Tory government. Openly divided parties don't win elections.

Hopefully there will now be a difference between the two main political parties! For too long since utterly fucking Blair took control it has been bloody swings and roundabouts. Hopefully John Smith can finally stop turning in his grave...

drdre I think that's right.

But I think JC would say that is preferable to the current situation. I don't think he intends to make a party that can win. His beliefs would expect his brand of politics to come via revolution.

There is plenty of evidence to show that a revitalised public sector is well worth investment, try the oecd's or the imf's report. Austerity economics is pretty well established as crap now. What we need to do is stop the huge money drains from the public sector into private pockets. Privatization has for years meant nothing more than private profit and public debts - stop that and much of the needed reform pays for itself. The myth that private sector is more efficient and reliable than the public sector was never anything more, it has been used to justify increased inequality for 40 years and now it stops.

Have to confess I am not convinced about this odd form of quantitative easing, I'm not that much of an expert, but we certainly need a return to more communal attitudes and public ownership of public infrastructure.

The Labour supporters who are wanting more of the same policies, is winning more important than the actual policies or stance of the party? Not being snarky, it's a genuine question.

There doesn't seem any point in winning if to win you have to be almost a Tory.

Dawndonna like the 300 odd ones who rejected Thatcher's economic policy?

MrsCorbyn, I loathe LK, but I have no idea what you mean about her "reproductive choices", never heard anything about that. So I promise you, the media's portrayal of her has nothing to do with my dislike of her; it's her, she made me dislike her by being her on every debate/tv appearance I've seen; she's insufferable, imo. Her. Her manner. Who she is. What she says. How she says it.

Slightly pathetic for jamie reed to tweet his resignation. Let the man have his moment.

Would that be the policy that has us up the creek, currently Carol?

That's fair enough, I can only hope that he does come good - at the moment I personally can't see it.

In all honesty, I don't see him being leader when the next election comes around. I give him a year, two at most. He's been put on the highest peddlestool - there's only two ways to go from that. Either he's going to prove us nay-sayers very wrong and be the best thing that's happened to this country in years, or he's going to fall apart and leave the party in an even worst state. If the latter happens, most voters will say 'if we couldn't rely on him, we can't rely on any of them', and politics really will all become the same. I hope he realises this and isn't about to make a fool of himself or the people who believe in him.

Jux - fair enough, I wasn't implying it did. She was lambasted for choosing not to have kids and I think that's pretty reprehensible.

Yes brilliant - another older white man from London in charge. Plus ??a change, plus c'est la m??me chose.

Gold, I was asked that by a Liz K researcher who was subsequently rude to me so I didn't even vote for her 4th like I planned to, he asked why I thought Labour lost, I said because more people wanted what the tories offered more. He asked what Labour should do to win, but I struggled to answer - I have a major problem with massaging your policies to what you think will get you a win rather than what you actually believe is right. If people don't want fairness and would rather be selfish, a party standing for fairness and the greater good will lose. I'd rather lose fighting for what I believe in than win by shitting on my principles. I'd rather Labour tries to convince people that they are the right party to vote for, even if they fail.

"There doesn't seem any point in winning if to win you have to be almost a Tory." - that right there has been the crux of my dilemma throughout the whole campaign. Is it true? Isn't Tory-lite better than Tory? I change my mind with the bloody wind these days. In the end I voted for Cooper.

It was a good speech and I really hope that all of my misgivings are wrong. I hope the press give him a chance - because that, more than anything, will dictate Labour's future.

I really like him, he seems like a decent very steady chap. I don't agree with him, but at least he is "real" - he clearly has long held, firm beliefs and that in itself is due much respect. I think it's why the others were just left in his wake, they just weren't credible. All that infighting is so unbecoming as well.

That said, I don't see him as obviously electable as PM unfortunately, but it could be interesting - who knows! Watch this space!

The only people who benefit from winning on a tory-lite policy are the politicians themselves who will gain big salaries/pensions/expenses.
Not much point for the rest of us

The whip and divisions - I've always hated the principle of whips. How can you have any kind of meaningful debate when different points of view are discouraged! We need solutions now in the face of the broken economy and climate change, that means different points of view from different backgrounds and different ideas. There should be no need for whips, or very very rarely, in a functioning democracy, they should be seeking out and negotiating a common consensus, and JC will foster that approach. Defying the whip and a party with different ideas across a spectrum of experiences are to be lauded, it's nothing to be afraid of. Not unless you're afraid of democracy in action, anyway.

And yes, how he copes with the parliamentary party will be fascinating - he's shown them very little loyalty over the years, and now he's going to need their loyalty.