To not understand all of this Corbyn hate

[clevername]

Disclaimer – I consider myself to be an intelligent and thoughtful person but also very uninformed and ignorant of political (and other) current affairs. Largely through my own choosing – I have virtually no faith in politicians and politics at all. I realised a very long time ago that the whole thing was an elaborate farce. I’ve always spoilt my ballot until Nick Clegg won me over and then proved, unequivocally, that I was right to not trust them. I vowed never to vote again but I’m feeling stirred to this time around and have therefore been looking into it more and trying to sift through the inevitable bullshit…

So – what is so bad about Corbyn? From what I understand (do remember my disclaimer and how uninformed I am!), the main people in the Labour party hate him because he is ‘unelectable’. So they’ve wanted him out for a long time but he has refused to go, on account of the fact he has been democratically chosen by the party members to be the leader. This annoys and frustrates them and they therefore blame him for creating an enormous and damaging rift in the party. But, surely, the fact that he has been elected as leader is testament to his popularity with Labour voters? And isn’t it a good thing that he stands his ground? Especially against the kind of people who would rather have someone like Ed Milliband (or his ilk – I don’t know any ‘current’ names) as party leader? Doesn’t it show that he is principled and ‘different’ from the political norm? Isn’t this something that we need?

And what does it matter if the Labour party are in shambles (a common reason I hear for not wanting to vote for them this time)? Surely that’s because of all of the ‘unelectable’ stuff above. But if he were to be elected, I’m guessing those problems would evaporate. Because he would have been elected. And anyway, aren’t political parties often shambolic? Wasn’t May’s drastic cabinet overhaul and sackings at the beginning of her reign (not to mention the Boris/Gove thing in the leadership contest) a clear sign of an ununited, shambolic party?

I realise Corbyn isn’t to everyone’s tastes politically but if you’re left leaning and want to try and get rid of the Tories, surely he’s not such a bad bet?

I’m sorry if this is making me come across as stupid but I genuinely want to know why some people (especially those who would normally consider themselves left-wing or Labour voters) dislike him so much.

Yes, JC is assuredly not a man of the people. Neither was Tony Blair come to that - not that I think he claimed to be, mind you. Crucially, though he did get manage to get elected and New Labour did do some positive things (NI Peace Process, SureStart centres, Minimum Wage...just off the top of my head).

Corbyn wasn't trying to open any dialogue. He actively wanted the IRA to bomb people. He was like a teenager trying to run with the big lads because it made him feel hard. Peace was never, ever on the agenda for him. Quite the opposite, as his own words prove.

Corbyn wasn't trying to open any dialogue. He actively wanted the IRA to bomb people. He was like a teenager trying to run with the big lads because it made him feel hard. Peace was never, ever on the agenda for him. Quite the opposite, as his own words prove.

To be honest thats libelous and a lie

Interesting that a picture of Corbyn at a rally of the disreputable Stop The War. Corbyn presided over the notorious 2003 STW in Cairo. Caroline Lucas stepped down from the group too because she was unable to stomach its statements after the Paris bombings.

I don't think anyone hates him. His critics recognise that he's intelligent and principled I'm sure. He's just not cut out for PM, especially not during a turbulent period.

Also, he's too left wing for the majority of voters. MN politics threads give a misleading impression of what the public thinks. For example, the 2 children benefits cap is supported by a large percentage of voters but on a MN thread about it, a sizeable number of posters would criticise it.

JustAnotherPoster00

Libellous and a lie? Really? These stories still stand: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html
and www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11749043/Andrew-Gilligan-Jeremy-Corbyn-friend-to-Hamas-Iran-and-extremists.html

"then you get the trope of we need a strong opposition by the conservatives"

Wanting a strong opposition is nothing to do with being Conservative (I assume you mean the party, not the other definition) and everything to do with wanting the government being held to account...which is one of the main functions of Her Majesty's Opposition, and which they are singularly failing to do at the moment. The buck stops firmly with JC on that one.

I can remember when we didn't have a strong opposition in the mid 2000s, the Tories were floundering and it seemed like New Labour would be in power for years and years to come. A weak opposition allows the government to do as they please and that is really not a position we want to be in.

Nice meeting Theresa had the other day with those lovely peaceful tolerant Saudis tho.

Not right wing and neo liberal biased at all then Seahorses

Ad hominem. So it has a bias, like every other media outlet. It is still true.

www.politico.eu/article/labour-party-leader-jeremy-corbyn-regrets-calling-hamas-friends-hezbollah-anti-semitism/

He apologised at least, can you tell me if Theresa May has apologised for selling arms to the saudis yet at least he hasnt sold anyone any weapons.

Corbyn was on the editorial board of Labour Briefing after the Brighton bombing - that piece was very, very far from condemning the bombing -it encouraged violence.

And google Jonathan Powell's recent interviews on meeting Martin McGuinness. JC opposed this process.

Usual shut down of repetetive right wing tropes, either way I'll be voting for him seems to be the only party leader that gives a shit if I starve to death or have somwhere to live or have some health care but hey I'm sure some of you would be grateful of the lowering of the benefits bill if more of us on benefits had the decency to roll over and die

By the way, I have voted Labour all my life. I probably will in the GE, because I like the local candidate.

I care very much about the party and I absolutely hate what is happening to it.

What I want is to have a LP that is effective in opposition, that can hold the government to account and - crucially - is one enough people want to vote for to make it electable. We don't have that right now,

I'm realistic enough to know that compromise is needed on some issues, and I'd rather an imperfect but electable party that can actually do some good than the ineffective shambles we curently have.

No doubt that makes me a neo-liberal, blairite, red tory etc. Well, so be it.

just I can understand your anger, I know my sister has gotten discouraged from claiming everything she's entitled to under this paltry system due to the stigma and hassle involved. I wish we had a more sensible leader though to beat the tories. JC has the wrong rhetoric he should be calming business fears for the bigger aim of unlocking the mess tories have made of disability benefit claiming.

It just feels like the same conversation over and over again. I've voted Labour all my life, I despair at the state they're in.

I respect people who intend to vote for JC, i don't respect people who use lazy phrases like red Tories to describe those NOMINALLY ON THE SAME SIDE who lean more towards a centrist position.

I think JC is a principled man. I don't think he's a good leader, especially looking at the spiteful unpleasant behaviour from the clique surrounding him that he tolerates by failing to distance himself from.

I'd love to be wrong. I'd love Labour to win. I'm convinced they won't, and by going ever harder to the left and alienating the moderates who might once have voted for them, they never will again.

It's not about the MSM and the sheeple just needing to understand more about lovely Jeremy. And for as long as the party persists in the delusion, the Tories have carte fucking blanche.

No doubt that makes me a neo-liberal, blairite, red tory etc. Well, so be it.

Nobody has thrown those around in here other than neo liberal, that 1 I used because it is an ideology in the same way that liberalism, conservatism and socialism is, I was using it in its correct context not as an insult

Just you may not believe me but I completely understand where you're coming from about benefits. I agree, the system and the way people are being treated is just appalling as I've had cause to know from recent personal experience.

I've heard truly horrendous things from people who support applicants through the process. I just don't think JC is the person to sort things.

I'd love to be wrong. I'd love Labour to win. I'm convinced they won't, and by going ever harder to the left and alienating the moderates who might once have voted for them, they never will again.

I think its now more about getting the disillusioned and disenfranchised to vote

I just don't think JC is the person to sort things.

He is the only party leader talking about it tho, and I dont necessarily disagree but lets get a labour government first and then if need be hold another leadership election when things are a little more stable in most of the poor peoples lives, maybe its the final glimmer of hope I have

Good, because I'm none of those things (I don't think so, others may disagree) although I do think Blair did so some good. They are regularly used as a way of insulting people and shutting down debate though.

Yes - but looking at the current Tory lead in brexit voting, EU funded Wales, that won't necessarily be voting in the way we'd like...

After the last seven years of Tory misrule you'd have to be utterly divorced from reality to believe a Tory when they try to claim that they ensure that the benefits of their governance are felt by everyone across all of society. Such a claim is so backwards it's ridiculous, but apparently an awful lot of people actually buy into such backwards Tory rhetoric, otherwise they'd be cratering in the polls for talking such Orwellian rubbish instead of actually leading.

At Prime Minister's Questions Theresa May actually tried to claim that she's going to deliver economic benefits across all levels of society in precisely the way that the Tories haven't been doing since 2010.

I decided to create an infographic to counter this ridiculously backwards propaganda with some actual facts. This is the article to go with the infographic listing the sources in case anyone is in any doubt about the fact that the Tories have been ruling for the benefit of the super-rich minority at the expense of everyone else for the last 7 years.

1. Longest sustained decline in workers' wages on record

Sources: Evening Standard, Guardian, Financial Times

1. Wages still 10% below 2007 levels in real terms

Sources: Independent, BBC, The Times (paywall)

1. Most unaffordable house prices in history

Sources: Financial Times, Office for National Statistics

1. 400,000 more children growing up in poverty

Sources: Mirror, Child Poverty Action Group

1. 1 million+ reliant on food bank handouts

Source: Independent (The Trussell Trust supplied food packages to 554,000 different people, and they're only one of the food bank organisations accounting for less than half the total, meaning packages have been likely distributed to more than a million different individuals, before you even get to estimating how many children were fed on food bank handouts)

1. Systematic impoverishment of disabled people

Sources: Multiple sources collated in this AAV article.

1. Super-rich minority literally doubled their wealth

Sources: Guardian, Telegraph

Conclusion

In order to accept Theresa May's claim that she will rule for the benefit of all, you'd have to completely disregard the last 7 years of Tory rule. You'd have to literally deny reality in order to imagine that there's any reason whatever to believe her completely backwards rhetoric.

anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/

Just, I agree with you about benefits.

I also try not to make insulting assumptions about other people because they disagree with me.

I am a party member, and have voted Labour all my life. I want a leader I can back and don't want my choice of party to be on the basis of who has the least repellent, violent "friends" or who would screw up Brexit the least. I want more than that. If Labour does as badly as predicted, I dread to think what will happen to the poor, the sick, the vulnerable. JC has been more incompetent that I thought he would be but in other ways it has been pretty well as predicted summer 2015....we knew Trident decision and the referendum was coming and so did he.

Not wrong, Just, although i do find the tone of that blog bloody annoying btw.

But it's happening. Labour need to work out why their message isn't getting across. And i suspect, looking at Trump and Brexit and current polls, that years of telling people they're thick for voting a certain way is part of the problem. Assuming we're so patently right that only a fool wouldn't see it does not persuade anyone to our side.