Why is everyone in the public crazy about Jesus Corbyn/Corbyn Wan Kenobi?

[BeckerLleytonNever]

I mean, WTF? He has disciples (as one journalist observed).

Ive totally gone off Alec Guiness now as all JC -(even the initials!!!!) needs is a long brown cloak with a hood like a bloody Jedi master.

And hell be walking on water next!

What is it about him that has thousands signing up for Labour membership?

I WAS a Labour member but because of him Ive left .

genuine question, what influence is he having, to make him followed like a deity?

What's wrong with a politician acting according to his principles?

The point being a man of principle isn't a man with such questionable friendships

And then of course there is the constant rebelling against the party he was elected to represent. The left of the party broke away when Labour changed clause IV of the constitution and formed the Laboir Socialist Parry . Majority of MP's happy with it so were voters but the SLP which is firmly where Corbyn's beliefs are placed fail miserably at elections so he wouldn't be an MP if he stood for them and then he wouldn't have made a career out of being the rebellious MP which has paid him a nice comfortable salary for many years

gasp0de this sums it up for me:

Even as the Leader of the Opposition, he voted on Trident as he wanted to, not in accordance with Labour Party policy as agreed at the conference. This means that the Labour Party manifesto at the next election will be utterly meaningless because if he doesn't agree with it he won't implement it.

It is absolutely right that a backbench MP should vote with their conscience. They have been given a mandate to do so, as they have been elected as an individual. Defy the whip and accept the consequences; be that losing the whip, or losing their local support and losing the next election. That is the basis on which democracy thrives.

But, once that backbench MP becomes leader, they have a responsibility to put their own ethics aside, and champion the majority views of the party they lead. To do otherwise makes a mockery of democracy and appears to be a slippery slope towards dictatorship.

wibblewobble8 I don't think a Tory majority of 12 is as bad as it's going to get. Plus I think the Scottish issue did for labour in the last election. Also miliband was proved unelectable but I and many other labour voters did at least vote for him. Now lots of labour voters I know and on here are saying they wouldn't vote for a JC led Labour Party. Are we to be branded Blairites (an unhelpful label given Iraq but I think he did a lot of good too) and closet Tories? In which case should we vote Tory even though we don't agree with their plans and would prefer the needs of the many rather than the needs of the rich few to be addressed? JC is not presenting a viable left wing alternative to the Tories. He isn't even providing opposition to the Tories at this crucial time.

He can't run his own party. I wouldn't trust him to look after the country. In fact his actions in the EU referendum shows he will persue his own agenda at the cost of what's been agreed in the rest of the party.

Oh & I meant to write that he's stuck in the 70s and 80s.

I gave up my Labour Party membership when we went to war with Iraq

I still voted for labour as I felt they were best party to run the country under the leadership they had Blair's government did many good things for the country

I would never vote for Jeremy Corbyn

I am not sure who I shall vote for in the next election. Who knows if we follow Corbyn's reasoning we shall have another party leadership election next year and then he might face someone like Keir Starmer

I believe people will tire of Corbyn very soon when we have a second year of a hopeless opposition nothing he has done yet in parliament has been impressive since he became leader

The Tories are well ahead in the polls at the moment. If we had a General Election tomorrow, Labour would lose. There have been some very worrying statements from Corbyn and his supporters about how winning elections is not the only important thing, it's just as important to have the right policies and not compromise on that. Well, sorry, no. Having policies that you and a tiny band of the ideologically pure are happy with is all very well, but you can't change anything in the UK unless you win political power in an election. And as thing stand at the moment, there aren't enough electors willing to vote for significant increases in taxes and public spending, reduced defence spending, open borders immigration policy, giving up Trident and leaving NATO.

JC doesn't have charisma, he doesn't have a well oiled pr machine behind him.
What he does have is a proven track record of stating his principles and not backing down on them. People who are sick of the Tories, austerity and Blue Labour are rising up and saying 'enough'.
The Labour party is supposed to represent the working people, the poor and disadvantaged, and lately it hasn't been.
The people the LP ought to be representing are rising up to get rid of the rich MP's who are in it for their careers, rather than for the people.
The real leftwingers in the labour party want our party back.

Rich mp's who are in it for their careers

What you mean ones who have led a privileged life that has enabled them to take low paying jobs in politics and then become MP's and sit on the back bench rebelling against the party they are meant to represent when there is a party they perfectly fit into but won't gain them a career in parliament

Yes I know excatly the type you mean

Maybe you should read up on those behind him they are not a bunch of graduates who have no idea they have worked very hard at promoting the man of integrity

Labour's electoral record does not support the idea that the real leftwingers have ever had much success convincing the UK voters to support their policies.

1945 - Labour won with a huge majority, introduced the NHS and the welfare state, nationalised many industries - this is the one and only Labour government that had a mandate for huge social and economic change and it didn't last long.
1950 - Labour re-elected on a tiny majority
1951 - Labour had to call another election, lost to the Tories; the Tories increased their majority in each of the next two elections
1964 - Labour finally in power again but with another tiny majority
1966 - Labour win with majority of 96
[At this time the party was led by Harold Wilson, centre-left, keen to emphasise technology, modernity etc etc - all copied by Blair in the 90s]
1970 - Labour lose again
1974 - Labour win again, but only with small majorities (two elections that year) - economic meltdown and industrial turmoil continue, much of it fomented by the extreme leftwing union leaders like Arthur Scargill
1979 - Mrs Thatcher wins, and goes on winning with increased majorities all through the 80s as the Labour Party lurches to the left, shoved along by the Militant entryist tactics
1992 - Labour lose to John Major's Tories, in spite of the poll tax debacle
1997 - Labour get elected under Tony Blair because they have moved right back to the centre; in the 2000s Blair wins two more elections, still only just left of centre
2010 - Tory/LibDem coalition
2015 - the Tories win an overall majority

There is no appetite in this country for hard left policies. There never has been. There will never be enough voters of that persuasion to get a far left party into power. Now that the SNP has secured the majority of the left-leaning Scottish voters I can't see how Labour can ever win another majority in the UK again without significant changes.

I think the 'deification' (which is a massive exaggeration in itself) comes down to two things:

1. A hostile media and hostile members of the Labour Party mean that those who support Corbyn can become defensive (I know I do).
2. There aren't many true socialists who are genuine contenders for Labour leadership. I suspect if there were several, the many of us who support Corbyn would probably be a bit more spread out. His politics are popular, it's as simple as that. There's nothing sinister going on - it's not like Trump at all, there is substance to Corbyn's beliefs.

Thank you for the breakdown

Yes we have seen how successful a far left Labour Party is with Michael Foot

Still if that is more important to so many Labour Party members than Tories been in power election after election then it's best labour do split

People who are sick of the Tories, austerity and Blue Labour are rising up and saying 'enough'.

And that's fine if there are enough of them to 1) field a candidate in every constituency at the next election, and 2) win a majority in enough constituencies to secure a majority in the House of Commons.

Otherwise, the Labour Party will be condemned to always be the opposition.

And in the mean time, those LP members and supporters who are not comfortable with the extreme left taking the party back may break away, form a new party. Or will choose to leave and join one of the other left of centre parties.

If you assume that the country is split more or less 50:50 between left and right, a split left vote more or less guarantees that the only party to the right (the Tory's) will continue to win elections.

I really don't understand how people can claim that Corbyn sticks to his principles... He (half-heartedly) backed the Remain campaign although he's been a lifelong eurosceptic. He also doesn't believe in the honours system, yet recommended Shami Chakrabarti for an OBE off the back of her investigation into Labour's anti semitism problem... His only nomination in fact. I'm finding him increasingly cynical

I have voted Labour all my life, but if Corbyn wins the leadership race, that will be the end of Labour as we know it.

He is coming across as a man with principles and a lot of young people are behind him. My main issue is that he is taking us back to the old days of militant. For those of us old enough to remember, Militant took Liverpool to the brink of bankruptcy without making a huge amount of difference to people's lives. The youngsters who are voting for Corbyn have no idea how dangerous the true left wing rely are.

A good leaders listens, works collaboratively, includes their team in decision making and inspires people. Corbyn has done none of this with his MP's. Disagree with him and he sacks you. He is a dictator, not a leader.
If you take the Iraq war out of the equation, Labour under Blair represented a large section of the British public and did a huge amount of good for a lot of people. Blair is being used as a scapegoat for the Iraq war, whilst people conveniently forget the good he and his Government did for this country.

Corbyn doesn't represent me. Country would go bust under him, unemployment would rise, business would be taxed to the hilt and he would increase benefits which would not give people an incentive to work. As for the Tories - although I am a high income earner, they are only arsed about the top 1% and cripple the rest of us.

There is no one in politics who I feel represents me at the moment. After canvassing and giving out leaflets from the age of 8 and voting at every opportunity since I was 18, the time has come for me to think long and hard about an alternative to the crazy left and nasty right.

But the Labour Party is not and never has been as socialist party

It has taken ideas from socialism there is a socialist party (well a few around)

A starting point might be to consider what we mean by 'principles'.

I'm also keen to learn why he is so principled? He's the best thing to ever happen to the Conservative party

I don't get it either, OP. I haven't heard any plausible policies yet, and the whiff of cosy brocialism and turning a blind eye to anti-semitic prejudice in the party all adds up to something that to me doesn't smell much like principle at all

The problem is that 'principled' seems in this definition to roughly mean 'he agrees with me' - all fine and good but that doesn't make an opposition!

He is a man of principles, which are:

• misogyny
• anti-semitism
• bankrupting the UK
• bankrupting the rest of the world

Yes to your post Lucy. I am not sure how I will vote in a GE.

I'm a party member and I joined after the general election. I voted for Yvette Cooper. I have tried to be involved with the clp but many of them are members of Momentum and strong Corbyn supporters. . I think that too many Corbyn supporters look at things in a binary way; you are either for Corbyn or if not you are against the Labour Party and democracy. I have been i insulted and ridiculed on Labour Party forums when I've tried to discuss this. I have renewed my membership recently specifically so I can vote for Owen Smith. Corbyn is all about Corbyn. He has principals but has voted endlessly against the whip and in reality should still be on the back benches because of this.

had to leave internet last night and Ive come on now for a bit and seen all posts!

Look- I liked the fact he used publics questions towards scumeron on Pm QT, thwas good, plus the fact he didn't leave a sinking ship like the not captian of the not titanic did like that chicken hearted Scumeron did, and hes sticking to his guns regarding being leader of the LP,

I just don't understand the hippy type ideals in a world that's NOT 1967 summer of love any more, that Britain needs defences and he wants to have a tea party withisis and have a nice chat, the fact he should have voted the way he wanted to vote in the EU ref and not pussy footed about, hence so many labour members leaving the party...

its just the cult like following I don't get.

i don't like ANY of the parties btw, their all in it for themselves.

and agree with CarolDecker.

There is story after story about Corbyn undermining his colleagues.
This is as good as any.
Other stories are about him refusing to do things to campaign for Remain.

His principles don't extend to being nice to people or nurturing good will or inspiring his peers. That's not a good leader, is it?