Labour "ruling elite" "worried sick" about Jeremy Corbyn says Len McCluskey

[claig]

"Unite's Len McCluskey said "an enormous surge" of people wanted to take part after Mr Corbyn was confirmed as running "because people are inspired".

Mr McCluskey accused the "ruling elite" of "trying to rubbish" Mr Corbyn.
...
He said that those who thought Mr Corbyn was "marginalised" should "watch this space".

"I know the people who will be uncomfortable, despite the fact that they are saying the opposite - and that's the ruling elite," he said.

"They try and rubbish it, they try to turn it into a joke, but secretly they will be worried sick that ordinary people are suddenly given something to inspire them and something to link onto," Mr McCluskey said."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33504201

Good luck Jeremy Corbyn. Real democracy that ruins the plans of Labour's "ruling elite".

I don't need Labour party members to agree with me - he won 3 elections and had a record breaking 173-seat majority, better than any other Labour leader.

Yes, he is toxic. Those seats didn't go for Foot & they won't go for Foot reincarnated either.

Farage is also an electoral failure - he proves my point.

Alyosha I agree. I like Corbyn and he seems very decent but he's not going to win back Tory voters and without that Labour are sunk.

Isit just FYI, I am scrolling past each and every one of your posts as they are bonkers and/or incomprehensible.

claig I'm intrigued by your regard for Corbyn! If he wins, would you vote Labour or UKIP?

'he won 3 elections and had a record breaking 173-seat majority, better than any other Labour leader.'

He won the first one by a landslide because the whole country had had enough of Tory sleaze after 18 years. They called Blair "Bambi" in those days, he was a total joke and yet we still voted for him because we had had enough of the Tories. The next two elections he only won because Murdoch backed him.

'Those seats didn't go for Foot '

Foot was the wrong man at the wrong time. he was up against Thatcher. Now everything has changed. Farage has rewritten the rules and Labour has been wiped out in Scotland.Labour have to adapt to what is happening now and that is why Labour Party members are in large part preferring Corbyn and Watson to the Oxbridge graduate team of more of the same.

'Farage is also an electoral failure'

Labour up North don't think so.

'claig I'm intrigued by your regard for Corbyn! If he wins, would you vote Labour or UKIP?'

I would probably still vote UKIP, unless Corbyn came up with radical changes that would make people's lives better and there is a possibility that he might do that.

Corbyn is the type of leader who might renationalise lots of strategic industries and services and he might introduce a living wage and he might create employment with investment and he might crack down on corporate tax evasion and he might improve education and the health service and transport prices etc. There is no knowing what Corbyn might do, which is why the entire great and the good and the not so good are in total meltdown. Even one of Blair's best cliche-ridden PPE speeches can't stop Corbyn.

Damien McBride and Ken Livingstone on Russia Today just now.

McBride said that the Labour elite's strategy of calling MPs who nominated Corbyn "morons" and implying that Corbyn is a nut is similar to Cameron's failed strategy of calling UKIP voters "fruitcakes". He says that people who listen to Corbyn end up thinking he is reasonable and want to listen to him.

Ken Livingstone thinks that Corbyn will win the leadership election. He says he supported rightwing Denis Healey against Michael Foot because he didn't think Foot would win. He says he wouldn't be supporting Corbyn if he didn't think he could win. He says Corbyn can argue his point of view unlike some of the ohers who worry about every word they say and he says that some of the MPs who joined Labour under Blair aren't even real labour - they suck up to bankers and joined for a career move.

He says left wing policies are popular if they are good, it's not about left or right, but just about whether policies are good and appeal to people. He says he was popular when he ran the GLC which is why Thatcher abolished it and he was not Blair's favourite choice for Mayor at first because it was said he was too left wing, but in the end Blair had to ask him to be Mayor.

All across the world we are seeing the same phenomenon - people have had enough of these party machine spinners, the Blairites, this sort of patronising guff in Blair's speech

'Labour can win again when our values are a guide not a distraction.'

People are looking for politicians who are real and mean what they say - be that Farage, Corbyn or Donald Trump - all of them against the Establishment position and all called "loonies" or toxic or idiots.

Corbyn at the next election pretty much guarantees another Tory majority.

The SNP will hold onto most of the 50 odd seats next election. England is traditionally more right wing than Scotland so a lurch to the left just puts Labour at an even more disadvantage.

Whatever your personal opinions of his Tonyness may be. The fact remains that until he became leader, Labour were unelectable. They lost the very next election after he left. And whilst he was in power he won three elections outright.

So I think it's probably a good idea to listen to what he has to say if Labour really want to stand a chance of winning. If they'd rather remain in opposition just to cling onto their traditional left wing values then go for it. Gideon's laughing his socks off.

ssd …. re your ”isitmebut, seriously, do no.10 pay you well?”

Seriously why would a Conservative voter totally hissed off about what 13-years of a Labour government did to me, mine, and this country, NEED to be paid to post my thoughts to those clearly in denial, especially on what was, effectively, an anti Conservative propaganda board posted on by socialist? Believe it or not, sadly (for all) this is my idea of fun.

TendonQueen …. Re your ”Isit just FYI, I am scrolling past each and every one of your posts as they are bonkers and/or incomprehensible.”

Yes dear, thank you for telling me, but I really don’t care, as I only give the time to those who want to debate subjects as at least I am willing to do that, the FACT many on here are in denial of Labour’s 13-year record, their record since in opposition - and a laughable 2015 General Election Manifesto of further left of centre policies that carried on from their last administration – is EXACTLY WHY the Labour leadership debate is in crisis, for a Labour membership in denial that is, not for the rest of us.

Talking about “bonkers and/or incomprehensible”, here were my thoughts on that Manifesto that was rejected by the electorate basically offering company bashing, landlord bashing, any wealth at all bashing as tax hikes and nothing much else was to come, free of charge, which in value terms, is light-years better than the money Labour paid Mr Axelrod.

Why didn't anyone realise that he could hardly weave his Obama magic as the Democrats were not in power leading up to and into the financial/economic crash, while Labour (and their policies/record) were. Duh.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2356888-Labour-Manifesto-Responsible-Credible-Visionary

claig ... the difference between Blair and Farage is that Blair won Labour THREE General Elections under his Labour leadership, while Farage has failed to become a basic self serving Westminster MP on the 8th time of trying - yet you still have trouble working out who was/is the peoples leader?

FYI Labour won a 166 seat majority in 1997 as the country already had 18-years of Conservatives who had lowered the penal taxes inherited from Labour, but idea wise got stale, was keeping the UK finances tight from the 1990/1 recession and budgeting for a BALANCE UK Budget by 2001/2 - and was divided/squabbling about Europe.

Under Labour, 'things could only get better', from those restraints and how did that work out by 2010 - if Labour had inherited their current mess in 1997 and couldn't spend like a drunken sailor in a brothel, they wouldn't have lasted one term.

People tend to forget that Blair was mainly responsible/interested in our Foreign Policy e.g. wars, Brown the sulky clunking fist Chancellor then PM was in charge of the UK's domestic finances/policies and lightening regulations on the UK banks - so lefties saying we (Labour) have to move left of Blairs UK domestic policies, looks to both rewrite history and proves that they are still in denial. IMO

Claig ...re your "Corbyn is the type of leader who might renationalise lots of strategic industries and services and he might introduce a living wage and he might create employment with investment and he might crack down on corporate tax evasion and he might improve education and the health service and transport prices etc."

Do you live in this country; where is he going to get the money for 1970's style nationalisation (and on what grounds, the UK States record? lol), someone has just introduced a policy for a living wage lite, someone already has put in place with the OECD plans to stop UK and global corporate tax evasion, and HOW will an ever higher tax leftie ever create any investment/employment in the Private Sector - they can (and did) 'create' Public Sector investment & employment, but to be sustainable the Private Sector economy has to be structured to support it (and wasn't).

And as for "There is no knowing what Corbyn might do"

EXACTLY, you never know, which was why businesses were Kacking themselves on the prospect of an independent SNP's Scotland and a Miliband led Labour government last May, as most need to plan regarding taxes, investment, hiring, locating, relocating, 2-5 + years AHEAD - so the majority don't DO uncertainty and investment, especially with the RECORD of far leftie socialism and their 'understanding' of what drives business investment growth/investment/hiring.

'Do you live in this country'

Not currently. I'm currently on Mars, but I still get to tune in to any newscasts of Farage speeches.

'where is he going to get the money for 1970's style nationalisation'

From cracking down on corporate tax evasion and possibly nationalising banks.

Your Chief Space Cadet-in-waiting Farage is clearly starved of the oxygen of publicity if needs to call in to the Labour leadership hustings on the radio and challenge them to debate how they will individually vote in the Referendum.

I always suspected he wasn't fully up to speed on an EU Referendum when he knew that the only main political party that WOULD offer the people a Referendum, was losing vital votes to UKIP at a ratio of 2 to 1 to Labour - in his own vain attempt to fulfil his dream for his own buffalo butt to join a few others, sitting with the rest of the elites in Westminster.

FYI "Nigel of Kent", Westminster only has around 650 votes in the Referendum, its the other 64 million citizens that he has to reach out to, and Labour leaders in waiting really have NOTHING to politically gain pandering to your perpetual need for publicity, and possibly loads to lose.

When they go on holiday with their friends or families, I wonder if he will start stalking them?

'Farage is clearly starved of the oxygen of publicity'

The Establishment is trying their utmost to prevent any publicity for Farage despite popular demand and ratings that go through the roof everytime Farage is on TV.

He won the first one by a landslide because the whole country had had enough of Tory sleaze after 18 years. They called Blair "Bambi" in those days, he was a total joke and yet we still voted for him because we had had enough of the Tories. The next two elections he only won because Murdoch backed him.

Why do people always blame the bloody media? Maybe it was that people were broadly for the Labour party, and then in 2015 they were against the idea of an SNP-Labour coalition.

Foot was the wrong man at the wrong time. he was up against Thatcher. Now everything has changed. Farage has rewritten the rules and Labour has been wiped out in Scotland.Labour have to adapt to what is happening now and that is why Labour Party members are in large part preferring Corbyn and Watson to the Oxbridge graduate team of more of the same.

Farage has not rewritten the rules. His party had 1 seat....they still have one seat. He is an electoral failure.

Labour up North don't think so

Yeah, we lost so many seats in the North to Ukip.

Quentin Letts' sharp eye, sharp mind and sharp wit in top form on Blair's "progressive", "modernising" speech full of spin.

"Tony Blair makes a strangely self-satisfied swami. His modernise-or-die contribution to the Labour leadership rumpus, made before breakfast in the City of London yesterday, took the form of a short speech followed by an on-stage interview with some glottal-stoppy stand-up comedian.

For this the two of them actually sat in armchairs and Mr Blair adopted an indulged tone, toasting his toes against the adoration of 200 Blairites.
...
‘Zeitgeist… modernity… we were the change-makers… we can win again but only if our comfort zone is the future,’ said Mr Blair. There was an absence of policy detail.
...
Talking to the comedian, Mr Blair frequently lapsed into waffly, aw-shucks burbles, self-regarding jests and management-speak gibberish. ‘We need to release the process of thinking,’ he said. Members of the audience nodded like Grasshopper sitting at the feet of the Shaolin priest in that Seventies TV show Kung Fu.

He gee’d himself along, littering his bluffish assertions with ‘righ’, righ’, righ’?’ He said that ‘the Tories are gonna get cocky’. There was a postured toughness when he said this.
...
Eau de vanity scented the scene. This was a more needy performance than one might have expected from a former PM. Ambition has not yet abated in him.

Someone asked if Neil Kinnock had done ‘most of the heavy lifting’ on Labour modernisation. Blair’s smile went cold.
...
Meanwhile, he still had time for the euro and he feared Labour was not ‘intellectually tough enough’ to accept change. Yet he remained ‘Labour through and through’, which may have been his way of saying he will not quit the party if Comrade Corbyn wins

[[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3171544/One-eye-throbbing-kept-lapsing-aw-shucks-burbles-QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-Tony-Blair-preach-faithful.html]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3171544/One-eye-throbbing-kept-lapsing-aw-shucks-burbles-QUENTIN-LETTS-sees-Tony-Blair-preach-faithful.html

'Maybe it was that people were broadly for the Labour party'

And maybe it wasn't, which is why they will be out of power for the next 15 years at least and if Blair or his ilk were to make a comeback it would be 30 years minimum. Blair went to war, that is why the media barons backed him. Now they no longer need him, he needs them with his modernise-or-die speeches and no one cares about him and his philanthropy anymore.

The gate keepers slipped up and let the people in. Now every bigwig and moderniser available is trying to shoo them back out again.

"One aide to a rival candidate said: “This is too little too late. These Labour MPs don’t realise they are were supposed to be gate keepers.

“Their role was to determine the candidate selection – their vote is now just one of over 300,000 members and supporters.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11756688/Half-of-the-Labour-MPs-who-backed-Jeremy-Corbyn-desert-him.html

They are all saying how they won't serve under Corbyn. If Corbyn gets in, then I doubt he will employ the modernisers. It will be teh end of lots of their careers, though doubtless they will get some other taxpayer funded jobs on quangos, or jobs in charidees or as philanthropists.

Claig .. just over one year ago you were telling me that the Conservatives were finished, so forgive me is I take your 15-year Labour forecast with the proverbial pinch, nay sack of salt.

This Labour leadership contest may or may not end well, but a parliament is 5-years, and IF a Labour leader from amongst those others thought they should run, should not 'rise' within that time, I'd suggest that one could within 10-years and be 'a game changer' - especially as all those extremely bright, opinionated Conservatives within the parliamentary party, are not happy UNLESS 'revolting' - and unfortunately Cameron will be stepping down by the end of this parliament.

Whenever 'an open goal' appears before you, you still need to be able to put the ball in the back of the net, and who knows who will be leading the Tories by 2020.

P.S. Blair with a report worth of £20 million (his estimate) to £60 million (an independent figure), needs no one so this is for fun, yet I can think of a party that needs rich bakers should the Big McC throw his expensive toys out of the pram if doesn't get his candidate.

...'rich BACKERS' not bakers.

If Corbyn wins it means the end of the Labour party and the rise of SDP 2.0/or defections from Labour to the Lib Dems.

Yes possibly, then it will be a real Labour Party and what Ken Livingstone called those who joined "for a career move" can get a job in a charidee or a taxpayer funded quango instead of pretending to be Labour.