Could somebody explain why Corbyn shouldn't be voted for as Labour party leader?

[Myturnnow4]

I've listened to people argue this, but haven't heard a reasoned argument yet. The main criticism appears to be, "he's on the left" but don't go on to explain why that in itself is a bad thing.

UKIP don't want and don't need MPs. They want votes to exit the EU. Carswell was probably still in touch with his Conservative instinct to see Labour unelectable. Just a twitchy habit, really. Farage is pleased, though.

Looks like George Galloway does divide opinion on the hard left.

Meanwhile that Corbyn supporter whose blog was quoted below on this thread, ex-diplomat Craig Murray, was quite upset to have been rejected by the SNP. It seems they questioned his ability to respect party discipline. I guess they'll never be popular with that sort of attitude.

lostinikea, I thought Corbyn had said he has not made up his mind and is open to all possibilities. Have you got a link where he says he will campaign to stay in?

'It seems they questioned his ability to respect party discipline. I guess they'll never be popular with that sort of attitude.'

They would never have as popular a leader as Corbyn because discipline is not in his vocabulary, but principle is. Any party that requires the level of discipline the SNP demand is built on unstable foundations.

'A victory for Jeremy Corbyn in the Labour leadership race will reduce the party's chances of winning the next election, a poll for The Independent on Sunday reveals.

As ballot papers arrive for more than 600,000 members and supporters, the wider electorate thinks Mr Corbyn stands the least chance of returning Labour to power in 2020, the ComRes poll shows. In a dramatic twist, David Miliband, defeated by his brother in 2010, would stand the most chance of winning for Labour.'

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-would-reduce-labours-chances-of-winning-the-next-election-poll-reveals-10457458.html

David Miliband? Are they serious? Who was polled, the attendees at the Progress think tank?

I wouldn't trust Galloway as far as I could through him which would be mm

The only thing he is interested in is the spotlight.

His is curently trying to become London mayor and one of his major speakers at his next 'rally' is Basghari (sp) of #mossadstolemyshoe thenputitback fame.

'The only thing he is interested in is the spotlight.'

I agree. I think he is a phoney.

He refused to rule out campaigning for Britain to quit the EU.

This echoes the stance by Len McCluskey of Unite to Cameron that the union might switch sides and campaign for Brexit if he achieved the benefit changes he intended and watered down any worker rights.

That would be a delight for the Tory Eurosceptics who, if Cameron didn't make those changes, would campaign for withdrawal anyway and mobilise popular support on the anti-immigrant vote. If they got their way they would tear up all the rest of the employment legislation such as holidays and maternity pay. And of course sign trade agreements with the U.S. inviting companies to buy up every hospital and school in the land going far beyond any EU treaty.

"leaving the grey Tory vote to win out."

And why not, WE see through the 'new politics' bull squirt, WE remember the UK 'sick man of Europe' despair under a 1970's Labour Party/Trade Union bosses movement - and Corbyn and backers anti business etc ideology/policies are NO DIFFERENT.

JC has the same initials as Jesus Christ. Nuff Said. He's Awesome.

staggle, but then Corbyn would win a landslide. Corbyn has changed our entire political future. The Establishment thought that their favourites would out-argue Corbyn and thereby show the public their right wing aspirational business, immigration credentials. They and their favourites thought it was going to be a piece of cake. But none of them realised that they had no arguments to offerl.

When it became obvious that the Oxbridge trio didn't have a single idea between the three of them, they probably phoned up their PPE mates in the Tory party and asked them to supply some arguments as they were Tory lite and were light on ideas an maybe the Tory heavies had some good arguments. But it was soon discoveed that the Tory heavies had no argments against Corbyn either.

When the metropolitan elite inquired how the case against Corbyn was progressing, they were staggered to find that their favourites had a blank sheet apart from the word ANNIHILATION of or future career prospects written on it.

That is when the metropolitan elite gathered around a cauldron incanting "hubble, bubble, toil and trouble", when lo and behold Mephistopheles Blair appeared in a black cloak with an eery toothy smile. The faithful at the Progress think tank immediately communed to hear the master speak and warn of ANNIHILATION of their future career prospects if Corbyn was to win.

Now the attendees at the Progress think tank, known as "the progressives", have all applied to work in charidees, faith foundations and philanthropic positions because no one else would employ them.

A landslide. Like it came back from the 1983 nadir. It only took 14 years. Corbyn will be 80.

www.ukpolitical.info/ConvLab.htm

Dinosaurian Corby owes his success to ”modernisers” - no wonder claig likes him lol

”Labour modernisers like me wanted a new way to elect leaders. Good grief”

”We've made a huge mistake”
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11803400/Labour-modernisers-like-me-wanted-a-new-way-to-elect-leaders.-Good-grief.html

By Dan Hodges

straggle, it is a totally different time now and Corbyn is up against Cameron.

Cameron is no Thatcher. Cameron is the heir to Blair, a progressive moderniser, and when Corbyn buries Blairism, he will also trounce Cameroonianism, because it is practically the same thing.

Claig.., what a complete lot of mis-informative rollocks.

Cameron was no heir to Blair in policies, as he was just the front man, the policies of fat State, tax high/give some back, welfare state - were mainly Browns.

Corbyn ressurects the failures of the 1970's Labour movement that kept them out of power for 18-years - how many times do people have to mention that - and where do you see the 1970's successes that Corbynism, who's policies closely resemble the anti business, state controls etc 2015 Miliband manifesto?

'The [union] Barons called it correctly. And we, the self-satisfied modernisers and pragmatists, did not.'

The self-satisfied modernsers were promoted by the metrpolitan elite, but they had no base with the people, as Corbyn and the unon barons have shown. The modernisers probably mainly came from Oxbridge and now they will have to go back there or onto a charidee - no one else will employ them.

"The problem was us so-called progressive modernisers. We thought having to convince enough MPs and enough long-standing Labour Party members and enough sensible trade unionists of our case was just too much hard work. So we said “ah, screw that, let’s just get ourselves another way of electing a leader. One that doesn’t really involve us having to convince anyone at all. We’ll just push out the union hotheads and bus a new bunch of members in”. Like the political equivalent of so many TV dinners. The TV Progmods.

And here is the result."

The Left’s progressive modernisers have to look at the self-satisfied reflections in the mirror. And the finger pointing directly at ourselves."

What the metropolitan elte and their progressive moderniser servants have learned is that stitch-ups don't work forever media mates can't help them forever. Democracy is back, the people are back

Cameron doesn't have to be Thatcher, the State as large as it NEEDS to be, so citizens keep as much of their own salaries as possible, and help businesses to invest/hire is CORE Conservatism - totally opposite to the Blair/Brown administration and the CORE Labour ideology/record.

The 'people' if any doubt in 2010, can now see which country model/ideology, is both better for them and SUSTAINABLE.

WE tried Corbynism in the 1970's, it FAILED.

I think a lot of people are missing the point about a leader election at this stage. He doesn't need to be able to win a general election. The next general election is not for another five years yet. What he needs to do is to be an effective opposition leader, to counter the lies about austerity told by posh braying twats who in five years in power have spent more than Labour did in 13 years, to counter the notion that the real threat to the UK is coming from desperate people escaping countries that we have helped to fuck up rather than looking at the chinless wankers who are directly responsible for children in one of the richest countries in the world being fed by food banks, to provide an alternative narrative that addresses the glaring inequalities that are damaging people's lives now, not in five years time. And for that, I think he is eminently qualified and suitable. I think he will make a good job of it.

I’ve just seen in the papers review “Corbyn to offer help to entrepreneurs”

He just blurts what people want to hear/believe, but if no business believed Miliband or Sturgeon in 2015, they ain’t gonna believe Corbyn in 2020. Guffaw.

Money to nationalise, money to increase the size of the state, money to increase the size of the States ‘investments’ and money to help businesses with fair taxes for all – first stop £3 trillion of UK National Debt, on the way to £5 billion after 5-years of that joker.

Here goes Corbyn, 100% behind the people and the middle class. The metropolta elite can't believe what they are reading, Tories are having a tantrum. What on earth can they all do against Corbyn? Where will they get their arguments from? The Tory lites had "Sure Start" as their big idea and the Tory heavies have nothing at all except for the mantra of more modernisation.

"Jeremy Corbyn has launched an audacious bid to defeat his rivals by pledging pro-business reforms to back entrepreneurs as voting begins in the Labour leadership race.

In a move to broaden his appeal to all parts of the party as ballot papers are distributed, Corbyn will announce a series of measures including tax cuts for small businesses and increased spending on training."

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/15/jeremy-corbyn-pledge-pro-business-back-entrepreneurs

Bankers in a cold sweat. Corbyn has nothing for them.

Claig. What are your Political beliefs , other than what is 'fashionable' and anti establishment !.

I find it quite remarkable that you were so pro UKIP Farage policies , limited immigration, low tax (Flat rate proposed) Selective education keep spending on armed forces at 2% of GDP.

You now side with Some-one who looks like a 'bitter bastard' proposing High tax on wealthy people (What that means and who ?) who states he wants to come out of NATO Nuclear disarmament , links to Hamas SINN FEIN.

What do you believe in, apart from anyone perceived to be 'Anti Establishment .

first stop £3 trillion of UK National Debt

I don't think Corbyn could do as well as Cameron has done in that regard - welfare spending alone has increased by £28 billion since he got in.

'but if no business believed Miliband or Sturgeon in 2015, they ain’t gonna believe Corbyn in 2020. Guffaw.'

The difference is that Corbyn is not a moderniser, he ia man of princple. Eveyone believes him, including the bankers which is why they are applying for jobs in taxpayer funded charidees as we speak, because no one else will employ them.

'What are your Political beliefs'

I am for the people against the elites. I prefer and agree with Farage to Corbyn on most things, but there is a huge difference between Farage and Corbyn- Corbyn will be better for the country because he has more courage and vision than Farage in that he will solve bigger more important problems. He will solve housing, employment, investment, manufacturing and rein in the bankers. It will be a better country for everyone apart form the metropolitan elite under Corbyn.

I will have to put up with Corbyn's political correctness, with his climate change nonsense etc in order to have the bigger issues facing the country solved.