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.

Many potential Corbyn supporters are being ejected, so looks like Corbyn could loose with a small margin, after second/third preference votes distribution. All set for continuous blairites/centre-left infighting. Sad.

Financially inept, PFI proliferater, Andy Burnham could be a narrow winner.

So far most of the 60,000 rejected are duplicates or not registered voters so there's nothing suggesting unfairness in that. It depends on how many more get rejected and whether that's solely in the intention to vote LibDem or Green. Personally I think that canvas data would only be valid - or possibly even collected - in a marginal seat. Tory/TUSC/UKIP votes have to be ruled out wherever - though TUSC vote would be tiny: Michael Crick estimated there were only about 8,000 of the old Militant activists so that wouldn't sway away from Corbyn. LibDem or Green in a Tory/Labour marginal? That suggests they would rather see the Tories win than Labour.

We will at least be able to see the split among full members, £3 supporters and affiliated union supporters. And I'd like to see a geographical breakdown too.

Re the OP question, I've just heard on Sky that a paper cup with Corbyn's DNA on it has sold at auction for £50.

If a paper cup costs a penny and there are enough suckers out there that would pay £50, Jezza could gob on millions of them and single handedly get rid of the annual UK government budget deficit.

First year sold within the UK, second year Cuba, third year Venezuela ....now THAT is what I call 'money printing'. lol

*Because the chances of Prime Minister Corbyn in 2020 are approximately zero. An election campaign fought by a 71 year old man whose politics have been repeatedly rejected at the ballot box by the UK electorate, with five years of age shift meaning that the electoral influence of the baby boomers, who are mostly fairly comfortably off, will be at its absolute peak.

A focused, united Tory Party, led by a 49 year old George Osborne (most likely), versus a grey-haired pensioner who gets rattled by being chucked soft ones on C4 News? C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas la guerre: c'est de la folie.

Corbyn is wildly popular on twitter, amongst people of whom there aren't many and they don't vote anyway. Examples of campaigns that were wildly popular on twitter: AV and Scottish Independence. Remind me how those votes turned out?

The best Corbyn could do would be to stack up larger majorities in what are already safe Labour seats, plus (possibly) winning a few Lab/Tory marginals. That's not enough to form a government, assuming (as is likely) that the SNP don't implode in fratricidal killings in the next five years.

I have some sympathy with Corbyn's policies in the abstract, I voted Labour in 1983 so I'm one of the people that a similar set of policies didn't alienate and I don't necessarily see policies of the left as inherently impossible. But the reality of an Osborne/Corbyn general election in 2020 will be five more years of Tory misrule, and if youreallycare about the vulnerable, rather than wanting Labour as a talking shop, a compromised Labour government that can do some good is infinitely preferable to a pure Labour opposition that can do nothing*

This post sums it up perfectly. The idea that there are millions of voters who will swing it because they didn't vote in the last election because there wasn't a sufficiently left wing candidate is nonsense.

The idea that those who did vote didn't vote Labour because it is insufficiently left wing is nonsense.

Like the poster of this comment I voted Labour in 1983 that was despite the set of policies then not because of them.

And the real challenges for Labour Party funding are only just beginning.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/29/yvette-cooper-legal-challenge-trade-union-bill-labour-leadership

Perhaps the reason Tony B Liar is not in House of Lords is that he still think Labour voters would invite him back as Leader. Man in Alice in wonderland.

Labour must come to its senses.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34100741

Tony Blair was never voted out by the general public - or even the members. Only half of the selectorate are actual members.

Blair is absolutely correct in his analysis.

What? Vote him or his cronies otherwise you are doomed!!!

Guy perhaps in illusion of being important.

"Guy perhaps in illusion of being important."

Let democracy rule. What is he so afraid of? Who do public services serve primarily? Who do those screaming against them serve primarily? Without redistribution and its vehicles the elite are free to exploit as much as they like.

Blair has done a massive favour to Corbyn by "speaking out" in this way. He has no comprehension as to how much he is hated.

In addition, I am Corbynite, but Y.C recent stance on the Trade union bill is to be commended. We can thank Corbynmania for that one

'Tony Blair has given up on Labour’s leadership election'
...
But he makes clear too that he knows his warnings will make no difference to the ‘Corbynistas’. He accepts that ‘the Labour party is now effectively a changed political party over the space of three months’. Blair has given up on stopping Corbyn. He appears to be making his point so that he can say that he tried his best.

He certainly doesn’t bother trying to woo Corbynistas, describing the phenomenon as ‘Alice in Wonderland’, and characterising the candidate’s supporters thus:

‘It’s a revolution but within a hermetically sealed bubble – not the Westminster one they despise, but one just as remote from actual reality. Those in this bubble feel good about what they’re doing. They’re making all those “in authority” feel their anger and their power. There is a sense of real change because of course the impact on politics is indeed real. The Labour party is now effectively a changed political party over the space of three months.’

What’s also striking about the Blair piece is his admission that he doesn’t fully understand what is going on in his party either, even though he does have a jolly good stab at explaining the rise of anti-politics parties across the developed world. He writes that ‘people like me have a lot of thinking to do. We don’t yet properly understand this’ and adds that he doesn’t know what the answer is to the question of how the party takes on the anti-politics feeling."

blogs.spectator.co.uk/isabel-hardman/2015/08/tony-blair-has-given-up-on-labours-leadership-election/

Sheer utter panic among the elite. Blair doesn't understand the people, the elite don't either and however many Establishment bigwigs they throw at the people, they all fall flat on their face. What a wonderful thing democracy is. Jez we can!

Hallelujah.
JEZ WE MORE THAN CAN

C?RBYN FOR 2020

You seem to be forgetting the Labour party has to win a general election before Corbyn can do anything. That is not going to happen.

It’s a revolution but within a hermetically sealed bubble – not the Westminster one they despise, but one just as remote from actual reality

He is absolutely spot on with this. Corbyn is simply an older version of Tommy Sheridan and will have as much appeal to voters as Sheridan did.

"Corbyn is simply an older version of Tommy Sheridan"

In defence of Jezza a somewhat mild mannered version I'd suggest.

As a soft southerner, every time I saw Sheridan give a speech, I expected it to end with a 'Glasgow kiss' - with firm instructions to "stitch that".

Yes, sorry I did mean to say "an older and far politer " version.

In actual fact, Corbyn is more like Ghandi. Or Mandela. Or John Lennon.

Blair wrote a very good column in yesterday's Observer. I am a Tory supporter but Blair is right on all this. I am very very supportive of Corbyn becoming Labour leader as there will not then be a Labour government for a generation and that will be a very good thing for the poor of the UK.

Took Tony a while to reveal his true Tory self then didn't it.

When will the rest of the New Labour Blairites follow suit, and just join the Tory party finally.

Blair was always a Tory.
Nothing he says about Corbyn is surprising.

I assume you are on a wind up now squidzin

In actual fact, Corbyn is more like Ghandi. Or Mandela. Or John Lennon

Not sure how such a true socialist as you are can admire the man who wrote " imagine no possessions, it's easy if you try" whilst owning 2 New York apartments, one of which was just to store possessions.

Janet Blyton is correct. If he wins there won't be a Labour government before 2025 at the earliest.

You're just jealous of John Lennon.

Lass, have you heard of Parliament? It used to work quite well once.

The executive is not the be-all-and-end-all in a functioning democracy. Thank god, given David Cameron's stupidity- I saw he revisited the question of stripping all security off online transactions (of all kinds) recently. As well as the fox hunting thing.

LighteningOnly, is that to me?
If democracy is your consern, voting Corbyn widens this further than any other party leader.
Presently, our so-called democracy is lead by a small niche if Oxbridge-Westminster inherited wealth establishment elites. Keeping all so-called democratic power in the hands of a wealthy minority.

Under Corbyn, no policy will be made by him directly, or limited to collegues. Decision making on policy will be widended to vote for all labour members much in a Scandinavian style.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/27/jeremy-corbyn-labour-membership-policy-leadership

In addition JC promises to set up a fund to enable people on low incomes to become labour MPs.

True democracy at last.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-will-set-up-a-fund-to-help-people-on-low-incomes-become-labour-mps-10468820.html