Excited about the Labour leadership announcement

[Badgoushk]

For full disclosure I'm a Jeremy Corbyn supporter. I'm quite excited and hopeful that he's won again. Anyone else feeling it?!

'corbynistas and trump supporters have a lot in common, even if they don't see it themselves'

Corbynistas look down on Trump, UKIP and Trump and UKIP supporters, but it is not the same the other way around. Trump supporters don't look down on Sanders supporters and UKIP supporters prefer Corbyn to the rest of the 172. We know we all want a better future with and end to the rigged, corrupt Establishment system. We just disagree about what way is best. But if Corbyn and Momentum achieve it, so much the better because it is the outcome that counts not who does it and who wins. We have no party loyalty, we want the best party for the job whatever that may be.

'labour don't have some ordained right to be the opposition party, they can be wiped out. '

If the 172 had won and Labour tried to hold onto the centre for the Establishment then Labour would have been wiped out because the times and the people have changed and the centre is collapsing across the entire Western world and the people want change. Corbyn and Momentum and Trump are just two facets of that desire for change.

'Trying to shift the Overton window is all well and good, but there is going to be the opposite spectrum that also happens, so the centre is what makes the government. '

No because the Overton window has already moved. The people moved it, Momentu moved it. The 172 and the Etablishment tried to hold it in place but they failed. The centre has collapsed totally but people still have not realised the enormity of the seismic change. When Trump wins in November, everybody will come to ters with the enormous changes that the people have forced to happen in the face of opposition from the Establishment and the centre.

'You need to take your core support with you, not abandon them'

Yes, but the core support will have to follow the tsunami of populist insurrection that is sweping the metropolitan elite and their mates out of favour and then out of power. Blair is a casualty of it, the 172 have been defeated twice, nothing can stop the change that the people want.

No one cares. But I thought all these shiny new members really did care, they care better than anyone apparently. They care enough to attend his rallies but not enough to vote in elections. So I have to put my trust in them at a general election, no thanks. It's always someone else's fault isn't it , the media, voter apathy, on and on.

'No one cares. But I thought all these shiny new members really did care, they care better than anyone apparently. '

They care because they care enough to join a party, unlike the majority of us who would never spend money or time on that. But they don't live in that council ward or whatever. They travel from all over the place to attend a Corbyn rally, but they don't live in that electoral ward and therefore can't vote and no amount of door knocking by them will convince a dissatisfied public to turn out and vote for these politicians who they think are "all the same" and "all in it together".

What is Blair a casualty of, exactly? He left, he wasn't pushed out and certainly seems to be doing very well for himself.

If you don't want to be (or aren't capable of being) a leader then you certainly shouldn't be standing for a Leadership position.

But they don't live in that council ward or whatever.

Everyone lives in a ward.

Just more excuses.

Aargh. That proves the point we are all making then. Being members means nothing if they can't change the vote. It would be funny if it wasn't so tragic.

'What is Blair a casualty of, exactly?'

A casualty of the anti-establishment shift in public mood, just as is Cameron, who was known as the "heir to Blair" and so is Osborne who is said to have referred to Blair as "the master". No one bemaons their defeat and turn in fortunes. Gone and forgotten overnight as the public mood shifts unstoppably toward change.

'If you don't want to be (or aren't capable of being) a leader then you certainly shouldn't be standing for a Leadership position.'

You are right about that. The public has been getting sick of Corbyn because he has shown himself to be weak and unable to put the 172 back in their box. That lack of leadership is what has caused the public to disapprove of the entire Labour Party. Nobody wants to vote for a shambles with no leadership because they know that it won't be able to change anything. But the public doesn't care one iota about the Westminster Bubble stuff of whether Corbyn's leadership involved him praising Owen Smith and incresing his quota of meetings or whether Corbyn decided to call a reshuffle while soe Labour MPs were standing outside a tube station with some rail leaflets which they hoped would get publicised.

'Everyone lives in a ward. '

Yes but the question was about the council election in that area and why Momentum weren't able to ensure a Labour victory. The reason is that the public aren't Momentum members and don't care about any of the politicians.

'Aargh. That proves the point we are all making then. Being members means nothing if they can't change the vote.'

Absolutely because the general election won't be determined by Momentum members, it will be the entire general public. Momentum members could only effect change in the Labour Party where they defeated the 172 and that will then cascade down to policiy changes that the 172 don't like and ultimately it is the entire general public who will decide.

I was comparing, trump, corbynistas and UKIP in the same boundary as not listening to polls, believing in some shadowy figure and conspiracy, the thought process is that if everyone would just give their 'figure head' time they would come around, any dissenting voices are obviously brainwashed by whatever media is pointing out flaws.

I am yet to see any UKIP supporter prefer Corbyn to the 172, Corbyn is not as anti establishment as his PR spin has made out, the far left maybe anti EU but there are huge differences between your working class UKIP supporter and your degree educated middle class momentum advocate.

Nailing your colours to the mast of a trump win is another subject, Hillary is an abonimation, and if it was anyone other than trump she would be redundant already, however trump along with Europe points to a lunge to the right, moving further to the left actually allows this lunge, if you see what I mean

ComRes S Mirror Indy poll:
38% said Owen Smith has a better chance of winning the next election than think Corbyn has (31%).

Ahem. Before, presumably, but who knows?

Corbyn didn't walk the walk or talk the talk when it came to Brexit.

He has mobilised Labour brexit voters to vote for him. In a huge way.

Now is he going to deliver. What has he ever delivered to the electorate beyond the party faithful?

I'm not voting in the next election I know who is going to win and its not Corbyn.

Yes you are right that Trumpites and Corbynistas have similarities in their distrust of the Establishment, the media, the polls etc.

'I am yet to see any UKIP supporter prefer Corbyn to the 172'

"Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.

The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.

Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham."

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/14/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-most-popular-candidate-voters-all-parties

' Corbyn is not as anti establishment as his PR spin has made out, the far left maybe anti EU but there are huge differences between your working class UKIP supporter and your degree educated middle class momentum advocate.'

I agree that Corbyn is nowhere near as anti-establishment as Trump or Farage. Corbyn is with the metropolitan elite on lots of issues, but he is still anti-establishment because the establishment are against him and don't want him to get power.

'however trump along with Europe points to a lunge to the right, moving further to the left actually allows this lunge, if you see what I mean'

Not really because Trump is anti the free tarde deals, for protectionism and possibly tariffs, for increased maternity benefits in the States, against the globalist wars and Wall Street lobbyists etc which are all anathema to the right. Trump is close to Bernie on some issues, so left-right is not an accurate description of what is happening in politics (even though Corbyn and momentum etc clai it is), what is really going on is populist versus Establishment and that combines aspects of the left and right.

Corbyn didn't walk the walk or talk the talk when it came to Brexit

Anyone with an any political nous knew Corbyn was tied with the brexit vote, he is anti globalisation re business but pro open borders which is a condratiction not only within itself, but to the core labour vote.

What is has he ever delivered to the electorate beyond the party faithful?

Has he delivered anything so far? everyone can make pie in the sky promises, just look at the greens, as the main opposition your policies are going to be scrutinised, this apparently is a conspiracy though.

He was even told to stop using the tax credits climb down as some kind of labour win, as it was effectively the Tory back bench that stopped it going through, making the decisions for a country is a lot harder than sitting by and telling someone else they have done wrong.

(I realise this Unfortunetly may come across as I am having a go at you, I'm not )

Good article by Nick Cohen on Corbyn's win

"Utopias are always banal. Corbyn’s Utopia allows his supporters to wallow in the warmth of self-righteousness. They want to end austerity. Stop greed. Bring peace. How they do it is not their concern. Practicalities are dangerous. They take you away from utopia and back into the messy, Blairite realm of compromises and second-bests."

Sounds just like Leavers.

I kind of agree left v right is somewhat redundant terms, I'm sure that guardian article ruffled some feathers, but as I posted earlier, recent polls indicate that under Corbyn labour are losing the working class vote that hasn't already shifted to UKIP, plus, that article is from last year and he has dropped in polls since then, as for the 'holding Tories to account' stat, that is making the assumption that labour have a right not only to power but opposition, Scotland should be a shot across the bow to this kind of mindset.

'recent polls indicate that under Corbyn labour are losing the working class vote that hasn't already shifted to UKIP,'

Yes. There is no getting away from the fact that Labour is politically correct so they will always be out of touch with the working class who are mainly common sense and therefore Labour has to offer the working class real benefits in order to hold them. That is what Orwell said about the socialists who drive the working class away. But do you really think that Chuka Umunna, Tristram Hunt, Yvette Cooper, Owen Smith etc would appeal more to the working class than Corbyn does, when Corbyn offers an end to the bedroom tax from the start, an end to cuts in benefits, guaranteed council house tenancy, investment in poorer comunities, support for the steel industry, nationalisation of rail, scrapping of tuition fees etc etc. Unlike with Chuka and the 172, working class voters believe that Corbyn means it.

Yes that article was from a year ago but I don't know of any more recent UKIP voter surveys about Corbyn. In general voters are slow to change their minds and a general trend lasts for a long time and most voters believe (possibly erroneously because Corbyn has shown that he is weak) that Corbyn means what he says and in general UKIP voters liked what he said on issues of housing, jobs etc even if they dislike his immigration policies etc

'Scotland should be a shot across the bow to this kind of mindset'

In my opinion, Kezia Dugdale is an absolute disaster for Labour in Scotland. Twice she has opposed Corbyn and she is with the 172 etc. No wonder Labour aren't making headway in Scotland. If they put a fire and brimstone old school socialist like Bob Crow up there, I think he would probably give the SNP a run for their money. But that is Labour's whole problem - metropolitan elite politically correct status quoists who don't fight for old school socialism effectively.

The best run institutions, and the Labour Party is very much an institution, are always more successful with a good leader.

Schools
Hospitals
Industry

Football teams - no one wins with a principled or idealistic leader.

Elendon you are right. The leadership that is needed is the leadership to set a direction and defeat any opponents who try to derail it. That is why everyone has confidence that Trump will be a good leader, because he is tough and determined. Corbyn has shown weakness and an inability to put the 172 in their box and that is a bad sign and does not inspire confidence with the public.

Theresa May, on the other hand, has shown amazing courage and leadership as she dismantles the Cameron legacy and tells all the Brexit MPs and all the rest that she is in charge and she will decide.

The principle of antiglobalisation is as wacky as saying that global warming is a hoax. It has already happened.

I'm not discussing politics with you Claig.

Simply because you make no sense.

'The principle of antiglobalisation is as wacky as saying that global warming is a hoax. It has already happened.'

The reason Davos and the entire world establishment is so frightened of Trump is because they think he will unravel all their plans over globalisation and global warming. They are worried.

"A casualty of the anti-establishment shift in public mood"

But Blair never was defeated, was he? That's my point. Even with widespread anger over the the Iraq War, he still won an election. He then resigned as PM when he chose to and has subsequently made a good career for himself. It doesn't look like he will be bought to account for his role in the Iraq War.

In what real sense is he 'a casualty of the anti-establishment shift in public mood', because he hasn't faced any consequences as far as I can see? Apart from not being widely liked - but I rather doubt he's much concerned about that.

Springer maybe because you in your own words are a foreigner (not sure if you live here or have lived here long) and I take it have little understanding of our political history is why you struggle to understand why so many people believe Corbyn to be unelectable.

Many people will remember how the left of the Labour Party allowed Thatcher to win three elections she should have only one two at the most once again the left are trashing the Labour Party many of us also remover to strangle hold the unions from the far left of be party had on the country in the late 70's. I saw my family who were staunch Labour Party members step away from the party and the same thing is happening now.

The mere mention of the IRA brings up many negative feelings for many many people. A politician that has shown disregard for our countries armed forces, the work that that has been done to keep our country safe along with our security services and and the peace process that politicians and other have engaged in strikes at the very core of many people in the UK. Corbyn has never been part of any peace process but had shown to befriend and show solidarity to groups that are considered by the EU and USA to be terrorist groups and have attacked uk citizens and armed forces. You have to remember we have been a country that has been under terrorist attack for much of the last 40 years either from the IRA (and break off fractions) or Islamic terrorists.

We are also a country that is deeply divided by class Labour was the traditional party of the working class this changes under Thatcher she understood be working classes aspired to have middle class trappings, Blair also got this Corbyn doesn't, aspiration is a dirty word for the far left and his form of socialism

Be is inspiring some young people I think give it a few years many will be less idealistic about politics and will see he offers little more than empty policies. And the far left now have someone in the Labour Party they can get behind they are very vocal but a very very small number of the electorate