[JoshBB]

like, I've seen so many people say 'I like him but hes unelectable!' it's unreal.

Makes you wonder, is he really unelectable? Maybe if people stopped throwing that around the misperception generated by the media would die down a bit and we could have an honest and principled leader for once.

[Ashley.]

if he was unelectable

then how did people vote to elect him



something to consider.

[arista]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

like, I've seen so many people say 'I like him but hes unelectable!' it's unreal.

Makes you wonder, is he really unelectable? Maybe if people stopped throwing that around the misperception generated by the media would die down a bit and we could have an honest and principled leader for once.

Ignore It

Its far to Early

A Broad Range must be brought forward
for 2020

[bitontheslide]

its not far to early to tell, he is unelectable, and i don't like him at all

[Jack_]

At this point in time, I too consider him unelectable. However, five years is a very long time in politics (a lot can change in a week let alone that long) and given the chance to build upon the movement he has already established, there is every chance that at long last he can shift the political direction and appetite towards true socialist, left wing ideals and policies. Rather than seeking divide and rule answers in parties like UKIP that blame immigrants, those on welfare and Europe for societal issues, he can hopefully address people's very real and very important concerns with other ideas regarding social housing, anti-austerity, tax avoidance, the list goes on.

It will not be easy, and he is going to face a barrage of abuse and smearing from the right wing press that has already begun, plus too a fear mongering narrative of economic and defence insecurity from the Conservatives that will be peddled day in, day out throughout his tenure, but I believe it can potentially be done, he just needs to address the issues that are important to the electorate whether we like it or not with alternative visions that don't revolve around blaming and shaming certain groups of people. Concrete policies that are attractive to working class and middle income people, and small business owners, rebutting the idea that Labour's economic management is unstable and pointing out that the Tories backed their spending plans pound for pound until 2008. If he and the rest of the party members can join together to create workable policies that address the mood of the electorate and offer a viable alternative and point out the flaws of the Tories, all whilst refraining from mud slinging, abuse and theatrical politics inside the commons, he may just be able to show Cameron and co up for what they are.

If an election were called now, he would lose catastrophically because Britain is a society that rests in the centre ground/ever so slightly to the right. But the reason I voted for him and the reason why I'm so excited and delighted at his victory is that at last genuine socialist, left of centre politics are about to be given a national platform for the first time in a very long time. Even if Corbyn steps down or is outsted before the next election, which at present I also think is a possibility, the hope is that Labour will learn that their traditional values is what they need to stick with. That is what the resounding message from their members and supporters is, and the career politicians who are dissenting at the moment need to either put up or get out. If people want the Tories, they can vote for the Tories. An opposition that is a watered down version of the party in government is not good for democracy, it disillusions thousands of people, makes politics and politicians look 'all the same' and is ultimately pointless.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

if he was unelectable

then how did people vote to elect him



something to consider.

Because the people who elected him leader are all paid up members of the Labour party. People voting in a general election... aren't.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Jack_

At this point in time, I too consider him unelectable. However, five years is a very long time in politics (a lot can change in a week let alone that long) and given the chance to build upon the movement he has already established, there is every chance that at long last he can shift the political direction and appetite towards true socialist, left wing ideals and policies. Rather than seeking divide and rule answers in parties like UKIP that blame immigrants, those on welfare and Europe for societal issues, he can hopefully address people's very real and very important concerns with other ideas regarding social housing, anti-austerity, tax avoidance, the list goes on.

It will not be easy, and he is going to face a barrage of abuse and smearing from the right wing press that has already begun, plus too a fear mongering narrative of economic and defence insecurity from the Conservatives that will be peddled day in, day out throughout his tenure, but I believe it can potentially be done, he just needs to address the issues that are important to the electorate whether we like it or not with alternative visions that don't revolve around blaming and shaming certain groups of people. Concrete policies that are attractive to working class and middle income people, and small business owners, rebutting the idea that Labour's economic management is unstable and pointing out that the Tories backed their spending plans pound for pound until 2008. If he and the rest of the party members can join together to create workable policies that address the mood of the electorate and offer a viable alternative and point out the flaws of the Tories, all whilst refraining from mud slinging, abuse and theatrical politics inside the commons, he may just be able to show Cameron and co up for what they are.

If an election were called now, he would lose catastrophically because Britain is a society that rests in the centre ground/ever so slightly to the right. But the reason I voted for him and the reason why I'm so excited and delighted at his victory is that at last genuine socialist, left of centre politics are about to be given a national platform for the first time in a very long time. Even if Corbyn steps down or is outsted before the next election, which at present I also think is a possibility, the hope is that Labour will learn that their traditional values is what they need to stick with. That is what the resounding message from their members and supporters is, and the career politicians who are dissenting at the moment need to either put up or get out. If people want the Tories, they can vote for the Tories. An opposition that is a watered down version of the party in government is not good for democracy, it disillusions thousands of people, makes politics and politicians look 'all the same' and is ultimately pointless.

Great post Jack.
We really do need different parties that have different opinions and ideas.
I am all for old style Labour Party, not too far left but left enough to be an alternative to the Tory right.
We appear to have lost the lLib/Dems for now so no middle ground either.

[Toy Soldier]

It really all hinges on how successful the Tories are over the next 5 years, to be honest. If things actually improve in our society due to Tory policies, or if things stay pretty much the same / only get a bit worse and the Tories manage to spin-spin-spin-spin it into positives like they somehow did this year, then yes he is unelectable.

If Tory cuts and austerity policies are proven to be an absolute disaster and they don't manage to successfully cover up the damage they've done, then no, he is not unelectable. I honestly feel that if, after 10 years in government, the Tories haven't proven the worth of their economic policy to the extent that the country / towns / lives start to improve, then people will be ready for a change.

Of course, like I said, the probable outcome is that nothing at all will get any better but the Tory press will once again employ a 6 month campaign of smoke, mirrors and figure-fiddling to make it look like things are super awesome .

[Tom4784]

If he was unelectable I doubt the Tories would have felt the need to create and release those attack vids.

[Shaun]

The whole concept of 'electable' irks me - it just plays into the hands of the bland, policy-less Blair clone that the media are desperate to whittle anyone down to.

**** image. **** winning over idiot middle ground voters. The fact he stands for something is enough to put him leagues ahead of the rest.

[MTVN]

Well he's already refusing to engage with the media and his shadow cabinet appointment has been chaotic so its not a good start. The unelectable thing is not purely media scaremongering, it's based on - amongst other things - his inexperience, the fact the vast majority of the PLP disagrees with him, his controversial views particularly over foreign policy, the history of the left in the last few decades etc.

The flip side of this is of course that if we rewind to June there is not a single person who would have predicted the outcome of the leadership election that we got, least of all Corbyn himself. So yes, if our predictions can be turned upside down in just a couple of months then there is no point making cast iron forecasts about the election that is nearly five years away. We are just going to have to wait and see.

[kirklancaster]

When 'The Media' report something which Tibbie Lefties agree with it is 'Genuine Reportage', but when 'The Media' report something which Tibbie Lefties do not agree with, it is 'Media Scaremongering/Manipulation or Character Assasssination/Lies.... Yawn, zzzzz.

No one - Journalist or other - has invented Corbyn's controversial statements on terrorist organisations past and present, or paid look-alikes to fake his meetings and dealings with these 'enemies of the UK', and his words and deeds thus far concerning these terrorists borders on treason.

The above is fact - like it or not - and yet this 'virtual' fifth columnist is now leader of the Labour Party and a contender for the most powerful political office in the UK.

Corbyn supporters have a very real problem when it comes to crowing about him winning future power and forming the first Labour Government since 2010, because in order for this to be achieved, one of two momentous 'sea changes' will HAVE to occur;

1) The Labour Party will have to convince the great majority of the British public that by some 'miraculous epiphany', Corbyn has completely changed nearly all his views - particularly his anti-patriotic (treasonous) views on Foreign Policy.

Alas, up to now Corbyn - having only been elected for a few days - has attended a 'Welcome Refugee' rally and did not sing our National Anthem during a WW2 Memorial Service for our fallen heroes. Hardly a great start.

2) By some greater miracle, the Labour Party will have to change the mindset of the great majority of the British Public who currently number IS and other terror organisations, and unfettered Immigration as their greatest concerns.

With a world increasingly fractured by bloodletting, chaos and destruction at the hands of IS, and an ever swelling sea of legitimate refugeees requiring entry into the economically fragile UK, along with hundreds of thousands of 'economic' illegal immigrants demanding entry, changing the mindset of the great majority of the British Public and allaying their fears will be difficult - if not impossible.

I do not worry about Corbyn for I believe that this man - like ALL political extremists, cloaked or otherwise - will continue arrogantly to comit one 'faux pas' after another over the coming months, and his '15 minutes of fame' will be short-lived.

[Toy Soldier]

Hmmmm... When was the last time the mainstream media reported anything that wasn't heavily right-biased? . Regardless, if I'm being lumped in with those who "call things I agree with genuine reportage", I'd challenge you to find one example of me insisting this.

The media / press is trash. It's trash whether it's slamming Miliband / Corbyn, Farage, or any of the Tory ghouls. It's just a fact that it tends not to ever do the last of those. But I can assure you I'm 100% equal opportunities when it comes to my disdain for the idiotic, sneering old foghorn of British "reportage" on every single topic.


The only other thing I'll pick up on, is the "national" anthem and refusal to sing it being somehow anti-patriotic. You can love this country and believe it shouldn't have a monarchy. No, more than that, you can believe that the monarchy should be dismantled BECAUSE you love this country. He's not refusing to sing the song because it's the national anthem, he's refusing to sing it for the same reason that I wouldn't sing it: because he doesn't want to sing a song of worship for a bunch of elitist, murderous villains.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Shaun

The whole concept of 'electable' irks me - it just plays into the hands of the bland, policy-less Blair clone that the media are desperate to whittle anyone down to.

**** image. **** winning over idiot middle ground voters. The fact he stands for something is enough to put him leagues ahead of the rest.

That's why I thought that Ed Milliband was good because he actually had policies (even if he didn't put them across brilliantly) I could understand what he was trying to say.

Every other democratic country has opposition values to the main party in their country, yet in the UK we all have to be Tory lite to be able to get anywhere because the Media won't accept anything else, it's a disgrace.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Hmmmm... When was the last time the mainstream media reported anything that wasn't heavily right-biased? . Regardless, if I'm being lumped in with those who "call things I agree with genuine reportage", I'd challenge you to find one example of me insisting this.

The media / press is trash. It's trash whether it's slamming Miliband / Corbyn, Farage, or any of the Tory ghouls. It's just a fact that it tends not to ever do the last of those. But I can assure you I'm 100% equal opportunities when it comes to my disdain for the idiotic, sneering old foghorn of British "reportage" on every single topic.


The only other thing I'll pick up on, is the "national" anthem and refusal to sing it being somehow anti-patriotic. You can love this country and believe it shouldn't have a monarchy. No, more than that, you can believe that the monarchy should be dismantled BECAUSE you love this country. He's not refusing to sing the song because it's the national anthem, he's refusing to sing it for the same reason that I wouldn't sing it: because he doesn't want to sing a song of worship for a bunch of elitist, murderous villains.

"I'd challenge you to find one example of me insisting this" - Your post confuses me somewhat; where did I mention you personally?

"The media / press is trash. It's trash whether it's slamming Miliband / Corbyn, Farage, or any of the Tory ghouls. It's just a fact that it tends not to ever do the last of those." -- LOL What planet are you on? Farage has been villified and crucified in the press.

"The only other thing I'll pick up on, is the "national" anthem and refusal to sing it being somehow anti-patriotic." -- Under the Constitutional Laws of this country, The Queen is the Head of State, and Corbyn is now Leader of The Labour Party - one of Her Majesy's two main political parties. As such he has a PUBLIC DUTY to follow lawful protocol and procedure in a STATESMANLIKE manner. Singing our National Anthem at 'THE' Memorial Service to our fallen heroes is part of that protocol and this treasonous pig should have complied.

By NOT singing our National anthem at such a public place on such an emotional occasion, Corbyn is arrogantly 'cocking' yet another 'snook' at the UK and it's people, but that's fine, because it is yet one more 'faux pas' that this terrorist-loving, anti-British, anti-Democratic extremist has made, and his arrogant lack of moderation will be his undoing.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

That's why I thought that Ed Milliband was good because he actually had policies (even if he didn't put them across brilliantly) I could understand what he was trying to say.

Every other democratic country has opposition values to the main party in their country, yet in the UK we all have to be Tory lite to be able to get anywhere because the Media won't accept anything else, it's a disgrace.

That just plain wrong. The political balance of a country is generally proportional to its peoples wealth. As the general wealth of the UK people has increased since the second world war, the need and desire for left wing politics has diminished. It no longer serves the needs of the majority of the population. The press simply reflects the consensus of the people at the time.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

That just plain wrong. The political balance of a country is generally proportional to its peoples wealth. As the general wealth of the UK people has increased since the second world war, the need and desire for left wing politics has diminished. It no longer serves the needs of the majority of the population. The press simply reflects the consensus of the people at the time.

Another good post - excellent points.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

"I'd challenge you to find one example of me insisting this" - Your post confuses me somewhat; where did I mention you personally?

"The media / press is trash. It's trash whether it's slamming Miliband / Corbyn, Farage, or any of the Tory ghouls. It's just a fact that it tends not to ever do the last of those." -- LOL What planet are you on? Farage has been villified and crucified in the press.

I naturally assume you include me in it because I have a large ego. Deal with it.

And Yes kirk I was saying it's always trash, whether it's Farage, Corbyn or Simon Cowell... I was acknowledging that Farage gets plenty of it. Just because my own opinions of the man are not good (because of his policies and manner, not because of the press) doesn't mean I don't know when the press is jabbering ****.

Though the focus now seems to have switched to Corbyn in general.

"The only other thing I'll pick up on, is the "national" anthem and refusal to sing it being somehow anti-patriotic." -- Under the Constitutional Laws of this country, The Queen is the Head of State, and Corbyn is now Leader of The Labour Party - one of Her Majesy's two main political parties. As such he has a PUBLIC DUTY to follow lawful protocol and procedure in a STATESMANLIKE manner. Singing our National Anthem at 'THE' Memorial Service to our fallen heroes is part of that protocol and this treasonous pig should have complied.

By NOT singing our National anthem at such a public place on such an emotional occasion, Corbyn is arrogantly 'cocking' yet another 'snook' at the UK and it's people, but that's fine, because it is yet one more 'faux pas' that this terrorist-loving, anti-British, anti-Democratic extremist has made, and his arrogant lack of moderation will be his undoing.

Now see, this I just can't get on board with. It's a political catch 22... A monarchy monopoly. Essentially it's saying that you can't be properly engaged in UK politics if you refuse to acknowledge the monarchy as a valid political system. And so if you believe there shouldn't be one? Tough. Because then you're not a proper politician and so will never be in a position to try to change it. No. It's 2015 and major political factions should be able to (and just SHOULD, in my opinion) openly reject the monarchy.

I mean just look at the national anthem if you want to know why I will never sing it. It's about precisely three things. Elitism, War-mongering, and a fictional man in the sky. Not for me, thanks, not any of it. I get that some people love the cuddly old Queen, are "proud" of our country's history as bloodthirsty conquerors, and believe in said men in the sky... And that's fine... But kindly don't force your prayers upon others with the caveat that they're "treasonous" or "anti-patriotic" if they won't comply.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Now see, this I just can't get on board with. It's a political catch 22... A monarchy monopoly. Essentially it's saying that you can't be properly engaged in UK politics if you refuse to acknowledge the monarchy as a valid political system. And so if you believe there shouldn't be one? Tough. Because then you're not a proper politician and so will never be in a position to try to change it. No. It's 2015 and major political factions should be able to (and just SHOULD, in my opinion) openly reject the monarchy.

Can't agree with this. At the present time, the UK constitution is based around a monarchy. The queen opens parliament. The leader of the governing party goes to see the queen prior to starting government and resigns to the queen when finishing.

Every country has an anthem. It is a song to celebrate the nation. I am not a royalist, I will be much happier when we become a republic, but until that time, that is the fundamental basis of our constitution. Corbyn's refusal to sing the anthem is him sticking 2 fingers up at the people of this country, as it is THEIR constitution until THEY decide its time for change.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I naturally assume you include me in it because I have a large ego. Deal with it.

And Yes kirk I was saying it's always trash, whether it's Farage, Corbyn or Simon Cowell... I was acknowledging that Farage gets plenty of it. Just because my own opinions of the man are not good (because of his policies and manner, not because of the press) doesn't mean I don't know when the press is jabbering ****.

Though the focus now seems to have switched to Corbyn in general.



Now see, this I just can't get on board with. It's a political catch 22... A monarchy monopoly. Essentially it's saying that you can't be properly engaged in UK politics if you refuse to acknowledge the monarchy as a valid political system. And so if you believe there shouldn't be one? Tough. Because then you're not a proper politician and so will never be in a position to try to change it. No. It's 2015 and major political factions should be able to (and just SHOULD, in my opinion) openly reject the monarchy.

I mean just look at the national anthem if you want to know why I will never sing it. It's about precisely three things. Elitism, War-mongering, and a fictional man in the sky. Not for me, thanks, not any of it. I get that some people love the cuddly old Queen, are "proud" of our country's history as bloodthirsty conquerors, and believe in said men in the sky... And that's fine... But kindly don't force your prayers upon others with the caveat that they're "treasonous" or "anti-patriotic" if they won't comply.

You are missing the whole point T.S. - I am not saying that as a private individual Corbyn should support the monarchy, but that as a STATESMAN and Leader of one of Her Majesty's political parties he should comply with protocol -- especially on such a public and very solemn occasion.

The idiot will hoist himself on his own petard - you will see.

[Toy Soldier]

Right but if all statesmen must fall in line with protocol - legitimising the monarchy - then how does one make a (meaningful) political stand against that monarchy?

I for one have had enough of cardboard cut-out politicians playing along with these outdated charades.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Right but if all statesmen must fall in line with protocol - legitimising the monarchy - then how does one make a (meaningful) political stand against that monarchy?

I for one have had enough of cardboard cut-out politicians playing along with these outdated charades.

By lawfully CHANGING the constitution - in Corbyn's case ONCE he has attained the office of PRIME MINISTER.

Wait: I hear music.... Someone singing. I can see two figures on horseback approaching....

"To dream, the impossible dream..."

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

By lawfully CHANGING the constitution - in Corbyn's case ONCE he has attained the office of PRIME MINISTER.

But then you're fighting to change something that you have already legitimised by playing along with it to get into that position, massively weakening the argument against it and all but ensuring that your campaign will fail.

I'm sure that's the point, of course. A nefarious and self-sustaining system of privilege and control.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Can't agree with this. At the present time, the UK constitution is based around a monarchy. The queen opens parliament. The leader of the governing party goes to see the queen prior to starting government and resigns to the queen when finishing.

Every country has an anthem. It is a song to celebrate the nation. I am not a royalist, I will be much happier when we become a republic, but until that time, that is the fundamental basis of our constitution. Corbyn's refusal to sing the anthem is him sticking 2 fingers up at the people of this country, as it is THEIR constitution until THEY decide its time for change.

Your stance is identical to mine - I am not a Royalist and will feel glad when this anachronism is gone for good, but as you so eloquentky put it: "But until that time, that is the fundamental basis of our constitution."

We are also in full agreement of JUST WHY Corbyn did not sing the National Anthem.

[Tom4784]

The whole national Anthem point is stupid, how many people actually know the words to it without googling them? Not ****ing many.

It's easy to act offended but most people don't even know the actual words to the first verse, never mind the song itself. It's just a very desperate stick to beat him with.