Jeremy Corbyn might actually win?

[MikeG]

You're following perfectly well, but trying to extract yourself from the absurd claim that "the centre always wins UK elections" by nitpicking the tendencies of particular pairings from left and right.

No seriously, Glenn, I have no idea what that list means.

 

[Antony]

Says the guy who claimed that neoliberalism is left-wing.

Well, exactly. Of course the terms are not "well-understood" at all. In any case, the idea that a range of political views can be graded as though points along a line, is ridiculous.

 

[lionking]

If it wasn't so important, it would be hilarious: the leader that few Labour MPs wanted, and all the Conservatives wanted. It could hardly be a bigger gift to the Conservative party. The upside will be an increased interest in politics for a while. The downside is another 10 years of opposition for Labour.

Optimistic I think. Labour is now absolutely unelectable.

 

[WildCat]

Increasing liquidity when in the depths of a recession is a very different thing from doing it when the economy is booming. Proposing it, as Corbyn explicitly has, as a means to increase public spending is a very different, and very left-wing, thing compared with using QE to stimulate a contracting economy.

C'mon, just because Corbyn's favored policies haven't worked in Greece, or Venezuela, or the Warsaw Pact, or anywhere else doesn't mean they won't work in the UK!

 

[Giz]

C'mon, just because Corbyn's favored policies haven't worked in Greece, or Venezuela, or the Warsaw Pact, or anywhere else doesn't mean they won't work in the UK!

Oh, I'm sure all those places weren't pure enough in their left wing dogma. .. or maybe the right wing media discouraged folks. .. or maybe it was the CIA... it certainly couldn't have possibly been that the ideology didn't survive meeting economic reality.

 

[p0lka]

Optimistic I think. Labour is now absolutely unelectable.

Why?

 

[metacristi]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...win-Labour-leadership-shock-poll-reveals.html

" The latest polling, seen by the New Statesman, puts Mr Corbyn ahead once second preference votes have been taken into account.

Andy Burnham is said to be winning in first preferences on 39 per cent, Mr Corbyn would be second with 33 per cent, Ms Cooper third with 25 per cent and Ms Kendall trailing in a distant fourth with just four per cent.

But Labour’s preferential voting system would allow Mr Corbyn's popularity among second preferences to hand him victory. "


Wow. I'd assumed either Burnham or Cooper would be the winner. (Though being an economic realist, I thought Kendall would be best at the job.)

So, If JC does win, does that mean a happy base but a long spell in the wilderness of opposition? Seems kinda likely...

He won as far as I see. I saw part of his acceptance speech and I can say that I agree with part of what he said there about world poverty, inequality and so on. Unfortunately the small BIG problem with his discourse is that it does not take in account the realities of day by day life, for example the disadvantaged people in the third world he defends do not subscribe, quite often, to the set of values he accepts so the project is doomed to failure on long term.

Unfortunately the world is full with retrograde forces which just wait for a better time to come to the surface. That's why being capable to oppose them at all times is crucial. I'm afraid calling Osama bin Laden's killing 'yet another tragedy’, linking with Hamas, intending to disarm UK and so on cannot help to create a better world on long term. Given that a liberalism without borders has inside the germs of its own demise I would not vote for him if I were a British citizen Too much 'progressiveness' of this kind is as harmful as the extreme right.

 

[lionking]

Why?

Because the electorate there (and in Australia for that matter), won't accept a socialist platform.

 

[JihadJane]

He won as far as I see. I saw part of his acceptance speech and I can say that I agree with part of what he said there about world poverty, inequality and so on. Unfortunately the small BIG problem with his discourse is that it does not take in account the realities of day by day life, for example the disadvantaged people in the third world he defends do not subscribe, quite often, to the set of values he accepts so the project is doomed to failure on long term.

Unfortunately the world is full with retrograde forces which just wait for a better time to come to the surface. That's why being capable to oppose them at all times is crucial. I'm afraid calling Osama bin Laden's killing 'yet another tragedy’, linking with Hamas, intending to disarm UK and so on cannot help to create a better world on long term. Given that a liberalism without borders has inside the germs of its own demise I would not vote for him if I were a British citizen Too much 'progressiveness' of this kind is as harmful as the extreme right.

What/who do you consider to be the world's "retrograde forces"?

Osama bin Laden alive could have provided important intelligence so of course it was a tragedy that he was killed for no good reason. Corbyn has never "linked" with Hamas, nor he is intending to disarm the UK.

 

[p0lka]

Too much 'progressiveness' of this kind is as harmful as the extreme right.

what we need in the UK is a counterbalance to the right wing politics we have at the moment.
labour has only been slightly less right wing than the tories recently, which has shifted the average to the right.
A left wing labour will shift that average the other way, which is a good thing in my opinion.

Because the electorate there (and in Australia for that matter), won't accept a socialist platform.

Australia is always about 2 elections behind us in the UK is the common joke when you have Australian relatives, heh.

 

[WildCat]

Osama bin Laden alive could have provided important intelligence

Wait, you now admit he really was a terrorist? Was he responsible for the 9/11 attacks?

 

[caveman1917]

Wait, you now admit he really was a terrorist?

He was sponsored by the CIA for years, what else would he be?

 

[WildCat]

He was sponsored by the CIA for years

Stop it, now I have diet coke coming out of my nose!

 

[The Atheist]

Excuse me? This is not our victory.

I got better and more productive things to do than "leaping joyfully on your bandwagon", thank you.

Yes, I've already commented on the sour grapers.

A few of them in this thread.

 

[trustbutverify]

Says the guy who claimed that neoliberalism is left-wing.

Corbyn is solidly left-wing by mainstream standards. I'm sure the ANP considers most self identified right wing politicians to be moderately conservative.

 

[dudalb]

It's Corbyn's being a apologist for Islamic Extremist that scares the hell out of me.
Labor has just repeated the 1982 "Most Public Suicide Note In History" fiasco.

 

[dudalb]

Because the electorate there (and in Australia for that matter), won't accept a socialist platform.

And some who might accept a left wing economic platform will be turned off by Corbyn's fruit loop foreign policies,particularly his apparent insistence on being an apologist for Radical Islamic groups.

Boy, are his supporters here going to be in for a shock when reality sets in.

That somebody like Jihad Jane is so in love with the guy is a kiss of death for him...and the labor party.

 

[dudalb]

Corybn on Putin and the Ukraine: (From Wikipedia)

Corbyn has stated that NATO is to blame for the crisis in Ukraine and described Russia's actions as "not unprovoked".[103] He has said it "probably was" a mistake to allow former Warsaw Pact countries to join NATO: "Nato expansion and Russian expansion – one leads to the other, and one reflects the other."[103][104] Corbyn's views on Ukraine, Russia, and NATO were criticised by a number of writers, including Halya Coynash of the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group,[105] Anne Applebaum in The Sunday Times,[106] Ben Judah in The Independent,[107] and Roger Boyes in The Times.[108] Writing for The Daily Telegraph, Edward Lucas saw Corbyn as having a "desire to appease Russia by sacrificing Ukraine" and said that Corbyn's "anti-imperialist sentiments did not stretch to understanding countries such as Ukraine."[109] In April 2014, he wrote an article for the Morning Star attributing the crisis in Ukraine to NATO. He said that the "root of the crisis" lay in "the US drive to expand eastwards" and described Russia's actions as "not unprovoked".[103] Corbyn told The Guardian in August 2015: "I am not an admirer or supporter of Putin's foreign policy, or of Russian or anybody else’s expansion". Corbyn would like to pull the United Kingdom out of NATO,[110] but has acknowledged that there is not an appetite for it among the public and instead intends to push for NATO to "restrict its role".[111]

He might just be the best thing to happen to the Tories in some time.....

And from his general attitude toward the US,even if some freak chance he should gain power, US and UK relations would reach the worst level since 1776....which would no doubt please some of the hard lefties here.

 

[dudalb]

And I see the "Lost Tribe" theory of politics..that there is a vast,hidden,hard right or hard left vote out there that will be brough forth if a major party nominates a candidate radical enough ...is not confined to US politics.

 

[angrysoba]

Corybn on Putin and the Ukraine: (From Wikipedia)



He might just be the best thing to happen to the Tories in some time.....

And from his general attitude toward the US,even if some freak chance he should gain power, US and UK relations would reach the worst level since 1776....which would no doubt please some of the hard lefties here.

Worse than in 1812?