Labour's new leader

[downimpact]

I could never be an ex voter, but I do find it's about voting for the least worse option most of the time.

[j_jza80]

But here's the rub: you don't know what the consequences of "voting for the least worst option" are. How many people voted in Labour as the "least worst option", only to find they launched an illegal war with their new found power? Sometimes the very worst things happen with the best intentions.

[stevie_b]

He seems to be a true conviction politician, a rare breed these days. The last previous one was arguably Thatcher. It'll be an interesting time for British politics. I would have said Liz Kendall would have been the best choice, but she came last in the contest.

 

It might be that the public warms to his approach, and see it as a refreshing change from the "spin from a suit" that comes from most politicians.

[Abz]

He wants running round the barrack square until he's fit to drop, shaving, throwing in a cold shower and made to scrub down with Dettol, putting in a sensible clean suit and tie, then put to work in the kitchen where he can't do too much harm. Scruffy old git.

 

 

The BBC seem to be orgasming over his election, their producers obviously recognise and empathise with fellow scruffy old gits. The coverage they are giving it is ludicrous.

 

Like the smart bankers who put the country down the pan?! I am all in for smart but his a politician not a high end lawyer/model. He needs to be in touch with the country, not in a £2,000 suit.

[j_jza80]

Like the smart bankers who put the country down the pan?! I am all in for smart but his a politician not a high end lawyer/model. He needs to be in touch with the country, not in a £2,000 suit.

 

Surely we should be more concerned with what our well paid public servants wear than bankers? I mean, who really cares what bankers wear? Politicians are paid by us, and are our face on the world stage. They don't have to wear Saville Rowe suits, but there is no excuse for them looking scruffy.

 

I'm not singling out Corbyn out BTW, that goes for them all.

 

In fairness though, he isn't the worst dressed MP... Not for the squeamish

 

 

[imi]

I actually think it's a good thing, Labour are so similar to the Tories that it didn't matter who you voted for they were all the same.

At least now there will be some difference and a choice, I don't know if they'll ever get into power though.

 

 

time will tell whether there is any substance to his policies...

[imi]

I'm not sure I get this attitude, Labour didn't cause the financial crisis, they just happened to be in power at the time. Sub prime mortgages and the banks caused the crash.

 

Cant have it both ways - when the economy was doing well, Brown was the 1st to take credit - as soon as the tides turn they shy away.....

 

Labour were the ones responsible for deregulating the banks - they are equally responsible for causing the crisis that has set the country back many decades - Not to mention the hand out culture that seems to be the norm.

[sideexitsupra]

You're saying that like it's a bad thing, I think that's exactly why he's had so much support. The whole parliamentary system needs improving and here is someone who may actually look to make improvements given a chance.

 

It would seem that he has a lot of support from the labour faithful, but I don't believe the marginal voters will go for him as pm. In that respect you are right, I don't think it is good for the Labour Party overall.

[j_jza80]

The 'impartial' BBC have given this leadership campaign more coverage than the general election! Well, certainly more coverage than any leadership campaign I can ever remember.

 

Speaking of the BBC, this is on their website this morning: 24 things that Jeremy Corbyn believes

 

Of particular interest:

 

Talking to militant groups is necessary to win peace in the Middle East. Corbyn faced heavy criticism for using the word "friends" to describe Hamas and Hezbollah. He has responded by saying he had used the term in a "collective way" adding that while he does not agree with either organisation, a peace process means "you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree".

 

I fail to see how it is a "peace process", when you're proposing handing power to people that are proponents of gender inequality, homophobia, racism, anti-semitism, honor killings, FGM and all other manner of atrocities.

 

Replacing Trident would be a costly mistake. Corbyn, a long-term CND member, says plans to replace the nuclear missile system should be ditched. He believes the project's £100bn price tag could be better spent "on our national well-being".

 

I didn't realise "national well-being" was a deterrent to unstable Nuclear armed states like North Korea and Pakistan, or had the ability to be a moderate voice among the much larger nuclear superpowers.

 

Labour should not support air strikes against Islamic State in Syria. Corbyn, who is national chair of the Stop the War Coalition, believes innocent Syrians would suffer and the supply of arms and funds to the Islamic State group should be cut off instead.

 

A little inconsistent, as we know he believes in including violent militant groups in negotiated power sharing. There is also the not inconsiderable hurdles of us having no ability to stop the flow of funds or weapons to IS, as they are clearly supported by wealthy regional backers with huge oil assets.

 

The immigration debate has been "quite unpleasant". In an interview with Channel 4 News, Corbyn said the current discourse around the issue "fails to recognise the huge contribution migrants have made to this country". He added: "We should let people into this country who are desperate to get somewhere safe to live".

 

Now he sounds like a student union activist. Very few people would fail to acknowledge the huge contribution migrants have made to this country, but he is tarring everyone who is skeptical about mass immigration with the EDL brush. The majority, including the working class who he claims to represent, would just like to see immigration implemented in a controlled, sustainable manner. At this rate, we will have the largest population in Europe in 35 years.

 

The dispute between the UK and Argentina over the Falkland Islands could be resolved with "some degree of joint administration". In an interview with the BBC in 2013 he said other territorial disputes had been settled in this way, and under such an arrangement the islanders' British nationality could be maintained. He added that during the 1982 Falklands conflict it had been in Margaret Thatcher's interests to "divert attention from her catastrophic economic issues". During the leadership campaign, a Corbyn spokesman said he supported "a long-term negotiated settlement" that took the islanders' views into account.

 

Within one paragraph, you can see that he really doesn't understand the situation, and is relying on the Blairite tactic of immaterial soundbites. He presumes that those Islands are ours to do with as we please, and in doing so he is just as bad as the Argentine authorities. The islanders have already overwhelmingly voted in favour of British rule, it is not for us to go against their wishes and hand them over to Argentina. He also utterly dishonors the sacrifice of the British troops who went to the Falklands to fight for their right to self determination.

 

Ireland should be united.

 

Again, Northern Ireland should have the right to self determination. There is huge support for both positions, they are hardly being kept against their will.

 

A national maximum wage should be introduced to cap the salaries of high earners.

 

Because over taxing the wealthy has worked so well in France... drive off all the wealth and the wealth creators, and who is left to fund Corbyns Socialist paradise? I mean, the top 1% already pay 30% of income tax revenues. What he is proposing is effectively putting a huge sign over Britain saying 'Closed for business'.

 

The arms trade should be restricted. Corbyn would like to see the "brilliance and skill of those in the arms industry be converted for peaceful purposes".

 

Another nail in the coffin of our world leading arms industry. But Labour has a long tradition of destroying this industry (see Nationalisation of our Aircraft industry in the 70's, and TSR2)

 

Although Labour Party membership has increased significantly over the last few days, if his views on these subjects become part of the Party Manifesto, it will probably spell the end for Labour.

[Dnk]

The 'impartial' BBC have given this leadership campaign more coverage than the general election! Well, certainly more coverage than any leadership campaign I can ever remember.

 

Speaking of the BBC, this is on their website this morning: 24 things that Jeremy Corbyn believes

 

Of particular interest:

 

 

 

I fail to see how it is a "peace process", when you're proposing handing power to people that are proponents of gender inequality, homophobia, racism, anti-semitism, honor killings, FGM and all other manner of atrocities.

 

 

 

I didn't realise "national well-being" was a deterrent to unstable Nuclear armed states like North Korea and Pakistan, or had the ability to be a moderate voice among the much larger nuclear superpowers.

 

 

 

A little inconsistent, as we know he believes in including violent militant groups in negotiated power sharing. There is also the not inconsiderable hurdles of us having no ability to stop the flow of funds or weapons to IS, as they are clearly supported by wealthy regional backers with huge oil assets.

 

 

 

Now he sounds like a student union activist. Very few people would fail to acknowledge the huge contribution migrants have made to this country, but he is tarring everyone who is skeptical about mass immigration with the EDL brush. The majority, including the working class who he claims to represent, would just like to see immigration implemented in a controlled, sustainable manner. At this rate, we will have the largest population in Europe in 35 years.

 

 

 

Within one paragraph, you can see that he really doesn't understand the situation, and is relying on the Blairite tactic of immaterial soundbites. He presumes that those Islands are ours to do with as we please, and in doing so he is just as bad as the Argentine authorities. The islanders have already overwhelmingly voted in favour of British rule, it is not for us to go against their wishes and hand them over to Argentina. He also utterly dishonors the sacrifice of the British troops who went to the Falklands to fight for their right to self determination.

 

 

 

Again, Northern Ireland should have the right to self determination. There is huge support for both positions, they are hardly being kept against their will.

 

 

 

Because over taxing the wealthy has worked so well in France... drive off all the wealth and the wealth creators, and who is left to fund Corbyns Socialist paradise? I mean, the top 1% already pay 30% of income tax revenues. What he is proposing is effectively putting a huge sign over Britain saying 'Closed for business'.

 

 

 

Another nail in the coffin of our world leading arms industry. But Labour has a long tradition of destroying this industry (see Nationalisation of our Aircraft industry in the 70's, and TSR2)

 

Although Labour Party membership has increased significantly over the last few days, if his views on these subjects become part of the Party Manifesto, it will probably spell the end for Labour.

 

Agreed

[imi]

Corbyn is creating a real media frenzy....they simply can't stop slating him creating an aura of fascination around the guy......

[Abz]

Corbyn is creating a real media frenzy....they simply can't stop slating him creating an aura of fascination around the guy......

 

Noticed that, they are constantly slating him. Which makes me like him even more.

[cered]

"HE DIDN'T SING GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!!!!34!!!!!!1!!! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE, CHRISTIAN DOCTORS WHO WORKED FOR CHARITIES DIED SO HE CAN SING DA ANTHEM!!!!!!123!!!! DAILY MAYUL IS RIGHT!!!!!!!! LOONEY LEFT!!!!"

 

Front page of the Daily Mail is full of anti-Corbyn, it's beautiful. It appears that their only file-photo of him is doing a sort of faux-Nazi salute. Funny that

[neilp9876]

It not just the bbc, it's on every front page today. The more he is attacked the more appeal he will have with people, he will get voted in just to annoy the established powers at be.

[JasonR24]

I'm liking him just because the media doesn't.

[MaveriK]

"HE DIDN'T SING GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!!!!34!!!!!!1!!! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE, CHRISTIAN DOCTORS WHO WORKED FOR CHARITIES DIED SO HE CAN SING DA ANTHEM!!!!!!123!!!! DAILY MAYUL IS RIGHT!!!!!!!! LOONEY LEFT!!!!"

 

Front page of the Daily Mail is full of anti-Corbyn, it's beautiful. It appears that their only file-photo of him is doing a sort of faux-Nazi salute. Funny that

 

So, you think it ok for him not to sing it?

I suppose its ok for him to not wear a poppy as well?

 

Him getting into power would be the worst thing to happen to this country, thankfully most people of common sense will not vote for him and his "Looney Left" beliefs.

[cered]

So, you think it ok for him not to sing it?

I suppose its ok for him to not wear a poppy as well?

 

Him getting into power would be the worst thing to happen to this country, thankfully most people of common sense will not vote for him and his "Looney Left" beliefs.

 

The answer to both of those questions is... He has the right/freedom of choice to do or not to do. The same way you have the right to vote him in or not.

 

 

I'm laughing at the media coverage that he has, it's at least taken some of the spotlight off the "savage" immigrants

[j_jza80]

He doesn't stand a chance of getting voted in. The Tories won the election because they were on the right side of public opinion on subjects like the economy, benefits, immigration, EU referendum, Trident etc. Corbyn is moving the party even further away from the public on these points. Good for a party of protest, NOT for the opposition.

 

Another threat comes from the SNP. Many of Corbyns views and policies will resonate with SNP voters, who will see 2020 as an opportunity to vote the Tories out of power. But this will threaten the SNPs primary goal of Scottish Independence. Will the SNP just stand by and allow this to happen? I doubt it.

 

But probably the biggest threat is from his own party. Just a few days into this new Labour movement, and it is in total disarray. Mixed messages coming from the party on every subject so far, and Corbyns disrespectful behavior/appearance yesterday is sure to have upset many people in his own party. Whether or not Corbyn believes in god, or supports the monarchy is immaterial. The point is the people to whom he was supposed to be showing respect overwhelmingly did. There is a time and a place for making statements, and yesterday he got it totally wrong.

[JasonR24]

So, you think it ok for him not to sing it?

I suppose its ok for him to not wear a poppy as well?

 

Him getting into power would be the worst thing to happen to this country, thankfully most people of common sense will not vote for him and his "Looney Left" beliefs.

 

Why does it matter? I don't sing the national anthem, I don't care for the royal family and I don't wear a poppy. Mostly because there's more important things in life and I'd rather be doing that so yes it's perfectly fine.

 

Not that I care for any politician I just don't think it matters at all.

[j_jza80]

Why does it matter?

 

Think of it as turning up to a friends wedding in a church, and only the people who devoutly follow Christianity sing the hymns. People still sing the hymns for the benefit of the bride and groom, and don't let their personal views interfere with their friends special day. It is an act of friendship and respect.

[JasonR24]

Think of it as turning up to a friends wedding in a church, and only the people who devoutly follow Christianity sing the hymns. People still sing the hymns for the benefit of the bride and groom, and don't let their personal views interfere with their friends special day. It is an act of friendship and respect.

 

Fair point. I did sing hymns at my friends wedding recently... But this isn't a friend. He's a leader of a political party. Surely that's no obligation to sing the national anthem? I know some people will see this as an insult but where do you draw the line on who to please? I think by just following what he believes he's at least showing he won't pander to certain people.

[Chris88]

Why does it matter? I don't sing the national anthem, I don't care for the royal family and I don't wear a poppy. Mostly because there's more important things in life and I'd rather be doing that so yes it's perfectly fine.

 

Not that I care for any politician I just don't think it matters at all.

 

Of course Corbyn and yourself have the right not to sing the National Anthem and not to wear a poppy as a symbol of respect and remembrance for those that gave their lives so that Corbyn and yourself could have the right not to sing the National Anthem or wear a symbol of remembrance.

 

Please consider the hundreds of thousands that gave their lives so that you can do the more important things that you'd rather be doing.

[JasonR24]

Of course Corbyn and yourself have the right not to sing the National Anthem and not to wear a poppy as a symbol of respect and remembrance for those that gave their lives so that Corbyn and yourself could have the right not to sing the National Anthem or wear a symbol of remembrance.

 

Please consider the hundreds of thousands that gave their lives so that you can do the more important things that you'd rather be doing.

 

I do show my respect by living my life as a thoughtful person. I just don't think it's necessary for token gestures. Wearing a poppy or singing the anthem doesn't mean you're a good person trying to help other people out. I've seen a few nasty excuses for people wearing them. That's all I'm saying. I have the utmost respect for those people who are remembered.

[j_jza80]

But this isn't a friend. He's a leader of a political party. .

 

I meant Corbyns respect towards those who served and sacrificed themselves during the Battle or Britain. Surely they are as deserving of our respect as anyone, including friends and family?

 

He was, intentionally or not, using a day of remembering our fallen heroes as an opportunity to make a political point. I only hope he doesn't do something similar on Remembrance Sunday, for his own sake.

[JasonR24]

I meant Corbyns respect towards those who served and sacrificed themselves during the Battle or Britain. Surely they are as deserving of our respect as anyone, including friends and family?

 

He was, intentionally or not, using a day of remembering our fallen heroes as an opportunity to make a political point. I only hope he doesn't do something similar on Remembrance Sunday, for his own sake.

 

Was it a political point though? That's what people are taking away from it and what the media are running with because they love to do this sort of thing but really, couldn't he have just not wanted to sing and decided to stay silent. Just because someone thinks it's disrespect it doesn't mean that's the case. It's all personal preference. I wouldn't expect anyone to sing hymns if I was getting married. Like I don't expect anyone to sing the national anthem. Expectations aren't a good judge of character. Just because someone meets your expectations on the surface it doesn't mean they are a decent person.