The Establishment must truly hate Corbyn.

Latest smear attempt is he's an anti-semite apparently.

What I find amusing is that some of my friends who have been veering towards UKIP are warming to him because of the Establishments hatred of him. Now if he could be convinced to end the free movement of labour I think he could actually win an election for the Labour Party.

If they both join the Lib Dems , bingo !

Within weeks of a concerted smear campaign seeking to discredit the left's views on Israel, he starts making some lazy comparisons between ISIS and Israel.

And yes, I know what he really said. It wasn't as bad as is being portrayed, but I shook my head at it as soon as I saw it and think he's on very dodgy ground.

The real point though is that if in these moments he is doing incalculably stupid things like this then he has absolutely no hope at all of ever controlling the narrative. Ever.

Who wants a progressive always being forced to be a reactionary in the face of their own fsck ups? And as leader, too?

Hardly the first time that anti-Semitism has been flung around as an accusation – and vbfg is completely right in his analysis of this being overdone.

However, partly because he had never been a serious 'contender' for the leadership previously, once of the main problems with Corbyn is that he has no established team around him. The nature of today's UK political scene is Spads and Wonks etc. And because, from day one, people in the party (primarily, but not exculsively, the Parliamentary party) worked against him, this feels unreasonable.

Unfortunately – and from a personal perspective, I think that he has brough important issues to the fore (the need to build social housing being but one) he has few leadership skills and has appointed a 'team' on the basis of an understandablly defensive response to much from the rest of the PLP.

The possibility – and it is only that – that we might face a GE in the autumn does, however, urgently raise the issue of his electability beyond the activists and new members – and yes, there have been many new members since his leadership began.

The party's biggest problem is not an easy one to solve: a swathe of the mainstream media, having denigrated Ed Miliband for how he ate a sandwich, and then invented a Labour-SNP coalition, has now decided that truth is no longer a problem.

In the case of Corbyn, they now simply ignore his presence at, say, loads of Remain events – thus he is 'doing nothing'.

All sides flawed. The whole thing a mess. The People of the UK not actually being treated as the main concern.

The above shows he is doing something right and must be supported. The moment we get someone who the media support and publicise, is the time we should be really concerned, as that means they are owned by them.

The whole point about Corbyn is that people know he hasn't been bought. The very fact he has so far resisted resigning is another sign of his independence and strength of will. The Blairites and media are pushing him to resign because that lets them off the hook re the membership. The fact he hasn't gone "touch wood" is calling their bluff, as to stand against him is akin to political suicide.
For Labour to get rid of Corbyn in this way will destroy the labour party amongst the grass roots. The Party Conference would be an absolute war zone.

And in the opposite corner the sane one is Theresa May.

These are the stakes.

Absolutely. You could tell this from the vitriol and lies that have been poured at him continually from the media and the right ever since he was on the leadership ballot. Ranging from describing him as extreme left-wing to a national security risk, to he's dangerous to the nation, to now he's weak.

Corbyn is a puppet - he is a front for the like of McDonald - he will do what he is told.

As a leader he is unelectable - he lacks gravitas - intellectually and actions.

Put him up against May and she will destroy him and the Labour party in one fell swoop it would be carnage.

Waiting in the wings keeping her powder try is Yvette Cooper who would be significantly more electable than Corbyn

Last but not least - you cannot have a main man who will not press the button - end of.

The best outcome for Labour at this point is to split.

The leadership and the local party seem to be pretty much in step with each other. The people of the constituencies voted for the rebels. Each wants to protect their mandate.

This is my preferred outcome right now. I have considerably more faith in the prospect of a Lib-Lab pact than I do in the current leadership ever controlling the narrative. Without any ability to do that they are toast. And so are we.

Prior to the Eu referendum Labour had increased their share of the vote, performed better than expected in the local elections, won 4 major mayoral elections, as well as moving ahead of the conservatives in some of the polls. All this on top of increasing their membership massively. What more do they want a leader to do given the position they were in after the general elections. Can anyone really imagine anyone else in the leadership race doing any betterment Now, I don't agree with a lot of his opinions, but at least I know what they are. Corbyn has galvanized young voters more than anything other politian in my life time, and given the rise of more radical political rhetoric in the last couple of years it seems foolish to right Corbyn off. An "I can't believe it's not tories" Labour party is the last thing we need.
As for the accusations of antisemitism, it was a bit of a "face palm" moment. Although I don't think he said anything that wasn't true, and people need to realise that criticising the Isreali government is not the same thing as antisemitism, you just know the media would twist it in the way that they have.

Well then let's examine the logical constructions that he used:

"Muslim friends" and "Jewish friends".

Totally down with this. Here are two groups of people with an identity with whom we have no quarrel at all that is any way related to that identity. These groupings are real, and equatable. Anyone can easily accept these concepts of identity based groupings as things that are very much alike.

I have been led by the construction of the logic in this argument to consider that we are now equating things that are, as with the above, very much alike.

So where do we go now? Israel and the Islamic State. The democratically elected government of Israel, and the Islamic State. Before we had two things that were very much alike, and now we have Israel and the Islamic State.

If you are not personally offended by this then cool. Personally I have the same problem with that attitude that I do with those Leave voters who backed a coalition of racists pushing a nationalist agenda saying that they are not personally racist. Yes they are, they looked in the face of xenophobia and fscking shrugged. If the real lives of real people are just collateral damage in your analysis of what you want and how you get it then you're a 2@.

It's not much of a conspiracy to say that when the narrative at that moment in time is on the complete lack of leadership of those who got us to this position, to turn it on yourself because of your spectacular tone deafness on these issues then you're not just not a leader, you're actively damaging to the interests. If you do it in the shadow of a recent smear campaign deigned to discredit you on exactly this issue then you're beyond stupid. Incalculably stupid. Dangerously stupid. The kind of well meaning stupid that shows exactly how you will be derailed from every last item on your agenda.

But he doesn't actually stop there.



No, fsck you. There is no "at the same time". That first sentence is complete as it stands and needs no qualification at all. No one should be expected to do anything at all, at any time, to satisfy some artificial expectations placed on them because of their faith, race, nationality, gender identification or sexuality.

Do not condemn Jews, the most vilified group in human history, for the actions of a government. Excellent position to take. You do not follow this up with 'At the same time, don't be surprised if the Labour party membership start moaning about Jews and "Zionists" purely because of it'. This is an obscene false equivalence.

Seriously, how stupid is this person? The more I consider the actual words he used, and the constructions of logic that he used, the less charitable I am towards him.

edit: The word of the week is Verschlimmbesserung. Look it up.

VBFG, I recommend you listen to Shami Chakrabati who chaired the inquiry discussing the findings and Corbyns position. www.lbc.co.uk/chakrabati-defends ... ism-133112 To summarise she pointed out the media manipulation of the story and the way the media have attacked Corbyn who instigated this inquiry, while at the same time ignored the blatant racism displayed by the Conservative and UKIP parties in recent times.

VBFG, I recommend you listen to Shami Chakrabati who chaired the inquiry discussing the findings and Corbyns position. www.lbc.co.uk/chakrabati-defends ... ism-133112 To summarise she pointed out the media manipulation of the story and the way the media have attacked Corbyn who instigated this inquiry, while at the same time ignored the blatant racism displayed by the Conservative and UKIP parties in recent times.

It doesn't matter what her opinion is. I know damn well it's media manipulation. The point is that he's a rank amateur with no hope of ever controlling the narrative. He cannot lead. It was what, three weeks ago when to save face one of the most famous party members of all was being ejected. And he's making lazy comparisons like this. It's just stupid, and he's a liability.

If he wanted to not be a liability then the thing to do would have been to act with knowledge that the media does manipulate. I have yet to see much evidence that he's capable of it. Who, apart from Sideshow Bob, walks into exactly the self same trap over and over? Why would you even be going there at all when there are real, pragmatic and in everyone's faces issues of racial hatred going on right here and right now? You can't find an actual, relevant analogy from the practical issues of the surge of violence and intimidation following the vote? Then what's the point in you? Why are we abstract at all?

I'm very much not against a candidate from the left who can actually lead. Corbyn is not that person entirely on his own merits. This kind of crap is his leadership from now until the day it is over.

It really is fun watching and reading the rubbish about Mr Corbyn. It's years since a politician has scared so many that what they say and write is anything that they hope will bring him down.
The faux labour politicians have shown themselves to be the Tory lite that they are and the media have tried to convince everyone that the man is dangerous by their actions. The trouble is they forget one key factor.
We live in interesting times and perhaps a change is in the wind. People are afraid of change, especially those who benefit from the status quo and they will say and do anything to ensure it stays that way.
Let the fun begin.

Yes mate. It's us v them. That's the spirit.

It's not about his beliefs. It's him.

I am amazed by the love for Cameron on here! He has been the most incompetent and embarrassing PM during my lifetime.

Angela Eagle is ridiculous, my a@@e has more charisma. Surely she would only ever be a name to get a leadership contest going and for one if the awful brigade then to actually get elected?

Labour has nobody credible and likeable to the public that I can think of. Corbyn is probably their best bet as at least people are getting used to him and there will be some respect for his willingness to be different. As I said before, Labour lost a great opportunity in not backing Brexit. If the PLP had followed Corbyn's principles rather than pushing their's on him they would be in a very strong position right now and could have legitimately argued for a General Election that they may have won. But they missed that opportunity and have probably destroyed themselves by once again showing that they are unrepresentative.

As to the voter disconnect of parliament generally, now could be a great opportunity for British politics. One that will not be taken.... why not all agree to PR and then let Labour and Conservatives splits occur? We could then have several parties who would be more representative of a divided nation's views and the centre ground would be secured via coalition. Seems the way to go from here to me.

Yep. If Corbyn's had backed the leave campaign labour would probably be in pole position to win the next election. He could've also moved attention away from the immigration argument, and made it more about the undemocratic, megalomaniac nature of the Eu.
Now we're left with fascists May, and Gove, or Angela Eagle, who described a report from the liberal Democrats in 2008, warning of a dangerous bubble in the housing market as "nonsensical".

Labour are not a credible party of government for the simple reason they have not even been able to execute a simple coup to get rid of Corbyn. Michael Gove showed how to get rid of the Etonians!

If Labour's self-professed brightest and best (actually dull and useless) can't organise an internal coup how could they lead a divided country, with a strong opposition and deal with complex post-Brexit international affairs? Answer: they simply could not.

I don't think that Gove can win the Tory leadership election. If May wins she will give him a low powered job while he desires one of the top jobs. If Leadsom wins (she's gaining popularity amongst Brexiters) she may give Gove a top job. At the moment I can't see Gove being one of the final two.

I was not expressing an opinion on whether Gove would be leader, simply that he did what a lot of the Tory party wanted.

One of the rare occasions that I generally agree with the comment from Dally

Toppling Johnson has near enough handed the job to May, a remainer. Surely Gove knew his actions would turn people against him. Whether it's all part of a clever strategy worked out between him and Boris I do not know. Boris would have been a shoe-in for PM had Gove not turned on him.

Gove's betrayal of Johnson came a day after Sky revealed the leaked email from [iDaily Mail[/i columnist Sarah Vine to hubby Michael Gove, warning that he must be careful in his support of Boris, as neither her boss, [iMail[/i editor Paul Dacre, nor Rupert Murdoch trusted the former London mayor.

People know how powerful the media is in terms of politics, but this is a rare piece of actual evidence. Plus, Dacre hates being dragged into issues and the subsequent declaration of the [iMail[/i for Theresa May has more than a hint of his being very, very unhappy with both Mr and Mrs Gove.

Imagining the conversations in the Give household, and between Mrs Gove and her boss is most amusing.

As to whether Gove thought his actions would turn people against him – who knows? We're apparently now in a world where, according to him, we don;t need experts and, if you lie often enough, people will believe you.

Someone needs to show that bar steward where the ocean is!

I'm genuinely at a loss as to why there is such strong support for him from Corbyn supporters. Why so much focus on him and not the policies?

The reason I ask is because he is simply unelectable, whilst a number of policies he espouses are not. The guy is an electoral asset only to a tiny base of rusted on supporters. All the evidence suggests he's simply not up to running a political party never mind a government.

Surely there's another potential leader who can close the gap and make Labour firstly a credible opposition and then a party of Government, not just a party for the far left twitterati and rent-a-mob marchers?

One thing that seems to have come out of the woodwork from Corbyn defenders is the kind of language last heard publicly by Rik in the Young Ones. Neo-liberal and Blairite are two of the most annoying, completely meaningless words ever to be heard outside of a students union.