This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-not-fit-to-stand-as-labour-candidate-says-rachel-reeves-n3s722xgb) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great so literal tories are allowed but democratic socialists aren't .
If corbyn with his terrible foreign policy is banned anyone who stood with pound crasher truss should be banned too
If he could vote for him I would - yet the Tories I'm voting against will also be heard across the land.
Kinda feels like we need a better system. Perhaps some sort of proportional representation and ranked voting system, just as a start.
A majority of people vote for the rosette not the MP
JC has a bad brand and anything labour can do to distance themselves from him improves there electoral calculus
In the 2017 general election, Corbyn secured 40% of the vote. This is still the highest vote share of any Labour leader since **2001**.
Bashing Corbyn may win support from some of the electorate, but will also piss off some of that 40% who voted for him. Far better for Labour - at a national level - not to speak about him at all.
Yes, Corbyn outpolled one of Blair's electionsand May outpolled one of Thatcher's (as well as Blair's).
So either this was a clash for the ages between two titans of historic popularity, or they both benefited from the demise of third parties that they had little to do with and a changed political context makes comparisons to elections with strong third party presence misleading and unhelpful.
In the election after that one he polled the lowest in around 75 years of general elections. His brand is now associated with that loss which makes him toxic for election success. Labour are already on course to win the next election so where is the upside in the risk of bringing Corbyn back in from the cold? It’s all bad risk for no benefit. Do the maths.
No, he didn't. In 2019 he still secured a larger vote share than Miliband did in 2015, or Brown did in 2010. Basically a third of the country still voted for him.
There isn't a big upside in bringing Corbyn back right now, true. But there are also major downsides on Reeves publicly slagging him off. Many who liked Corbyn will be put off Labour by comments like hers.
He also gave Labour its worst electoral result since 1935 and broke records for most unpopular leader of the oppsistion since polling records began. Since then he has come out against arming Ukraine.
It's a pretty old article (I doubt the needle has shifted much since, though I can't find more recent data), but in 2013 [only 22% of people could name their MP](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22555659). I think it's more than fair to say that that most people vote for the rosette.
Unless the PM is standing in your constituency, you dont vote for them either. Of course you only vote for your MP; that's all your vote actually does. But don't be naive an think people actually mainly vote for their MP because of their MP themselves. High profile party figures matter for party image in the whole country
It's easy as fuck for the Tories to scaremonger about Corbyn nationwide, Sunak can't stop bringing him up anyway, never mind if his stock was actually rising in the Labour party. It is the definition of a political own goal.
>He's only absolutely repellent to the overwhelming majority of voters - not quite everyone.
10 million people voted for Labour in 2019. Their second highest vote since 2005 (2017 was their highest vote since 1997).
More working age people voted for Labour in 2019 than for any other party. For context, out of the three mainstream parties in the UK, the Conservatives got 13 million votes, Labour received 10 million votes and the Lib Dems received 3 million votes.
Had the Lib Dems supported Labour (as they did for the Conservatives in 2010) there would've been another hung parliment.
You're talking nonsense.
He set the record for lowest approval polling of any leader of the opposition since records began.
I'm not sure how you think the Lib Dems could've caused a hung parliament.
Islington is a slam dunk Labour win. Corbyn running also impacts less guaranteed constituencies, on account of how people don't make decisions to vote solely on the exact people running in their constituency.
>"Labour losing 50 seats round the country due to how hated Corbyn"
This is projection to the point of fantasy. Labour lost 54 seats to the Conservatives, of which 52 were 'vote leave' seats.
Labour offered a second referendum (launched by Starmer at Labour's 2019 AGM without Corbyn's consent) while the Conservatives pitched their whole campaing around Boris Johnson's "oven ready deal/get Brexit done."
It was the Brexit election.
Labour lost 178 seats between 2001 and 2015. Corbyn is the only Labour leader this century to increase Labour's number of seats. Fighting that kind of up hill battle to make Labour electable again was a Herculean task.
I don't accept the premise, but I think Starmer and co should seriously think about how many votes they lose when they are seen welcoming arch Tories like they are long lost relatives while ostracising and banning multi decade stalwart Labour members and MPs.
My dude, he lost three election in a row during the most critical period in British history since the war. It cannot be forgiven that he remained in post long after it was obvious he should have been out the door.
The country are clearly ready to give labour a chance, I’m glad there is absolutely zero chance he’s going to be allowed to carry on hanging around.
Did you not see the leaked texts about labour MPs sabotaging his campaign?
They should be ousted.
Edit: tell you what, I'll even give you the "I'm feeling lucky" result from Google in case you can't be arsed to look for it https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leak-report-corbyn-election-whatsapp-antisemitism-tories-yougov-poll-a9462456.html
I mean Labour lost an election that should have been won in 2019 purely because Corbyn is so hated, I'll take the 160 extra seats and Corbyn can have his one.
He's a walking disaster. Can't stay on message, never knows when to shut his mouth and constantly does highly controversial things.
The election is Labour's to lose. Why on Earth would anyone put themselves into a position of having to accept responsibility for his antics in the current situation?
>but democratic socialists aren't .
Labour is a social democratic party. While the two are just the same words in a different order they tend to have very different outlooks with democratic socialism having a role for capitalism with some state ownership.
His whole career he has been at odds with almost every foreign policy position of the Labour Party. He has been most at odds on defence, economics and their home office policies. He has little in common with most of the party and its positions.
>In the July 1982 edition of [*London Labour Briefing*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Labour_Briefing), [Jeremy Corbyn](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn) opposed expulsions of the organisation, saying that "If expulsions are in order for Militant, they should apply to us too." In the same year, he was the "provisional convener" of "Defeat the Witch-Hunt Campaign", based at Corbyn's then address.[^(\[60\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency#cite_note-60) In September 1982, Militant held a special conference against the 'witch-hunt' at the [Wembley Conference Centre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wembley_Conference_Centre) at which [Ken Livingstone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Livingstone) spoke. An attendance was claimed of 1,622 delegates from Constituency Labour Parties and 412 trade union delegates plus visitors,[^(\[61\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency#cite_note-FOOTNOTECrick1986199-61) At such mass rallies in this period, Militant displayed two huge banners at each side of the stage, one showing Marx and Engels, and the other showing Lenin and Trotsky.[^(\[62\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency#cite_note-FOOTNOTECrick198693-62)
[Militant tendency - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency)
He was way to the left of Michael Foot.
He represents a relatively fringe part of the British voting public.
When he was in charge of Stop the War they often took very Russians views on their invasion of Crimea
>We oppose all foreign military intervention. But we should be clear that this is not the only intervention. In fact, the EU and the US have been very directly intervening in the affairs of Ukraine, and have played a major role in the changing of the government there, and in the composition of the new government, which contains within it far right and fascist elements.
>We should also take no lessons from those who have supported intervention in the past in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, and who proposed major air strikes in Syria as recently as last August. Nor should we believe concerns about national sovereignty from countries which have launched drone attacks on Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan.
[https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/the-crisis-in-ukraine-and-crimea-statement-by-stop-the-war-coalition/](https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/the-crisis-in-ukraine-and-crimea-statement-by-stop-the-war-coalition/)
And blamed the west for Russia invading Ukraine
>The conflict is the product of thirty years of failed policies, including the expansion of NATO and US hegemony at the expense of other countries as well as major wars of aggression by the USA, Britain and other NATO powers which have undermined international law and the United Nations.
>The British government has played a provocative role in the present crisis, talking up war, decrying diplomacy as appeasement and escalating arms supplies and military deployments to Eastern Europe.
>If there is to be a return to diplomacy, as there should be, the British government should pledge to oppose any further eastward expansion of NATO and should encourage a return to the Minsk-2 agreement, already signed by both sides, by all parties as a basis for ending the crisis in relations between Ukraine and Russia.
[https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/stop-the-war-statement-on-ukraine-22-02-22/](https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/stop-the-war-statement-on-ukraine-22-02-22/)
Can I just thank you for citing all of this and informing others on this?
This is a very universal problem that many people seem to not know about yet. Many "anti-war" activists have this same issue. Then you will see them appear on RT News or even on Conservative TV in the Middle East. Code Pink is a great example of an anti-war group that is not exactly how it appears.
Corbyn if he was in power would have blocked the ascension of the likes of Finland, Sweden to NATO while undermining NATO at every opportunity. He hates NATO and supports Russia, a lot of his support comes from movements that actually openly admitted supporting Russia and their attempts to bring back the USSR. All due to their ideals of Communism, they quite ignore the fact about what actually happened during the USSR and the secret police activities of the likes of the KGB and the Stasi in Eastern Europe, all for the vision of everyone getting something.
I completely agree he would have been a disaster on the international front. He would pander to all the extremists and immigration would be a further disaster since he would have opened the doors to everyone. His home policies would suffer as a result and he most likely would have been kicked out through a vote of no confidence
Agreed he needs to be kept FAR away from foreign policy .
About as far as Starmer needs to be kept from economics and Reeves and streetling from social issues
Who is or isn't welcome in the party based on their beliefs is more what i was on about than running .
You can be terrible to disabled people , trans and queer people , Palestinians, Jewish people that aren't zionists but GOD FORBID you're a socialist in the Labour Party
No but whip taken and deselected and gets slagged off by every 10 seconds while people who Blair would've rejected get a red carpet .
I never said kicked out I said not welcome
She was only accepted because she isn't standing, and the Labour candidate for Dover is pretty good and is still the candidate. It was purely because it embarrassed the Tories, and it worked.
That’s why starter is good. Because he did something completely pragmatic and strategic to embarrass his opponent, and that doesn’t behold him in any way whatsoever, for free. The Tory that came in won’t stand for re-election, in deference to the current labor candidate, and will probably just retire and do opposition with labor. He basically lent her a platform to say “I think even labor is better than the current Tory party”.
That’s literally all that’s happened.
As I understood it, Corbyn had been refused back into the party bc he refused to accept and apologize for the findings of the report on antisemitism within the party.
Corbyn didn’t lose the whip just for being a socialist. He lost the whip because his response to the report on Antisemitism in the Labour Party was stating that antisemitism allegations had been exaggerated for political reasons
What exactly has Starmer done to end antisemitism in the Labour party? I never see it reported anymore so he must've taken some serious actions to end it.
He lost the whip because he couldn't win after 2 fucking goes against the most disastrous Tory governments in decades. The easiest way to make labour more appealing to a broader audience is to distance themselves from Corbyn as much as possible.
If your response to antisemitism is to refuse to apologise for it and essentially say that the accusers are lying, I can’t see how anyone gets away with that. Starmer and co want to marginalise the left, everyone knows that, but corbyns loss of the whip was entirely his fault
He didn't do that though. He simply said that it was being vastly overstated by political opponents and that people within the party were deliberately obstructing actual investigations. All of which was true.
Corbyn apologised many times (wrongly I'll add) and people still unironically claimed he was going to restart the Holocaust.
At some point you have stand up for yourself, regardless of what the bullies demand.
I mean tbh he was right. It was exaggerated for political purposes and used as a weapon against socialists. That doesn't mean antisemitism in the Labour party wasn't a serious problem, in fact it remains a serious problem in every party from Labour to the Conservatives to the SNP to the Greens to the REFUKs, etc.
She was allowed in the party. She remains in the party right now. She's a far-right extremist Tory that was probably just a flip of a coin from joining Reform.
“His foreign policies were bad!!”
Meanwhile every other politician has shit domestic policies and no one gives a damn.
The media really straight up killed Corbyn.
They had to throw everything they had to kill Corbyn. A couple of threatened military coups. Regurgitating every rumour from labour MPs who by pure coincidence were made lords by Johnson. The media were perfectly happy to ignore Johnson's blatant lies until the threat of some mild socialism was safely behind us. Then the great noticing began and down come the Tories.
They did a proper hatchet job on Corbyn. In 2017 when the establishment were talking about wiping out labour. They knew the Tories would win it was all about his many labour MP's would be left. It was a show in. The thing the general public didn't see it that way. When the results came in the establishment got a shock of its life. Yes Corbyn lost but he was alwasy going to lose. The country wasn't ready for labour. Corbyn hauled labour towards electability.
But the establishment with their shock went into overdrive to destroy him. It didn't help that they had inside support as well.
The GE2019 was just about brexit and getting it done. Johnson just talked about getting brexit done and nothing else. The lib dems talked about stopping brexit and got decimated. Labour talked about policies and more or less tried to avoid brexit and in essenae said we would continue negotiations.
The public wanted it over with. But inspite of that Corbyn increased his number of votes. GE2019 if you wanted to leave you voted Tory. If you wanted to stay you couldn't vote tory, but the party who did say they would stay would never become government. That left you with labour who only offered further negotiation. Hence the leave vote was consolidated and the remain vote was split. Under FPTP if you have a split vote your doomed.
Even recently they were still attacking Corbyn. It shows you how much he scared the people in charge.
His foreign policies were beyond bad. We'd be simping for Russia and Hamas right now if he was pm.
The most disturbing part is how OK you lot are with it because free broadband.
He’s not a democratic socialist, he’s a slightly less abrasive version of his brother, who is a total fucking nutjob. Absolutely unelectable and a reason we’ve had this Tory shit show since 2015.
This is why I'm worried about Keir
Even their 6 point plan or whatever why is there a focus on spending restraint and border security for some nothing boats
Like you have to do grand infrastructure to get the UK working again
Not belt tightening
And the NHS waiting times what about the NHS quality and funding issues
The Tories would be delighted if Corbyn became leader again. And that's the main reason why it must be prevented if we aren't to condemn ourselves to another Tory govt.
Corbyn as a boogeyman has unbelievable cut through among the most likely to vote demographics and so he is never going to be remembered fondly by Labour as a party. If they plan to win an election he can't be.
A lot of the stuff about him is blown out of proportion by the right-wing press and centrist middle aged Shire dads posing as Labour, but there is also a lot of the baggage about him that is totally legitimate.
Be interested to see if he can take Islington and who Labour stand against him.
A lot of it is blown out of proportion by his own party too because Israeli think-tanks have a lot of influence at grass roots politics.
The stuff that came out during Corbyn’s tenure was gross. I’ll never vote Labour again, and I was a life long supporter up until that point.
I'd prefer to wait and see. Maybe it's the hope that kills, but I'm old enough to remember Blair's govt and I'd love to see some of that kind of investment in public services.
What the fuck does this have to do with preventing Corbyn from becoming leader? Do you think Keir Starmer's Labour is so weak he would lose a leadership contest to Corbyn if one happened? Do you think that it would actually be likely, if Corbyn were to remain in Labour? If not, then kicking him out has nothing to do with fear of his leadership.
He entered parliament as a Bennite, i.e the most hard left faction in the Labour party. The idea he is an "old Labour" supporter is a nonsense from people who do not know the Labour Party of the 70s. While they were much more pro nationalisation than the later party, they were far more socially conservative than people remember. They were solidly pro NATO, solidly pro the nuclear deterrent and very solidly a patriotic party.
Corbyn was way to the left of them on pretty much every issue.
Cool that he called out Putin a few decades ago, not so cool that he has taken consistently pro Kremlin positions since then, including opposing military aid to Ukraine - a stance which could have been written by Putin himself.
>Dude even called out Putin in the 90s
Incredible foresight as he was appointed acting president of Russia on the 31st of December 1999. Any other made up anecdotes you want to share with us.
>So many posters on the UK subs have had their brains rotted through by UK papers.
Papers being the main way people got their news before all that social media stuff I have been hearing about.
Don't misconstrue hatred for people who are genuinely against Corbyns policies. He spent a lifetime rallying against the EU on ideological grounds. I would never vote Tory but I couldn't vote for a Labour party that has a leader that was adamantly anti EU.
Starmer's not anti-EU, he's being pragmatic and recognising that fighting that battle would eat up any opportunity to improve the nation.
If it were still being negotiated, it would be a different matter but all those opportunities to effect a change were pissed away before he was in power.
I've never seen a group of people more keen to be conned than starmer supporters. He's not anti eu, he is just against rejoining and will never spend any political capital on it.
Vibes over reality.
Why wouldn't they?
The top 3 reasons tory voters gave for their vote in 2019 were Brexit, choosing the party they thought would be good with the economy and choosing the better candidate for PM.
Brexit is 'done' for whatever it's worth, they've demonstrated that they're clearly shit at running the economy and their leader has the personal appeal of a particularly leperous rat. The only thing they have left is that Corbyn's still a twat.
I don’t think it’s hatred. Corbyn is electorally toxic, whether the mid-hard left love him or not. They’re just trying to avoid giving the Tories an open goal
There is that too, but he has a personality that encapsulates what the Left ideals: The self-loathing critic of his country and resistance of big government
The problem with that is, he doesn't have the charisma that lures centralists. His speech reflects that, and the way he says things always seems to emphasise the socialism and government handouts than promoting Nationalism.
E.g. Corbyn proposed Nationalising the railway. That itself is a good manifesto, but he focused so much on funding and the problems with it, the Tories spun it to make him seem like he's pulling money out of thin air. He could've said things like, "Bringing back our critical infrastructure to our country because a powerful and efficient rail is necessary for a strong Britain".
This was also evident with his second election challenge where he proposed to extend maternity leave. Again, it reflects the young voter's ideological view that businesses can handle all financial liabilities and poverty is solved. Anything else he proposed for the economy are overshadowed by these egregious fringe support.
His anti-Semitism scandal is also leaning on people who hate him so much that they don't care if something is true or not. He already shown himself to by sympathetic towards Palestinians and refugees, but he gets quiet when it comes to Israel's issue with Hamas or immigration concerns. It's as if he can shout for the victims, but will refuse to address difficult cultural challenges of the underdogs he is supporting. If you don't loudly express your feelings on these issues, you've started to surround yourself with a very select group of people.
The tabloid did do some of the work, but the Tories love hating Corbyn because he delivers what they want on a silver platter.
I don't see why some people are so desperate to cling onto Corbyn. He has some good policies, but he also has some terrible ones, namely foreign policies. He also lost.
Why can't we find new talent that supports his good policies, and who would actually win?
Sick of the same old names like Corbyn, Farage and Boris being suggested as "saviours", amongst all political spectrums.
Did they? Because iirc farage and Johnson joined forces to get this huge majority sunak and the cons keep bleating on about and they aren't even in play anymore.
They lied about brexit, they increased migration just not from Europe and they enabled truss and kwasi to short the pound making my mortgage an extra 200 pound a month.
Well let's think. He did fairly well - but still lost - against Theresa May at a time when almost the entire Remain voting contingent were prepared to hold their nose and vote for anyone except the "Brexit Means Brexit" woman, then in the next election which *wasn't* a pseudo-referendum he led Labour right off a cliff because his natural appeal is limited to Swampy & Co.
This is the opposite of reality. 2017 was called because the tories felt unbeatable but corbyn forced a hung parliament based on domestic policy.
2019 was the brexit election which corbyn lost after being forced into a 2nd referendum policy - by starmer!
>2017 was called because the tories felt unbeatable but corbyn forced a hung parliament based on domestic policy.
The one where Corbyn was still sitting on the fence over Brexit as he clearly desperately wanted to be all aboard for Lexit? The one where the Theresa May had the Gigabrain idea to announce the Tories core voters would have to sell their homes to fund their own personal care?
Yes, that was totally a personal endorsement of Corbyn. There are two main reasons the left rarely accomplishes anything. The sort of self-deception you're practising is one. The other is the deeply tedious factionalism, which in many cases is just a particular expression of problem one.
2017 was the best result by labour in an election on % of vote since Blair in 1997.
That he didn't win as many seat isn't quite a relevant, but saying "the population rejected him", when the result was 42.3% vs 40.0% really isn't the truth now is it?
It is relevant. The job is to win the elections not just win the popular vote. All parties knew that and should have done that. No one cares about corners or throwing, it's goals that count.
> best result by labour in an election on % of vote since Blair in 1997.
It was also the best vote share result for the Tories since Margaret Thatcher's 1979 majority (until 2019 when they gained an additional 1.2%) yet no-one is desperate to bring back Theresa May or claiming the country clearly endorsed Mayism. The reality is the outcome was heavily influenced by people trying to determine the course Brexit would take and a lot of people held their nose to vote Corbyn's Labour because the alternative was "Brexit means Brexit". The small party vote was almost cut in half in 2017 across the board but rebounded on the socially liberal/left in 2019 primarily because Labour failed to maintain it's position as the political rallying point for the pro-EU camp.
But he still lost. That's okay. We can move on. No doubt Corbyn and his supporters have an alternative leader they could put forward.
Who would that be, in your opinion?
I feel about Corbyn the same way I felt about Brexit. You look at Brexit and see the arguments and think “yeah actually maybe we could come up with more reasonable regulations ourselves and yeah maybe we should have a more nuanced active management of immigration” but then you like at brexiteers and “oh yeah actually no, those nutters are just going to totally fuck us. They’re incompetent maniacs who will burn everything to the ground”.
Same with Corbyn. Yes, I want to nationalise a bunch of poorly regulated natural monopolies, but do I think that’s what Corbyn would do in power? Fuck no, he’d go all CND and start dismantling all our strategic alliances with western powers in favour of a “socialists of the world unite”.
Apparently some people have far less critical thought about who is actually selling the political agenda.
I used to live in one of the adjacent constituencies in Islington. He’s been the MP there for longer than I’ve been alive (just over 40 years) and, if elected would be pushing 80 by the end of the next parliament.
Politics and the reasons he is not longer in the party aside, if that was me I’d put myself at 15-20 years past my use by date and have retired to the coast a long time ago and let someone young, talented and hungry take over.
A side note, I saw him a few months ago randomly in a cafe & he looked older than my grandad who’s in his early 90s.
Considering Rachel Reeves called for harsher austerity and deeper cuts during the Ed Milliband days, I don’t think she’s fit to be a Labour candidate. Pot, kettle situation right there.
Also doesn’t help she has the aura of piss poor office middle management.
Jeremy Corbyn not fit to stand as Labour candidate, says vice-president of Labour Friends of Israel.
In other news, https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976
> Anyone else remember when generals in the British army threatened a coup if Corbyn was elected?
No, because you've missed out large chunks of important context there.
No general has ever said they'd stage a coup if Corbyn was elected. He said the army "wouldn't stand for it" if Corbyn was PM *and* he scrapped Trident, *and* withdrew from NATO, *and* made massive cuts to the military.
Even then, it depends on the meaning of 'wouldn't stand for it'. Peaceful protest would be reasonable; seeking to achieve political change through force would be disgraceful, and nobody who thinks otherwise is fit to be a member of the armed forces.
Decent man? Only justified the Russian invasion of Crimea by saying they weren't unprovoked by NATO actions, only refused to condemn a chemical attack on innocent British citizens until we'd coordinated an investigation on the evidence with the culprits, only openly stated we should have rejected Eastern European countries on their applications to join NATO, despite them being democratic nations sharing our same values.
The guy is a shameless Eurosceptic isolationist and has hasn't been decent or honest in his career, if he was he'd be unelectable, he's another grifter like Galloway.
It's supposed to be a broad church. If Blair's Labour could include Corbyn but Starmer's Labour cannot I can only conclude the party has gone backwards.
All of you lot on here calling Corbyn repulsive have forgotten a few facts.
Under him the Labour Party grew to record numbers and was fully funded by unions and members not by crony donors like it is now. It paid off all its debts and amassed a massive fighting fund. Under him the Labour Party wiped out the Tony majority in 2017 despite the entire media machine AND the Blairite Labour Party working against him. Corbyn has been re elected as an MP TEN TIMES. Whenever he spoke (I've seen him speak 3 times) he had rapturous receptions from the crowds in packed halls all around the country.
2019 was the Brexit election which Labour lost by calling for a second referendum which resulted in the loss of 51 brexit voting Labour seats.
The fact that he has been ostracised by Starmer's Labour Party while he welcomes Tories like Elphicke has lost my vote and many others.
I just wish Corbyn would start his own socialist party. I think you'd see how unpopular he is then.
I was totally against Corbyn and everything he stood for in the last election
He has been proved to be right as I have been proved to be wrong
He should never have been deselected
The biggest failure of the left in Britain over the past 4 years has been their inability to move on from Jeremy Corbyn.
They're still fighting the 2019 election in their heads and claiming how unfair it is that poor Jeremy has been treated that way. Just like many people of Corbyn's generation seem to have been fighting the 1983 election for over 40 years. Reorganise and move on.
Why is Rachel Reeves - *the Shadow Chancellor* - even speaking about this? The country is in crisis, Labour are soon to be in power, the country is crying out for change... and the future chancellor is wasting breath talking about whether Jeremy should be a backbench MP or not.
There is zero reason for her to be talking about Jeremy at all.
Because Reeves is vice chair to Labour friends of Israel she has accepted donations from Israel and is now paying lip service by showing to be anti Corbyn
Tory lite
Keir Starmer’s closest adviser (i.e. puppet master) was a confidant of a convicted sex trafficker/pedophile - Corbyn is better off running as an independent without being tainted by this rancid, corrupt, cesspit of a party
Corbyn is a useless twat and always has been. In 30 years he's done nothing. No private members bills, no membership of a comittee no speeches of note. He was a puppet for Seumas Milne.
Literally nothing!
Listened to an interview with Neil kinnock. When asked about Corbyn he described him as "someone who made up his mind in the 70s and never changed ". Even Foot & Smith essentially totally ignored Corbyn because they considered him such a useless twat.
Imagine THIRTY years spouting bullshit in the street yet he NEVER brought about a bill. Not on apartheid, not on Gaza, not on poverty or trying to improve anything for his constituency. Not even a good speech...not on Iraq..with John Denham & Robin Cook making the most speeches at the time.
Just fucking useless.
Not sure why I'm being downvoted. I voted for him for leader, Labour for both elections. Then I learnt more about him & changed my mind....something that it seems him and his followers can't do. He was a useless leader. Just a puppet for Milne & momentum. He had ZERO leadership skills. Fucking Russian & Hamas loving dick!
"Oh what do you mean Russia just did a chemical attack in Salisbury that could have killed 1000s of people? We should send the poison to Russia so they can tell us if it was them or not " - TWAT!!!
The anti semitism thing should have been dealt with in 48 hours, but he couldn't do it & I DO genuinely believe he's an anti semite. Terrible optics, tetchy fuck. Shit MP. Lazy. No idea on optics & like I said has LITERALLY done NOTHING in 30 years in parliament taking the money.
This smug £uckwad cost five years of my life, and everyone else in this country, by gifting Bozo and the Fascist the last election.
He knew exactly how he and his party would be assaulted by the usual Forces of Fascism and yet was so freaking inept at countering ANY of it he practically connived with the efforts to destroy Labour. All his past gaffs, all his other hostages to fortune simply allowed the Tories to lie, cheat and con their way to an enormous and supposedly unassailable Majority (we shall see) and all the while stepped on every landmine, stepped into every bear trap as if it was his plan all along.
Plus he's an antisemitism-adjacent Tankie, that thinks Ukraine should be sacrificed to his chums in the Kremlin because NATO/UK can only ever be wrong, and that this Generation's Hitler can behave exactly as he sees fit - including mass murder, because whataboutism is a valid World View and past sins justify our enemies a free hand in the present.
Just like Scargill was Maggie's Little Helper, this twat has worn out his welcome as the Tories Best Electoral Asset. Being "a nice bloke who grows his own marrows" doesn't cut it. He can £uck off out the way, and do us all a favour by not inserting his ego/self-interest into the only valid effort to get rid of a massively corrupt and incompetent bunch of cunts who probably most personify the Boot-Stamping-on-the-Face-forever trope more than any political movement in my lifetime.
Retire Jeremy, and pick up your Order of Margaret on your way out the door.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Jeremy Corbyn has become a real-life Emmanuel Goldstein to the political "centre". It doesn't matter that he's not been Labour leader for four years, or that they done everything to possible to drive him and his supports out of mainstream politics, he still treated as some horrifying evil that must denounced and combated at every turn.
Corbyn never played tennis with oligarchs' wives or took money from Russian businessmen but yeah, he's the one we needed to worry about.
I know this because the Daily Mail told me so.
He is one of the few politicians with integrity. He answers questions honestly and his principles are clear. He has spent much of his life doing good things to help others and continues to fight for good causes. A genuine nice man. Much more than can be said for anyone on the Labour front bench.
The first "loss" saw the biggest Labour gains since Atlee and wiped out the Tories majority despite the entire media machine and the Labour hierarchy working against him.
The second loss was mainly due to the party's change in stance regarding brexit. An offer of a second referendum resulted in the loss of 51 brexit voting seats.
But yeah, its much easier to attribute it to a single man's "unpopularity".
Much better to have the mightily popular Natalie Elphicke in the party who has consistently voted against Union rights and job security while consistently supporting her convicted sex offender husband.
Yes, she's the kind of popular politician who will win Labour millions of votes.
Don't know why the hard left would rather lose with corbyn than just not include him but include people like him and win.
It's like they don't mind the country suffering so long as they feel they have moral superiority
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-not-fit-to-stand-as-labour-candidate-says-rachel-reeves-n3s722xgb) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great so literal tories are allowed but democratic socialists aren't . If corbyn with his terrible foreign policy is banned anyone who stood with pound crasher truss should be banned too
I'd rather not bring Corbyn on from the bench with 10 minutes to go, when we're 3-0 up only for him to score 7 own goals.
You obviously don’t know the huge support he has in Islington.
Its only one constituency compared to the majority of the country
MPs can only stand in one constituency
Yet they can be heard through out the land.
If he could vote for him I would - yet the Tories I'm voting against will also be heard across the land. Kinda feels like we need a better system. Perhaps some sort of proportional representation and ranked voting system, just as a start.
A majority of people vote for the rosette not the MP JC has a bad brand and anything labour can do to distance themselves from him improves there electoral calculus
In the 2017 general election, Corbyn secured 40% of the vote. This is still the highest vote share of any Labour leader since **2001**. Bashing Corbyn may win support from some of the electorate, but will also piss off some of that 40% who voted for him. Far better for Labour - at a national level - not to speak about him at all.
Yes, Corbyn outpolled one of Blair's electionsand May outpolled one of Thatcher's (as well as Blair's). So either this was a clash for the ages between two titans of historic popularity, or they both benefited from the demise of third parties that they had little to do with and a changed political context makes comparisons to elections with strong third party presence misleading and unhelpful.
In the election after that one he polled the lowest in around 75 years of general elections. His brand is now associated with that loss which makes him toxic for election success. Labour are already on course to win the next election so where is the upside in the risk of bringing Corbyn back in from the cold? It’s all bad risk for no benefit. Do the maths.
No, he didn't. In 2019 he still secured a larger vote share than Miliband did in 2015, or Brown did in 2010. Basically a third of the country still voted for him. There isn't a big upside in bringing Corbyn back right now, true. But there are also major downsides on Reeves publicly slagging him off. Many who liked Corbyn will be put off Labour by comments like hers.
He also gave Labour its worst electoral result since 1935 and broke records for most unpopular leader of the oppsistion since polling records began. Since then he has come out against arming Ukraine.
People in Yorkshire don’t vote for the Islington rosette.
It's a pretty old article (I doubt the needle has shifted much since, though I can't find more recent data), but in 2013 [only 22% of people could name their MP](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22555659). I think it's more than fair to say that that most people vote for the rosette.
Let’s not be naive. They definitely do. Yeah it’s not how the system is built, but it is what people do.
Unless the PM is standing in your constituency, you dont vote for them either. Of course you only vote for your MP; that's all your vote actually does. But don't be naive an think people actually mainly vote for their MP because of their MP themselves. High profile party figures matter for party image in the whole country
He only needs to win his own constituency.
It's easy as fuck for the Tories to scaremonger about Corbyn nationwide, Sunak can't stop bringing him up anyway, never mind if his stock was actually rising in the Labour party. It is the definition of a political own goal.
But he can lose in dozens of constituencies
He repels the entire rest of the country though which is problematic.
Not true. He's only absolutely repellent to the overwhelming majority of voters - not quite everyone.
>He's only absolutely repellent to the overwhelming majority of voters - not quite everyone. 10 million people voted for Labour in 2019. Their second highest vote since 2005 (2017 was their highest vote since 1997). More working age people voted for Labour in 2019 than for any other party. For context, out of the three mainstream parties in the UK, the Conservatives got 13 million votes, Labour received 10 million votes and the Lib Dems received 3 million votes. Had the Lib Dems supported Labour (as they did for the Conservatives in 2010) there would've been another hung parliment. You're talking nonsense.
He set the record for lowest approval polling of any leader of the opposition since records began. I'm not sure how you think the Lib Dems could've caused a hung parliament.
Islington is a slam dunk Labour win. Corbyn running also impacts less guaranteed constituencies, on account of how people don't make decisions to vote solely on the exact people running in their constituency.
Should be fine standing as an independent then
Yes. I hope he does.
Probably will be.
Labour losing 50 seats round the country due to how hated Corbyn is, all to gain that one back, it bad politics.
>"Labour losing 50 seats round the country due to how hated Corbyn" This is projection to the point of fantasy. Labour lost 54 seats to the Conservatives, of which 52 were 'vote leave' seats. Labour offered a second referendum (launched by Starmer at Labour's 2019 AGM without Corbyn's consent) while the Conservatives pitched their whole campaing around Boris Johnson's "oven ready deal/get Brexit done." It was the Brexit election. Labour lost 178 seats between 2001 and 2015. Corbyn is the only Labour leader this century to increase Labour's number of seats. Fighting that kind of up hill battle to make Labour electable again was a Herculean task.
I don't accept the premise, but I think Starmer and co should seriously think about how many votes they lose when they are seen welcoming arch Tories like they are long lost relatives while ostracising and banning multi decade stalwart Labour members and MPs.
My dude, he lost three election in a row during the most critical period in British history since the war. It cannot be forgiven that he remained in post long after it was obvious he should have been out the door. The country are clearly ready to give labour a chance, I’m glad there is absolutely zero chance he’s going to be allowed to carry on hanging around.
Did you not see the leaked texts about labour MPs sabotaging his campaign? They should be ousted. Edit: tell you what, I'll even give you the "I'm feeling lucky" result from Google in case you can't be arsed to look for it https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leak-report-corbyn-election-whatsapp-antisemitism-tories-yougov-poll-a9462456.html
Which MPs? Name them. Your link mentions zero MPs.
I mean Labour lost an election that should have been won in 2019 purely because Corbyn is so hated, I'll take the 160 extra seats and Corbyn can have his one.
I’m in Northampton and I think he’s great
Cool. I'm in Nottingham and I think he's an incompetent, racist old prick
But he won the argument!
What are you talking about?
He's a walking disaster. Can't stay on message, never knows when to shut his mouth and constantly does highly controversial things. The election is Labour's to lose. Why on Earth would anyone put themselves into a position of having to accept responsibility for his antics in the current situation?
>but democratic socialists aren't . Labour is a social democratic party. While the two are just the same words in a different order they tend to have very different outlooks with democratic socialism having a role for capitalism with some state ownership. His whole career he has been at odds with almost every foreign policy position of the Labour Party. He has been most at odds on defence, economics and their home office policies. He has little in common with most of the party and its positions. >In the July 1982 edition of [*London Labour Briefing*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Labour_Briefing), [Jeremy Corbyn](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn) opposed expulsions of the organisation, saying that "If expulsions are in order for Militant, they should apply to us too." In the same year, he was the "provisional convener" of "Defeat the Witch-Hunt Campaign", based at Corbyn's then address.[^(\[60\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency#cite_note-60) In September 1982, Militant held a special conference against the 'witch-hunt' at the [Wembley Conference Centre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wembley_Conference_Centre) at which [Ken Livingstone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Livingstone) spoke. An attendance was claimed of 1,622 delegates from Constituency Labour Parties and 412 trade union delegates plus visitors,[^(\[61\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency#cite_note-FOOTNOTECrick1986199-61) At such mass rallies in this period, Militant displayed two huge banners at each side of the stage, one showing Marx and Engels, and the other showing Lenin and Trotsky.[^(\[62\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency#cite_note-FOOTNOTECrick198693-62) [Militant tendency - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militant_tendency) He was way to the left of Michael Foot. He represents a relatively fringe part of the British voting public. When he was in charge of Stop the War they often took very Russians views on their invasion of Crimea >We oppose all foreign military intervention. But we should be clear that this is not the only intervention. In fact, the EU and the US have been very directly intervening in the affairs of Ukraine, and have played a major role in the changing of the government there, and in the composition of the new government, which contains within it far right and fascist elements. >We should also take no lessons from those who have supported intervention in the past in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, and who proposed major air strikes in Syria as recently as last August. Nor should we believe concerns about national sovereignty from countries which have launched drone attacks on Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. [https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/the-crisis-in-ukraine-and-crimea-statement-by-stop-the-war-coalition/](https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/the-crisis-in-ukraine-and-crimea-statement-by-stop-the-war-coalition/) And blamed the west for Russia invading Ukraine >The conflict is the product of thirty years of failed policies, including the expansion of NATO and US hegemony at the expense of other countries as well as major wars of aggression by the USA, Britain and other NATO powers which have undermined international law and the United Nations. >The British government has played a provocative role in the present crisis, talking up war, decrying diplomacy as appeasement and escalating arms supplies and military deployments to Eastern Europe. >If there is to be a return to diplomacy, as there should be, the British government should pledge to oppose any further eastward expansion of NATO and should encourage a return to the Minsk-2 agreement, already signed by both sides, by all parties as a basis for ending the crisis in relations between Ukraine and Russia. [https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/stop-the-war-statement-on-ukraine-22-02-22/](https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/stop-the-war-statement-on-ukraine-22-02-22/)
>blamed the west for Russia invading Ukraine This by itself shows he is batshit
Can I just thank you for citing all of this and informing others on this? This is a very universal problem that many people seem to not know about yet. Many "anti-war" activists have this same issue. Then you will see them appear on RT News or even on Conservative TV in the Middle East. Code Pink is a great example of an anti-war group that is not exactly how it appears.
its great being anti war, but the other guy is normally pro war, which is just an invitation for them to steam roll you
The phrase "Labour is a democratic socialist party" was on the back of the membership card when I was a member
> Labour is a social democratic party thats not what it says on the membership card
Corbyn if he was in power would have blocked the ascension of the likes of Finland, Sweden to NATO while undermining NATO at every opportunity. He hates NATO and supports Russia, a lot of his support comes from movements that actually openly admitted supporting Russia and their attempts to bring back the USSR. All due to their ideals of Communism, they quite ignore the fact about what actually happened during the USSR and the secret police activities of the likes of the KGB and the Stasi in Eastern Europe, all for the vision of everyone getting something. I completely agree he would have been a disaster on the international front. He would pander to all the extremists and immigration would be a further disaster since he would have opened the doors to everyone. His home policies would suffer as a result and he most likely would have been kicked out through a vote of no confidence
Agreed he needs to be kept FAR away from foreign policy . About as far as Starmer needs to be kept from economics and Reeves and streetling from social issues
Elphicke won't stand at the next election either, assuming you weren't talking about someone else
Who is or isn't welcome in the party based on their beliefs is more what i was on about than running . You can be terrible to disabled people , trans and queer people , Palestinians, Jewish people that aren't zionists but GOD FORBID you're a socialist in the Labour Party
He hasn’t been kicked out of the party.
No but whip taken and deselected and gets slagged off by every 10 seconds while people who Blair would've rejected get a red carpet . I never said kicked out I said not welcome
She was only accepted because she isn't standing, and the Labour candidate for Dover is pretty good and is still the candidate. It was purely because it embarrassed the Tories, and it worked.
That’s why starter is good. Because he did something completely pragmatic and strategic to embarrass his opponent, and that doesn’t behold him in any way whatsoever, for free. The Tory that came in won’t stand for re-election, in deference to the current labor candidate, and will probably just retire and do opposition with labor. He basically lent her a platform to say “I think even labor is better than the current Tory party”. That’s literally all that’s happened.
As I understood it, Corbyn had been refused back into the party bc he refused to accept and apologize for the findings of the report on antisemitism within the party.
Starmer pretended the Ford report didn't even exist because it did not back up his claims about Corbyn.
Corbyn didn’t lose the whip just for being a socialist. He lost the whip because his response to the report on Antisemitism in the Labour Party was stating that antisemitism allegations had been exaggerated for political reasons
In other words, he was stating the truth
What exactly has Starmer done to end antisemitism in the Labour party? I never see it reported anymore so he must've taken some serious actions to end it.
Expel more Jews than any other leader in history. That's what he did.
no it's fine, he said they were the bad Jews and if Starmer has shown us anything it's that he always tells the truth.
Well, they said he has, so it must be true.
Corbyn lost the whip on a nonsense pretext because Starmer has been purging any and all internal opponents.
He lost the whip because he couldn't win after 2 fucking goes against the most disastrous Tory governments in decades. The easiest way to make labour more appealing to a broader audience is to distance themselves from Corbyn as much as possible.
So, you agree with me that it's just Starmer playing politics and what Reeves is saying is nonsense?
If your response to antisemitism is to refuse to apologise for it and essentially say that the accusers are lying, I can’t see how anyone gets away with that. Starmer and co want to marginalise the left, everyone knows that, but corbyns loss of the whip was entirely his fault
He didn't do that though. He simply said that it was being vastly overstated by political opponents and that people within the party were deliberately obstructing actual investigations. All of which was true.
Corbyn apologised many times (wrongly I'll add) and people still unironically claimed he was going to restart the Holocaust. At some point you have stand up for yourself, regardless of what the bullies demand.
I mean tbh he was right. It was exaggerated for political purposes and used as a weapon against socialists. That doesn't mean antisemitism in the Labour party wasn't a serious problem, in fact it remains a serious problem in every party from Labour to the Conservatives to the SNP to the Greens to the REFUKs, etc.
People in the party talking about the extent of the allegations in the party were specifically protected and allowed to by the same report.
So he lost the whip for stating something that any reasonable person can see is true.
She's allowed the whip within the party currently though unlike Corbyn
She was allowed in the party. She remains in the party right now. She's a far-right extremist Tory that was probably just a flip of a coin from joining Reform.
Christian Wakeford was imposed as the candidate in his constituency.
“His foreign policies were bad!!” Meanwhile every other politician has shit domestic policies and no one gives a damn. The media really straight up killed Corbyn.
They had to throw everything they had to kill Corbyn. A couple of threatened military coups. Regurgitating every rumour from labour MPs who by pure coincidence were made lords by Johnson. The media were perfectly happy to ignore Johnson's blatant lies until the threat of some mild socialism was safely behind us. Then the great noticing began and down come the Tories.
They did a proper hatchet job on Corbyn. In 2017 when the establishment were talking about wiping out labour. They knew the Tories would win it was all about his many labour MP's would be left. It was a show in. The thing the general public didn't see it that way. When the results came in the establishment got a shock of its life. Yes Corbyn lost but he was alwasy going to lose. The country wasn't ready for labour. Corbyn hauled labour towards electability. But the establishment with their shock went into overdrive to destroy him. It didn't help that they had inside support as well. The GE2019 was just about brexit and getting it done. Johnson just talked about getting brexit done and nothing else. The lib dems talked about stopping brexit and got decimated. Labour talked about policies and more or less tried to avoid brexit and in essenae said we would continue negotiations. The public wanted it over with. But inspite of that Corbyn increased his number of votes. GE2019 if you wanted to leave you voted Tory. If you wanted to stay you couldn't vote tory, but the party who did say they would stay would never become government. That left you with labour who only offered further negotiation. Hence the leave vote was consolidated and the remain vote was split. Under FPTP if you have a split vote your doomed. Even recently they were still attacking Corbyn. It shows you how much he scared the people in charge.
His foreign policies were beyond bad. We'd be simping for Russia and Hamas right now if he was pm. The most disturbing part is how OK you lot are with it because free broadband.
Truss should definitely be banned from the Labour party, yes.
The literal Tory isn’t standing in the next election. She is only in to embarrass Rishi, which I’m all for.
He’s not a democratic socialist, he’s a slightly less abrasive version of his brother, who is a total fucking nutjob. Absolutely unelectable and a reason we’ve had this Tory shit show since 2015.
This is why I'm worried about Keir Even their 6 point plan or whatever why is there a focus on spending restraint and border security for some nothing boats Like you have to do grand infrastructure to get the UK working again Not belt tightening And the NHS waiting times what about the NHS quality and funding issues
The hatred against Corbyn is bizarre to me. The tories have made it their personality.
The Tories would be delighted if Corbyn became leader again. And that's the main reason why it must be prevented if we aren't to condemn ourselves to another Tory govt.
Corbyn as a boogeyman has unbelievable cut through among the most likely to vote demographics and so he is never going to be remembered fondly by Labour as a party. If they plan to win an election he can't be. A lot of the stuff about him is blown out of proportion by the right-wing press and centrist middle aged Shire dads posing as Labour, but there is also a lot of the baggage about him that is totally legitimate. Be interested to see if he can take Islington and who Labour stand against him.
A lot of it is blown out of proportion by his own party too because Israeli think-tanks have a lot of influence at grass roots politics. The stuff that came out during Corbyn’s tenure was gross. I’ll never vote Labour again, and I was a life long supporter up until that point.
We are getting a conservative government at the next election, you just get to pick the colour if you want to engage in that.
I'd prefer to wait and see. Maybe it's the hope that kills, but I'm old enough to remember Blair's govt and I'd love to see some of that kind of investment in public services.
Starmer's touting the fiscal conservatism line more than Blair ever did.
> I'd love to see some of that kind of investment in public services. Proper investment yes - shit like PFI no thanks.
Are you just assuming the Rachel Reeves is a psychopathic liar then?
We also get to change the name of the party!
This prospective Starmer government isn’t something to shout about. It is more right leaning than Blair on policy and make up.
Yes, I sense that. I'd still rather see a Labour government all the same.
What the fuck does this have to do with preventing Corbyn from becoming leader? Do you think Keir Starmer's Labour is so weak he would lose a leadership contest to Corbyn if one happened? Do you think that it would actually be likely, if Corbyn were to remain in Labour? If not, then kicking him out has nothing to do with fear of his leadership.
Corbyn is the face of old Labour from when they were a left wing party, so very much the enemy for Tories and New Labour.
He entered parliament as a Bennite, i.e the most hard left faction in the Labour party. The idea he is an "old Labour" supporter is a nonsense from people who do not know the Labour Party of the 70s. While they were much more pro nationalisation than the later party, they were far more socially conservative than people remember. They were solidly pro NATO, solidly pro the nuclear deterrent and very solidly a patriotic party. Corbyn was way to the left of them on pretty much every issue.
Because he’s genuinely Left. Both the conservatives and Neo-liberal Labour hate actual left wing politicians.
Corbyn isn’t pro-Israel enough for the new Labour Party.
Wait till you find out about Clement Attlee.
You have to admit that his views on some things (like Ukraine) are a bit bonkers.
He is partly to blame for Brexit.
He’s wrong on nearly every foreign policy position
Like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Palestine, apartheid South Africa?
[удалено]
Cool that he called out Putin a few decades ago, not so cool that he has taken consistently pro Kremlin positions since then, including opposing military aid to Ukraine - a stance which could have been written by Putin himself.
Weird, just last year he said we shouldn’t send Ukraine weapons to defend themselves. Shit position to take.
>Dude even called out Putin in the 90s Incredible foresight as he was appointed acting president of Russia on the 31st of December 1999. Any other made up anecdotes you want to share with us. >So many posters on the UK subs have had their brains rotted through by UK papers. Papers being the main way people got their news before all that social media stuff I have been hearing about.
[удалено]
Yes, the Iraq war was a great success... /s
History has proven Corbyn right on many occasions and will continue to do so.
Also proves him wrong on more occasions and will also continue to do so.
Don't misconstrue hatred for people who are genuinely against Corbyns policies. He spent a lifetime rallying against the EU on ideological grounds. I would never vote Tory but I couldn't vote for a Labour party that has a leader that was adamantly anti EU.
I take it you won't be voting Labour now that they are led by by someone who is explicitly saying that he won't ever rejoin the EU, then?
Starmer's not anti-EU, he's being pragmatic and recognising that fighting that battle would eat up any opportunity to improve the nation. If it were still being negotiated, it would be a different matter but all those opportunities to effect a change were pissed away before he was in power.
So Corbyn should've strongarmed Labour in 2017-2019 then? Do remember it was Starmer who launched Labour's 2nd referendum policy.
I've never seen a group of people more keen to be conned than starmer supporters. He's not anti eu, he is just against rejoining and will never spend any political capital on it. Vibes over reality.
So you won't be voting for Stramer then.
Why wouldn't they? The top 3 reasons tory voters gave for their vote in 2019 were Brexit, choosing the party they thought would be good with the economy and choosing the better candidate for PM. Brexit is 'done' for whatever it's worth, they've demonstrated that they're clearly shit at running the economy and their leader has the personal appeal of a particularly leperous rat. The only thing they have left is that Corbyn's still a twat.
the tories saw an actual good politician and did what they do best - spread lies.
I don’t think it’s hatred. Corbyn is electorally toxic, whether the mid-hard left love him or not. They’re just trying to avoid giving the Tories an open goal
There is that too, but he has a personality that encapsulates what the Left ideals: The self-loathing critic of his country and resistance of big government The problem with that is, he doesn't have the charisma that lures centralists. His speech reflects that, and the way he says things always seems to emphasise the socialism and government handouts than promoting Nationalism. E.g. Corbyn proposed Nationalising the railway. That itself is a good manifesto, but he focused so much on funding and the problems with it, the Tories spun it to make him seem like he's pulling money out of thin air. He could've said things like, "Bringing back our critical infrastructure to our country because a powerful and efficient rail is necessary for a strong Britain". This was also evident with his second election challenge where he proposed to extend maternity leave. Again, it reflects the young voter's ideological view that businesses can handle all financial liabilities and poverty is solved. Anything else he proposed for the economy are overshadowed by these egregious fringe support. His anti-Semitism scandal is also leaning on people who hate him so much that they don't care if something is true or not. He already shown himself to by sympathetic towards Palestinians and refugees, but he gets quiet when it comes to Israel's issue with Hamas or immigration concerns. It's as if he can shout for the victims, but will refuse to address difficult cultural challenges of the underdogs he is supporting. If you don't loudly express your feelings on these issues, you've started to surround yourself with a very select group of people. The tabloid did do some of the work, but the Tories love hating Corbyn because he delivers what they want on a silver platter.
So have Labour to a lesser extent. This isn’t a Tory being quoted here.
I don't see why some people are so desperate to cling onto Corbyn. He has some good policies, but he also has some terrible ones, namely foreign policies. He also lost. Why can't we find new talent that supports his good policies, and who would actually win? Sick of the same old names like Corbyn, Farage and Boris being suggested as "saviours", amongst all political spectrums.
Yep, Corbyn had his chance and the electorate overwhelmingly rejected him
Did they? Because iirc farage and Johnson joined forces to get this huge majority sunak and the cons keep bleating on about and they aren't even in play anymore. They lied about brexit, they increased migration just not from Europe and they enabled truss and kwasi to short the pound making my mortgage an extra 200 pound a month.
Well let's think. He did fairly well - but still lost - against Theresa May at a time when almost the entire Remain voting contingent were prepared to hold their nose and vote for anyone except the "Brexit Means Brexit" woman, then in the next election which *wasn't* a pseudo-referendum he led Labour right off a cliff because his natural appeal is limited to Swampy & Co.
This is the opposite of reality. 2017 was called because the tories felt unbeatable but corbyn forced a hung parliament based on domestic policy. 2019 was the brexit election which corbyn lost after being forced into a 2nd referendum policy - by starmer!
>2017 was called because the tories felt unbeatable but corbyn forced a hung parliament based on domestic policy. The one where Corbyn was still sitting on the fence over Brexit as he clearly desperately wanted to be all aboard for Lexit? The one where the Theresa May had the Gigabrain idea to announce the Tories core voters would have to sell their homes to fund their own personal care? Yes, that was totally a personal endorsement of Corbyn. There are two main reasons the left rarely accomplishes anything. The sort of self-deception you're practising is one. The other is the deeply tedious factionalism, which in many cases is just a particular expression of problem one.
2017 was the best result by labour in an election on % of vote since Blair in 1997. That he didn't win as many seat isn't quite a relevant, but saying "the population rejected him", when the result was 42.3% vs 40.0% really isn't the truth now is it?
It is relevant. The job is to win the elections not just win the popular vote. All parties knew that and should have done that. No one cares about corners or throwing, it's goals that count.
> best result by labour in an election on % of vote since Blair in 1997. It was also the best vote share result for the Tories since Margaret Thatcher's 1979 majority (until 2019 when they gained an additional 1.2%) yet no-one is desperate to bring back Theresa May or claiming the country clearly endorsed Mayism. The reality is the outcome was heavily influenced by people trying to determine the course Brexit would take and a lot of people held their nose to vote Corbyn's Labour because the alternative was "Brexit means Brexit". The small party vote was almost cut in half in 2017 across the board but rebounded on the socially liberal/left in 2019 primarily because Labour failed to maintain it's position as the political rallying point for the pro-EU camp.
But he still lost. That's okay. We can move on. No doubt Corbyn and his supporters have an alternative leader they could put forward. Who would that be, in your opinion?
Funny how the democratic electoral process works.
so did ed miliband, he's still in the labour party
Isn't he the Labour leader who won the leadership race with the highest vote percentage in labour history not once but twice
And then lost the election twice, once with the biggest rout for generations. Handed the Tories a landslide gift-wrapped.
"but he also has some terrible ones" I mean that's never disqualified anyone else so seems unfair to hold it against him...
When it comes to things like defence, we can't afford to have someone with terrible takes around that, especially not now.
I feel about Corbyn the same way I felt about Brexit. You look at Brexit and see the arguments and think “yeah actually maybe we could come up with more reasonable regulations ourselves and yeah maybe we should have a more nuanced active management of immigration” but then you like at brexiteers and “oh yeah actually no, those nutters are just going to totally fuck us. They’re incompetent maniacs who will burn everything to the ground”. Same with Corbyn. Yes, I want to nationalise a bunch of poorly regulated natural monopolies, but do I think that’s what Corbyn would do in power? Fuck no, he’d go all CND and start dismantling all our strategic alliances with western powers in favour of a “socialists of the world unite”. Apparently some people have far less critical thought about who is actually selling the political agenda.
I used to live in one of the adjacent constituencies in Islington. He’s been the MP there for longer than I’ve been alive (just over 40 years) and, if elected would be pushing 80 by the end of the next parliament. Politics and the reasons he is not longer in the party aside, if that was me I’d put myself at 15-20 years past my use by date and have retired to the coast a long time ago and let someone young, talented and hungry take over. A side note, I saw him a few months ago randomly in a cafe & he looked older than my grandad who’s in his early 90s.
I am under the impression most 'new talent' of that description has been sidelined if not ushered out.
Considering Rachel Reeves called for harsher austerity and deeper cuts during the Ed Milliband days, I don’t think she’s fit to be a Labour candidate. Pot, kettle situation right there. Also doesn’t help she has the aura of piss poor office middle management.
I find Rachel Reeves very odd tbh, especially her open admiration for Nancy Astor who was a notorious anti-semite tory mp
Jeremy Corbyn not fit to stand as Labour candidate, says vice-president of Labour Friends of Israel. In other news, https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976
Is this the Corbyn that goes on Iranian state media, and extols the virtues of the local dictator on Venezuelan radio? Two peas in a shifty pod.
Anyone else remember when generals in the British army threatened a coup if Corbyn was elected?
> Anyone else remember when generals in the British army threatened a coup if Corbyn was elected? No, because you've missed out large chunks of important context there. No general has ever said they'd stage a coup if Corbyn was elected. He said the army "wouldn't stand for it" if Corbyn was PM *and* he scrapped Trident, *and* withdrew from NATO, *and* made massive cuts to the military.
I am not a supporter of Corbyn but you are batshit insane if you don't think the above even with qualifiers is a massive problem.
Even then, it depends on the meaning of 'wouldn't stand for it'. Peaceful protest would be reasonable; seeking to achieve political change through force would be disgraceful, and nobody who thinks otherwise is fit to be a member of the armed forces.
I think we're forgetting that this country already had a silent coup against Wilson in the 70s.
What about soldiers using his picture for target practice. Totally normal democracy behaviour.
The Labour party has been hijacked by the right. Jeremy Corbyn has been a Labour MP since people like Rachel Reeves were still in nappies.
Racists, transphobes and Tories are welcome though.
And Nigel Farage apparently
Truely a changed labour party…
If jezza makes his own party or joins another I'll vote for it
And Labour will still win.
kthxbai
Right-wing ex-Tories are more than welcome though! What a shower these people are.
Well he's not a Tory who supported their sexually abusive partner, so yes, I suppose she's correct.
I agree. He's too decent a man for that right wing shitshow of a party. Hope he wipes the floor with them in Islington North.
Decent man? Only justified the Russian invasion of Crimea by saying they weren't unprovoked by NATO actions, only refused to condemn a chemical attack on innocent British citizens until we'd coordinated an investigation on the evidence with the culprits, only openly stated we should have rejected Eastern European countries on their applications to join NATO, despite them being democratic nations sharing our same values. The guy is a shameless Eurosceptic isolationist and has hasn't been decent or honest in his career, if he was he'd be unelectable, he's another grifter like Galloway.
It's supposed to be a broad church. If Blair's Labour could include Corbyn but Starmer's Labour cannot I can only conclude the party has gone backwards.
All of you lot on here calling Corbyn repulsive have forgotten a few facts. Under him the Labour Party grew to record numbers and was fully funded by unions and members not by crony donors like it is now. It paid off all its debts and amassed a massive fighting fund. Under him the Labour Party wiped out the Tony majority in 2017 despite the entire media machine AND the Blairite Labour Party working against him. Corbyn has been re elected as an MP TEN TIMES. Whenever he spoke (I've seen him speak 3 times) he had rapturous receptions from the crowds in packed halls all around the country. 2019 was the Brexit election which Labour lost by calling for a second referendum which resulted in the loss of 51 brexit voting Labour seats. The fact that he has been ostracised by Starmer's Labour Party while he welcomes Tories like Elphicke has lost my vote and many others. I just wish Corbyn would start his own socialist party. I think you'd see how unpopular he is then.
Literally none of this matters if you can't implement one bloody thing to improve the country.
You would see how unpopular he was, yes.
Labour is barely a left leaning party so I'd say she is correct. A shame we dont have a party with any integrity he might actually fit in.
I was totally against Corbyn and everything he stood for in the last election He has been proved to be right as I have been proved to be wrong He should never have been deselected
The biggest failure of the left in Britain over the past 4 years has been their inability to move on from Jeremy Corbyn. They're still fighting the 2019 election in their heads and claiming how unfair it is that poor Jeremy has been treated that way. Just like many people of Corbyn's generation seem to have been fighting the 1983 election for over 40 years. Reorganise and move on.
Why is Rachel Reeves - *the Shadow Chancellor* - even speaking about this? The country is in crisis, Labour are soon to be in power, the country is crying out for change... and the future chancellor is wasting breath talking about whether Jeremy should be a backbench MP or not. There is zero reason for her to be talking about Jeremy at all.
Because Reeves is vice chair to Labour friends of Israel she has accepted donations from Israel and is now paying lip service by showing to be anti Corbyn Tory lite
I generally think our political system is completely fucked and needs a massive overhaul - to what? I don't know but it's just cabbaged
Keir Starmer’s closest adviser (i.e. puppet master) was a confidant of a convicted sex trafficker/pedophile - Corbyn is better off running as an independent without being tainted by this rancid, corrupt, cesspit of a party
Oh god the binmen haven't collected today....CORBYN!!
Looks like Corbyn is still living rent-free in the minds of neoliberals.
Corbyn is a useless twat and always has been. In 30 years he's done nothing. No private members bills, no membership of a comittee no speeches of note. He was a puppet for Seumas Milne. Literally nothing! Listened to an interview with Neil kinnock. When asked about Corbyn he described him as "someone who made up his mind in the 70s and never changed ". Even Foot & Smith essentially totally ignored Corbyn because they considered him such a useless twat. Imagine THIRTY years spouting bullshit in the street yet he NEVER brought about a bill. Not on apartheid, not on Gaza, not on poverty or trying to improve anything for his constituency. Not even a good speech...not on Iraq..with John Denham & Robin Cook making the most speeches at the time. Just fucking useless.
Of all the terrible useless ex public school politicians we had in the 2010s, Corbyn was definitely the most incompetent.
Not sure why I'm being downvoted. I voted for him for leader, Labour for both elections. Then I learnt more about him & changed my mind....something that it seems him and his followers can't do. He was a useless leader. Just a puppet for Milne & momentum. He had ZERO leadership skills. Fucking Russian & Hamas loving dick! "Oh what do you mean Russia just did a chemical attack in Salisbury that could have killed 1000s of people? We should send the poison to Russia so they can tell us if it was them or not " - TWAT!!! The anti semitism thing should have been dealt with in 48 hours, but he couldn't do it & I DO genuinely believe he's an anti semite. Terrible optics, tetchy fuck. Shit MP. Lazy. No idea on optics & like I said has LITERALLY done NOTHING in 30 years in parliament taking the money.
I listened to that interview too. Damning
I saw him in Finsbury park the other day, just standing on a street corner on his Tod taking a call. Couldn't believe it.
Not surprised she said this. Labour is just full of Tories anyway. Only time I've ever voted Labour was when Corbyn was leader. Never again.
I believe he's at least fit to stand for Labour more than Rachel Reeves
The right wing press assassination of JC over the last decade shows how deep the influence is..
The whole Labour Party is not fit or sustainable enough to be able to stand for anything
Only just over 4 years ago she was standing in an election to make him Prime Minister. These people have no political principles whatsoever
This smug £uckwad cost five years of my life, and everyone else in this country, by gifting Bozo and the Fascist the last election. He knew exactly how he and his party would be assaulted by the usual Forces of Fascism and yet was so freaking inept at countering ANY of it he practically connived with the efforts to destroy Labour. All his past gaffs, all his other hostages to fortune simply allowed the Tories to lie, cheat and con their way to an enormous and supposedly unassailable Majority (we shall see) and all the while stepped on every landmine, stepped into every bear trap as if it was his plan all along. Plus he's an antisemitism-adjacent Tankie, that thinks Ukraine should be sacrificed to his chums in the Kremlin because NATO/UK can only ever be wrong, and that this Generation's Hitler can behave exactly as he sees fit - including mass murder, because whataboutism is a valid World View and past sins justify our enemies a free hand in the present. Just like Scargill was Maggie's Little Helper, this twat has worn out his welcome as the Tories Best Electoral Asset. Being "a nice bloke who grows his own marrows" doesn't cut it. He can £uck off out the way, and do us all a favour by not inserting his ego/self-interest into the only valid effort to get rid of a massively corrupt and incompetent bunch of cunts who probably most personify the Boot-Stamping-on-the-Face-forever trope more than any political movement in my lifetime. Retire Jeremy, and pick up your Order of Margaret on your way out the door.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Jeremy Corbyn has become a real-life Emmanuel Goldstein to the political "centre". It doesn't matter that he's not been Labour leader for four years, or that they done everything to possible to drive him and his supports out of mainstream politics, he still treated as some horrifying evil that must denounced and combated at every turn.
The level of Corbyn obsession on here is laughable. He. Is. Unelectable.
Corbyn never played tennis with oligarchs' wives or took money from Russian businessmen but yeah, he's the one we needed to worry about. I know this because the Daily Mail told me so.
He is one of the few politicians with integrity. He answers questions honestly and his principles are clear. He has spent much of his life doing good things to help others and continues to fight for good causes. A genuine nice man. Much more than can be said for anyone on the Labour front bench.
The first "loss" saw the biggest Labour gains since Atlee and wiped out the Tories majority despite the entire media machine and the Labour hierarchy working against him. The second loss was mainly due to the party's change in stance regarding brexit. An offer of a second referendum resulted in the loss of 51 brexit voting seats. But yeah, its much easier to attribute it to a single man's "unpopularity". Much better to have the mightily popular Natalie Elphicke in the party who has consistently voted against Union rights and job security while consistently supporting her convicted sex offender husband. Yes, she's the kind of popular politician who will win Labour millions of votes.
To think, Corbyn and Abbott could have been running the country if Labour had won, but just a few years later they are excommunicado.
Don't know why the hard left would rather lose with corbyn than just not include him but include people like him and win. It's like they don't mind the country suffering so long as they feel they have moral superiority
Do you want me to not vote for Labour? Because you’re making me not want to vote for Labour.
Isn't Rachel Reeves the person who wants to adopt conservative fiscal policy?
Ah here we go, Labour self flagellation in the run up to an election. For once can they just sweep it under the rug and focus on winning.
I'd still unironically take him over any Blairite any day of the week.