British Version of Bernie Sanders Leading Race To Lead Labour Party - Polidicks

Alternate Headlines: Marxist Cheese Enthusiast Threatens Democratic Hostile Takeover of Labour Party, Kill Tony Blair Candidate for Leftist Party Proposes Leftist Platform, Is Ridiculed [img]http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/pictures/462xAny/8/9/5/18895_Jeremy-Corbyn-eyes-victory.jpg[/img] [i]Above: Corbyn Eyes Victory[/i] [quote][url]http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/11/yougov-poll-jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-should-we-trust[/url] A poll last month showed Corbyn 17 points ahead of Burnham in the first round, and on course to win by 53% to 47% after second preferences were taken into account. Tuesday’s poll suggests Corbyn has extended his lead, and that he now has 53% of first-preference votes, meaning that [b]he could win outright on the first ballot[/b].[/quote] [quote][url]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-leadership-battle-jeremy-corbyn-6313190[/url] Bookmakers are united in predicting a Jeremy Corbyn victory in the race to be the next Labour leader. [...] [b]Paddy Power has already paid out £100,000 on bets.[/b][/quote] Context: The Labour Party is holding an election to select their next leader (ie candidate for Prime Minister in 2020), and an old man fro London has electrified the Labour base more than the other three candidates could have ever hoped. Everyone has declared that he is a loon who will make Labour unelectable. So what's happening? How is this nutcase winning the race to replace someone who was already considered too far to the left (Ed Milibland)? 1. He is not a nutcase. In fact mainstream economists agree Corbyn's stance against austerity is completely logical. Ed Miliband lost partly because he gave legitimacy to right-wing views by vowing to limit immigration and continue austerity. Corbyn is not too far to the left of Labour, he is simply bringing Labour back to being an actual opposition party to the Tory government, instead of the Blairite vision of being "Tory-lite". 2. Look at this picture: [img]http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article6288120.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/Labours-candidates-for-Leader-and-Deputy-Leader.jpg[/img] Pictured here are three sad sacks of human flesh pretending to have feelings about poor people, and one old man with a lot of pent up rage and stubble. No other candidate has impressed Labour voters. Even Corbyn's enemies in the right-wing press will admit this. What is going to happen when Labour is led by Corbyn? Can he possibly win in 2020? Can he even last until then?

Corbyn's been an MP for decades and was a good friend of Tony Benn. If there's any chance of a socialist party having any kind of sway in government, he's probably it.

Corbyn's the only person in the picture who looks like leader material, appears to have strong principles and isn't willing to just bend over and present his arse to the Tories. The other 3 are non-entities noone gives a shit about. Yvette Cooper's probably the only person most people have heard of in passing but what has she done? A brief glance over her wikipedia profile will tell you all she has ever done of note is push forward the HIPS scheme, avoid criticism on it, and watch it fail as after 11 years it still hasn't materialised.

Isn't Bernie Sanders a baseline politician in other countries?

He's shared a platform with a literal Holocaust denier and conspiracy theorist Paul Eisen. He's referred to Hamas and Hezbollah as his 'friends' and said that Hamas represented an important platform for positive social change in Palestine, and other 'anti-zionists' whose beliefs include spreading the ideas of Jews literally eating babies and using them in their bread. He believes in 'spheres of influence', accuses NATO of aggression in expanding into East Europe, and says that it was wrong to allow Poland to join NATO, and excuses the invasion of Ukraine with comments about the 'borders ebbing and flowing in history' or some rubbish. He's a key member of Stop the War, a Putin-appeasing group aka Useful Idiots Inc./The Enemy of the West is Our Friend. He tries to make the point that he meets with these extremists in order to promote peace, but there's a difference between meeting with them professionally and behaving as he does. He tries to hold up Venezuela as a success story of socialism. His economic policies are delusional, expecting to raise £120 billion off of the tax gap - Somehow. Even though the inevitable higher taxes will only increase the tax gap and offering no explanation on how to end it. He focuses intensely on anti-austerity politics - Forgetting that was a battle lost and finished in the 2010 and 2015 elections - And in 2020, it will be expected that the next government will run a surplus. He wants to print money to finance himself. He says he will reopen COAL MINES. He wants to re-nationalise without compensation. He wants to isolate Britain from the globalised world and simply stick his fingers in his ears rather than facing up to reality. He's an unreformed socialist from 1983 and will be deservedly destroyed by voters, everywhere except perhaps the north of England. He will not beat the SNP in Scotland, nor will he beat the Tories in middle-England. He will even lose many seats in London as it has been seen that there lies the centre of Kendall support. Not that he will actually make it to the next election, with the support of only 20 MPs. Comparing this guy to Sanders is insulting to Sanders. [editline]25th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE]1. He is not a nutcase. In fact mainstream economists agree Corbyn's stance against austerity is completely logical. Ed Miliband lost partly because he gave legitimacy to right-wing views by vowing to limit immigration and continue austerity. Corbyn is not too far to the left of Labour, he is simply bringing Labour back to being an actual opposition party to the Tory government, instead of the Blairite vision of being "Tory-lite". [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.cityam.com/222952/no-leading-economists-are-not-supporting-jeremy-corbyn-s-far-left-agenda[/url] And that version of Labour cannot do anything as it cannot win elections. Ed Miliband was -perceived- as being too left wing by voters, regardless of reality. When looking at the views of those who voted Tory over Labour and those who didn't vote, they generally state that Labour is for 'helping the scroungers' in some sense - ie. It was seen that Labour was only the party of the minority interests - Which is rather nice, but not something you can win an election off. Corbyn not too far to the left of Labour? Okay, say that to the 200 MPs who are to the right of Corbyn - Despite left-wing Miliband plants in safe seats. I know that just because you have a significant moral superiority over being correct on Iraq you feel that the Blair era did nothing for people. But the reality is between 1979 and 1997, Labour passed no laws to help the people you want to help. Not one. Under Blair? The minimum wage, investment in schools, freedom of information, investment in NHS and so on occurred. There's no point, even if you believe in it, fantasising about socialism in a centre-right country if you actually want to be a party of government and a party of change.

Maybe if the Labour party hadn't essentially turned into 'the Tories but kind of a little bit different on one or two policies', there'd be more than one candidate who was actually left-wing. All three other candidates essentially envisage the exact same thing and yet state that their very slightly different party will be better than everyone else's slightly different party. I don't think Corbyn is perfect- his association with anti-Semitic groups is definitely concerning even if it doesn't seem to have manifested much in his politics- but at the very least, he shows that Britain is willing to consider left-wing parties in the same way that Nigel Farage did for the right.

Hmm... I wonder why the Tories who want to actually win elections and the Labour MPs who actually want to win elections are similar in policy... Could it be, shockingly, that in the UK, the centre-ground is popular, and both want to occupy it to win? Who could have thought. The last time Britain was able to 'consider' a left-wing candidate was when 1983 happened. Except now, there is no backing from large groups of Labour MPs for Corbyn, a much smaller Labour heartland to work with, he, unlike Benn and Foot, has no gravitas within the party, and the unions are weaker than they have ever been. A few thousand people showing up at Corbyn rallies, whilst impressive and showing his grassroots backing, does not show that he has the support of the country at a whole. And given that he can't even gain the support of his own party on his policies, and the fact he will be TORN TO SHREDS (I mean, they labelled Miliband as 'Red Ed') by the Tories, the country will not consider a left-wing candidate.

I like Corbyn. He seems like a genuine guy who truly believes in what he thinks. I kind of liked Milliband too to be honest. The problem with Corbyn is that in my opinion he's just too far left for anyone to vote. And in some places he's idiotic (Getting rid of Trident, the maximum-wage thing for example). And if he doesn't get in the Tories will again. And the other Labour candidates seem to false for anyone to vote. Kind of a catch-22 for Labour as a party.

He's basically the only labour candidate that's actually left wing, the other 3 want to go more right wing to try and get those Ukip/tory voters.

[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;48536695]He's basically the only labour candidate that's actually left wing, the other 3 want to go more right wing to try and get those Ukip/tory voters.[/QUOTE] How dare they try and win votes off of people who didn't vote for them?! Heresy!

If I were British I'd vote Corbyn on the spot, seems like a great candidate for leader and recent opposition leaders/prime ministers are running for the hills because they were center-right Funnily enough the Australian Labor Party needs exactly the same thing

Corbyn actually wants to do what he says, some of it might be far-fetched but he's defiantly not just another generic politician. [editline]25th August 2015[/editline] Oh and the "put tony blair on trial for war crimes" stuff is a bit stupid.

I really don't see how a left wing extremist compares to Sanders.

[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;48536726]how is he a british version of Bernie Sanders wtf op[/QUOTE] He's a bit unorthodox I guess? That's pretty much it.

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48536536]He's shared a platform with a literal Holocaust denier and conspiracy theorist Paul Eisen. He's referred to Hamas and Hezbollah as his 'friends' and said that Hamas represented an important platform for positive social change in Palestine, and other 'anti-zionists' whose beliefs include spreading the ideas of Jews literally eating babies and using them in their bread. He believes in 'spheres of influence', accuses NATO of aggression in expanding into East Europe, and says that it was wrong to allow Poland to join NATO, and excuses the invasion of Ukraine with comments about the 'borders ebbing and flowing in history' or some rubbish. He's a key member of Stop the War, a Putin-appeasing group aka Useful Idiots Inc./The Enemy of the West is Our Friend. He tries to make the point that he meets with these extremists in order to promote peace, but there's a difference between meeting with them professionally and behaving as he does. He tries to hold up Venezuela as a success story of socialism.[/QUOTE]Man, fuck that guy. People who support spheres of influence should be put in a sphere of turds.

[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;48536726]how is he a british version of Bernie Sanders wtf op[/QUOTE] he's old

He isn't even that left wing... the only reason he seems that way is because of the veer to the right over the past few decades thanks to neoliberalism and Mr Blair and his ilk. There is almost no point having any elections if both political parties in for any kind of chance of winning are pretty much the same... 'Weathervane' politicians are waste of space - we need politicians with principles and Mr Corbyn, while I don't consider myself a supporter of his, seems to have them.

[QUOTE=Mabus;48536717]I really don't see how a left wing extremist compares to Sanders.[/QUOTE] I can't say I've seen him out blowing busses up or anything. Are you sure extremist is the word you're looking for? He's just quite far left and compared to any of the current leadership, that's quite a radical position to hold. But in no way is he an extremist.

He's basically the only labour candidate that's actually offering real labour party policies isn't he? The rest, as far as I can tell, are nobodies and might as well morph into one creature and join the cons. Economists seem to be backing him, which isn't really a surprise. He's no extremist at all; his policies are really mainstream economics, what you've experienced in the UK is some weird anti-logical void of austerity which is what you don't want in times like this. [url]http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/08/23/uk-britain-politics-labour-idUKKCN0QS0OZ20150823[/url]

[QUOTE=Antlerp;48536877]He's basically the only labour candidate that's actually offering real labour party policies isn't he? The rest, as far as I can tell, are nobodies and might as well morph into one creature[/QUOTE] go and join the SWP if you want a party with the policies of Corbyn, instead of forcing the opposition to be unelectable The other candidates have been weak. But that doesn't make Corbynism right. [editline]25th August 2015[/editline] Also: [url]http://www.cityam.com/222952/no-leading-economists-are-not-supporting-jeremy-corbyn-s-far-left-agenda[/url]

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48536886]go and join the SWP if you want a party with the policies of Corbyn, instead of forcing the opposition to be unelectable The other candidates have been weak. But that doesn't make Corbynism right. [editline]25th August 2015[/editline] Also: [url]http://www.cityam.com/222952/no-leading-economists-are-not-supporting-jeremy-corbyn-s-far-left-agenda[/url][/QUOTE] Just vote for the Conservatives then if you don't want Corbyn's policies? With Corbyn in power, you can actually have an opposition, meaning: to oppose the existing regime. Right now there isn't one, is there? SWP is for the Scots, no Englishman would vote for them would he? So far, Labour appears to just be another Conservative party, so you might as well vote Conservative if you like them right now.

SWP = Socialist Workers Party not SNP Yeah, bLIAR was literally just TORY-LITE!! He accomplished nothing for the poor!

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48536977]SWP = Socialist Workers Party not SNP Yeah, bLIAR was literally just TORY-LITE!! He accomplished nothing for the poor![/QUOTE] you wot mate? I don't know why you bought up "bLIAR", but, he certainly did lie about one big thing didn't he?

Yes, but shockingly Iraq doesn't undo all of the good that was accomplished under him. In fact all of the policies that you are crying about the Tories undoing under austerity were pretty much begun or expanded under him and Brown.

I do, at the very least, find it bizarre that people are willing to dismiss left-leaning parties for very minor reasons ("The Greens want to get rid of Trident!" as if that would ever be possible unless they won a vast majority of seats, "The Lib Dems betrayed students!" as if they're still not one of the best parties in terms of their policies for young people) and yet are willing to forgive Labour or the Tories for any number of past events because hey, you can't judge them. English lefties/ people who are anti-austerity are basically fucked at the moment, there's nobody we can vote for any more. On the bright side, the Lib Dems do show a sign of being a slightly more centrist left-leaning party, but they're dealing with the fallout of a single made 5 years ago amongst people who don't give a fuck in any other situation (see how few people cared when the Tories got rid of maintenance grants last month- it was in the papers for a day then disappeared from public notice). But I'm sure that if they begin to get popular again, the newspapers will all start talking about what he did 7 years ago and how he was like this and that. Maybe I'm just jaded because I live in the South, which is basically entirely Conservative now.

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;48537048](see how few people cared when the Tories got rid of maintenance grants last month- it was in the papers for a day then disappeared from public notice).[/QUOTE] Woah holy fuck did this really happen and how the fuck was there no noticeable backlash? That tiny amount maintenance grants provide is super useful for those of us who were poor as fuck anyway, and it is such a small amount that there is no way it was costing the government enough to be a headache. Sounds like cutting for the sake of cutting rather than cutting to actually have an impact.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;48537080]Woah holy fuck did this really happen and how the fuck was there no noticeable backlash? That tiny amount maintenance grants provide is super useful for those of us who were poor as fuck anyway, and it is such a small amount that there is no way it was costing the government enough to be a headache. Sounds like cutting for the sake of cutting rather than cutting to actually have an impact.[/QUOTE] They turned them into loans. I really don't understand why.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;48537080]Woah holy fuck did this really happen and how the fuck was there no noticeable backlash? That tiny amount maintenance grants provide is super useful for those of us who were poor as fuck anyway, and it is such a small amount that there is no way it was costing the government enough to be a headache. Sounds like cutting for the sake of cutting rather than cutting to actually have an impact.[/QUOTE] It was part of the budget straight after the Election. I guess the government want to show that it wasn't the Lib Dems who didn't give a fuck about students. [editline]25th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=FlashMarsh;48537092]They turned them into loans. I really don't understand why.[/QUOTE] Maintenance loans have interest. Combined with their longer-term payoff plan from 2010, it essentially means more money in the long run as long as the students can actually afford to pay the loans off in any reasonable amount.

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;48537192]It was part of the budget straight after the Election. I guess the government want to show that it wasn't the Lib Dems who didn't give a fuck about students. [editline]25th August 2015[/editline] Maintenance loans have interest. Combined with their longer-term payoff plan from 2010, it essentially means more money in the long run as long as the students can actually afford to pay the loans off in any reasonable amount.[/QUOTE] Offtopic, but that's the issue with UK student loans. They're unpayable - But unlike the US where they are very harsh if you don't pay, in the UK if you are not successful you simply will not have to pay. In effect the Conservatives have created an enormous student loan bubble of unpayable debt because the loans are large enough to be unpayable - But not organised in a way (not that I would want this to be the case) to make people pay. They're saving money in the short term but building up the potential of a long term disaster.

Shock horror people are tired of red torys