An interesting piece in the Torygraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11768611/Corbyns-rivals-think-hes-a-dinosaur-they-couldnt-be-more-wrong.html

Some of them are starting to see him as a serious threat. Tories, don't vote for Jeremy Corbyn. It won't end well

Calilasseia wrote:But one factor to take into account here, is that Corbyn is already familiar with the tactics. He's been pretty much on the receiving end of Murdoch-inspired demonisation since the 1980s.

He has? My impression is that he's been on the receiving end of overwhelming disinterest, because until this leadership contest came around, he's never been an especially important figure.

Strontium Dog wrote:.... impression is that he's been on the receiving end of overwhelming disinterest, because until this leadership contest came around, he's never been an especially important figure.

Farron was Lib Dem president before he was leader, of course. Corbyn has never so much as run a whelk stall at the TUC summer fete. It's not a criticism, just the reality of the situation.

And anyway this is a thread about Corbyn, do try and stay on topic, there are plenty of other threads where you can indulge your obsession for bashing politicians who attempt to advance the cause of liberty.

Strontium Dog wrote:... there are plenty of other threads where you can indulge your obsession for bashing politicians who attempt to advance the cause of liberty.

It gets to a point when I don't know whether you are taking the piss, or whether you really believe the drivel you spout. It's like Poe's Law for politics.

You're either the living embodiment of liberty or you aren't.

Jeremy Corbyn and Labour definitely aren't, just to be clear.

chairman bill wrote:An interesting piece in the Torygraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11768611/Corbyns-rivals-think-hes-a-dinosaur-they-couldnt-be-more-wrong.html

The right sees Corbyn's ideas as poison? Good. A crop-dusting we will go.

Strontium Dog wrote:You're either the living embodiment of liberty or you aren't.

Jeremy Corbyn and Labour definitely aren't, just to be clear.

Just because you assert these things, doesn't make them true. The thing is, nobody, not even the Labour Party members, are claiming that Labour is the living embodiment of Liberty. We just point and laugh at the idiocy of your claim that the LibDems are.

Now, I also wouldn't claim that Jeremy Corbyn is this living embodiment, but that said, I'd be interested in what you think makes him an enemy of freedom 'n' liberty.

Strontium Dog wrote:You're either the living embodiment of liberty or you aren't.

Are you claiming to be the living embodiment of liberty? Or Tim Farron?

Strontium Dog wrote:You're either the living embodiment of liberty or you aren't.

Jeremy Corbyn and Labour definitely aren't, just to be clear.

Strontium Dog wrote:

Calilasseia wrote:But one factor to take into account here, is that Corbyn is already familiar with the tactics. He's been pretty much on the receiving end of Murdoch-inspired demonisation since the 1980s.

He has? My impression is that he's been on the receiving end of overwhelming disinterest, because until this leadership contest came around, he's never been an especially important figure.

I don't often agree with you but I do on this.

Emmeline wrote:

Strontium Dog wrote:

Calilasseia wrote:But one factor to take into account here, is that Corbyn is already familiar with the tactics. He's been pretty much on the receiving end of Murdoch-inspired demonisation since the 1980s.

He has? My impression is that he's been on the receiving end of overwhelming disinterest, because until this leadership contest came around, he's never been an especially important figure.

I don't often agree with you but I do on this.

Nicola Sturgeon stood for election as an MP in 1992, failed to get elected, stood for a local council in 1992, failed to get elected, failed again in 1995, failed as an MP in Glasgow in 1997, and it wasnt until 1999 she was elected - on the list, not as a constituency MSP - to Holyrood. It was 2007 before she won as a constituency candidate.

And she's now the First Minister, she is certainly the most popular politician in UK, and there's no sign she's losing popularity any time soon. (edit - on a very similar set of policies as Corbyn)

Corbyn's record of election is hardly poor, he's just had out of favour politics since the Blair takeover. I do wonder about the assumption that a guy that's been elected many times in his constituency is unimportant, but new MPs are talked of as potential leaders, like that former Director of Prosecutions guy.

ronmcd wrote:

Emmeline wrote:

Strontium Dog wrote:

Calilasseia wrote:But one factor to take into account here, is that Corbyn is already familiar with the tactics. He's been pretty much on the receiving end of Murdoch-inspired demonisation since the 1980s.

He has? My impression is that he's been on the receiving end of overwhelming disinterest, because until this leadership contest came around, he's never been an especially important figure.

I don't often agree with you but I do on this.

Nicola Sturgeon stood for election as an MP in 1992, failed to get elected, stood for a local council in 1992, failed to get elected, failed again in 1995, failed as an MP in Glasgow in 1997, and it wasnt until 1999 she was elected - on the list, not as a constituency MSP - to Holyrood. It was 2007 before she won as a constituency candidate.

And she's now the First Minister, she is certainly the most popular politician in UK, and there's no sign she's losing popularity any time soon. (edit - on a very similar set of policies as Corbyn)

Corbyn's record of election is hardly poor, he's just had out of favour politics since the Blair takeover. I do wonder about the assumption that a guy that's been elected many times in his constituency is unimportant, but new MPs are talked of as potential leaders, like that former Director of Prosecutions guy.

I'm sure I'd heard of Nicola Sturgeon for several years as a rising star of the SNP before she became 1st Minister. She's shown potential as a leader for some time - Jeremy Corbyn has not.

True, enough, but he's shown it now, which is what matters. Bernie Sanders wasn't a potential leader either until this year. Corbyn is certainly more of a leader than three careerist nonentities who didn't even have the guts to vote against the orders of a temp!

Beatsong wrote:Keir Starmer

That's the bloke

Matt_B wrote:Sanders is only really a potential leader in the sense that he'd be the next in line if Hillary Clinton fell from grace. Corbyn actually has a far better chance than that, thanks to the paucity of talent on the Labour front bench.

Sanders' star is on the rise: he's come from nowhere (well, Vermont, apologies to the Green Mountain state, please don't shoot ) to become a serious contender, and may well beat Clinton, as Obama did in '08.

Still, if you're going to throw around terms like "careerist nonentites" when was the last time Corbyn had a job outside politics?

Probably when he volunteered in Jamaica for a few years, but that misses the point: Corbyn isn't a careerist in the sense that he follows the crowd to climb the greasy pole. He's been a "rebel" (i.e., doing the job he's actually elected to do) for years.