He looks like he could have a ruck. I quite like him. I also like that he kicked off at that **** on C4 news.
[img] 
[/img]
He'd make a better leader than any of the last three (at least)
Just signed up to (genuinely) vote.
That young people are not voting should also not be dismissed - its a major disaster.
yes, mainly for them. Look at how Gideon stuffed the under 25s in the latest budget.
[img] 
?oh=1f285b0e7cc0906ecd0c2b3795acd07f&oe=564F99B6[/img]
you have to agree with a statement that you genuinely support the aims of Labour in order to join up
You would have thought they might be better off asking their potential leaders to sign that...
You would have thought they might be better off asking their potential leaders to sign that...
Yep, pretty sure Milliband didn't have a clue what Labour stood for. I certainly don't know what Harriet Harmen stands for.
I certainly don't know what Harriet Harmen stands for.
self interest, self obsession, looking good in blue
In the meantime the LibDems have just elected someone from the left of the party to lead them - so that's the LibDems doomed then.
And the LibDems had done so well with their lurch to the right under Nick Clegg.......the electorate seemed to love it.
For opposition leader ... yes.
The question is will he be as good as Pol Pot?
You city people will be ploughing fields ...
😆
In the meantime the LibDems have just elected someone from the left of the party to lead them - so that's the LibDems doomed then.
Do the Libdems still have a left and a right wing? It's a bit like my semi-detached having an east and west wing.
Actually, having watched Corbyn taking apart that buffoon from C4 News, I quite like him. Articulate, properly passionate, not fake Milliband passionate. He'll be good at PMQs. Obviously, not so keen on any Year Zero policies, but I'm there to be persuaded. 🙂
The Mash approve
I go do something else for a little while and come back to find that I am a £3 Tory-Beast, molesting the poor, innocent Labour Party. 😳
I love the ego filled honesty of the Tory £3 voters - the willingness to tell us all what shallow, dishonest and utterly self centred people they are.
I am so self-centred that I am giving them 3 of my hard earned pounds.
- Lying to screw up an election (you have to make agree with a statement that you genuinely support the aims of Labour in order to join up).
Is democratically voting for a socialist, red in tooth and claw, to be leader of the increasingly left-wing party really against the aims of the party of Kier Hardy and Tony Benn ? (not to mention Jim Devine, David Chaytor, Eric Illsley, Dennis McShane, Margaret Moran and Elliot Morley )
- Trying to undermining the rights of others to be represented by anyone other than a right wing party.
Strange, I thought that I had every right to give them my money and help choose a leader - I don't see how having a vote undermines the rights of others - perhaps you could explain that ?
- Attempting to destroy a legitimately elected opposition party by underhand means.
Would that be the party of the Dodgy Dossier? The £1 million bung to allow tobacco adertising to continue on Formula One ?
Hear the Mighty £3 Tory roar!
::squeak::
Perhaps best not to use the Telegraph link...
The direct link on the Labour website is
https://supporters.labour.org.uk/leadership/1
Cranberry, maybe you are right. You are perhaps giving people more choice in future, even if that is not your actual intent. Roll on with your £3 🙂 Its been such a long time since so many of us had any party worth voting for.
Have a nice night, off to bed myself now.
Jezzas brother is Piers Corbyn..the source of many of Daily Express bonkers weather forecast headlines
wiw win --three pound to vote--money on at the bookies , pays for itself and we get a leader who is princpled, and offers hope for millions of poor people .....
there is an irony in 'making' money and getting a socialist elected for leader of a revisionist party that seeks to appease capitalists more than the tories....
Interesting blog post on this;
[url= http://barristerblogger.com/2015/07/17/committing-electoral-fraud-to-back-jeremy-corbyn-is-a-bad-idea/ ]http://barristerblogger.com/2015/07/17/committing-electoral-fraud-to-back-jeremy-corbyn-is-a-bad-idea/[/url]
Well worth a read if you have a couple of minutes.
wiw win --three pound to vote--money on at the bookies , pays for itself and we get a leader who is princpled, and offers hope for millions of poor people .....
😉
Transient hope or real hope - we shall see. What's going on elsewhere suggests more of the former frankly.
a load of tripe --that blog --full of lazy cliches--wonder if he does copy for daily fail writers as well----i'm voting corbyn because i agree with his stance --and millions of others do as well--but in this stage managed 'democracy' it is usually denied us a voice in the puppet show..
I think the blog is about those voting for him because they think his beliefs are a bad thing for the labour party electorally, not those who agree with his views?
voting corbyn because i agree with his stance -
This is a good thing - tempted to do so myself.
Voting for him because you support another party and think his election will nuke the labour party into oblivion to your preferred party's benefit is a bad thing not only because to do so you are being fraudulent but also for the general health of democracy. That was the thrust of the blog wasn't it?
I think it'd be a novelty to actually have a party leader who doesn't just blindly accept the neo-liberal consensus, like its been passed down from god on tablets of stone, and actually offers an alternative. I'm so frigging bored with them all unquestioningly offering more of the same, with a different coloured tie. It'd just be nice to hear someone voice an alternative.
It seemes to have gone dowwn well north of the border last time out. I'm sure it'd go down equally as well in plenty of other places too
Listened to whatever-his-name-is who's just been elected Lib Dem leader this morning ... "blah blah blah... fiscal responsibiliy..... blah blah blah... hardworking families... blah blah blah... balancing the books..... blah blah blah... fiscal responsibiliy..... blah blah blah... hardworking families... blah blah blah... balancing the books..... blah blah blah... fiscal responsibiliy..... blah blah blah... hardworking families... blah blah blah... balancing the books............"
Oh just **** off!!!!!
Hmm, well, to tackle the blogs points - the declaration that one supports Labours aims is quite simple to pin down - the Labour Party constitution sets out its aims in clause iv:
[i]The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.[/i]
I'd suggest that most tories could happily sign up to that, they just have a fundementally different belief in the best ways to go about achieving it, indeed, one could argue that in redrafting the clause in 1995 it was specifically worded in this wooly fashion, so that it could attract former conservative supporters.
As for the point on ''not a supporter of any organisation opposed to" surely that is a double edged sword, one recalls Ken Livingstone being thrown out of the party because he stood against it, would you suggest that Ken should not be able to join and vote? George Galloway? Vince Cable? Shirley Williams? Are they to now be excluded from the democratic processes of the Labour Party too? How about members of the socialist Labour Party? Can they take part in the election? former Labour supporters who joined The Lib Dems, are they out? those who went from Labour to UKIP? How about members of the Communist Party or Militant? CPGB(ML)? green? Can they vote? How about 'natural' Labour supporters who voted SNP because they thought the Labour Party had abandoned them? Surely they have become 'supporters of an organisation opposed to Labour'?
I'm inclined to think that the 'political left' probably should have learnt of the danger of "purges"...
As for the point on ''not a supporter of any organisation opposed to" surely that is a double edged sword, one recalls Ken Livingstone being thrown out of the party because he stood against it, would you suggest that Ken should not be able to join and vote? George Galloway? Vince Cable? Shirley Williams? Are they to now be excluded from the democratic processes of the Labour Party too? How about members of the socialist Labour Party? Can they take part in the election? former Labour supporters who joined The Lib Dems, are they out? those who went from Labour to UKIP? How about members of the Communist Party or Militant? CPGB(ML)? Can they vote? How about 'natural' Labour supporters who voted SNP because they thought the Labour Party had abandoned them? Surely they have become 'supporters of an organisation opposed to Labour'?
Well quite obviously most of them shouldn't, no (Although as Ken is a member of the party's national executive committee I suspect he might be voting 😉 ). It's not really that hard. The vote has been extended to 'registered supporters'. The clue is in the word 'supporter'. I don't think it would be unreasonable to consider 'registered supporters' to be current Labour party voters than aren't actually signed up members of the Labour party. That was the intent at any rate. I'm not entirely sure why you think gorgeous George or Vince as members of other political parties who stood against Labour candidates at the last election would consider themselves 'registered supporters' of the Labour party and would want to vote and denying them a vote would be some huge breach of democracy.
Chukka Umunna and Tristram Hunt on Newsnight last night illustrated perfectly why Jeremy Corbyn is proving popular. Everything they said was about being tactical and thinking 'how can we win?'
Don't they realise that in order to win a general election the Labour party will actually have to stand for something and be about something?
To paraphrase Walter Sobchak, say what you will about the Tories but at least they're clear about what they stand for, however unpleasant, intolerant, uncaring, selfish and nakedly greedy that might be. Since Blair's misadventures in the middle east, Labour really haven't stood for anything at all and that's why not enough people have voted for them.
its a lazy piece of copy,been aired elsewhere, what is funny that something that started out as an afterthought to have atoken left candidiate,has exposed the moribund and clueless offerings from the blairite rump , that is over represented in the parlimentary section but not among activists --history tells us that thinks can change very quickly and what was unbeliavable last week becomes accepted by many a week later...i dont know how many of you have read marx and engels -communist manifesto written in 1848 -its a very easy read , not long , but would possibly alarm some in its accuracy....
Chukka Umunna and Tristram Hunt on Newsnight last night illustrated perfectly why Jeremy Corbyn is proving popular. Everything they said was about being tactical and thinking 'how can we win?'
[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/tristram-hunt-ducks-out-of-leadership-race-after-discovering-hes-a-tory-2015052198479 ]indeed[/url]
They're just Tories, with different coloured ties, who perhaps aren't going to look like they're actively enjoying it quite so much as they shaft the poor to line the pockets of their rich friends.
I'd like a labour party back that doesn't just shrug from its comfortable upper middle class ivory towers, and just accept that that's just the way things are
Everything they said was about being tactical and thinking [s]'how can we win?'[/s] 'how can we attract the broadest level of support for the party'
one leads to the other....
@Convert - on that basis, you sucessfully rule out the possibility of attracting lost voters - eg. The natural Labour supporters who went to the SNP and UKIP.
Chukka Umunna and Tristram Hunt on Newsnight last night illustrated perfectly why Jeremy Corbyn is proving popular. Everything they said was about being tactical and thinking 'how can we win?'Don't they realise that in order to win a general election the Labour party will actually have to stand for something and be about something?
I thought the same - Umunna's comment about "boxing clever" was profoundly depressing for those of us on the left. Whether you agree with Corbyn or not, he has the courage of his convictions and is passionate, and just perhaps that is why so many are warming to him, given the bland, uniform mediocrity of his competitors.
apparchniks with no beleifs other than self interest -career politricks, that is what fills most of the benches in that crumbling edifice dahn saaf....the difference is that the tory side actually run tings,so its slightly less hypocritical of them --the so called liberal and labour puppets seem to have been voiced in a chinese workshop with random messages....as for burnham -he even looks like a puppet!
@Convert - on that basis, you sucessfully rule out the possibility of attracting lost voters - eg. The natural Labour supporters who went to the SNP and UKIP.
True (and I guess I am in that camp as I voted green at the last election as Labour in my constituency was a wasted vote and I like the green candidate personally). Maybe it should include those who intend to come back (with the right leader in charge). Either way it excludes active members of other parties. To be honest though, any labour voter who went to UKIP can stay there as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather not be involved in any political party that someone even remotely attracted to UKIP could find a home.
Is Corbyn the natural successor to Tony Benn?
I would have thought that Hilary Benn was the natural successor to Tony Benn...
and let's not forget what support for Tony and a shift to the left did to the party in the Eighties...
Its not the eighties though. The political lanscape is now unrecognisable from then.
Lets be honest... the present Tory-light Labour party is totally unelectable. Its a pointless irrelevence. So to just continue with the more of the same offered by the main candidates isn't going to get them anywhere. Why go for a pale, hand-wringing imitation, when you can have the full-blooded, cruel, nasty, heartless real thing?
So rediscovering some left-leaning principles, or any principles at all, would be a start IMHO.
I wish Corbyn would form a real left wing party. He has a cat in bells chance of moving the LP significantly from the centre ground.
Let's have a genuine socialist party and then we can see how much genuine support there is and what impact it can make.
Otherwise like everyone from Blair, Hollande, even Tsipras you will continue to see supposedly LW parties merely implemented the policies that all other parties would implement. Think which of the above is implementing the most aggressive austerity plan, then which one is banging in most about supply side policies - all traditionally associated with right of centre parties?!?
The alternative scenario is that this will lay bare the actual impotence of politicians and governments. In truth they do not lead. They react. Perhaps this whole nonsense in Europe and elsewhere will wake us all up to the fact that governments should and do have limited roles.
everyone thinking that Corbyn is the messiah and that a left wing labour government can surely only follow his ascension is delusional.
The only true question is whether the "left" want a strong-voiced, clear left-wing ideological party in permanent opposition OR an electable centre/right/left red Conservative electable brand of Labour with which to block right wing government and press the social democratic agenda.
When the delusional come to their senses, do they still stand by the principled left wing politician, or will pragmatism lead them back to No10 with Chuka to evict Dave?
I think you're jumping the gun a bit there, he's only one person and even if he does get elected, the Labour party won't change all that much over night just because someone with a beard is the leader.
When the delusional come to their senses, do they still stand by the principled left wing politician, or will pragmatism lead them back to No10 with Chuka to evict Dave?
After reading the recent Guardian profile of Chucky, and his opinions, him taking over from Dave would shift policy in Downing Street substantially to the right.
George Osbourne could make a more credible pitch to represent the traditional values of the labour party
fair enough binners. Do you mind voting for Yvette instead then, as I have £25 at 5/1 riding on her and I need all the help...
The only true question is whether the "left" want a strong-voiced, clear left-wing ideological party in permanent opposition OR an electable centre/right/left red Conservative electable brand of Labour with which to block right wing government and press the social democratic agenda.When the delusional come to their senses, do they still stand by the principled left wing politician, or will pragmatism lead them back to No10 with Chuka to evict Dave?
But I guess the question is why would you care? If a tory in a red tie got into 10 Downing Street would a supporter of the true left feel any more that a party which represented them was in power than if a tory with a blue tie was in power? It'll just be more of the same. I'd rather support a party that was truly left of centre that was not in power than have no left of centre party to vote for at all.
Stoner --delusional --yeah thanks daddy o --of course he may not reflect your 'leanings' -but there are already plenty for you to choose from --all us lefties want is one we can relate to--you keep yoor revisionist opportunist baggage for some media doll that soothes you ...
I'd say she's a shoe in Stoner. Once they've finished they're pretending to have a debate, and even let the token comedy left winger play as well. She ticks all the labour boxes
PPE from Oxford
Never had an actual job
Lives in Islington
Probably holidays in Tuscany
Never been seen outside London
Generally ****ing clueless
Put your house on it!
and she's a wimmin too.
Never been seen outside London
You'd never have guessed:
I'd rather support a party that was truly left of centre that was not in power than have no left of centre party to vote for at all.
+1. This may sound ridiculous to those who think the labour party can get into power on a centrist agenda and then do 'left' things when they're there, but the main problems with this is that..
1. The last two elections have shown they can't get into power on a centrist/right agenda, mainly because they've lost their base supporters to the SNP and UKIP
2. The last labour govt didn't do all these wonderful 'left' things people talk about.
Going back to the law analogy. If democracy is to work, it needs a leftwing option otherwise there's no point. There's no point in the defence whining to the judge and jury that they don't like being the defence and they'd rather be the prosecution instead.
everyone thinking that Corbyn is the messiah and that a left wing labour government can surely only follow his ascension is delusional.The only true question is whether the "left" want a strong-voiced, clear left-wing ideological party in permanent opposition OR an electable centre/right/left red Conservative electable brand of Labour with which to block right wing government and press the social democratic agenda.
When the delusional come to their senses, do they still stand by the principled left wing politician, or will pragmatism lead them back to No10 with Chuka to evict Dave?
this +1
So easy to be idealogically sound, isolate oneself from the electorate and be smugly satisfied as one sits on the sidelines.
Personally I'd rather see some Left wing policies rather than none - and if that means some Realpolitik, so be it.
And Milliband was far from an effective centre-right candidate.
One last point - Jeremy will be 71 at the next election. Just saying...
I'd rather support a party that was truly left of centre that was not in power than have no left of centre party to vote for at all.
and that I applaud, convert. But when in 2020, it's PM Boris, or Theresa, or George, and they've sunk Corbyn's battleship, there'd better not be a load of whining about it 🙂
But I guess the question is why would you care?
I care because in the absence of PR voting, consensus politics in the middle ground is, to me (IMO yadda yadda etc etc), preferable to hard leftism whining from the side lines leaving hard rightism in power to do as they please.
But I guess the question is why would you care? If a tory in a red tie got into 10 Downing Street would a supporter of the true left feel any more that a party which represented them was in power than if a tory with a blue tie was in power?
Hmm, Tony Blair being a case in point perhaps?
Minimum wage
Human Rights Act
Massive expansion in NHS and School Spending (abject the fact we may be paying for it for the rest of our lives)
Scottish and Welsh Devolution
Freedom of Information
House of Lords reform
Civil Partnerships
Reduction in child poverty (tax credits, child benefit etc.)
paternity, maternity, and adoption leave
The right wing C***!
politriks has been moving to a US stylee-where two or combo of smaller pro capitalist parties all compete for the residence of certain london houses--what they all do is neither much here or there --its not far off, hence the huge disinterst in it --the votes for 'alternatives' -ukip and in scotland they were given a clear socialist option -where the only part of the country that saw over 50% voting for it --as opposed to the tories getting barely 30 % --i long abandoned parlimentary nonsense , but you do need some people there to expose the brayin puppets..
Doesn't matter a damn who becomes the Labour leader, unless Murdoch decides to back them they haven't got a chance after the press has finished savaging them.
when in 2020, it's PM Boris, or Theresa, or George
I believe this will be the case no matter who wins the labour leadership election.
I care because in the absence of PR voting, consensus politics in the middle ground is, to me (IMO yadda yadda etc etc), preferable to hard leftism whining from the side lines leaving hard rightism in power to do as they please.
Steady on there Stoner, you're sounding almost liberal. Are you feeling OK?
everyone thinking that Corbyn is the messiah and that a left wing labour government can surely only follow his ascension is delusional.The only true question is whether the "left" want a strong-voiced, clear left-wing ideological party in permanent opposition OR an electable centre/right/left red Conservative electable brand of Labour with which to block right wing government and press the social democratic agenda.
When the delusional come to their senses, do they still stand by the principled left wing politician, or will pragmatism lead them back to No10 with Chuka to evict Dave?
Nonsense for a couple of reasons:
1. Many people like Corbyn not because they agree with everything he says but because he is a breath of fresh air in a sea of beige, identikit politicians.
2. Labour positioning themselves as "mild Tories" was tried recently - it didn't work out too well for them.
when in 2020, it's PM Boris, or Theresa, or GeorgeI believe this will be the case no matter who wins the labour leadership election.
Unfortunately I think you're right. The Tories at the last election, taking full advantage of the fact they were up against an utterly clueless muppet, successfully put labour in a box labelled 'rabid lefties', even though they were nothing of the sort. And it worked a treat. No matter who becomes the next labour leader, the Tories are going to carry on hammering this message home.
After all, they learned the technique from 5 years of constantly repeating the narrative that the recesssion/crash was all labours fault. Say it often enough and it becomes true. In the publics mind at least.
I reckon the Tories will have to biblically **** up for labour to be in with even a sniff at the next election
I think Labour need a very simple message.
Like (suitably worded):
We will undo all the oppression of the underclass and make the rich corporations pay their share of tax to fund it. We will end welfare for the wealthy. We will not go to war.
Simples. 🙂
and make the rich corporations pay their share of tax to fund it. We will end welfare for the wealthy.
This is really all it takes. There's barely a person I speak to, tory or labour leaning who doesn't agree with this. I've no doubt they would have won the last election if they'd found a way to communicate this and hammer the message home. But in their infinite wisdom they decided they'd rather talk about immigrants, chavs, and 'balancing the books'.
They won't win unless they make some comment regarding spending and budget control.
I look forward to the day when a new set of lenses are created that replace the increasingly irrelevant left and right wing.
Given the confused nature of politics and economics these days we really do need new terms of reference.
1. Many people like Corbyn not because they agree with everything he says but because he is a breath of fresh air in a sea of beige, identikit politicians.
Where have I heard that before?
[img] 
[/img]
Won't someone think of the Hard Working Families ™
Corbyn not left enough for my liking...
[img] 
?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=a5dae82146f3416ba69b910562ae2349[/img]
Ah, a proper Champagne Socialist 🙂
loddrik - MemberCorbyn not left enough for my liking...
Jeremy Corbyn is certainly more left-wing than Derek Hatton.
[i]"It’s been 27 years since I left Liverpool city council. Since then politics has changed, the world has changed and I’ve changed with it."[/i] - millionaire property developer Derek Hatton.
I think you'll notice that the above picture is not of today's 'millionaire property developer' Derek Hatton, rather a mid 1980's Militant Tendency Derek Hatton...
I know exactly what he is now. He used to live quite literally around the corner from me. Plus I've picked him up outside Goodison after the match and all he was talking about was playing golf in the Algarve!!
[img] 
[/img]
Thats a lot of potential voters. If only someone could give them something to vote for.
I think you'll notice that the above picture is not of today's 'millionaire property developer' Derek Hatton, rather a mid 1980's Militant Tendency Derek Hatton...
I'm sorry you hadn't made your very point clear. I now see that the point you were making is that 'Corbyn is not left enough for your liking,' when compared to a transient Trot of 30 years ago.
Well the truth is that very few of us were left-wing enough for transient Trots of 30 years ago.
Were you once a Trot loddrik ? And were you terribly left-wing and revolutionary ? 🙂
[img] 
[/img]
Thats a lot of potential voters.
Fascinating graph, an amazing increase in non voters in under 10 years (1992 to 2001). Also, we seem to have passed peak apathy which I didn't realise.....
Now where's that photo of Lynch's alter-ego Fred Kite when you need it....... 'All those fields of corn and opera in the evening'.....
Have you tried google images ?
[quote=ernie_lynch said]Have you tried google images ?
Don't be silly, central committee will have censored all those.
I see.
Very good.
Unfortunately not. Maybe you can post one up of him Ernest? 🙂
I was at two constituency hustings tonight the results we very clear a Corbyn and Watson landslide in both.
[url= http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4501406.ece ]My Week- By Jeremy Corbyn*[/url]
Tuesday
Bit of a bruising interview on Channel 4 News last night. I shouldn’t have been surprised. Famous bastion of the hard right. Krishnan Guru-Murthy gave me a hard time for describing Hamas and Hezbollah as “my friends” and I rather lost my temper. Silly, really, but I was worried there was far worse to come out. Thank God they didn’t realise I’m also friends with Len McClusky.
ernie_lynch said » Have you tried google images ?
Don't be silly, central committee will have censored all those.
Rubbish. Thanks to the recent privatisation, we are pleased to be able to announce a new more efficient Google images which is able to compete in a competitive marketplace. Of course, there is now a charge for each image viewed, this may or may not increase incrementally due to the need to provide increasingly absurd shareholder dividends. It is our aim that the less well off in society will no longer be able to benefit from the service within 5 years. At least, not if they also want to be able to feed their children.
You couldn't make this stuff up. Nominate someone you don't agree with then complain when the plan goes tits up.
Three Labour MPs who lent support to Mr Corbyn to get him on the ballot and broaden the leadership debate have told The Telegraph their decision has backfired. .........there is growing anger from those who put forward Mr Corbyn despite disagreeing with his politics about the way he has grown to dominate coverage of the race.
Just watching the sunday politics show, they have got all 4 candidates in a debate He's the only one who looks like a leader imo. And i'm no leftie.
Interestingly The Guardian / Observer are pretty convinced that Corbyn will assign Labour to Oblivion for a good few decades if he wins...
If a leaked poll is any guide, then a growing number of the Labour party membership now seem to view Jeremy Corbyn as the answer to that drubbing. This is like a pupil who, on being told they answered incorrectly, repeats the same answer shouting ever more forcefully. It’s still the wrong answer. The party faces a choice. It can strive to get re-elected and thereby have an impact on those it purports to represent. Or it can sink in to a warm bath of delusion and face an even larger wipeout in 2020.
Interestingly The Guardian / Observer are pretty convinced that ....
Does the Guardian/Observer even support the Labour Party ? I can't remember what their stance was back in May.
Certainly in May 2010 the Guardian was urging it's readers to back Nick Clegg and his party, despite all the evidence that he was just another repackaged Tory. Even they would agree that was a monumental blunder.
So I wouldn't pay too much notice to what the Guardian/Observer opinion is or what they are "pretty convinced" about.
Does the Guardian/Observer even support the Labour Party ?
Those publications are generally left leaning and socialist in their views....as the Labour party is supposedly too.
Without actually coming out and saying it i'd say they would align themselves more with Labour than the Tories.
I hope Corbyn wins, Labour could do with a traditional leftie leader....whether they get elected with him or not is largely irrelevant, it creates a genuine opposition and forms the basis for good polar opposite debates on ideological issues.