Bart S wrote:A good backbencher but not a man for the top job.
When Corbyn first ended up on the ballot I welcomed his presence as a kind of 'disruptor' - sort of like Bernie Sanders in the Democratic race. Someone to give a contrary voice in a debate that was dominate by candidates who couldn't quite figure out what the role of the opposition was. Remember when the other candidates abstained from votes they later gave strong opinions on, for example? Or when one said that it wasn't Labour's place to oppose welfare reform because the people had mandated it? In the context, Corbyn was a welcome addition. I sure as hell didn't want him to win - although, I'm not sure there were any of the candidates I would have wanted to win more, either.
I don't really believe Corbyn won that leadership campaign on the back, only, of new political engagement or the repopularisation of old and out-of-date populist ideas; in part (and this is where Labour diverges from the Democrats), it was because there was no credible or creditable mainstream candidate. I suppose I, like many others, misread just how fecked up Labour had become since the previous leadership election. In effect, the internal workings of the party appear to me now, in retrospect, like the internal workings of a failed state. Here's the major problem now - once again, Labour are entirely without a credible candidate to take over the leadership. The current machinations, therefore, seem only likely to further weaken the structures of the party, with very little material gain.
Corbyn is unelectable - not so much because of his policies, many of which would draw a disturbing amount of popular support - but because he is a leader of a political party that in recent decades has always had to face down a hostile media, with its own agenda. Corbyn has proven himself utterly out of his depth when it comes to having (or at least trying to develop) the skills that allow him to succeed in the face of that. The big big problem, though, is that no other candidate looks remotely capable, either. These moves may indeed oust Corbyn but it will be a very public defenestration carried out under dubious circumstances - not least shifting the goalposts of the party's own leadership election rules during the process. Doing it will gain very little, at least in the short-term. None of the other candidates are remotely capable, either, even if they are more 'mainstream'.
The only benefit I can really see is that it undermines the party's power structures so much that a strong and capable voice has the opportunity to arise from the rubble in a few years. But even that is relying entirely on chance.