November 18, 2020 at 7:50 am #197667
Yesterday’s decision to readmit Corbyn absolutely stinks. What makes it worse is that decisions of this nature usually take a while, but they fast tracked this through to save him before the new NEC come through.
Once again we’re left with a party that is not prioritising consequences for anti-Semitism and trying to save the skin of a tired old crank who has long past redemption for this. He has had many years, and many opportunities, to ask for forgiveness and he never has. He has gaslit, boasted about his poor credentials to excuse himself, denied the problem’s existence before having to backtrack and deflect when he can no longer excuse and tried to thwart all attempts at dealing with it thoroughly. The EHRC has vindicated this and damned Labour for their awful handling of the situation. His latest non-apology in a long line of non-apologies, where he has never admitted culpability. It’s nowhere near enough for readmittance for undermining a report; he hasn’t contradicted it and the original statement still exists. He only apologised for their concern (“sorry you feel that way”), not his actions, which his apology does not come close to doing. He still thinks he’s right, and as such should not have been readmitted as if everything is ok.
Let’s not beat around the bush, the EHRC is a legal document and Labour could end up in court over this. Yet these morons don’t care. They are far more bothered about saving face for the washed up has been who failed miserably and has achieved practically nothing throughout his career. The EHRC documented that the issue was with interference in cases. With them fast tracking this to get Corbyn back on board it shows they have learned absolutely nothing and Labour is still a party which doesn’t take its internal discipline issues seriously. I have no trust in the NEC’s findings today and it has left me at odds with Labour yet again.
Anti-Semitism is not something which should be treated as a game, it should be stamped out. Yet, time and time again, the same old crowd treat it as a means to save their own skin, their mates’ skin and gaslight everyone by saying those investigating are the problem because it means them taking some responsibility and maybe self-reflecting for once. I wish the party could actually deal with the issue properly, but it never will be done this way while the party has too many excuse makers at the top not wanting to admit culpability or take responsibility, and the media outriders go around bolstering their self-righteousness by saying that consequences for the culprits is destroying unity or how it’s politicisation to do this. All of which ignores that Corbyn undermined the report, and no matter what the views are of those in Labour opposed to him, are we supposed to just let wrongs slide because of that? What’s the real issue? That Corbyn undermined a serious report of a serious nature or that some people don’t like him? And don’t you think it’s this pig headed, vile excusing of the inexcusable which makes others not like him?
Starmer has a big decision to make now, and fast. His own leadership has been undermined by the NEC. I know there is talk of unity, but that is not what the hard left want. He will be a traitor/wrecker/saboteur to the end for them. He can’t avoid that civil war by sticking his head in the sand. Besides, what use is unity if it means defending the morally inexcusable? For many long years the Jewish community begged to have their concerns heard, they were shunned, ignored and told that they were nasty bullies for daring to bring it to light. The concerns were that it made the glistening image of Saint Jeremy Corbyn, forever on the right side of history, look bad. It got worse. Jewish MPs were hounded out the party, sent death threats and Jewish activists were attacked with the most awful racist abuse. We were told it was all a smear campaign and the victims were nefarious schemers who weren’t motivated by hurt or sadness, but sinister plots to get some modern day Christ-like figure. The EHRC report came and made it clear that the ‘smears’ were true, inexcusable and indisputable, and these wishful martyrs still make out they’re the real victims because their idiotic former leader undermined the report by making false claims to make himself look better. You told us these claims were false, that they were smears and nothing should be done about them. You don’t get to demand how we should respond to this when you were the ones who amplified the issue to breaking point.
They need to get a grip and so does Starmer. The party’s relations with Jews is deservedly at an all time low. We need to be begging for forgiveness, but we are doing everything to hurt them. In light of this, I expect Starmer to reopen the investigation, given the farce it was (how can we possibly trust the same people highlighted as running inadequate investigations in this to make a neutral decision? Why was it fast tracked?) and refuse the whip. If not, then my support for Starmer will drop like a stone. I am fed up of anti-Semitism being excused by the party, and nothing about the Tories’ many ills changes this.November 18, 2020 at 9:03 am #197670
Here’s what David Baddiel thinks about it:
I don’t care that much either way about Corbyn. The progressive confusion around a/s goes back far further then him + won’t be sorted by single political decisions but by the development of a complex nuanced understanding of Jews as a real, discriminated-against ethnic minority.
— David Baddiel (@Baddiel) November 17, 2020November 18, 2020 at 9:21 am #197671
I agree that the issue is far deeper rooted than Corbyn, it’s a problem across large parts of the left. You only have to look at Starmer’s Facebook page where he has recently visited a synagogue to see the usual comments from lefties saying how he is a slave to Israel or a tool of the Zionists because of this. However, when one individual makes comments which undermine the response to dealing with it there has to be consequences. Otherwise anyone can make such comments again and feel like they’ll be protected. As leader of the Labour Party Corbyn allowed this to flourish. He then undermined the report and contradicted leadership’s commitments; Starmer needed to take action to show he’s in charge and that Labour are no longer ignoring Jewish concerns.
As I say, it’s the whole action to whizz this through which has really left a sour taste. It smacks of a stitch up to get him back in without due process, and it would feel this way regardless of the purpose of the disciplinary issue. The new, less Corbyn friendly, NEC commences next week and this just screams of a Corbyn friendly NEC making a last ditch effort to save him before it’s too late for them. I would love to know why this case had to be zoomed through above all others on a rational means, but I suspect there isn’t one. The NEC have shown they don’t care about integral investigations, or respecting the need for such, just saving their own skin. They preach moral righteousness, but behave just as tribal as many other politicians.
Starmer has been played, and his statement last night gave the impression that he knew it and was angry. However, he should have started the independent complaints process straight away, instead of waiting for the EHRC ruling, which would have meant Corbyn having to deal with non-biased figures, not his comrades who have been complicit in the failings highlighted by the EHRC.November 18, 2020 at 10:22 am #197674NorthumbironParticipantOffline
Registered On: January 3, 2014
So if there were an election in the New Year who would you vote for?
This is the real outcome of this. At a time when the party in government are clearly not fit for purpose they are able to muddle their way through with a healthy majority because there is no viable opposition.
You hear nothing from the other middle-left parties. The only one outside government making a noise is far-right nut job Farage with his curiously named Reform UK.
Whatever you think of Corbyn he should have been the one to fall on his sword for the good of the party and the country. All this does is open the door (and the windows) for more right wing whataboutery.
As if the country wasn’t in a big enough mess!November 18, 2020 at 11:32 am #197677
I have no idea as to who I’d vote for. Before yesterday I was warming back to Labour, but the actions of the NEC have put a spanner in the works. It depends on how Starmer reacts and if he truly makes it a safe space for Jews and whether he ensures there will be consequences for offenders. I am back into the uncertain stage. I can’t stomach voting for a party which goes out of its way to excuse racism, no matter its other commitments. I’d feel like an enabler of it.
He should have fallen on his sword, but he was never going to, as that would ruin his reputation as the most honest, kind and anti-racist campaigner in Labour. He’s stubborn and unable to adjust his worldview or consider that those who criticise him may not be doing so purely out of spite for him or his ideology. His idea of good for the party is for everyone to do what he wants.
And it’s the reaction of the right as to why this is so damning too. The left will say we need to unify now, but Gove and co are already out the block to say how this shows how Starmer is on Corbyn’s side and is continuing Corbyn’s legacy here. It was hard to make this argument before, but it is far easier now. He can’t make a convincing defence when Corbyn can be so easily readmitted at break neck speed. It may be out of his control, but to the public it will appear as a mess and Starmer will be seen as weak and unable to stop this. Not good.November 18, 2020 at 11:56 am #197682
All hypothetical as we know there won’t be a GE for 4 another years. Maybe sooner but I wouldn’t bank on it. By that time the Party under Starmer should be in a strong position to gain swinging seats. I suspect what the Tories will have undertaken by then will mean they haven’t got a cat in hells chance of re-election.
Your point about all this appearing to the public to be a mess BRI, I honestly don’t think the majority of the public could give a stuff about this issue. They’ve got far bigger problems to deal with right now than giving a second thought about Corbyn and Starmer. They’re more likely to be observing the complete car crash the Tories are right now and how it’s impacting on their livelihoodsNovember 18, 2020 at 12:06 pm #197686
I think the majority of the public are put off by Corbyn. Through seeing him reinstated I think the general perception will be “Starmer’s bottled it and given in to the hard left” who are the ones who made them so repulsive to the public.November 18, 2020 at 12:58 pm #197696
I can of course conclude that you will not be voting for the Tories who have not completed their anti-Semitism investigations dating back to December 2019.
Classic whataboutery I agree, but hardly ever mentioned in this debate nationally and on this forum.November 18, 2020 at 1:41 pm #197705
No, I didn’t vote for them in 2019, nor did I Labour. I would find it incredibly hard to vote for a party which does not represent my values.
You don’t hear about such, because the Tories are not led by someone who let the issue run riot in the party and there is no evidence of any kind of obscuration of justice from the top. There was with Labour. This doesn’t mean there aren’t issues with anti-Muslim bigotry, for instance, as we have seen.November 18, 2020 at 2:19 pm #197707
I would agree the majority of the public were put off by Corbyn, but the reasons were manifest. He’s not the leader anymore, the fact that he’s been reinstated won’t even register with most people. And I think ‘repulsive’ is an exaggeration. The ‘hard left’ image and direction of the Party are reasons Labour lost the election, but they aren’t the only ones, by far. I think it would be fairer to say the Tories appealed more to non-traditional Tory voters due to Johnson over Corbyn, as played out in the media, and ‘getting Brexit done’. I don’t think the issue of anti-semitism in the Party wouldn’t have been a significant factor.
Sorry, not intending to digress too far from your OP BRI but I do think you are very submerged in a topic that will bypass most people who aren’t too interested in politics in much depth.November 18, 2020 at 2:26 pm #197708
I don’t think people follow the intricacies, but they can see management failure and it was obvious that it was a management failure on Corbyn’s part. He did nothing to stop the issue as leader, creating an image of a party dogged by problems. Now, with him being readmitted into the party after being suspended, it appears as if Starmer has no control to the public. It’s not the specificity of the issue which is the problem to the public, but the appearance of weakness in dealing with trouble makers; in this case, a trouble maker people don’t like.
People didn’t like Corbyn because of Corbyn. We can’t whine about the media when the media didn’t make Corbyn do unpopular things. Those who think it was all or predominantly about Brexit, though it was one factor, need to consider why Corbyn was polling higher in reasons as to not vote Labour. As Anna Turley said, in Redcar for every one voter saying Brexit was the reason they’re not voting Labour another nine said it was the rubbish leader.November 18, 2020 at 4:33 pm #197712
And you know Anna Turley was telling the whole truth? 9 out of 10 eh? You don’t suppose there’s a chance she exaggerated and that she might have had a leading question in there do you?
I don’t doubt many in Redcar didn’t vote Labour because of a lack of faith in Corbyn as a leader. I also don’t doubt a great many thought Johnson was a more charismatic and interesting personality (many vox poppers said it – they didn’t like the Tories but they liked ‘Boris’). I also know the Daily Mail and The Sun are the biggest selling newspapers in the country and they continued championing the saviour of Brexit and ridiculing Corbyn at every opportunity.November 18, 2020 at 4:45 pm #197713
Yes, because everyone against Corbyn can’t be honest. When the polling backs it up, I see no reason to doubt. When Labour saw a plunge in support after the Skripal incident and pathetic apologia, I see no reason to doubt. When his ratings as leader were well into the minuses, I see no reason to doubt. Of course the opposition had to have a leader who was more well liked, and his mantra around Brexit did help, but even if Labour had a better Brexit strategy people still wouldn’t have wanted to vote for them because of Corbyn.
Corbyn was a media laughing stock at least in part because he was a laughing stock. Labour won’t have a chance of winning an election while he continuously causes issue over the fallout from anti-Semitism and his allies keep trying to sway it to their favour against the current party direction. Corbynism was trounced, it’s time to move on. Starmer has tried to get the moving on stage into action, while not letting consequences slip for those who need such for their actions, it’s time for everyone else to and let Corbyn and his acolytes face some responsibility for once.November 18, 2020 at 4:49 pm #197714
To be fair to Turley, it was me who exaggerated through false memory. Just checked and she said it was four who mentioned Corbyn to every one who mentioned Brexit. I doubt these were verified stats, but an attempt to say that there was more saying Corbyn than Brexit.November 18, 2020 at 6:27 pm #197716
“Labour won’t have a chance of winning an election while he continuously causes issue over the fallout from anti-Semitism and his allies keep trying to sway it to their favour against the current party direction”.
I wouldn’t put it as strongly as that given the performance of the Tories, but this, for me, is the key point.
The last thing Starmer needs is a divided party, but the problem is not going to be solved by removing the whip from Corbyn. It would be better for the party if Corbyn would announce he is standing down or forming a new group, but can’t see either happening soon.November 18, 2020 at 6:37 pm #197717
The party is divided regardless now, there’s no getting around it. The Corbyn faction do not want consequences for their actions and will cry murder at such. The only way at appeasing them is to allow them to run it how they want, otherwise they will keep undermining the leader. Giving Corbyn back the whip will do little to stop that; they will be emboldened to push boundaries further.
Keeping the whip removed will at least signal some intent for them that their actions have repercussions. It should stay that way until Corbyn makes a sincere apology, which isn’t a sorry for concerns or “sorry you feel that ways,” but one where he fully acknowledges that the actions undertaken under his leadership led to the EHRC’s damning conclusion without once talking of being the victim of exaggeration.
There will be no unity as they continue to snipe at Starmer, and letting them know their actions have no consequences will only make them more inclined to undermine him and act as they have done. The recent actions of Corbyn allies in the NEC shows they’re not interested in what’s right for the party, only factionalism. I don’t know how we can get unity until they either compromise, realise this or go.November 18, 2020 at 6:54 pm #197718
Winning a general election is clearly not top of their agenda. No point having policies, agendas and campaigning on issues if the party remains as the permanent opposition.November 18, 2020 at 8:01 pm #197719
To be fair to Turley, it was me who exaggerated through false memory. Just checked and she said it was four who mentioned Corbyn to every one who mentioned Brexit. I doubt these were verified stats, but an attempt to say that there was more saying Corbyn than Brexit.
I think you exaggerated it because you wanted it to be true. I’m not a fan of Corbyn, McDonnel, McCluskey, Momemtum, etc, at all but clearly you loath Corbyn with a such a passion you’re prepared to claim he’s a ‘washed up has been’ who ‘has achieved practically nothing throughout his career’. You’ve gone from objective criticism to personal attacks.
I’m sure the majority of members not on the hard left of the Party are fully versed on the problems within the Party. It’s nothing new is it? Personally, I don’t see how your rhetoric is in any way helpful to uniting the Party and moving forward, which is what you acknowledge and what everybody bar a total ignoramous knows.November 18, 2020 at 8:17 pm #197722
‘Yes, because everyone against Corbyn can’t be honest.’
No one here is saying that. Why the need for sarcasm? You run the risk of undermining objective reasoning and critical thinking if you start going down that route. What is highly likely is that some people who are against Corbyn are not honest. Same as any other political leader throughout history.
I think it would be helpful if you didn’t tar anybody who questions some of the actions against Corbyn with the same brush.November 18, 2020 at 9:01 pm #197723
No, it was honestly mistaken memory. Please don’t go down the route of Bucks in assuming everyone who disagrees is disingenuous. If I was trying to hoodwink it would be stupid of me to come clean.
If you listened to Anna Turley on this you’ll hear how she isn’t vindictive about Corbyn, she has worked for Corbyn as a volunteer in the distant past. She was honest and obviously concerned about Labour for the party, not to get Corbyn. Why the automatic assumption that criticism of Corbyn is likely inauthentic? The defenders who said it was all smears have been shown to be wrong, and the whistle blowers to be correct, so while we can’t trust everything, there is clear evidence that Corbyn was incompetent and a moral disaster. The public could see that.
Besides, when everything else points to Corbyn as a major problem, why is this so unbelievable? He was disliked and Labour polls have improved, as have leadership ratings, despite Starmwr being a remainer.
How should I refer to an immoral crank who has sullied the party with its most shameful episode in its history? I am not going to lose sleep over my dislike for Corbyn and attacks on him when he has soiled the party’s image and takes no responsibility.
People on here refer to Johnson and Tories with negative language. I don’t think my language against Corbyn is much different.
Personally, I don’t think unity is more important than consequences for those who have made Labour a safe space for Jew haters. I don’t want such bigotry to be glossed over so the hard left might get on board, when they won’t anyway.November 18, 2020 at 10:48 pm #197725
Just to be clear BRI, I’m not suggesting you were being disingenuous or were trying to hoodwink. And I’m not ‘going down Bucks route’. I said I think that’s what you wanted to believe, and that’s based on your loathing of Corbyn as demonstrated in this thread. It’s my opinion.
Yes, the defenders of Corbyn who have said it was all smears have rightly been proven wrong. Equally, those who say there were smears, as I do, shouldn’t be shut down either. That’s not a healthy approach, I’m sure you would agree?
What I find uncomfortable about the content of your posts in this thread is that you appear to be closing down any opportunity to allow any praise of Corbyn whatsoever.November 18, 2020 at 10:54 pm #197726
You’ve made your point about Corbyn, on this and numerous other posts BRI, and many of your points I agree with. I would prefer to see the Labour Party deal with this matter themselves rather than seeing continuous head kicking by people on social media and on this board. There is a danger that it’s getting as unsavoury as those who seek to defend Corbyn at any opportunity. That’s my main argument here. Is that so wrong?November 19, 2020 at 7:27 am #197728
I don’t know what praise there is to be had for Corbyn. The party’s a shambles because of his leadership. We criticise the Tories on here, and give them a kicking regularly, I don’t see why giving this awful individual a slamming should be any different.
Of course you have to judge every criticism of Corbyn based on the evidence. There is a big difference between the silly stuff about Corbyn being a Czech spy and not being respectful enough on Remembrance Sunday and the actual problems. From what I’ve seen it was the actual problems which caused far more issues to the public than the overreached stories. We can’t really moan about smears when the smears are true and there is a danger of assuming that any criticism of Corbyn is such. That’s been a large issue for the past few years, which has led to claims of anti-Semitism being dismissed unfairly.
Like I say, I am not going to lose sleep over negativity towards a rotten individual who has shamed Labour. He led the party to the point where it was investigated by the EHRC, which found severe problems with the party. The only other party investigated to date has been the BNP. I don’t see the need to be polite towards him. We aren’t towards Farage, Johnson, Hancock et al. on this board, so I don’t see why I should treat a Labour MP any differently when he has shown himself to be overly tolerant of anti-Semitism.November 19, 2020 at 8:28 am #197729
It was the silly stuff that did for him over “the problems”.
People were not going to vote for a man or party who would “bankrupt” the country, had close contacts with the Russians, who would waste tax payers money, who was London centric, looks scruffy and us part of the Metropolitan elite.
No, they much preferred Johnson, who wasn’t any of the above!!!!!!November 19, 2020 at 8:54 am #197731
I don’t think over-close fondness for Russia is too far wide of the mark given his willingness to deter from making a stand against them, even when they poison people on our shores, and when he pockets money from RT. There is definitely a sign that this did have an issue: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/31/election-foreign-policy-russia-corbyn-labour-skripal/
The opinions on Corbyn being out of touch is subjective, but I wouldn’t say it was absolute rubbish, because even if exaggerated it wasn’t in the same league as unsubstantiated stories, like the cited Czech spy nonsense. You may disagree with it, but to win an election we need to convince the voters. They may be further to the right than you and I might like, they might view the left with suspicion, but we will not win them over by hunkering down backing someone they distrust.
I agree that Johnson is the epitome of privilege, but I guess he doesn’t have the baggage of someone like Corbyn, who appeared out of touch, in that being left comes with an assumption of wanting people to change. People might accept it from Johnson because he is not pleading with us to improve, but the left tells us we need to change. This can get people irritated if that person is perceived to be not like them.November 19, 2020 at 9:44 am #197733
Personally, I think you’re out of touch BRI. As I’ve mentioned before, the majority of people in this country don’t analyse politics in any sort of depth like you do, as evidenced by the gutter press they lap up, the s*** TV they devour, the new born youtube scientists, obsessions with materialism and junk food, etc. Research shows that 30% of the population are conspiracy theorist about Covid 19 in some shape or form, FFS.
So carry on with your moral crusade against Corbyn as much as you like, most people in this country couldn’t care less about internal struggles in the Labout Party, believe it or not they are more interested in reading vitriol about his scruffiness and whether he can ‘get Brexit done’ or not.
‘We will not win them over by hunkering down backing someone they distrust.’
Who’s doing that here? 99% perhaps, but he’s absent. Beyond this board, who’s doing it? Momentum, Mccluskey, etc. Well, forget reasoning with them about it. Ain’t gonna happen.
Corbyn isn’t the leader of the Labour Party anymore. You’ve made it abundantly clear why you despise him. I’m sure many of your criticisms are shared by people on the left. Can you please stop repeating stuff we already know about him and the situation?November 19, 2020 at 9:53 am #197735
Not once have I said that the public follow this in detail. I have said that it is surface level, probably. For instance, they see someone excusing Russia for the Skripals and think “he’s pro-Russia, him, and not going to defend our national security.” Same with anti-Semitism. I am sure they’re not following every detail, but they will think “how has he not got a hold on the situation after many years? Can’t be a strong leader or one willing to solve the situation.” I’ve said this many times in this thread, so I don’t know where this idea has come that I think the public are fully clued up.
Corbyn should be the past, but he keeps putting himself in a position where he is in focus. Through this the party appears weak, and that is what I think matters for the public, as I keep saying. Starmer had Corbyn suspended, he has been readmitted. To the public this makes it seem like Starmer hasn’t got a hold on the party and is therefore weak. This is not a good look, no matter what knowledge the public have.
If they were more interested in scruffiness, why did the polling drop after his real problems? I think it’s fantasy to think that his inability to handle his problems had no effect but media fuss over scruffy clothes was the real reason why people didn’t like him.
As for Brexit, which was an issue, it would have made no difference. I think it would be out of touch to think that someone who was seen as an IRA sympathiser or weak on national security was going to be popular if it wasn’t for media articles on scruffy clothing or a more Johnsonite Brexit policy. And the problem is that he created the impression that he was those things.November 19, 2020 at 10:13 am #197738
Besides, doesn’t this issue cut above what’s popular for the party? Jews have been abused and gaslit for years, the EHRC has found it in breach of equality regulations, which is a damning indictment. There has to be consequences for such for the sake of the victims. Surely this matters more than anything else. Corbyn has continued to gaslight and undermine the response since its publication. This isn’t good enough and readmittance signifies that those who allow a culture of racism to flourish can escape with little to no punishment. If your boss at work was suspended for allowing racism to flourish and was reinstated without a sincere apology by the complaints committee I don’t think we’d be accepting of it, even if it meant company unity and ability to get the job done without fuss. We shouldn’t here in a party which tries to pride itself on anti-racism and equality.
I am aware of the differences between factions. I tried telling this to Bucks for this reason; I have not tarred anyone with the Corbynite brush on here, except for the 99%. I am aware of the soft left lean of this board and the differences in motivation. This thread wasn’t an attempt to call anyone out, but to open a discussion on a subject which has bugged me greatly for years.
I will stop the potential for any topics on this until it becomes past news. Corbyn’s leadership may be the past, but the fallout clearly isn’t.November 19, 2020 at 10:15 am #197739
I didn’t say that I think you think the public are fully clued up. Please don’t misconstrue. I’m pointing out that I don’t think they are. I am saying I think you’re out of touch with public perception regarding Corbyn and the Party. That is my opinion. It isn’t necessarily right.
Anyway, pointless debating with someone who’s acting like a dog with a bone. When someone like you suggest I’m approaching a debate like Bucksiron, it’s time I bowed out. I would say it’s been a healthy discussion but I can’t see at any point where you have tried to understand my view point.November 19, 2020 at 10:29 am #197741
I only said that because you were inferring that I had a hidden motive for making an incorrect recollection of an estimated figure for how many said they voted against Labour because of Corbyn or Brexit. Was it an internal bias? I don’t know, maybe sub-consciously, but I didn’t want a false claim to stand; I thought that was the moral position to take, rather than make it appear that my incorrect claim was trustworthy. I realised it was wrong and corrected myself. The conclusion was the same in that more people were judged to be voting on Corbyn than Brexit in Redcar.
I can see what you’re trying to say, I just disagree with it and I am putting my opinion across as to why. This shouldn’t be seen as an attack on you; I am just detailing my point of view. I am struggling to see how the public would be more bothered about non-issues like scruffy clothes than problems which could not be as easily defended. The anti-Semitism, IRA sympathiser and weak on national security points of view stuck around longer and would have had more of an impact. Sure, my arguments on such could be more thorough than the average person, but the image created by having someone where this was an issue is one that there is merit in these issues, whether you agree with them or not. To the public this doesn’t look good, and the reason they could stick around was because the defence was hard. We can’t argue against his anti-Semitism claims when he palled around with anti-Semites and made anti-Semitic comments, and did little to stop it. We can’t defend his IRA sympathiser line when he palled around with them and did nothing meaningful to contribute to a peace process. I think it’s clear that these lines stuck and it’s this impression which stuck. It may be that if Corbyn could be defended well on these things it wouldn’t have mattered, but that wasn’t the scenario we had, because the defence was next to impossible for his own actions. When the public see him as an IRA sympathiser and a danger for national security, it shouldn’t be a surprise that they can’t vote for him, Brexit or no Brexit.
You may disagree with how the press makes a focus on this, but the focus can only build if the issue is evident and cannot be defended. The press does have a Tory slant, and this is something which should ideally change to being more neutral, but I find it meaningless if there are problems behind the leader.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.