Topic: Jeremy Corbyn Poll

[Andy @ Allerton!]

As the Labour (and Tory and Russian and Brexit) and other threads quite often get derailed a bit by people mentioning this chap, I thought it might be an idea to have a poll (yay!) on the real reason he didn't get into power and also hopefully help the mods out a little so they can just have a quick look at this thread rather than deleting wads of guff out of the other threads.

As I've said, I've been personally blamed by some people I know/knew for Corbyn not to be elected. I actually voted for him (More credibly than he supposedly voted for Remain) but thought he was a terrible (If charasmatic to some) politician. He seemed to have spent so long fighting random lost causes on the backbench that he forgot what the job of Labour was. Slagging people off and offering good solutions is great. Slagging people off and then going for something you know the British Electorate will tell you to fuck off over is something else. He was great in front of students and his followers, but poor when it came to the actual business of the house. He just seemed a bit disappointed, shouty, angry and fairly vindictive most of the itme to me. Some of his ideas seemed to be in fantasy land and I wasn't too in awe of his fawning over Russia, the reaction to the antisemetism probe, his views of the UK's defence and support for some absolute nutters on the world stage (As well as telling Ukraine they were wrong to fight the Russians and should just give up for the good of everyone)


Obviously, that's my personal opinions there, that not everyone will agree with. I voted for him, many of the country didn't. Many of his followers (In almost a Trump-followers-like way) refused to believe that the UK wouldn't embrace their hero and therefore there had to be some wide conspiracy to make the most obvious choice in the history of history British PM and for the REAL Labour Party to sweep all before them on a path to Ultra-left ideals and a complete writing of society under Lexit.

That to me, again, seemed a bit far fetched.

Obviously if the mods want to delete this thread then fine. Or move it to another thread. Also fine. But quite often it comes back to Jezzer, so if we chat about it in here then it saves this ex-Labour guy popping up in loads of other threads.

[Elmo!]

It's usually derailed by you bringing up what your social media friends are saying about him. 

[Yorkykopite]

I cannot vote on this until there's a cheese option. Please fix.

Corbyn may have kept Leicester Red, but most of the country remained Blue, including Stilton. Corbyn himself was Crackers. His furtive support for Brie-xit was "a disgrace". He should have acted more Caerphilly with the PLP, but he surrounded himself with fellow members of the Haloumi Left. And the Stinking Bishop, or was it Abbott, was an embarrassment.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

It's usually derailed by you bringing up what your social media friends are saying about him. 

But this is the news channel and if people are talking about politicians or political parties or the UK or Brexit or current ongoing politicial situations/protests/meetings then isn't that news?

It's not like it's the odd random person, it's a concerted effort (Which to my not very experienced brain) from a fairly large (or it seems to be ) bunch of people

They are even making films as well as holding vigils, meetings and rallys.

I noticed the film popping on my Facebook feeds from a few of my local Corbynite mates.

It's made by Ken Loach and is called 'Oh! Jeremy Corbyn - the Big Lie" - its tag line being 'First UK screening of the film which tells the extraordinary story of how the establishment brought Jeremy Corbyn down.'

This is about the film here; https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/ken-loach-blasts-sir-keir-tool-of-the-establishment

LABOUR leader Sir Keir Starmer is a “tool of the Establishment” who deliberately undermined Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the party, legendary film director Ken Loach has charged.

In excerpts from his interview in the upcoming documentary film Oh Jeremy Corbyn — The Big Lie, the award-winning film-maker said the ex-shadow Brexit secretary acted like an “undercover spy cop” at his predecessor’s top table.

Labour leftwingers, many of whom have been expelled from the party since Sir Keir was elected leader in April 2020, have repeatedly accused the Holborn & St Pancras MP of spearheading Labour’s call for a second EU referendum to undermine Mr Corbyn.

Sir Keir, who became party leader soon after the Islington North MP’s resignation following a Tory landslide victory in the 2019 general election, has since ruled out reapplying for EU membership.

In the film, due to receive its premiere in central London next month, Mr Loach says: “Every now and then, to show that we’re a democracy, there’s a change of government.

“The party changes, but it’s so important from the Establishment’s point of view that the alternative party won’t change anything — and that’s what Starmer is proving now.”

Producer Norman Thomas said the former lawyer has questions to answer.

“He was director of public prosecutions when the spycops scandal came to light — undercover police officers infiltrating radical groups — and he’s since been accused of whitewashing this scandal.

“Now it seems Starmer was himself acting like a spycop in Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet — joining it to help bring it down.”

The documentary, produced by award-winning Platform Films, will be premiered at Conway Hall in Red Lion Square at 7pm on February 9.

Tickets are available here: https://bit.ly/corbynfilm

[BarryCrocker]

He's a shit Bernie Sanders.

[El Lobo]

As I've said, I've been personally blamed by some people I know/knew for Corbyn not to be elected.

Thats the ego explained I guess

Dont worry mate, it wasn't personally your fault that he didnt get elected.

[KillieRed]

There’s a reason he was a backbencher for decades. He couldn’t lead a conga line. But ultimately the British electorate fed information through many filters decided his version of Labour (or more likely just him) wasn’t for them.

[rob1966]

The public trusted Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson more than him

[tubby]

Not really into politics but from the outside looking in it was a combination of his Eternal Student shtick, and the Tories and media just relentlessly hammering him over it.  He's not my cup of tea and I don't think he was electable, but he didn't ever have a chance to even try.

[AndyMuller]

The real question is, is he better than Steven Gerrard in his prime?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Thats the ego explained I guess

Dont worry mate, it wasn't personally your fault that he didnt get elected.

I wish it was now.

Imagine the glamour, the glitz, the limos, the girls, the kebabs!!

[ChaChaMooMoo]

The real question is, is he better than Steven Gerrard in his prime?

And..

Can he do it on a cold rainy monday night in Stoke?

[Nobby Reserve]

Surely the only answer is 'a combination of those things'

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Surely the only answer is 'a combination of those things'

It seems that a fair few people don't think that. This is what I've come across when I've spoken to my mates about him - tend to swerve it in person and increasingly on Social Media because of the hassle.

They are absolutely convinced that it was a global conspiracy with everyone involved. I hadn't really heard the term 'fifth columnists' before Corbyn rubbished his way out of a chance of power, but apparantly this is how scumbags like me (That clearly orchestrated this world changing event from my local pub using a xylophone) should now be referred to in their eyes

That's the definition if you're interested (Though I'm sure that most people are more politically switched on than I am ) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_column

_____________________________

A fifth column is any group of people who undermine a larger group or nation from within, usually in favor of an enemy group or another nation. According to Harris Mylonas and Scott Radnitz, "fifth columns" are “domestic actors who work to undermine the national interest, in cooperation with external rivals of the state."[1] The activities of a fifth column can be overt or clandestine. Forces gathered in secret can mobilize openly to assist an external attack. This term is also extended to organised actions by military personnel. Clandestine fifth column activities can involve acts of sabotage, disinformation, espionage, and/or terrorism executed within defense lines by secret sympathizers with an external force.

_____________________________


Ironically, I think that Corbyn from what I've seen and read could possibly be referred to in that way? Some areas of his interest don't seem to entirely co-incide with the general interests of the UK.

I would say you could also level the same thing at the Conservative Party as well

In fact, you could probably say the same thing about any politicial entity. We live in a world and there is a lot of stuff outside the UK, but we seem to have spectacularly shot ourselves in the foot over Brexit which always looked like it was going to be a disaster if you weren't some kind of Lexit believing psycho or someone actually taking backhanders to crash the economy and rid everyone of pesky Human Rights, Working Rights and Environmental Protections.

[Sheer Magnetism]

He probably wouldn't have won an general election either way, but he was doomed from the start because the entire right side of the party were briefing and leaking about him to everyone they could, every chance they could, as soon as he was elected leader. If the shadow ministers hadn't stepped down and had been supportive of an actual left-wing platform we'd likely be looking at a different political landscape. Instead we have Keir Starmer, someone who's terrified to utter anything that could even be construed as left wing.

[Riquende]

The real question is, is he better than Steven Gerrard in his prime?

Corbyn anchoring the England midfield could have unlocked Gerrard & Lampard.


To be honest, whatever your view of his politics, Corbyn was never going to appeal to the vast, small-c conservative 'Middle England' that are the main key to winning power. He had far too many easy attack lines open for the Tories and others to use, and he was totally unsuited to actual leadership.

It still amazes me that he was exactly the sort of Labour leader that the Tories needed to fight against during the 'Brexit wrangling' years of 2016-19. Sympathetic to Leave himself, deeply unpopular to many, and likely to keep the Left divided during the post-referendum chaos. They could not have hand-picked a more preferable opponent short of installing one of Shapps' other personas into the role.

[lobsterboy]

Pensioners stopped him by voting for Johnson in droves.
They wanted a return to the good old days of power cuts, poverty, rickets and gurning for the queen.

[Father Ted]

Good that have just one thread for Corbyn moaning and general whinging instead of seeing it spread out across the entire sub-forum as it has been.

Anyone who actually tried to change things in this country was going to get with both barrels and he got it from all sides, all the time. The Labour Party just saw a bunch of twats they’ve hated for years threatening their precious careers, control, grifting opportunities and potential post-parliamentary safe jobs and went mental, the press who make this country such a vile place were obviously never going to accept it. Non-acceptance was the main thing, a big flat out ‘NO’ from everyone involved, like what we’d been doing in Britain for thirty+ years was working so well. Just a total refusal to even accept the idea that you’d have to listen to a bunch of scruffy twats you consider beneath you and beyond contempt. In these threads it was relentless whinging from day one, and it drags on today.

I liked him, still do. If some hapless managerial dullard like Starmer is the best you can ever hope for then what’s the fucking point? Marginally better than the Tories but nothing near what you’d require to actually solve things. But we can’t have anything decent in this country so we all have to wearily accept these dreary, uninspiring drones and their embarrassing flag-shagging photo shoots, stilted focus-grouped language, watered down policies and obvious untrustworthy tendencies…

None of this is to say he isn’t flawed, or made mistakes of course. Accepting the right of the party as colleagues who merely disagreed rather than arseholes who’d tank everything and accept ruling the ashes rather than support him was one of his major ones.

(All of this is just my opinion and, as with random left wingers you saw on Twitter or people on the bus who had the temerity to like Mick Lynch or someone instead of your own thoroughly sensible Labour right faves, you can actually ignore it and carry on with life. It’s all gone, you got what you wanted etc.)

[Mark Walters]

I wonder if those who voted Jeremy Corbyn on this poll can actually say what it was about him that actually prevented him from being in power. I mean, none of the ideas he had were terrible and certainly would not have been worse than the shitshow that is Britain right now.  I put all of the above with the mainstream media and Red Tories (absolute wankers!) being closest to the top and Labour voters closest to the bottom.

https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/jeremy-corbyn-is-the-most-smeared-politician-in-history

[PatriotScouser]

The simple answer is the electorate.

Yet we all knew this before during after the 2015 leadership contest.

We warned members, colleagues, friends and family that all you had to do was look at history and look at data and numbers.

People lie. People lie to themselves but data and numbers can't lie and they told a truth that those who backed Corbyn were unwilling or blind to accept the reality. Which is of course apart from 1945 the UK has never, ever elected a Party so far to the left that Corbyn would take Labour. We were told to 'believe' like Brexiteers had to 'believe'.

Actually there are tons and tons of things in common between Corbynistas and Brexiteers.

But they didn't want to look at the numbers, didn't want to look at the data and didn't want to look at history. We just needed a 'pure' Labour Party and controlling the Party became more important than helping people and winning elections. Difference between those groups of people and the rest in the Party are that - yes we do want to control the Party. Because simply put when we control the Party we have better chances to win elections and you know, actually helping people by being in Government.

The answer is always the electorate and if you're stupid enough and dumb enough to elect an unelectable leader as leader of your Party then you've had a cracking 5 years up to 2020. Personally I endured 5 years of hell waiting for this Corbyn project to flush out and down the drain and into the sewers, where it always belonged.

[Nobby Reserve]

The simple answer is the electorate.

Yet we all knew this before during after the 2015 leadership contest.

We warned members, colleagues, friends and family that all you had to do was look at history and look at data and numbers.

People lie. People lie to themselves but data and numbers can't lie and they told a truth that those who backed Corbyn were unwilling or blind to accept the reality. Which is of course apart from 1945 the UK has never, ever elected a Party so far to the left that Corbyn would take Labour. We were told to 'believe' like Brexiteers had to 'believe'.

Actually there are tons and tons of things in common between Corbynistas and Brexiteers.

But they didn't want to look at the numbers, didn't want to look at the data and didn't want to look at history. We just needed a 'pure' Labour Party and controlling the Party became more important than helping people and winning elections. Difference between those groups of people and the rest in the Party are that - yes we do want to control the Party. Because simply put when we control the Party we have better chances to win elections and you know, actually helping people by being in Government.

The answer is always the electorate and if you're stupid enough and dumb enough to elect an unelectable leader as leader of your Party then you've had a cracking 5 years up to 2020. Personally I endured 5 years of hell waiting for this Corbyn project to flush out and down the drain and into the sewers, where it always belonged.

"To defeat the Tories, you must become the Tories"

[TepidT2O]

Who?

Move on. Forwards, not backwards.

[rob1966]

Pensioners stopped him by voting for Johnson in droves.
They wanted a return to the good old days of power cuts, poverty, rickets and gurning for the queen.

Perfect example was that one on Vine yesterday, horrible Brexiteer cow.

[Theoldkopite]

Perfect example was that one on Vine yesterday, horrible Brexiteer cow.

Don’t talk like that about my Aunty Kath.

[Dr. Beaker]

I welcomed his election. It was commonly held (even on here) that Labour were out for a generation, nothing much was going on anyway, so it was perfect timing for Labour to have the Lefty/Corbyn experiment.

He had some good ideas, seemed to singlehandedly reject ‘austerity’, connected with the youth in a way that none of the ‘serious’ politicians could (what is up with these twats), introduced questions from voters at PMQ’s which I thought was a good ploy to get the PM to treat questions more seriously or face the consequences, rather than just laugh.

The downside was well known, dodgy back catalogue, nuclear deterrence, Russia (though that should be our weapon now, pending report actually being reported – maybe we’re saving it for the election) and age. Came across as a bit slow on his feet, a bit thick really and a shit sense of humour in so much as it actually exists.

Anyway then came Brexit – all change (as far as I was concerned). No time for experiments at this point, we needed a serious contender from this point on. Almost every politician was suddenly out of their depth. Corbyn as head of Labour was in an untenable position and should have resigned. The Left/Corbyn resigning would have been such a humiliation after waiting all that time for the opportunity, that it was never going to happen.

I prefer where we are now.

[Father Ted]

The simple answer is the electorate.

Yet we all knew this before during after the 2015 leadership contest.

We warned members, colleagues, friends and family that all you had to do was look at history and look at data and numbers.

People lie. People lie to themselves but data and numbers can't lie and they told a truth that those who backed Corbyn were unwilling or blind to accept the reality. Which is of course apart from 1945 the UK has never, ever elected a Party so far to the left that Corbyn would take Labour. We were told to 'believe' like Brexiteers had to 'believe'.

Actually there are tons and tons of things in common between Corbynistas and Brexiteers.

But they didn't want to look at the numbers, didn't want to look at the data and didn't want to look at history. We just needed a 'pure' Labour Party and controlling the Party became more important than helping people and winning elections. Difference between those groups of people and the rest in the Party are that - yes we do want to control the Party. Because simply put when we control the Party we have better chances to win elections and you know, actually helping people by being in Government.

The answer is always the electorate and if you're stupid enough and dumb enough to elect an unelectable leader as leader of your Party then you've had a cracking 5 years up to 2020. Personally I endured 5 years of hell waiting for this Corbyn project to flush out and down the drain and into the sewers, where it always belonged.

Disagree, the problem is the appalling media environment and the Labour Party itself. If you dare have the fucking nerve to elect anything remotely leftwing then they'll work their nuts off the destroy it and restore the order that they like, the one that favours both of them. A neutered, non-threatening opposition who'll play by the rules from the media perspective and jobs for the boys, money for old rope from Labour's. You can't even reach the public effectively or make an appeal to them because your every moment is spent fire-fighting the endless stream of controversies and bullshit generated by those two (compare with the endless soft-soap media pieces and encouraging, supportive vibes Starmer receives)

In a way I don't blame them, we've all got bills to pay etc.

The whole 'the electorate won't accept it' is just the cover story. They're not arsed about finding out if the public might possibly want something better than re-heated mouldy old New Labour dogshit forever (if slightly re-branded as the situation might require). You'll get what you're given, because that's what we like and we'll crash the plane into the mountain if anyone tries to take it away from us.

Again, it's irrelevant as the moment for arguing about this stuff has long since past (not that anyone on either side did anything but dig in and double-down on where they started originally).

[[new username under construction]]

Who?

Move on. Forwards, not backwards.

Yeah I don't really follow politics at all but why are people still banging on about him? does he still have some sort of power? Can we not go on about Scargill as well?

[Nobby Reserve]

Disagree, the problem is the appalling media environment and the Labour Party itself. If you dare have the fucking nerve to elect anything remotely leftwing then they'll work their nuts off the destroy it and restore the order that they like, the one that favours both of them. A neutered, non-threatening opposition who'll play by the rules from the media perspective and jobs for the boys, money for old rope from Labour's. You can't even reach the public effectively or make an appeal to them because your every moment is spent fire-fighting the endless stream of controversies and bullshit generated by those two (compare with the endless soft-soap media pieces and encouraging, supportive vibes Starmer receives)

In a way I don't blame them, we've all got bills to pay etc.

The whole 'the electorate won't accept it' is just the cover story. They're not arsed about finding out if the public might possibly want something better than re-heated mouldy old New Labour dogshit forever (if slightly re-branded as the situation might require). You'll get what you're given, because that's what we like and we'll crash the plane into the mountain if anyone tries to take it away from us.

Again, it's irrelevant as the moment for arguing about this stuff has long since past (not that anyone on either side did anything but dig in and double-down on where they started originally).

I think my political positioning is pretty close to yours.

And I agree with many of the points in your post.

The problem with Corbyn, though, was that he was too shit to be leader. Slow on his feet, lacked political instinct, was too stubborn and petty, had some big skeletons in his closet that made it easy for political opponents and the RWM to paint him as a caricature 'loony lefty' (his positioning on Ireland and Palestine were nuanced but pefectly legitimate, but in an age of soundbites and echo-chambers, politicians don't get a captive audience to say "Let me explain in detail what I mean..." to)

There were also a bunch of absolute muppets amongst his following, who were loud and gave even more ammo to the anti-left.

Saying all that, elements of the Labour Party sought to destabilise him from the start - briefing against him to Tory media who lapped it up, and refusing to work with him.

It was a unique time, when there was a huge groundswell of support for a more progressive/lefty direction for Labour. I now just view it as a wasted opportunity, as Corbyn was a million miles away from being the figure 'the left' needed to be in pole position to take advantage of that moment. I personally think McDonnell is the better politician.

Additionally, it was a tough period for any Labour leader to be fighting an election, regardless of their positioning. I think is a more savvy lefty (with less exploitable baggage) was leader now and Labour produced a manifesto exactly the same as the 2017 one, they'd do no worse than Starmer would with a much more timid/centrist manifesto.

The one thing I'll never defend Corbyn on, though, is Brexit.

[Nobby Reserve]

Yeah I don't really follow politics at all but why are people still banging on about him? does he still have some sort of power? Can we not go on about Scargill as well?

It's generally the anti-Corbyn crew who bring him up.

Oh, and Sunak. Who still throws it our in PMQ's even though Corbyn is no longer in the PLP.

[Wabaloolah]

I voted for Labour under Corbyn but the main reason Labour didn't win was Corbyn wasn't trusted as a Prime Minister.

I also don't believe he wanted to be PM deep down, he's much more comfortable being a protester on the sidelines than by actually having to make decisions on people's lives.

He fell into the job by accident and his "friends" on the left wouldn't let him give it up as they unexpectedly got control of the party.

[Wabaloolah]

Yeah I don't really follow politics at all but why are people still banging on about him? does he still have some sort of power? Can we not go on about Scargill as well?

there's a whole raft of leftwing soothsayers on Twitter and other forms of Social Media who won't let him go and are damaging a potential Labour victory by their refusal to support anyone other than darling Jeremy.

He should be dumped to the annuls of history but his supporters can't let him go

[oldfordie]

The simple answer is the electorate.

Yet we all knew this before during after the 2015 leadership contest.

We warned members, colleagues, friends and family that all you had to do was look at history and look at data and numbers.

People lie. People lie to themselves but data and numbers can't lie and they told a truth that those who backed Corbyn were unwilling or blind to accept the reality. Which is of course apart from 1945 the UK has never, ever elected a Party so far to the left that Corbyn would take Labour. We were told to 'believe' like Brexiteers had to 'believe'.

Actually there are tons and tons of things in common between Corbynistas and Brexiteers.

But they didn't want to look at the numbers, didn't want to look at the data and didn't want to look at history. We just needed a 'pure' Labour Party and controlling the Party became more important than helping people and winning elections. Difference between those groups of people and the rest in the Party are that - yes we do want to control the Party. Because simply put when we control the Party we have better chances to win elections and you know, actually helping people by being in Government.

The answer is always the electorate and if you're stupid enough and dumb enough to elect an unelectable leader as leader of your Party then you've had a cracking 5 years up to 2020. Personally I endured 5 years of hell waiting for this Corbyn project to flush out and down the drain and into the sewers, where it always belonged.

Yep. Corbyn has spent his whole career associating with cranks and extremists, he spent his whole career fighting for causes that most people believed were against British interests.  he spent his whole career plotting to bring down every Labour leader, he spent his whole career voting along with the Torys opposing Labour policys, so this is supposed to be the man with true Labour values who will fight for true Labour values is it.
The whole point of the Labour party being formed was to get as many MPs into Parliament as possible. the reasons for this aren't appreciated as much these days, am sure most haven't even considered what it was actually like to live under  a one sided rigged establishment who had the power to change laws to keep people in poverty with no effective way to defend themselves from this oppression, the luxery of modern life and the freedom we have to protect ourselves from the so called establishment has made people blind to the consequences of losing elections. we are seeing those consequences now. be in no doubt these bas..would take us back as far as possible if they could. Ironic to hear people talking about someone being attacked by the establishment then attacking the party that was formed to defend us all from the establishment.
I knew the consequences of Brexit, I also thought I knew the consequences of losing the 2019 GE but it's far worse than I ever imagined, forget PR or Brexit for now, we are in a similar position as the people who suffered in the years leading to the formation of the Labour party, we have a right wing government who intend to rig the system so we are unable to fight back with any real effect. they have to be hammered to teach them a lesson.

[Mark Walters]

I prefer where we are now.

And here in a nutshell is why this country is in the position that it's in now! I guess people get what they deserve 😏

[filopastry]

Too much baggage, too many supporters ready to embarrass themselves and the party, and to be brutally honest not very bright, it still kind of amazes me that so many people seem to have pinned to much belief in him.

I would agree with the earlier poster who said it would have been far better for the left to have McDonnell as their candidate in 2015, had some of the same issues as Corbyn but just a brighter politician and actually seemed interested in getting into govt rather than "winning the argument".

[Riquende]

Coincidentally, Marina Hyde's columnn today is about supporters of certain projects & politicians feeling betrayed, and she does leave some space for Corbyn.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/27/british-politics-heroes-liz-truss-boris-johnson

Less politically successful but feeling no less betrayed are supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, who still blame the media for the former Labour leader’s failure to win two elections, the first against the worst candidate and campaign in recent memory, and the second (by a landslide) against Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson. Perhaps betrayal is easier to swallow than the idea that the last thing on earth anyone in the red wall was doing on the doorstep was regurgitating anything some twat like me had written in the Guardian. (Let’s face it, if newspaper commentary of any type were remotely market-moving, the columns warning people off Johnson – from left and right – might have effected something other than a massive majority in his favour in 2019.)

[Father Ted]

I think my political positioning is pretty close to yours.

And I agree with many of the points in your post.

The problem with Corbyn, though, was that he was too shit to be leader. Slow on his feet, lacked political instinct, was too stubborn and petty, had some big skeletons in his closet that made it easy for political opponents and the RWM to paint him as a caricature 'loony lefty' (his positioning on Ireland and Palestine were nuanced but pefectly legitimate, but in an age of soundbites and echo-chambers, politicians don't get a captive audience to say "Let me explain in detail what I mean..." to)

There were also a bunch of absolute muppets amongst his following, who were loud and gave even more ammo to the anti-left.

Saying all that, elements of the Labour Party sought to destabilise him from the start - briefing against him to Tory media who lapped it up, and refusing to work with him.

It was a unique time, when there was a huge groundswell of support for a more progressive/lefty direction for Labour. I now just view it as a wasted opportunity, as Corbyn was a million miles away from being the figure 'the left' needed to be in pole position to take advantage of that moment. I personally think McDonnell is the better politician.

Additionally, it was a tough period for any Labour leader to be fighting an election, regardless of their positioning. I think is a more savvy lefty (with less exploitable baggage) was leader now and Labour produced a manifesto exactly the same as the 2017 one, they'd do no worse than Starmer would with a much more timid/centrist manifesto.

The one thing I'll never defend Corbyn on, though, is Brexit.

I'd agree on some of that.

He wasn't meant to be leader of course, had anyone thought it was do-able they might've thought to consider a more appropriate candidate. He was just the obligatory 'might as well put someone on the list' left-wing leadership punt that inevitably went nowhere. Except this time it didn't...

I mean, even if he'd been the most impressive left-wing figure this country had seen in decades (he wasn't, clearly, just a man in the right place at the right time) and ironed out all those faults I don't think it would have mattered to his enemies - the same people would still have come after him the same way, until they got what they wanted. As they would a more savvy, acceptable lefty. I don't imagine the PLP would ever accept being usurped by people they regard with total, sneering contempt.

[Sangria]

The one thing I'll never defend Corbyn on, though, is Brexit.

Try Ukraine. If Corbyn had been Labour leader when Russia invaded in February, politics left of the Tories would be dead for decades.

[filopastry]

Try Ukraine. If Corbyn had been Labour leader when Russia invaded in February, politics left of the Tories would be dead for decades.

Yes his handling of the Salisbury attack was bad enough, but Ukraine would have been another level of shit.

[Dr. Beaker]

And here in a nutshell is why this country is in the position that it's in now! I guess people get what they deserve 😏

?

[Wabaloolah]

?

think he's thinking you mean you prefer the country where it is today I took you to mean you prefer Labour being where it is