[Bored chemist]

I imagine a passing mod will split off this "tangential" discussion of what a politician didn't actually do.

Corbyn got them elected by the simple process of never actually answering a question or proposing a policy on anything.

No.
He had policies. Indeed, he had had pretty much the same policies for about 50 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Jeremy_Corbyn

But the BBC decided it was better to publish a faked picture of him in a Russian hat than to tell anyone what his policies were.
 As for not answering questions, you seem to have muddled him with someone else.
It was Boris who actually hid in a fridge to avoid questions (and illegally prorogued parliament to stop the opposition answering them).
As far as I recall, the only question he refused to answer was whether or not he would "push the red button".
Which is, of course, the correct thing to do when someone asks a potential commander questions about military strategy.


And the point remains; it was the Tories who screwed the UK.
They introduced a brexit poll, then failed to say what people were voting for.
Then, when it was clear that the mood of the population had changed they refused to revisit what had only ever been an advisory vote, but ploughed on with their policy that crippled the UK.

There really is no rational way to say that Corbyn did it.

[alancalverd]

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Which Corbyn did.

No entirely his fault on the major issue: he was a lifelong eurosceptic, leading a europhile opposition to a eurosceptic govenrment headed by a europhile, whose policy was dismissed by the electorate so the governing party elected a europhile leader to enact a eurosceptic referendum decision. Result: shambles. Then they dumped the leader and elected a liar, who they then dropped in favor of a financial incompetent, and so on down to the economic sewer.

But I still think Corbyn actually pulled the chain.   

[Bored chemist]

good men to do nothing." Which Corbyn did.

He roughly doubled the membership of the party to make it the biggest in Europe.
And he actually got rather close to winning.

graph.png (188.71 kB . 1394x701 - viewed 920 times)

And then the party stabbed him in the back.

Brexit pulled the chain.

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

Corbyn, the staunch Eurosceptic, showed leadership with a complete and utter lack of backbone adopting a policy against the will of the labour heartlands, cowtowing to the will of the condescending labour MPs liberal London centric mantra of "labour voters are stupid and didn't understand the Brexit vote".  Essentially he gave labour voters no where to turn except to the conservatives, there was already the libdems, labour lite for europhiles.

Anyone would think Corbyn didn't want the job.

[Bored chemist]

Most Labour voters were remainers.

[alancalverd]

Citation needed

[Bored chemist]

Citation needed

Why?
I thought it was common knowledge among those paying enough attention to, for example, realise that it was Boris who didn't answer questions.
But, here you are.
"The widely respected British Election Study (BES) conducted a face-to-face survey of 2,194 people across the country.

Its central estimate for the 2017 election was that 30% of Labour voters had voted Leave in the referendum."
from
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48039984
Or
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2017-election

[alancalverd]

Seems entirely feasible since the 2017 election wasn't about Brexit, which had been settled a year earlier by the referendum.

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

Seems entirely feasible since the 2017 election wasn't about Brexit, which had been settled a year earlier by the referendum.

Until it was dug up in 2018 . If you have one party representing the majority vote of the referendum it doesn't take a genius to work out who will win.