ks.234
Half way to Infinity
I agree with all of that, I just don’t agree that it’s necessarily re-writing history. It’s his opinion, and as much you and I might disagree with him, he hasn’t distorted the pastI think you do KS. He sees the ambiguity issue from purely a Leave position as if keeping a few Brexit Party voters wouldn't have then lost even more Remainers (of which there are far more in Labour's support). He also (of course) did not accept that Corbyn was in issue despite him quite clearly being the biggest issue - something that both Labour leavers and remainers actually agreed on.
Finally, no humility at all when confronted with Blair's correct assessment that the offer of an election was an 'elephant trap' for Labour.
In fact, on the Leave/Remain issue he has history on his side. For all I argued against Leave in all its forms, looking back from where we are now, both the LP and the country would now be better off with a leave Deal that included membership of the CU and SM and the possibility of a trade deal with the EU that ensured the safety of our NHS.
On Corbyn, yes he was an issue, but the reasons for that are complex and more important, they’re now irrelevant. To keep going back to dissecting Corbynism, what ever that is, will only play into the hands of Labour’s opponents and affect the next Labour Leader negatively.
Finally, Blair was absolutely correct about the bear trap. Agreeing to the election was a huge mistake. But as McC pointed out on Marr, Labour’s options were hamstrung when Swinson had said she would agree to an election. If the Lib Dem’s had got behind an anti No Deal alliance/agreement proposed by Lucas, Sturgeon and Soubrey, things might’ve been different, but once Swinson had sided with Johnson, and the alliance/agreement broken down, the accusation that Labour was frightened of an election, frightened of a democratic process, would have grown louder and louder with consequences even more disastrous when the election inevitably came.
So, yes McC is, in my opinion, a dinosaur who for the sake of Labour should confine himself to Union matters. But re-writing history? Not so sure.