As a lifelong labour supporter, I get what you mean, but ultimately feel as though I’ve been duped by this logic one time too many; the labour party are closer to the modern tories than they are the labour that brought us reforms like the NHS and so on.
I’m tired of labour being the only viable option because they’re the limp-dicked version of the Tories; Corbyn was the closest we got to seeing a supposedly left wing party actually introduce some socialist policy; and look at the furor that kicked up in the papers… The powers that be were clearly concerned about him, as we had a real chance for change (particularly with him having sights on taxing the rich their fair share) but instead he was smeared and the party showed its true colours by jumping at the opportunity to oust him.
No man or woman is above corruption; and people shouldn’t blindly follow anyone; but Corbyn has a lifetime record of activism… So if the options are Tory lite Vs a new party led by a lifetime activist. The question for me isn’t; “will this split the labour vote” but rather “why would anyone continue to vote labour, despite it being ultimately fruitless?”.
It wasn’t the Tories that just said no to a 500k strong petition to repeal the online safety act afterall. Fuck the Tories and fuck the Tory lites.
echodot@feddit.uk 7 months ago
I feel like Reform are more likely to split the conservative vote than Jeremy Corbyn is likely to split the Labour vote. Mostly because the left has a very complicated relationship with him, he’s truly awful at being a politician.
Meanwhile Farage is a good politician, he’s good at playing up to a crowd, he’s good at taking advantage of controversy.
Also of course signing up to the party newsletter doesn’t mean that you’ll vote for them when the time comes. A lot will be doing it to try and send a message to labour. I’ve signed up to the newsletter but I’m not particularly inclined to actually vote for them. Not unless labour gets substantially worse.