Why would you even REPEAT those "perceptions" when you know there's nothing to them? And why would you credit the Panorama broadcast when you know it was largely driven by a smear campaign the Labour Right has been perpetuating ever since Corbyn became leader?Ken , perhaps you should look up the definition of “perceived” before you throw out words like “lies”
Corbyn has flaws-though no more than anybody else who has ever led his party-but why on earth would you trust the claims of people who are obsessed with getting the British public to believe that a man who has campaigned against all forms of bigotry, throughout his life, is a secret bigot? Whatever you might feel about Corbyn, even if you think he's a bad leader, could he possibly be so intolerable that the use of slander is justified in the name of forcing him out?
And, looking at it on the level of practical politics...since Labour can't win the next election without a massive level of voter turnout, and there can't be a massive turnout if young voters stay away from the polls in disgust, how do you figure any successor to Corbyn can avoid a massive decline in youth voter turnout if there is the "perception", as you like to say, that that successor is only in the job because Corbyn was forced to stand down as the result of a successful campaign of vilification and slander? We all know that would be the widespread perception if anybody the PLP would approve of ended in the leadership.
