And then we come to Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of Britain's Labour Party. Now, Jeremy Corbyn is not a politician who many ordinary people will have heard of prior to his unexpected election as the leader of Britain's biggest opposition political party. Following the equally unexpected resignation of Edward Miliband, after Labour's dramatic defeat in the 2015 General Elections.
Sadly, after nearly 18 months of being leader of Her Majesty's Opposition Party, Jeremy Corbyn is still failing, miserably, to improve the prospects of the Labour Party ever being able to form a government in the pending 2020 General Elections, or the one after that.
Jeremy Corbyn is clearly enjoying the status and relative power which comes with being leader of the Labour Party, but he remains largely at sea and inept, when it comes to moulding the party into a credible and political machine. Which ordinary people are able to identify with, in the numbers required to sweep it int No.10 and into government.
We could argue that Jeremy Corbyn's profound failure is partly due to his reputation as a purportedly 'decent and honest man.' But I find that difficult to accept.
After all, is it not the case that party politics do not any need or use for 'honest and decent' men or women, as those attributes are not the kind which promote 'success' in politics? If you like, the electorate will not find 'honest and decent' politicians sufficiently 'attractive' and 'exciting.'
It is true that Jeremy has now improved his dress-sense and his physical appearance in public, but he is still unable to exude that air of wonderment, of rugged looks which would make the discerning electorate want to 'be seen out with him', as it were.
So, even if Jeremy Corbyn was really the personification of the 'decent and honest man', which has now become almost a standard preamble to speaking of him, he has not been able to convert this image into the political ruthlessness which is necessary to succeed in politics.
Why? Probably partly because Jeremy Corbyn, despite his 'honest and decent man' persona, which, as I have already said, is something I question, simply does not have the right persona which will find resonance in today's politics.
Yes, he has been good for Labour's recruitment drive, but elections are not won by the number of party members, but by the number of ordinary electorate who are moved to go and vote for the party in elections.
There is nothing saintly or shrewd about JC's leadership of Labour. We can see this in how he showed his disdain for the people of Copeland, by pointedly delaying his comment on it; probably having only done so, belatedly, on the advise of his more prudent advisors.
As if the people of Copeland do not matter in his grand strategy to win the next general election..
Jeremy has since claimed some responsibility for the his Party's loss of the Copeland bye election, but it hardly matters anymore, as his timing is wrong. He has already given the impression that Copeland's electorate did not and does not matter to Labour. Just as how the Brexit election did not sufficiently mattered to him.
That the reasons why they were not enamoured by Labour's performance and failure to respond to their concerns about job and their community, do not matter. That the loss of their support is, as it were, not so significant, and that there are other more 'worthwhile' potential lovers to be charmed.
Instead of doing all he could to 'convince' them of how much he cares for and they matter to him, and his Party.
No comments:
Post a Comment