1) "What Jeremy actually meant was..."
Thread
Another day, another clear statement by Corbyn, another round of his supporters desperately trying to re-imagine his meaning
No-one can govern like this, it can't go on
Thread
Another day, another clear statement by Corbyn, another round of his supporters desperately trying to re-imagine his meaning
No-one can govern like this, it can't go on
2) there's been numerous people re-interpreting the below:
"Jeremy's right - Labour can't stop #Brexit by itself"
That may be true, but that's not what he said, not even close
"Jeremy's right - Labour can't stop #Brexit by itself"
That may be true, but that's not what he said, not even close
3) the question was "would you stop Brexit?" Not "would Labour stop it?" But if Corbyn would *personally* do so
Secondly, he didn't say "Labour can't stop it alone" but "we can't stop it, *because the process has started* "(A50)
Secondly, he didn't say "Labour can't stop it alone" but "we can't stop it, *because the process has started* "(A50)
4) it's clear as day what he said & yet multiple supporters jump on social media to re-interpret what Corbyn "actually meant"
This can't go on, no one can lead a nation if his every comment has to wait for the "correct" interpretation
This can't go on, no one can lead a nation if his every comment has to wait for the "correct" interpretation
5) but it happens all the time - Corbyn supporters look at the words on the page but see alternative meanings, like Winston in 1984 seeing 6 fingers rather than 5.
They assert "we" means "Labour alone" when it makes no sense in context and cannot be known as an alternative
They assert "we" means "Labour alone" when it makes no sense in context and cannot be known as an alternative
6) I've seen people say "he was asked 'could Labour stop Brexit?' " when the actual question is there in black & white.
its bizarre, and deeply concerning
End/
its bizarre, and deeply concerning
End/
