This article by Martin Kettle on the Lib Dems (remember them?) leadership election is a textbook example of the deadeningly dreary, not to mention disingenous, output of The Guardians "star" columnists. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/15/liberalism-liberal-traditions-conservatives

During his brief autopsy of the Lib Dems GE campaign Kettle refers to "some bad seat-targeting". What he's actually talking about is a systematic campaign (remember their dodgy constituency polls?) to make it look like the deflating Liberals could win pretty much anywhere. [2]

What he doesn't mention is that The Observer helped the Libs in their tactical voting lies by pretending that the Libs could win in implausible places including Kensington & Chelsea (where they ran a vile campaign) ensuring the Tories won & an excellent MP @emmadentcoad lost. [3]

That of course was the whole point of the tactical voting campaign. For Corbyn led Labour to lose as many seats as possible. It was very successful as Labour lost lots of seats. The predictable "unintended" consequence was a hard right Tory Gov't with a huge majority. [4]

In a piece of trolling Kettle, while talking about the loss of the seats in the north due to Labours Brexit policy, states that "Starmer gets this".

If Starmer got it then why was he a prime mover in getting Labour to force a change in Brexit policy against Corbyns wishes? [5]

The truth is that Starmer and those whose main aim was to destroy a left led Labour perfectly understood the disastrous implications of changing Labours Brexit policy. Why did they push for the change then? Because the goal wasn't to stop Brexit, the goal was to get Corbyn. [6]

If this disingenous stultifying dross is all that The Guardian has to offer it's readers in way of analysis of British Politics then no wonder the paper is in a parlous state.

The big crime isn't just what The Guardian was during 2015-19, it's what it could have been. [7-END]