-
He made policies which are important the policies of one of the two major parties. The Green New Deal in particular, but also social housing, education, inequality, etc.. Things that are very important were made key platform goals. Dropping those in the hope of a win for the sake of a win is a terrifying outcome of this, in my opinion.
-
But he never put himself in a position where he could influence any of those things. I'll happily agree that influencing and leading policy is the party leaders role, but so to is working towards their execution.
I don't think it's personally his fault - those are the critical concerns of the Labour party. In choosing someone that the voters they need would simply never vote for they allowed it to happen that they would never be able to influence those policies.
christianSpaceman
I don't mean to be arsey about it. I just don't know what he's bought to the fore that won't just disappear.
Without execution I don't see the benefit in what he's done; the 'national conversation' has gone further right during his tenure.