Bird's views are repellent but it's pretty easy to see how that tweet is not appropriate. Frankly it's probably the inclusion of the gun that made this a suspending matter.
In what way repellant? As far as I can tell, Natalie Bird believes humans can't change sex, a view that isn't controversial among the electorate, and is scientific fact.
She has been targeted, vilified and harassed and the party has had to compensate her. Plus and ALDC, together with the weird, legally illiterate 'definition of transphobia' have done the Lib Dems a lot of damage with the public. This is another stupid, unnecessary blemish on our - hardly stellar - record.
Not sure I understand your point, for the last 2000+ years misogyny and treating women like 2nd class citizens was the consensus, now it's generally a far-right view.
Well I'd say trying to win over millions of voters would be an aim of the liberal democrats. Attacking them with hostile labels isn't going to do that.
To answer your question: no I don't think it has won Labour much support. But that's not what I'm saying. We're talking about the labels themselves here. Surely it would be mad to start calling half the country far-right because that limits the lib dems.
What you're suggesting would attract nobody to the Lib Dems, and lose them support from the LGBT community and people sympathetic towards them. Jesus how have you not noticed that from how pathetic Labour has been acting? Nobody will respect a party that'll stab their principles in the back to grovel for votes.
40
u/stewcelliott Social Liberal 4d ago
Bird's views are repellent but it's pretty easy to see how that tweet is not appropriate. Frankly it's probably the inclusion of the gun that made this a suspending matter.