I wonder if Rebecca Long-Bailey’s bizarre decision not to simply back down, delete and apologise when asked to by her party leader reflects a miscalculation that her wider role in the party as the leading member of a significant minority faction made her unsackable.

If your basic analysis of why you’re in a job is “a) he probably didn’t want me there but b) he had no choice but to give me something decent” then you have a position which looks a) weak and b) strong. It has to be managed quite skilfully, and can be, but this wasn’t it.

But assuming she didn’t want to resign on principle for this (I don’t think she did, because *she hasn’t subsequently articulated any principle she wanted to defend*) it appears to be a basic failure to think through the fact that she was accidentally forcing Starmer to sack her.

It’s also a basic failure to think through what signing up to zero tolerance of antisemitism implies, given that Starmer evidently saw the relevant section of the article as antisemitic, and she was made aware of that (she *still* hasn’t said whether she thinks it was or not).