It's a choice between Corbyn or Brexit. Guess who gets the vote?

In a piece channelling P Toynbee's advice to vote Labour but with a peg on your nose (Blair era I think), poor old G Younge agonises about nasty choices:

For those who want to stop no deal, Jeremy Corbyn is the only hope

It begins with an indignant defence of electoral proprieties:

The political and media establishments are still struggling with the choice the Labour party made in 2015. The fact that the decision was emphatic, had to be made twice following the failed coup, and was effectively endorsed by the electorate in 2017, has not been enough. On some level, that goes beyond the political to the psychological: they refuse to accept his tenure as legitimate.

Well they must have reason,surely? He told lies during his campaign? Only a small proportion of the electorate voted for him as leader? Nice moderate people like Chuka Umunna oppose him? He has a secret agenda with secret backers? He threatens to split his party? Come on Mr Younge... No:

Corbyn is the leader of the Labour party. He has a mandate. He represents something other than just himself. That is not a statement of opinion but of fact.

The real reason for support is not hard to detect of course:

For there is no route to a second referendum without Labour; there is no means of defeating Johnson without Labour. The party remains the largest, and by far the most effective, electoral obstacle to most of the immediate crises that progressives wish to prevent. Once again that is not a case for Corbyn or for Labour, but for reality.

Younge has no problems identifying facts or reality, of course, but not everyone sees it quite as clearly:

there is a clear contradiction too. Some of those who have devoted the past few years to stopping any kind of Brexit [surely you mean defending Parliamentary democracy?] now claim that the only thing worse than a no-deal Brexit – the worst kind of Brexit they could possibly imagine – is the leader of the only party that can stop a no-deal Brexit.

Then more agonising:

None of this is a reason to necessarily support Labour or Corbyn. [Surely it is just that for Younge?] There are all sorts of reasons, from antisemitism to an insufficiently pro-European stance, as to why progressives might decide not to back Labour at this moment; and the calculations are very different outside England and in those areas where tactical voting offers the best hope of getting rid of Conservatives. And given the redistributive agenda that Labour laid out at last week’s conference, there are all sorts of reasons why progressives might back it, too.

Then a final cry of alarum and despondency:

Johnson’s first couple of months in office have illustrated that what’s at stake is not a contest between bad and worse. This is a leader who uses the police as props; breaks the law to undermine democracy; and stokes division with rhetoric that can and has been easily co-opted by the far right, pitting a section of the population against parliament and the judiciary. Johnson’s cabinet and its agenda, both with regards to Brexit and beyond, do not represent a mere shift to the right but a paradigmatic sea-change in British politics that, where Europe is concerned, may have irreversible consequences.