Yes, because disliking Corbyn based on facts and past performance is clutching at straws. We should all just swallow the Momentum lies and propaganda.
All those young people who apparently get their information from many sources - why do they then believe sheer lies about Corbyn? Why, when there is is not one singe shred of evidence to support it, do the lies persist? Why do people give credence to sites such as Sqwawkbox that ran a story saying they had definitive proof Corbyn negotiated with Unionists during the peace process, basing this revelation on a news story that Unionist representatives had been invited to a Labour conference in the early 90s? No mention of Corbyn whatsoever in the original article, but apparently the vague possibility that he might have been in the building at the same time seemed to be 100% guaranteed proof that he would have been frantically negotiating with them. Because Corbyn has such a demonstrable track record of talking to both sides. FFS, he wouldn't even LOOK at Cameron on the way to the state opening of parliament.