dsr wrote:That's a big assumption. Why would they? Under Corbyn, there are only two possible options - May's deal, or Remain. Probably May's deal. May's deal would be in many ways the best option for them - why would they renegotiate with anyone who says that they will sign any deal that the EU cares to offer? That's why May got such a bum deal - because they always believed, correctly, that when push came to shove, they could ask for the sky and she would give it.
I see your logic. I think you've expressed it unfairly, but I see it nonetheless: Considering Labour have, and I imagine will continue to, rule out 'no-deal', then the EU could surmise they needn't bother even offering a different deal to Corbyn. Logic then dictates the choice for Corbyn is May v Remain, having ruled out no-deal. (This absolutely is not the same as
sign any deal that the EU cares to offer, mind you.)
I have 2 issues with this logic: First, the EU no longer wants us to remain. We'd be too much trouble after all that has happened. Second, if Corbyn simply chooses remain (in the absence of anything else being offered) and revoked A50, the EU know Farage would be the next PM, who would promptly leave with no deal. That is, just because Labour rules out no-deal, it doesn't at all mean the UK has.
Also, regarding your subsequent post, everybody - led by the media - see Labour's customs union proposal as a simple bolt on to May's wretched deal. It absolutely is not. Once you agree to at least match the EU's citizens' rights, consumer protections and regulatory standards in goods (including food), then
a customs union logically follows, the NI border issue fades and the backstop disappears. In exchange for all these commitments, Corbyn would target state aid and public procurement exemptions. Corbyn's deal would be fundamentally different to May's - not 'softer', not 'closer to the EU', not 'Norway' -
different.