There are people who think this is the natural state of affairs, so that anyone who holds some cross-cutting mixture of opinions must be confused or naive.

Maybe this is even the point - to tie potential rivals into the strategy so they have to sink or swim together. But probably just makes cabinet resignations more likely.

One theory is that it is a sacrificial lamb for internal horse-trading. The jewellery policy gets abandoned to placate the party, and in return they get through other harsh policies. Still terrible of course. And that theory may be wrong given that the policy was actually enacted in Denmark.

It may be that the way to think about politics in these circumstances changes to the way we think about war. Even in a just war it is eventually necessary to make peace with enemies for whom one has moralised contempt. Peace is better than war! You can still try to make peace with contemptible foes.

I'd add:
3 not expressing your criticisms in terms of antisemitic tropes and conspiracy theories
4 listening to Jewish people who explain that you are failing wrt 1-3 and not assuming bad faith on their part

Right, at some point you will actually have to fight your opponents, but you can influence the ground you want to fight on. E.g. if you want to argue that your opponents' policies are racist, wait till they choose a policy dividing line that makes them look racist to most people.

If a candidate says that they are for Faith, Prayer, and Charity, you know they are a secret Muslim.

Nostalgia of the centre-left is new and weird and arguably problematic, but not just a disease of hopeless politicos. The path forward is in getting the problem-solving and progressive vision stuff into the same package. I.e. the "missions" stuff is good actually, they should do that!

It's good! I do think though that the failure to be radical, forward-looking etc. is rooted deeper than in centre-left politicians. Arguably their base feels as though what really needs to happen is RETVRN (to 2006 or 2015), the time before everything went wrong.

Yes, but now they have to badger Lego to update their White House.

I wonder if your point about Obama is reinforced by the fact that to win the presidency Lincoln did not run on an abolitionist platform, and yet he did end up abolishing slavery.

To say that it is imperialism arguably underplays how bad it is. To impose a one-state solution from the outside, against the wishes of the two polities involved, is to destroy both of them as independent polities - i.e. what she is proposing is imperialist policide.

"Pizza à la Tiramisu" - that's French not Italian!

Oh yes, I'm sure this is from the perspective of parents who obsess about getting their kids into Oxbridge and therefore ignore how the rest of UK HE works.

Isn't this a thing that Oxbridge colleges have? That's my recollection, could be wrong / out of date.

I agree with the principle here, but I think the example is too simple. "Don't associate with Zionists" is obviously a silly demand; but e.g. "Don't associate with Kahanists" is not. Demands not to associate with racists and extremists can be reasonable, and we have to judge case by case.