After Rachel published the piece, in which she argued that Mr Corbyn has no future in the role, she was inundated with comments ranging from “risible to downright sinister”.
They included comments describing her as a “warmonger” and a “dumb b****” to accusations of right-wing bias and “pathetic journalism.”
Rachel, pictured above, printed a selection of the comments in a separate column on the abuse she received.
However, she has also taken the decision to unpublish her Facebook page, which had around 250 ‘likes’.
In her latest column, she wrote: “For journalists, having a thick skin comes with the territory.
“Normally, I have no problem shrugging off the odd dig about my ‘shoddy journalism’ (hell, sometimes I agree with them!) but this week I found myself the subject of some serious trolling/online abuse that left me a wee bit shaken.”
Rachel added: “The comments ranged from risible to downright sinister and half my Friday evening was spent deleting them and worrying what would come next when my phone buzzed with another notification.
“I won’t whinge on forever (not outside a pub, anyway) but do want to make a few points.
“Trolling is sadly seen as par for the course these days. Many forget, or don’t care, that there is a person at the other end when they get in front of a keyboard. You aren’t shouting into space though, everyone can hear you.
“I am a local reporter, not editor of The Sun/Daily Mail or part of a conspiracy to control minds.
“Most political hacks will be delighted if something they’ve written sparks a lively debate, but it can never be right that someone suffers abuse for sharing their opinion on an issue of public interest. It is an opinion and therefore can’t be right or wrong.
“Would you rather MPs’ statements were received by complete silence? Do Corbynistas think free speech should only be used to slate Tories?”