jump to navigation

So what did the Labour leadership think of their chances on election night. June 9, 2017

Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
trackback

Fascinating insight here into their thinking from the Guardian.

On Thursday morning, the team had prepared plans for about half a dozen scenarios. The best-case scenario, regarded as highly unlikely, was forming a government. The second best, viewed as almost as unlikely, was a hung parliament. The worst case, based on one of the worst of the polls, was the Conservatives on 380 seats, with Labour dropping to 190.

And:

The scenario the team expected to be dealing with was one in the middle, which put Labour on about 35-36% of the vote.

Interesting isn’t it? Their caution was sensible though they were also right to go out professing they were in it to win etcetera (as noted A Perkins didnt cover herself in glory in complaining that same day that they were doing that but what else could they do?).

Anyhow an impressive operation in every regard.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. 6to5against - June 9, 2017

If only they had been part of an international socialist organisation, they would have known what was going to happen….

Like

WorldbyStorm - June 9, 2017

I am saying nothing 😉

Like

Jolly Red Giant - June 9, 2017

Naw 6to5 – Corbyn isn’t a Marxist – and has been compromising with the Blairites far too much. On top of that the Momentum leadership are bureaucratic and conservative.

Liked by 1 person

2. Dermot O Connor - June 10, 2017

VERY interesting piece here by Craig Murray. First part is on the Blairoid anti-JC propaganda campaign (and how big media lies were undone by social media), second part is on the boundary review, and how the new boundaries would favour tories by 18 seats (however, such a review gives JC an opportunity for deselecting blairoids). The boundary review will also cost the DUP 1 seat, so….

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/06/the-bleating-of-the-blairites/

Like

3. Dermot O Connor - June 10, 2017

Jonathan Cook with more stats, very impressive. He makes the point that only Blair’s 1997 win was % bigger than Corbyn’s, (and of course, Blair had the entire press corps on his side, whereas JC had it against). Also, Blair had Scotland, JC did not, making JC’s south of Scotland achievement all the more impressive.

Also, JC did not have to sell his soul to get it.

http://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2017-06-09/here-are-the-facts-proving-corbyns-triumph/

Norman Tebbit said after the Miners’ strike “We didn’t just break the Unions, we broke the spell”.

Well, JC has broken the spell of centrist Clinton/Blair triangulators. They’ve sold themselves out for nothing.

Like

WorldbyStorm - June 10, 2017

In 1997 the Mail, Express, Telegraph and Times didn’t give endorsements to the LP. The Sun, Mirror, Ind and Guardian did. But obviously this time around there were many fewer endorsements so your point still stands. Oddly 2001 was the point of highest endorsements for the LP, where only the Mail and Telegraph endorsed the Tories, but the Ind endorsed the LP and the LDs.

Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: