Sal Paradise wrote:
Is that a good thing for Labour - he lost by 60 seats, most leaders would have done the honourable thing? How Labour see this as some kind of victory defies belief. That is only eclipsed by Queen Nicola no wonder they want to be bedfellows.
And the Tories and the DUP wanting to be bedfellows is what exactly? The DUP leader like Sturgeon does not sit in the House of Commons. We were told in 2015 if we voted Labour we'd be being dictated to by the unelected (to parliament) leader of the SNP. Tories to accept the same from the leader of the DUP? Hypocrites or what?
You also ignore the context within this election was fought.
if this were an election fought in say 2003 when there was no Brexit, no SNP having wiped Labour out in Scotland the election before and no cabal of Labour MP's openly hostile to the leader for two years before the election you might have a point.
Context here is everything and to try and say "Yeah, but Labour still lost" is failing to acknowledge that.
The SNP have been told to give Indyref2 a rest. It's no longer necessary to vote SNP if you want a left of centre MP in Scotland. Sure the Tories did better than Labour but both parties won seats off the SNP. So this result gives Labour a credibility in Scotland it lost. Voters who voted Tory for unionist reasons only now know they can vote Labour instead. So do SNP voters.
It's up to Labour to show a united front now and quit the bickering that was on show before the election was called. Corbyn has suddenly become electable but more importantly credible. The Tories thought they could ignore him and his policies. How will they appeal to the young voters who voted against then because of being shafted with tuitions fees for example?
This result is great for Labour because it's blown things wide open but left the Tories having to deal with Brexit (which will annoy one section of their party immensely) and, in case you missed it, worsening economic conditions.
