It wasn't obvious that Labour were going to win in 1945 though - they were going into the election with just 150 or so seats against Churchill as the hero leader. From what I've read most people expected they'd do a lot better but a win certainly wasn't obvious - indeed, the likes of Herbert Morrison told Attlee privately that they'd be contesting his leadership after the election because he was holding them back from the victory they felt they deserved, until they actually got it!

 

Not to mention that The Times didn't endorse Labour again until 2001 - even for those obvious wins in 1966 and 1997, they withheld the endorsement.

I think it was pretty clear that Labour would win in 1945 although the scale of their victory was a surprise. The evacuation of thousands of children from the inner cities gave a lot of people in rural areas their first opportunity to see just how much poverty there was in the UK. Any respect for Churchill was overridden by support for a party that was seen to be committed to implement the recommendations of the Beveridge report.

I think it was pretty clear that Labour would win in 1945 although the scale of their victory was a surprise. The evacuation of thousands of children from the inner cities gave a lot of people in rural areas their first opportunity to see just how much poverty there was in the UK. Any respect for Churchill was overridden by support for a party that was seen to be committed to implement the recommendations of the Beveridge report.

It's easy to say all that in retrospect. The widespread opinion within the media (even on Election Day itself) was that Churchill would win. Hence it can't really be said that The Times supported Labour because victory was obviously going to them, given amongst the commentariat it certainly wasn't.

It's easy to say all that in retrospect. The widespread opinion within the media (even on Election Day itself) was that Churchill would win. Hence it can't really be said that The Times supported Labour because victory was obviously going to them, given amongst the commentariat it certainly wasn't.

I'll look at that in more detail later but the first thing that stood out from your second link was that Labour had been ahead in the opinion polls for some time.

Did I say we shouldn't even try to fight against it? My original point was against popchartfreak's facile statement that going all out against the rich didn't matter 'because they were never going to vote Labour anyway' - their influence goes beyond that. That isn't a reason to not go against the interests of the rich, but I don't think there's been a single government in the West in the last fifty years that got elected on a platform of totally declaring war on the interests of the rich without ending in failure.

 

Didn't advocate all-out war on the rich, sorry, that would be suicide. I advocated stop being a wet rag and actually say something of substance against those rich in power who are constantly pulling out crap in the media to keep themselves rich. Sucking up to them is counter-productive and won't change their views and propaganda one iota. Nothing facile about that. Miliband is so laid-back he may as well be planking 24/7. If he can't handle the media then he should pick someone in his team who can to speak on his behalf.

 

The article Labour-list Mylene Klass article was priceless. Says it all. It won't hit grannies on benefits.

 

Interesting as the historical in-depth discussion is on the newspapers support for past left-wing parties is, it's not of that much use to 2014, where, as I said, we have the net, twitter, several existing newspapers, the BBC, word-of-mouth, logic, fairness, and coherent non-soundbite bullsit opportunities to put forward a fair deal for an unfair society that hasn't challenged the status quo since Thatcher took hold.

My litmus test is always that, if the Daily Mail commenters back a "left-wing" stance on something, it really must be public opinion. These are some of the top-rated comments on the Daily Mail story about Myleene:

 

"Is Klass living in la-la Richland? I don't know a single granny living in a mansion. Obviously if they live in mansions they are rich by definition. What is wrong with taxing the rich please?"

 

"...Poor little Myleen in her mansion.....amazing what bathing in a bikini in Celebrity Jungle can do for a womans career ....and bank balance...."

 

"You dont hear her moan about the bedroom tax,when you tread on the feet of the rich they squeal.if you dont want to pay your fair share myleen emigrate.you wont be missed"

 

"Idiot Klass said on proposed mansion tax "you can't point at things and tax them" Sure you can. IDS said there's a bedroom, and there's a tax."

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-28...arget-rich.html

I'll look at that in more detail later but the first thing that stood out from your second link was that Labour had been ahead in the opinion polls for some time.

They had, though polling wasn't renowned for its accuracy at the time - let's not forget Dewey-Truman three years later.

My litmus test is always that, if the Daily Mail commenters back a "left-wing" stance on something, it really must be public opinion. These are some of the top-rated comments on the Daily Mail story about Myleene:

 

"Is Klass living in la-la Richland? I don't know a single granny living in a mansion. Obviously if they live in mansions they are rich by definition. What is wrong with taxing the rich please?"

 

"...Poor little Myleen in her mansion.....amazing what bathing in a bikini in Celebrity Jungle can do for a womans career ....and bank balance...."

 

"You dont hear her moan about the bedroom tax,when you tread on the feet of the rich they squeal.if you dont want to pay your fair share myleen emigrate.you wont be missed"

 

"Idiot Klass said on proposed mansion tax "you can't point at things and tax them" Sure you can. IDS said there's a bedroom, and there's a tax."

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-28...arget-rich.html

I was disgusted at how favourable a write-up she got from most of the media despite some of the most flagrantly out of touch statements. Give me a two million pound garage any day...

Also: "You can't tax a glass of water". Actually it already is taxed indirectly through water rates, not that any of the privatised companies operating in the UK actually pay their fair share of corporation tax anyway.

 

It is pretty worthless engaging with people like that, their ignorance speaks more than they ever could.