leddy Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Do you think his short days of being prime Minister are near an end ? with the back benchers plotting his downfall !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHD Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 I'm not into politics in a big way Leddy, but I just wanted to say I love your thread title FWIW, with the state in which this country is in, I seriously doubt if he will be around for the full innings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnFrusciante Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 I think he'll survive only the 10000000th crisis of his Premiership, i'm hoping he falls, his reign as Prime Minister has been one of mediocrity, relaunches and economic failure. The biggest thing going against Brown at the minute is not, his personality or his performance as Prime Minister, it was the fact that he was been Chancellor of Britain since 1997, he rather arrogantly professed in 1999 that he had stopped the Boom and bust cycle forever, yet only months after he left the treasury, Britain finds herself in the worst economic crisis she has faced in over 30 years. His cause is no doubt helped by the lack of any alternative within the Labour party. Besides it's unlikely the 'rebels' will get the 70 MP's needed to force a leadership challenge. On another interesting note, i think the failure of Brown is down the the intellectual bankruptcy of New LAbour, they stand for absolutely nothing, back in the day Labour stood for the workers, it stood for the poor. New Labour like the old Liberal party before them stand for nothing. Tony Blair was able to disguise this through his spin and leadership nature, Brown cannot, and now people realise New Labour is simply a New Dog with no tricks. Brown has continually issued new policies and relaunches, however all they are in my opinion are a chance for a quick headline with very little substance, notice the irony? Brown will survive, however once the election arrives the Conservatives will wipe the floor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 I'm not into politics in a big way Leddy, but I just wanted to say I love your thread title FWIW, with the state in which this country is in, I seriously doubt if he will be around for the full innings. Agreed. It never bodes well when MP's start revolting and quitting. I don't think he was ever really PM material. He's never struck me as a leader. Has he actually done anything since he became PM? I can't seem to recollect anything. And I won't be voting for the Tories, Labour or the Lib Dems come election time. Monster Raving Looney Party all the way Their joint leader is a cat (Catmandu) and has been dead for some time, but at this rate, what can possible make the country any worse? (I'm actually joking, I'll probably go for Labour or Lib Dems. Or I just won't vote.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnFrusciante Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 I don't think he was ever really PM material. He's never struck me as a leader. Has he actually done anything since he became PM? Sums it all up about the 'Great Leader'. In terms on policy, no he has done little, he has introduced small things, mainly for cheap headlines, even so such policies were simply because he backtracked on the Budget, the same way he backtracked on Northern Rock and calling a General election around this time last year. As the great Vince Cable put it " He has went from Stalin to Mr.Bean in 6 months! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted September 16, 2008 Author Share Posted September 16, 2008 I'm not into politics in a big way Leddy, but I just wanted to say I love your thread title FWIW, with the state in which this country is in, I seriously doubt if he will be around for the full innings. Thanks, Golden brown was a classic I think he'll survive only the 10000000th crisis of his Premiership, i'm hoping he falls, his reign as Prime Minister has been one of mediocrity, relaunches and economic failure. The biggest thing going against Brown at the minute is not, his personality or his performance as Prime Minister, it was the fact that he was been Chancellor of Britain since 1997, he rather arrogantly professed in 1999 that he had stopped the Boom and bust cycle forever, yet only months after he left the treasury, Britain finds herself in the worst economic crisis she has faced in over 30 years. His cause is no doubt helped by the lack of any alternative within the Labour party. Besides it's unlikely the 'rebels' will get the 70 MP's needed to force a leadership challenge. On another interesting note, i think the failure of Brown is down the the intellectual bankruptcy of New LAbour, they stand for absolutely nothing, back in the day Labour stood for the workers, it stood for the poor. New Labour like the old Liberal party before them stand for nothing. Tony Blair was able to disguise this through his spin and leadership nature, Brown cannot, and now people realise New Labour is simply a New Dog with no tricks. Brown has continually issued new policies and relaunches, however all they are in my opinion are a chance for a quick headline with very little substance, notice the irony? Brown will survive, however once the election arrives the Conservatives will wipe the floor! I agree with alot of what you say but whats really sad is that the only alternitive is The Torries and again they ripped this country apart under Thatcher..I am afraid I have no time for any politicians of any party, it has become just like America where both the main parties have very little difference to them !! It just goes full circle with them both and the Liberals are not really a creditable alternative, its all very depressing as politicians on all sides just feather their nests ! I think Brown will be out before the election myself !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnFrusciante Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 I, it has become just like America where both the main parties have very little difference to them !! It just goes full circle with them both and the Liberals are not really a creditable alternetive, its all very deprressing as politicians on all sides just feather their nests ! Very true, it's a sad fact that the only difference between New Labour and the Tories, is that you expect sleaze from one and generate it from the other! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Sums it all up about the 'Great Leader'. In terms on policy, no he has done little, he has introduced small things, mainly for cheap headlines, even so such policies were simply because he backtracked on the Budget, the same way he backtracked on Northern Rock and calling a General election around this time last year. As the great Vince Cable put it " He has went from Stalin to Mr.Bean in 6 months! You made a valid point in your earlier post about New Labour no longer being respresentative of what 'Old' Labour was about. The average blue collar worker can no longer identify with Labour's policies. I'm not of a Tory 'background', and don't vote for them myself, so the only other alternative, aside from Labour, I have are the Lib Dems. And they are never in any real serious contention when it comes to elections. There will, inevitably, come a time when people will stop voting for any of these parties all together. I'm in no way political, but I like to think we have the right man or woman when it comes to the running of our country. Gordon Brown doesn't fit that bill. How is he tackling crime? Isn't it now the 26th child in London to have been killed by knife or gun crime this year? How the fuck can he stand in Downing Street and not wonder what he's doing wrong with a figure like that? How has education improved? I don't even understand why they're talking of upping the age limit from 16 to 17 for school leavers. What's the point of making them stay for another year? At this rate college's will lose out if all their first years are still at school. And by the time they reach their second year they'll probably either stay on at that school or be sick to the back teeth of education. How is a student to learn these so called 'hands on' diplomas when they're stuck in a classroom? Not to mention that levels of truancy could go through the roof. Education is so dire in this country. My school was all about doing well and getting into university - the implication being that if you left at 16 you were either a dosser or stupid. They almost laughed when mentioning apprenticeships as a career option (they had to mention it, but given their choice, they wouldn't have). They pretty much persuaded everyone to want to go to university (ensuing a massive cash installment for the school at it's success rate for GCSE's and A Level's) and now look? We badly need manual workers (i.e. the very kids who would've been apprentices) and we have to look to the Continent to get them. If the government stops trying to persuade everyone to go to university (and some clearly aren't suitable), maybe we can rely on the citizen's of this country instead of bringing in every bugger and their mum's from the Eastern Block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireOpal Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 (I'm actually joking, I'll probably go for Labour or Lib Dems. Or I just won't vote.) The leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg, is kind of dishy isn't he? Sorry - back to serious politics now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 The leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg, is kind of dishy isn't he? Sorry - back to serious politics now. He reminds me of the Tory leader, David Cameron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 He reminds me of the Tory leader, David Cameron Is that good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 Is that good Not for me it isn't. Wouldn't say I was attracted to either of them, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 Not for me it isn't. Wouldn't say I was attracted to either of them, really. Nice that we are having a nice adult in depth debate on politics...ooops I mean the looks of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheZeppyWanderer Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 I can see Brown being given a face-saving exit before the next general Election. What could happen is that there could be a leadership election - Brown wins it with a big majority, but far from unanimous, so he graciously steps down, in the same way Mrs Thatcher left office. The Labour party faithful surely know that if he is allowed to lead them into the next election, it's going to be a bloodbath - mainly down to Gordon being a Scotsman. It's nothing personal against him really (although many people WILL resent him having become PM without ever having won the job in any kind of election). The problem is, middle England, (wrightly or wrongly) are sick to death of the anomaly of Scotland and Wales having their own separate assemblies whilst still having big, even disproportionate representation at Westminster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 I can see Brown being given a face-saving exit before the next general Election. What could happen is that there could be a leadership election - Brown wins it with a big majority, but far from unanimous, so he graciously steps down, in the same way Mrs Thatcher left office. The Labour party faithful surely know that if he is allowed to lead them into the next election, it's going to be a bloodbath - mainly down to Gordon being a Scotsman. It's nothing personal against him really (although many people WILL resent him having become PM without ever having won the job in any kind of election). The problem is, middle England, (wrightly or wrongly) are sick to death of the anomaly of Scotland and Wales having their own separate assemblies whilst still having big, even disproportionate representation at Westminster. Yes we need our own parliment now too !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 Nice that we are having a nice adult in depth debate on politics...ooops I mean the looks of them Well the statement was in response to FireOpal. And it was off topic. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 Well the statement was in response to FireOpal. And it was off topic. Sorry. No NO I had a smiley at the end, I was joking so no worries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnFrusciante Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 Nice that we are having a nice adult in depth debate on politics...ooops I mean the looks of them You sound like writers for the The Sun or the Daily Star l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I have got a horsey Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 The problem is, middle England, (wrightly or wrongly) are sick to death of the anomaly of Scotland and Wales having their own separate assemblies whilst still having big, even disproportionate representation at Westminster. How is that possible unless the Scottish and Welsh constituencies are composed of a smaller number of people than in the English constituencies, thereby giving Scotland and Wales more members in parliament? Is that the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 I can see Brown being given a face-saving exit before the next general Election. What could happen is that there could be a leadership election - Brown wins it with a big majority, but far from unanimous, so he graciously steps down, in the same way Mrs Thatcher left office. The Labour party faithful surely know that if he is allowed to lead them into the next election, it's going to be a bloodbath - mainly down to Gordon being a Scotsman. It's nothing personal against him really (although many people WILL resent him having become PM without ever having won the job in any kind of election). The problem is, middle England, (wrightly or wrongly) are sick to death of the anomaly of Scotland and Wales having their own separate assemblies whilst still having big, even disproportionate representation at Westminster. Could you imagine if the situation was reversed and an Englishman was leader of Scottish Labour? It'd go down like a cup of cold sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheZeppyWanderer Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 Could you imagine if the situation was reversed and an Englishman was leader of Scottish Labour? It'd go down like a cup of cold sick. precisely. Also, there are Scots who are MPs in English constituencies, but no way would an candidate who happens to be English be elected in Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheZeppyWanderer Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 How is that possible unless the Scottish and Welsh constituencies are composed of a smaller number of people than in the English constituencies, thereby giving Scotland and Wales more members in parliament? Is that the case? well, in a nutshell, the British Parliament (The House of Commons) consists of 646 MPs drawn from all over Britain - they represent constituencies in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland with each MP therefore representing about 95,000 people. In this way, each region of Britain has input and influence on how the nation is run. However, in 1998 both Wales and Scotland were granted their own separate assemblies as well - whilst still retaining their respective members of parliament at Westminster. Thus, to the English voter (and taxpayer) it appears that Wales and Scotland wish to break away from the British political system (NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT) but still want to have a say in how Britain is governed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leddy Posted September 18, 2008 Author Share Posted September 18, 2008 Thus, to the English voter (and taxpayer) it appears that Wales and Scotland wish to break away from the British political system (NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT) but still want to have a say in how Britain is governed. Thats an oxymoron in my book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.