Following the political tone in NSR.

I actually think he'd make a decent Prime Minister, let alone leader of the UKIP, from what i've seen of him anyway.

Does anyone vote UKIP? Do they actually have any policies not related to getting out of Europe? Are they a credible alternative?

 

No!

What a tw*t!

Come back William Hague - all is forgiven!

 

I'd vote for him - he would make a wonderful PM.

 

LOL, why is he a tw@t?!

 

He's certainly slimey and 2 faced enough to be PM

 

No! He's a television presenter, not a potential PM with power and *real* responsibilities. I am sure that the reason you think he'd make a good PM is because of the way he presents himself, that's what he's trained to do all his life, it doesn't mean that he can run a country Tel. All IMO of course you muesli eating fop

 

He's a LEFTIE

 

Can imagine him asking 'Sharon' - after latest bombings


"So how does that make you feel"

 

Sorry - I did not mean to infer that Mr. Kilroy-Silk is in any way comparable to a certain part of the female anatomy. Oh no, I really did not mean that at all.

However, the fact that he is comparable, in many ways, to a smarmy, two faced, disingenuous, substandard permatanned orange skinned journalist has not escaped my attention.

 

True, Karl, but Tony Blair has made a career on precisely that! And i agree with RKS's central tenet of disassociating with Europe, so i'm wondering what the downsides are.

I'm a bit nervous that a lot of potential Tory voters will think the same way too, given the non-persona in charge of the Conservative Party, thus gifting Labour a third term.

 

Yes but Tel, what are the realistic options over there?
You have;
M Howard, about as dynamic as Charmin Ultra and with no alternative in his party.

R K Silk, a well presented, presenter able to air views and pose carefully scripted questions to carefully selected audiences.

T Blair, a proven failure running a party with other potential leaders ready to take up the reign and prove themselves equally useless.

If the options remain that bad, Blair will win.

 

Err...do you lot have some short memories or what?

What did Robert Kilroy Silk do before he was a TV chat show host?

He was the Labour MP for Ormskirk then Knowsley North sitting in parliament from 1974 to 1986 I think. Ironically he left the party as it was becoming too militant - now there's irony for you.

Anyway I think that the above would mean he probably better qualified than some to be in parliament wouldn't you say?

tiggers.

 

Agree with that tiggers, sorry I didn't know about his history as I live in the Fatherland. He's still permenantly orange though

 

..and I think he also use to be a barrister before that. There's no denying that he's a clever bloke, and not just limited to being a tv presenter.

Having said that, I don't think he's any better or worse than any of the other leaders. They're all as bad as each other (just in slightly different ways) IMHO....

 

No worries Karl, I was just surpised no one had mentioned it in the thread.

 

Why is that ironic, tiggers?

 

If there is anything that would make me vote for Michael Howard, it's Kilroy. The guy is pure slime. He's not even a good speaker.

 

How can you say that Kilroy is slime and Howard isn't. In my opinion, Howard is one of the slimiest ones out there, even worse than Blair and that's saying something.... !!!!

 

He left the party in 1986 as it was becoming too militant whereas now IMHO the Labour Party has shifted totally the opposite direction (in grass roots terms) to occupy the centre and even some of the centre right political spectrum, admittedly not on all issues, but on many.

 

also, he's now a member of UKIP which is arguably even more militant than Labour was when he left it...

 

I never said Howard isn't. Kilroy is slimier.

 

If the levels of apathy dropped a couple of % in this country, he could potentially become one of the most dangerous politicians in this land......whether you agree with him or not, he has had the b*ll*cks to say what many people think, rare commodity in todays US based *democracy*

 

We'll agree to disagree. Personally I think they're just as bad as each other (although Howard is a little creepier IMO).

 

Killroy isn't the leader of UKIP anyway. Roger Knapman is and after the results of the last European elections not many think he'll give up the job.

 

Personally i don't associate UKIP with militancy, but their agenda does seem somewhat limited. Knapman should step aside, Hartlepool or not, and give RKS a chance to prove what he's made of.

 

Would i vote for him.......nah..

1.He's been tango'd
2.Slimy two faced g1t
3.Loves himself too much
4.Self richeous and smug
5.Has anyone noticed his column is always about immigrants and terrorists,then he says he's not a racist.....yeah,whatever
5.Oh,and as a credible policy,withdrawl from the EU is stupid.

 

Kilroy is crap. Did you see him on HIGNFY? They verbally destroyed him. He had visibly shrunk under the desk by the end of the programme.

UB

 

Having said that, as an MEP I think he'd be good.

 

This is exactly why I would vote for him - apparently immigration applications would all be processed within 2weeks with the UKIP, and anyone coming from a safe country (ie most immigrants who come through Europe) would be deported.

 

No