Our unelected PM.......
02 June 2009, 04:10 PM
#1
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our unelected PM.......
Over and over on SN, we here about how poor it is we have an unelected PM, and how much better it will be when we get rid of him etc etc. SN is mainly Conservative, but no one ever mentions the fact that the last Conservative PM was also unelected.
Why does Gordon Brown garner such attacks for being exactly what his Conservative forbear was
Carrying on from that, you didn't elect David Cameron as party leader either (admittedly, you could turn away from voting Conserative if you didn't like the leader, but their leader is irrelevant now anyway).
Geezer
Why does Gordon Brown garner such attacks for being exactly what his Conservative forbear was
Carrying on from that, you didn't elect David Cameron as party leader either (admittedly, you could turn away from voting Conserative if you didn't like the leader, but their leader is irrelevant now anyway).
Geezer
02 June 2009, 04:35 PM
#3
I think you have a fair point: Major took over from Thatcher in November 1990, the subsequent general election was in April 1992 - 17 months after he took over. Whilst he was as charismatic as a piece of cucumber he did actually manage to win the 1992 general election.
Brown on the other hand took over from Blair in June 2007 and is still there by his fingernails, 24 months on and looks like nothing short of a few megatons will shift him until he absolutely has to go. Can they actually win a general election with him in charge?
Brown on the other hand took over from Blair in June 2007 and is still there by his fingernails, 24 months on and looks like nothing short of a few megatons will shift him until he absolutely has to go. Can they actually win a general election with him in charge?
02 June 2009, 04:41 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1998
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 June 2009, 11:28 AM
#7
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
03 June 2009, 11:29 AM
#8
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geezer
03 June 2009, 11:41 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Essex scooby less crew :(
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All Labour are doing now is trying to limit the damage. If they can restrict the Conservative majority at the next election they know there are some hugely unpopular decisions to make during the next term, i.e. tax rises and spending cuts.
Labour hope that this will sway the public against the tories and return them to power after just 1 term.
That's why we need a general election now, let the public decide who they want to run the country and let them get on with it.
03 June 2009, 12:43 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over and over on SN, we here about how poor it is we have an unelected PM, and how much better it will be when we get rid of him etc etc. SN is mainly Conservative, but no one ever mentions the fact that the last Conservative PM was also unelected.
Why does Gordon Brown garner such attacks for being exactly what his Conservative forbear was
Carrying on from that, you didn't elect David Cameron as party leader either (admittedly, you could turn away from voting Conserative if you didn't like the leader, but their leader is irrelevant now anyway).
Geezer
Why does Gordon Brown garner such attacks for being exactly what his Conservative forbear was
Carrying on from that, you didn't elect David Cameron as party leader either (admittedly, you could turn away from voting Conserative if you didn't like the leader, but their leader is irrelevant now anyway).
Geezer
Les
03 June 2009, 12:55 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
whos evers at the top will be attacked, no mater who it is.
all polititions yell how bad the other side is but never come up with real solutions to problem. As well as a bunch of con men (and women for the pc lot) that is lol
i can't see any of the current crop of crooks doing any better even if flash is crap, at least flash has experiance of running the economic side of the situation which should be the biggest concern at the min.
all cameron does is bark, labour's crap, labour's crp, labour's crap at the top of his voice.
all polititions yell how bad the other side is but never come up with real solutions to problem. As well as a bunch of con men (and women for the pc lot) that is lol
i can't see any of the current crop of crooks doing any better even if flash is crap, at least flash has experiance of running the economic side of the situation which should be the biggest concern at the min.
all cameron does is bark, labour's crap, labour's crp, labour's crap at the top of his voice.
03 June 2009, 12:58 PM
#13
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are forgetting that he was almost about to call an election, especially when it looked good for his chances at the time, but he chickened out with a specious excuse and that caused him to lose face pretty seriously before he continued to screw up as he has done.
Les
Les
Geezer
03 June 2009, 01:16 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 4,518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 of the differences ..
1) when Major replaced Thatcher it was sudden and relatively unexpected. No explicit promises had been made that Thatcher would lead until the next election. We went into the last election with Labour making it clear that Blair would lead for that term with the inevitable handover to Brown towards the end.
2) There was a meaningful leadership contest within the conservative party that at least allowed a debate on the direction and the succession. Ok - extremely limited as it was only MPs that had a say but there was a contest. The lack of any contest or debate around Brown is still hurting him today.
I would be absolutely in favour of a rule that any replacement of PM by his party should force a General Election within say 12 months. Immediate would potentially destabilise the country - but the electorate should be given the guarantee they will be allowed their say.
1) when Major replaced Thatcher it was sudden and relatively unexpected. No explicit promises had been made that Thatcher would lead until the next election. We went into the last election with Labour making it clear that Blair would lead for that term with the inevitable handover to Brown towards the end.
2) There was a meaningful leadership contest within the conservative party that at least allowed a debate on the direction and the succession. Ok - extremely limited as it was only MPs that had a say but there was a contest. The lack of any contest or debate around Brown is still hurting him today.
I would be absolutely in favour of a rule that any replacement of PM by his party should force a General Election within say 12 months. Immediate would potentially destabilise the country - but the electorate should be given the guarantee they will be allowed their say.
03 June 2009, 01:25 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geezer is quite correct ....... we do not elect a leader in this country, we elect a party - and we elected Labour.
We have what we elected, end of.
Looks very much like our economy will be the first to emerge from the turmoil .... not something which would have happened under the Tories (who, you may remember, suggested that we do absolutely nothing!).
People are feeling rather well off at the moment, and outside of the Tory loving SN, people are intelligent enough to see who runs the economy best - that's Labour!
I'm not going to vote Labour again .... and the Tories have not a chance in hell of attracting my vote. But, out of the two - Labour are the better choice.
We have what we elected, end of.
Looks very much like our economy will be the first to emerge from the turmoil .... not something which would have happened under the Tories (who, you may remember, suggested that we do absolutely nothing!).
People are feeling rather well off at the moment, and outside of the Tory loving SN, people are intelligent enough to see who runs the economy best - that's Labour!
I'm not going to vote Labour again .... and the Tories have not a chance in hell of attracting my vote. But, out of the two - Labour are the better choice.
03 June 2009, 01:29 PM
#16
The Aussie economy grew by 0.9% in Q1 so bollox to that Pete!
Pete in drivel posting shocker...
03 June 2009, 02:08 PM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
...
I would be absolutely in favour of a rule that any replacement of PM by his party should force a General Election within say 12 months. Immediate would potentially destabilise the country - but the electorate should be given the guarantee they will be allowed their say.
I would be absolutely in favour of a rule that any replacement of PM by his party should force a General Election within say 12 months. Immediate would potentially destabilise the country - but the electorate should be given the guarantee they will be allowed their say.
Dave
03 June 2009, 02:44 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 June 2009, 02:49 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geezer is quite correct ....... we do not elect a leader in this country, we elect a party - and we elected Labour.
We have what we elected, end of.
Looks very much like our economy will be the first to emerge from the turmoil .... not something which would have happened under the Tories (who, you may remember, suggested that we do absolutely nothing!).
People are feeling rather well off at the moment, and outside of the Tory loving SN, people are intelligent enough to see who runs the economy best - that's Labour!
I'm not going to vote Labour again .... and the Tories have not a chance in hell of attracting my vote. But, out of the two - Labour are the better choice.
We have what we elected, end of.
Looks very much like our economy will be the first to emerge from the turmoil .... not something which would have happened under the Tories (who, you may remember, suggested that we do absolutely nothing!).
People are feeling rather well off at the moment, and outside of the Tory loving SN, people are intelligent enough to see who runs the economy best - that's Labour!
I'm not going to vote Labour again .... and the Tories have not a chance in hell of attracting my vote. But, out of the two - Labour are the better choice.
Of course the party leader is one of the big factors in an election.
Les
03 June 2009, 02:54 PM
#21
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 of the differences ..
1) when Major replaced Thatcher it was sudden and relatively unexpected. No explicit promises had been made that Thatcher would lead until the next election. We went into the last election with Labour making it clear that Blair would lead for that term with the inevitable handover to Brown towards the end.
1) when Major replaced Thatcher it was sudden and relatively unexpected. No explicit promises had been made that Thatcher would lead until the next election. We went into the last election with Labour making it clear that Blair would lead for that term with the inevitable handover to Brown towards the end.
2) There was a meaningful leadership contest within the conservative party that at least allowed a debate on the direction and the succession. Ok - extremely limited as it was only MPs that had a say but there was a contest. The lack of any contest or debate around Brown is still hurting him today.
Geezer
03 June 2009, 07:38 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: York
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I think I am centre left, rather than Conservative and still think that on principle we should not have an unelected PM. Cameron is not elected, but he would be if there was a General Election and he became PM.
In terms of politics though, I have no clue what Brown's politics are, I just think he is a buffoon.
Even worse - one of his key Cabinet appointments isn't even an MP!
03 June 2009, 09:02 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only those voting in his constituency would vote Cameron into Government ..... the rest of SN would be voting for the Tory Party - and whoever they choose as their Leader.
03 June 2009, 09:19 PM
#24
Some key facts:
John major: Came in to power in November 1990 During the Gulf war
Brown : Came in to power in June 2007, there was no war (apart from a total mess in the middle East).
Major: called an election in April 1992; After 15 months in power
Brown: Not yet called an election; Has been in power for nearly 24months
Major: Won the general election with 14,093,007 votes in 1992
Tony Blair won with 13,518,167 votes in 1997 ( "landslide" yeah right as a percentage, yes. But Major still had more votes in 1992
)
Repeat general election reults for Blair are: 10,724,953 in 2001 and 9,562,122 in 2005 ALL less than the number of votes Major had in 1992 .
Brown: Most likely not to win any election
I'm sure there is some more little factoids I can dig up (And FYI, I'm a right wing Marxist 
)
John major: Came in to power in November 1990 During the Gulf war
Brown : Came in to power in June 2007, there was no war (apart from a total mess in the middle East).
Major: called an election in April 1992; After 15 months in power
Brown: Not yet called an election; Has been in power for nearly 24months
Major: Won the general election with 14,093,007 votes in 1992
Tony Blair won with 13,518,167 votes in 1997 ( "landslide" yeah right as a percentage, yes. But Major still had more votes in 1992
)Repeat general election reults for Blair are: 10,724,953 in 2001 and 9,562,122 in 2005 ALL less than the number of votes Major had in 1992 .
Brown: Most likely not to win any election
I'm sure there is some more little factoids I can dig up
(And FYI, I'm a right wing Marxist )
Last edited by ALi-B; 03 June 2009 at 09:22 PM.
03 June 2009, 09:28 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 June 2009, 10:09 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ali-B, I think you're being more than a little unfair over your quoting of John Major's votes as you completely fail to mention he ran for elction alongside Neil Kinnock... even I voted for him beucase of that.... well maybe not, but I certainly didn't vote for Kinnock.
03 June 2009, 10:11 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: York
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tell me a voter who will not be aware that a vote for the Conservatives is vote for Cameron as PM.
03 June 2009, 10:25 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's assume that Cameron (god forbid) dies the day after the election - would you claim that another election needs to take place as we have now not the PM we thought we were going to get?
No, thought not ..... and it's the very same with Brown.
03 June 2009, 10:45 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: York
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree - I am not denying what actually happens however I do think that it would be appropriate for any mid-term new PM should go to the polls to get the mandate.