Drowned in Sound

Search

Drowned in Sound Event sponsored tours and events.

Home > Community > Social

If Tony Blair was such a terrible leader and a total liar...

19 votes
? by guntrip

how did he win three General Elections?

guntrip | 03 May '08, 15:20 | Send note | Report this | Reply

yes

1997 - John Smith would have probably won the election, in fact pretty much any Labour politician would have won it, John Major's government was in dire straights.

2001 - William Hague's platform was so utterly out of touch with the population it was embarrassing

2005 - Michael Howard's policies showed absolute contempt for the intelligence of the British people, he only made very modest gains.

The fact that the Conservative party still exists in a viable form shows that Blair did not inspire the country outside of the suburbs of Middle England.

smiggs | 3 May '08, 21:06 | Send note | Report this | Reply

Because

he wasn't a terrible leader?

fullerov | 3 May '08, 15:21 | Send note | Report this | Reply

I always thought Blair was a pretty good leader

he hada couple of bad times but for the post part he gets the thumbs up from me.

Yesiamaduck | 3 May '08, 15:23 | Send note | Report this | Reply

if blair hadn't been so consumed

by hubris he'd still be PM and he'd win the next general election at a canter.

soapy | 3 May '08, 15:27 | Send note | Report this | Reply

with the media being like it is in the UK

EVERYONE is a terrible leader and a liar. There are just degrees of terribleness.

dan_thw | 3 May '08, 16:11 | Send note | Report this | Reply

^very much this

in a country where we're so proud of democracy and go on about it all the bloody time, the public do have a tendency to sidle up to unelected newspaper tycoons rather than elected officials.

Panic | 3 May '08, 16:31 | Send note | Report this | Reply

i dont think he was any worse than anyone else would have been

he tried his best i think, and for the most part did a pretty decent job, and the contrast between his success and brown is quite apparent. Not perfect, but fairly decent.

fucktherave | 3 May '08, 20:20 | Send note | Report this | Reply

well

the unfair FPTP electoral system makes him look more popular, only 22% of the population voted Labour in 2005. i suppose he didn't really win 3 general elections, Labour did. The opposition had unpopular leadership for most of it. And Tony Blair was actually good!

cat-g | 3 May '08, 20:29 | Send note | Report this | Reply

Blair wasn't a terrible leader.

Infact, history would've had him as one of the best leaders, had it not been for some pesky Eastern country we were compicite in butchering. The boom in Britain under Blair was actually quite unbeleivable, especially considering what had come before, and what looks like it might come afterwards - either a period under a clueless dour tool, or a Blair-clone Tory government. Obviously i was only a young boy under Blair, and i have no real interest in politics, but if i knew what i was talking about i might argue that reforms in education, progess in Northern Ireland and a booming economy might outweigh Iraq, immigration & a complete collapse of public safety. Maybe not. But i like him, and i think that even despite Iraq he'd win another election now.

twee_loser | 3 May '08, 20:36 | Send note | Report this | Reply

Are you hinting at the electorate are

by and large, a bunch of ill educated, ill informed idiots?

JoeDiddly | 3 May '08, 20:50 | Send note | Report this | Reply

how can

you say they are not?

zahidf | 3 May '08, 23:47 | Send note | Report this | Reply

I didn't...

JoeDiddly | 4 May '08, 11:55 | Send note | Report this | Reply

yes.

Yes, they are.

deadcats | 4 May '08, 01:06 | Send note | Report this | Reply

Because:

a) In my opinion, post-Iraq invasion, Blair is a war criminal.
b) In my opinion, anyone voting for Blair after the invasion of Iraq is endorsing a war criminal.
c) In my opinion, all people who endorse war criminals are idiots.

THEREFORE

d) In my opinion, all people who voted for Blair post-Iraq invasion are idiots.

deadcats | 4 May '08, 01:12 | Send note | Report this | Reply

good logic

!

expostfacto | 4 May '08, 01:58 | Send note | Report this | Reply

This narrows it down to

just over 24,400 people in Sedgefield really.

JoeDiddly | 4 May '08, 11:57 | Send note | Report this | Reply

You live there?

I'm from Spennymoor, which is why I get so very annoyed about it.

deadcats | 4 May '08, 23:52 | Send note | Report this | Reply

ah no

according to your profile you don't live there at all...

deadcats | 4 May '08, 23:52 | Send note | Report this | Reply

For the same reaons as outlined here:

http://www.drownedinsound.com/articles/3246791#r3248661

Essentially the politics of personality, exactly why two previous Tory Mayoral candidates with policies couldn't defeat Ken Livingstone but one without any apparently clue what he was doing could.

Blair's got a fantastic personality, slimey fuck that he is. No wonder he beat the shit out of the opposition. Even against Cameron I reckon he'd have won in 2010. All the shit that was on him would have washed off by then.

TheoGB | 4 May '08, 11:40 | Send note | Report this | Reply

....

There is something completely mesmerising about Blair.

God knows I've tried to fight it.

TheDailyBumbler | 5 May '08, 20:06 | Send note | Report this | Reply