Labour / Tory Party meltdown Referendum fallout

Nearly everyone's true political leanings start on far l/r politics, how many politically minded people have worn che Guevara t shirts, how many youths have made a nazi salute?. Then they grow up and work out that Actually fascism was evil and communism accounted for more murders than the aforementioned then realisation comes. Stable government has to please the silent majority. For every 10 stw demo activists there's probably 100's of people sat at home saying just look at these nobheads on telly Mary, for every edl demo ...

Take Iraq out of the question and ask who was the best pm in the last 50 years, ask who united (ugh) this nation over dividing it?
 
sir baconface said:
To give you a different viewpoint, I was a Thatcher fan and sick of the insipid wankers who followed her as party leader. After the initial disappointment of a Labour win, I soon realised Blair was indeed Tory Lite: a more talented, PR-savvy version of her successors. I was comfortable with him for a while but soon tired of his which-way-does-the-wind-blow policies. The main difference between Labour and Tory is on managing the economy. Blair and Brown's "investment" was largely on the never-never, which left the nation a large bill.

Ironically, Blair's tainted legacy comes from his own obsessive wish to match Thatcher as a popular war leader.
Click to expand...
You don't win successive or multiple terms as pm if you're not popular, but the systematic dismantling of our nations ability to produce/manufacture 'stuff' has lead us to where we are now. As a country we are over reliant on service industries, banking, insurance etc. We can all see the effect thats had. As for Iraq, it's a stain. Whoever was pm at the time though, it was gonna happen. It's an uncomfortable truth, we, like France, will stand shoulder to shoulder with the US, unlike France though the momentum morons would sooner see us stand shoulder to shoulder with the homophobic serial human rights abusers that is Russia
 
bluemoonmatt said:
You don't win successive or multiple terms as pm if you're not popular, but the systematic dismantling of our nations ability to produce/manufacture 'stuff' has lead us to where we are now. As a country we are over reliant on service industries, banking, insurance etc. We can all see the effect thats had. As for Iraq, it's a stain. Whoever was pm at the time though, it was gonna happen. It's an uncomfortable truth, we, like France, will stand shoulder to shoulder with the US, unlike France though the momentum morons would sooner see us stand shoulder to shoulder with the homophobic serial human rights abusers that is Russia
Click to expand...

I like the Ruskies, the French too.
 
bluemoonmatt said:
You don't win successive or multiple terms as pm if you're not popular, but the systematic dismantling of our nations ability to produce/manufacture 'stuff' has lead us to where we are now. As a country we are over reliant on service industries, banking, insurance etc. We can all see the effect thats had. As for Iraq, it's a stain. Whoever was pm at the time though, it was gonna happen. It's an uncomfortable truth, we, like France, will stand shoulder to shoulder with the US, unlike France though the momentum morons would sooner see us stand shoulder to shoulder with the homophobic serial human rights abusers that is Russia
Click to expand...

I don't think many PMs would have chosen to get as close to Bush as Blair did in the aftermath of 9/11. Most would have been a little more distant. Bush didn't really need any encouragement to react aggressively and, whilst Blair might have thought that he would be the voice of reason, he ended up just being Bush's cheerleader. Blair was completely seduced by the idea of being the US's best buddie.
 
bluemoonmatt said:
You don't win successive or multiple terms as pm if you're not popular, but the systematic dismantling of our nations ability to produce/manufacture 'stuff' has lead us to where we are now. As a country we are over reliant on service industries, banking, insurance etc. We can all see the effect thats had. As for Iraq, it's a stain. Whoever was pm at the time though, it was gonna happen. It's an uncomfortable truth, we, like France, will stand shoulder to shoulder with the US, unlike France though the momentum morons would sooner see us stand shoulder to shoulder with the homophobic serial human rights abusers that is Russia
Click to expand...

i don't recall France joining in Bush's i-rack fuck up? Freedom fries anyone.....
 
bluemoonmatt said:
Haha fuck it, I'm voting obi
Click to expand...

CnQOjgxW8AIeGgz.jpg
 
cibaman said:
I don't think many PMs would have chosen to get as close to Bush as Blair did in the aftermath of 9/11. Most would have been a little more distant. Bush didn't really need any encouragement to react aggressively and, whilst Blair might have thought that he would be the voice of reason, he ended up just being Bush's cheerleader. Blair was completely seduced by the idea of being the US's best buddie.
Click to expand...
Stopped reading in the first sentence if you think that you're beyond deluded welcome to labour.
 
bluemoonmatt said:
I'm lol(ing) at bojos new job I assume he's been told the term piccaninie isn't in popular use now
Click to expand...
He's actually the perfect guy for the job. Well known globally and well read in history. A man who has a proven record at connecting with a wide audience and as British as they come.

My bet is he will be a roaring success
 
Just seen the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, say that Cameron "nearly paid off the deficit". Piss poor reporting from a supposedly knowledgeable journalist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top