Tony Blair- Your views!

[RAM]

I never llliked him! He has gone from untouchable to a loser over the Iraq war!

He has blown any good politcal memory to a bad one

[Ghost Writer]

Tony Blair is the only liberal that I have ever liked. Truly a respectable man, willing to put what is right over what is politically popular. In addition, he is an excellent orator. Glad to have him on our side.

[Vinny Rafarino]

You sneaky bastard GW. Before he began bending over for dubya I'm sure you would have slagged him all the way back to '70's labour. I think you may have a career in right-wing politics.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Firstly, RAM, you really should start threads off a bit better than that.

Blair, in the public's eye, has gradually sunk to a new low. As RAM said, the war helped. But recently, the foundation hospitals, student top-up fees, firefighter strikes and the Euro have made people grow increasingly unhappy with him.

Then, those inside politics and those in Britain who know politics have completely slaughtered him because of this shake-up of the judiciary system.

Blair is good as a leader. But you can only go so far in rejecting the people's views untill you become criticised heavily. I believe Blair has taken it a step too far now. I don'd think he will be in power come the next election. It looks certain that Gordon Brown will take over as leader of the "Labour" Party

[nz revolution]

Should be sent to prison along with other members of Labour Parties around the world (I nominate the prominent members of the NZ Labour Party to go with him, anyone from Aussie going to nominate their Labour?) or sent to a tinned food factory to stand up the can that has fallen over on the conveyor belt.

Sorry if anyone actually does have that job, but I would prefer the dole/welfare to that.

I hope that union pulls the plug on Labour Party funding, when ours do that they will destroy the party that destroyed the union movement here with their Thatcherite politcs.

[Zombie]

Quote: from Ghost Writer on 11:59 am on June 22, 2003
Tony Blair is the only liberal that I have ever liked. Truly a respectable man


I never knew of a respectable politician. What planet are you from GW?

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

There have been plenty of respectable politicians my friend. These guys are amongthe most intelligent men in the country.

It's simply a case of you having no respect. The cynicism from themedia has filtered through your mind.

[redstar2000]

There have been plenty of respectable politicians my friend. These guys are among the most intelligent men in the country.

It's simply a case of you having no respect. The cynicism from the media has filtered through your mind.

And this year's BOOTLICKER award goes to: Socialsmo o Muerte!

Way to go, Sr. Muerte! I thought Fox News had it in the bag, but you easily trumped their most servile offerings.

Keep it up and you'll get that knighthood yet...the "Order of the Licked Boot" will be yours.

:cool:

[Zombie]

And this year's BOOTLICKER award goes to: Socialsmo o Muerte!

you took the words right out of my mouth RS.

SoM, please take the buttplug out of your ass the next time you want to debate.

Again, I'll ask the same question to you, what planet are you from?

Oh and just to comment on GW last post, you respect him just cos' he's being Dubya's perfect ***** don't you. ;)

[nz revolution]

Wow I never thought someone with the name Socialism or Death would defend the poodle known as Tony Blair.

Lock them up!

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

I'd like you to tell me where I defended Tony Blair. In my post, I was heavily criticising his policies and said that he needs to be replaced. Unless that is a defence in your book.

If you could all read properly, then you'd see that I said there are respectable politicians. I did not say that Tony Blair was respectable, because I don't think he is any more due to the reasons I outlined in my post.

If the criteria to win redstars "Bootlicker" award is having respect for some people who warrant it for their efforts in making this country more demcratic, then I will gladly accept it. Tell me, how much do you people know about the various MP's and peers? I'd love to know how you can criticise my view without even knowing the kinds of people I talk of. redstar, you especially. Have you ever watched the Commons? or the Lords? Have you ever heard any of the MP's, other than the big players, talking?

[Hegemonicretribution]

Quote:

If the criteria to win redstars "Bootlicker" award is having respect for some people who warrant it for their efforts in making this country more demcratic, then I will gladly accept it. Tell me, how much do you people know about the various MP's and peers? I'd love to know how you can criticise my view without even knowing the kinds of people I talk of. redstar, you especially. Have you ever watched the Commons? or the Lords? Have you ever heard any of the MP's, other than the big players, talking?

I have, but I still don't think he can be respectable until he gets a decnt hair cut;).

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

What do you mean "he"?

I was talking about nobody in particular

[Hegemonicretribution]

I meant that the no ones in particular you were talking about I have heard before. I have watched the commons and the lords. However "he" is Tony Blair.

I thought that if you knew that I had taken note of politics in the way you implied in your post, my view would be more valid.

So I suppose I was putting foward a point, that Tony Blair (subject of the post) cannot be respectable (GW started this one) unless he got a decent haircut(my view).

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Quote: from hegemonicretrobution on 4:51 pm on June 23, 2003


I thought that if you knew that I had taken note of politics in the way you implied in your post, my view would be more valid.


You haven't made a view on politicians.

[Anonymous]

I think Tony Blair plays too much on the support of Middle England and exchanges power for good policy. Some of his stuff is good and i generally think he is doing what he thinks is right, i dont like the way he is doing it though.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

He is not delivering on his promises though.

"Education, education, education" - yeah right.
"50% of people to go to University bt 2006" - so let's introduce top-up fees.

This was highlighted by Ian Duncain-Smith in the PM's Questions last week. Don't know if anyone saw that, but it was a good performance for a guy usually that boring.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 7:01 pm on June 23, 2003

Quote: from hegemonicretrobution on 4:51 pm on June 23, 2003


I thought that if you knew that I had taken note of politics in the way you implied in your post, my view would be more valid.


You haven't made a view on politicians.


The view was on Blair, and that without a decent haircut he will not get respect, such is the political background of most of his voters. Or perhaps I was making the point that that is how seriously I view him.

I respect Blair, he is an ass, but he is good at it.


Iian Ducain Smith does not get that respect as he has done nothing to deserve it as far as I can see. Then again I never saw him as I don't watch television.

The Torries really have fuck all going for them nowadays, except that labour are not liked. The bold leadership went with Thatcher, now they have shit policies and timid leaders to take them no-where. Labour has also shit policies, but the leader has the bollocks to stand up and ignore everyone, although I am sure there must be a happy mid-point?

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Of course the Tories have something going for them.

Everyone is growing increasingly frustrated with the amount of asylum seekers in Britain. The Tories have a strict policy to cut asylum which appeals to many people very much.

There is a growing anti-Euro and anti-EU feeling in Britain. The Tories, unlike Labour, heavily oppose entry to the Euro and would support a withdrawl from the EU. This also appeals to people very much.

The Tories have just intorduced a new policy of scrapping tuition fees. Despite this meaning they will also cut entry to University, this policy will appeal to many people in a more secure position in terms of getting accepted to University (or more so for those parents whose children are in a secure position when it comes to potential entry to Uni).

Clearly, the Tories do have somethings going for them. Also take their gain in seats on Labour in the 2001 election as well as their gain in the recent local elections, and you will see that the Tories are in a good position.


I have watched the commons and the lords


Then again I never saw him as I don't watch television.

Surely if you watch the Commons and the Lords like you claim you do, you therefore do watch TV and should have seen Mr. Duncan Smith.

[Anonymous]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 8:58 pm on June 23, 2003
Of course the Tories have something going for them.

Everyone is growing increasingly frustrated with the amount of asylum seekers in Britain. The Tories have a strict policy to cut asylum which appeals to many people very much.

There is a growing anti-Euro and anti-EU feeling in Britain. The Tories, unlike Labour, heavily oppose entry to the Euro and would support a withdrawl from the EU. This also appeals to people very much.

The Tories have just intorduced a new policy of scrapping tuition fees. Despite this meaning they will also cut entry to University, this policy will appeal to many people in a more secure position in terms of getting accepted to University (or more so for those parents whose children are in a secure position when it comes to potential entry to Uni).

Clearly, the Tories do have somethings going for them. Also take their gain in seats on Labour in the 2001 election as well as their gain in the recent local elections, and you will see that the Tories are in a good position.


I have watched the commons and the lords


Then again I never saw him as I don't watch television.

Surely if you watch the Commons and the Lords like you claim you do, you therefore do watch TV and should have seen Mr. Duncan Smith.


IDS is actually a damn good speaker, one of the best ive seen, perhaps only bettered by the sense of awe generated when Mr Benn (snr) took the podium.


The Education policy is ludicrous and the As-level system was shown up badly by the debarcal which resulted is the departure of Estelle Morris.

But to be honest the Tory party has not been electable since the departure of Thatcer. Major one with an incredible piece of luck, a combination of electoral campaigning and voter turnout.

Tony Blair is entrenched in Middle England and the Tories have no way of bringing them back barring disaster on the part of Bair
Effectively the Tories have very few who will vote for them, wit honly their grass root support whilst New Labour has an alientated support who have no other viable political options and the powerhous that is middle England.

I thankyou

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Why are you thanking us?


I beg to differ. The Tories are getting stronger as people become more and more discontent with Labour.

When you say "the Education policy is ludicrous", do you talk of the one I brought up which the Tories want to implement, or do you mean Labour's policy?
If you mean the former, then like I said, it is not ludicrous because of the fact that people who are secure in their position of entering Uni will not care about the cuts. If you are on about the latter, then I agree.

Estelle Morris did not leave because of the AS System. It was the marking fiasco that was the main reason for her departure. Not a great loss anyway.

You are wrong that Major's 92 victory was due to lack of turnout and luck. Indeed, it was the media who won it in 1992. The Sun's famous headline of "IF LABOUR WINS TODAY, WILL THE LAST ONE OUT OF BRITAIN PLEASE TURN OFF THE LIGHTS" on the morning of the election swung scores of votes. It was calculated that the Sun indeed saved 12 Tory seats and that 17% of Tory voters in the 92 election swung on the last day to vote Tory because of The Sun's article that day. It also did not help that Labour planned to abolish the monarchy and leave the EU had they wont that election. It was not "luck".

If the Tories have "very few people who will vote for them", please explain the recent local elections for me. As well as their gains in 2001.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 8:58 pm on June 23, 2003
Of course the Tories have something going for them.

Everyone is growing increasingly frustrated with the amount of asylum seekers in Britain. The Tories have a strict policy to cut asylum which appeals to many people very much.

There is a growing anti-Euro and anti-EU feeling in Britain. The Tories, unlike Labour, heavily oppose entry to the Euro and would support a withdrawl from the EU. This also appeals to people very much.

The Tories have just intorduced a new policy of scrapping tuition fees. Despite this meaning they will also cut entry to University, this policy will appeal to many people in a more secure position in terms of getting accepted to University (or more so for those parents whose children are in a secure position when it comes to potential entry to Uni).

Clearly, the Tories do have somethings going for them. Also take their gain in seats on Labour in the 2001 election as well as their gain in the recent local elections, and you will see that the Tories are in a good position.


I have watched the commons and the lords


Then again I never saw him as I don't watch television.

Surely if you watch the Commons and the Lords like you claim you do, you therefore do watch TV and should have seen Mr. Duncan Smith.


Good observation, although to be honest I only stopped watchin television in Oct 2002, before that I did watch it regularly. Actually, if you are being picky, I occasionly catch certainprograms. I saw a few news slots during the war on Iraq, and two sessions of question time. Both sessions were very good may I add.

Oh and to make sure I catogorize everything, a month or so ago I also watched Schindler's list.


I never said they weren't getting stronger, just that it is more down to Labour's poor policies, rather than their good ones. The education policy will win some votes, but loose others, many students struggle now, if the Torries got in they would be screwed as would the families.

As for the Assylum seekers I would say it more anything to oppose labour, not conservative is best. Hence increase in BNP.

[mentalbunny]

You know my brother actually knew someone who voted for Blair because he had a nice smile!!! So hegemonicretrobution's not far off with the hair cut thing!

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

There's been a more pro-Tory response to Asylum than a pro-BNP one though. You shouldn't get carried away with the BNP rise. Yes it's worrying, but it's not as great as people make out.

[Anonymous]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 9:36 pm on June 23, 2003
Why are you thanking us?


I beg to differ. The Tories are getting stronger as people become more and more discontent with Labour.

When you say "the Education policy is ludicrous", do you talk of the one I brought up which the Tories want to implement, or do you mean Labour's policy?
If you mean the former, then like I said, it is not ludicrous because of the fact that people who are secure in their position of entering Uni will not care about the cuts. If you are on about the latter, then I agree.

Estelle Morris did not leave because of the AS System. It was the marking fiasco that was the main reason for her departure. Not a great loss anyway.

You are wrong that Major's 92 victory was due to lack of turnout and luck. Indeed, it was the media who won it in 1992. The Sun's famous headline of "IF LABOUR WINS TODAY, WILL THE LAST ONE OUT OF BRITAIN PLEASE TURN OFF THE LIGHTS" on the morning of the election swung scores of votes. It was calculated that the Sun indeed saved 12 Tory seats and that 17% of Tory voters in the 92 election swung on the last day to vote Tory because of The Sun's article that day. It also did not help that Labour planned to abolish the monarchy and leave the EU had they wont that election. It was not "luck".

If the Tories have "very few people who will vote for them", please explain the recent local elections for me. As well as their gains in 2001.


I do indeed mean the latter.

Estell Morris resigned becaus of the marking fiasco which was an outcome of the AS-system.

John Major won bacause of : The Soapbox Tour - a great one time gimmick which won him lots of support from around the country and secondly because of the naivety and secutiry of the Labour voters coupled with the fact that many Tory voters were spurred into participating in the electoral process.

The polls prior to the election itself indicated a LAbour victory, this fact inspired many Tories to instigate a last minute change and lulled Labour voters into a false sense of security ie. they did not vote because they thought they would win it anyway.

'I thankyou' was just a nice little dramatic ending to an post, added a little bit of glitz to the topic.

I beg to differ about the strength of the Tories, if there was an election tomorrow Labour would win convincing a victory. It has been proven that the electorate will vote for a party who seems able to lead hte country strongly - this means a unified party. The current Tories contain just too many divisions to appear credible, there is also the fact that IDS is still alien to the majority of the public.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Shouldn't be so suprised. It's definately relevant.

Being a telegenic leader has become so much more important now; Kennedy .v. Nixon ("The Famous Beginning of Telegenicity"... Thatcher .v. Foot ...Thatcher .v. Kinnock ...Blair .v. Major ...Blair .v. Hague.

It's crucial today.

[nz revolution]

Socialsmo o Muerte



Sub-Comandante
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been plenty of respectable politicians my friend. These guys are amongthe most intelligent men in the country.

It's simply a case of you having no respect. The cynicism from themedia has filtered through your mind.

-----
HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!

I think that counts as defence of Tony Blair (the man who this thread is about)

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Funky Monk...I think the fact that 17% of the Tory voters swung due to one newspaper is more relevant.

Maybe if there was an election today, Labour would win. But I was indicating the growing strength in the Tory position. You talk of the divisions in the tory party, what about the Labour divisions.

nz revolution....

Zombie said, "I never knew of a respectable politician". So I answered that there are some respecatble politicians. So despite the thread being about Tony Blair, Zombie raised a sub-point to the thread which I answered to. If you think that my statement which you spoke about referred to Tony Blair you are quite simply illiterate. I did not write his name in there or any previous posts in the context of having respect for him, yet you appear to think I did. You clearly, therefore, have very bad reading skills.

[Anonymous]

Firstly id like to see the evidence linknig a 17% swing to just a single article. The article is famous and i may have jarred support but i think a swing of that magi=nitude cannot be attributed to a dingle incident.

When we talk of divisons with the Labour Party i do not think we can attribute to them the same relevance they hold within the Tory party. During his rule Tony has demonstrated that he can exercise tight control of his party as demonstrated with the pager policy. Yes, he has lost a couple of high-profile ministers, yes Brown is behind him urging him to fall but there are too many New Labourites to shift his control of the party.

Perhaps you are right, perhaps the Tory party is growing in strength, but it is still not a credible challenge to New Labour and i do not forsee that it will be for some time (legacy of Thatcher)

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

It has been calculated by psephologists. It iscommon knowledge among politics students. It is in just about every book on contemporary politics.

Some say 14%, some say 17%. Either way,it is very important.

[Anonymous]

Dont seem to be able to find anything about it in 'British Politics Today'

Cant see anything in 'British Politics in focus'

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Poor books then.

Like I said, it is common knowledge among politics students. As is the headline itself.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Maybe "British Politics Today" doesnt have it because it happened 11 years ago.

[Anonymous]

These are the standard books for A-level politics.

And i think you are being pedantic if you are talking about a title.
Both these books cover the last century, british Politics in Focus in a fair bit of detail.

And i have heard the headline but have never heard such large statistics attributed to it

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Try "Contemporary British Politics". Or any Media related Politics books.

Also, most "Politics PAL" update pamphlets since 1993 will have it in.

6 seats were saved...14% (arguably 17%) swing.

Maybe you should consult your teacher about it.

[Anonymous]

I dont really know if i can be bothered, unlikely to study British politics again.

[Hegemonicretribution]

I think I read something similar when I was doing politics at school. But the book was produced as a revision note by the tutor and it is very unnoficial.

It was also only a subnote.

Perhaps it is just a great myth, like was already mentioned it happened 11 years ago, and who can accurately guage how much effect it had. Some people lik to think themselves more independant and individual than the sort that would be swung because their newsprint said so.

Then again there are voters who don't care, like those that pay attention to haircuts;) or a smile as mentalbunny mentioned (I know someone else who did for the same reason)

There are some voters who see little difference in parties, or have become disheartened and the vote based on something like a headline may be their way of showing how little they care nowadays.