[Politics] Next PM (proper poll).

[Bry Nylon]

Starmer, it seems to me, is in the unusual position of not being a particularly effective Leader of the Opposition (I believe he would be a far better deputy) - but I think he would actually be a good PM - especially after the complete moral vacuum and chaos of the Johnson government.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Exactly the same here. When I started to become interested in politics, we had people like Geoffrey Johnson-Smith and Tim Renton as MPs in this area. We are just in Wealden, but were members of Tim Renton's local association for a while. Most members were not City types, but local businessmen and women in the area. Tim was a superb local MP, even though he was a Government Minister. I then joined the Battersea association when I lived in London (I've been back in Sussex since 2017 since my Dad died).

What did it for me was Brexit and the utter garbage told to people to get them to vote for it. It has been a nightmare as predicted, and every gain that has been claimed since then would have been possible if we were still EU members. Then, when Theresa May resigned, to elect Boris Johnson instead of the outstanding candidate, Rory Stewart, has done it for me as far as voting is concerned.

Yes, I admit that I voted for the Conservative candidate in Battersea in 2019, but she was a Remainer and had done an excellent job as Cabinet Member for Housing at Wandsworth Council, and I wasn't very impressed by the Labour MP, but I have since changed my view - she has beaten great odds to become an MP, and my tenants know her through the Parliamentary Christian networks). I won't be doing the same again. This latest business is just the last straw. If I still vote in Wealden (I still have my flat in Battersea, though rented out), I will vote Liberal Democrat; if I vote in Battersea again, it will be for Labour.

As for the result of an election, if it happened this or next year, I suspect it would be a hung Parliament, with Labour probably just ahead, but if Boris Johnson is replaced I would think a Conservative victory again is the most likely result.

Wow. That post really hits home. It pleases me not that we have a government (and may still have the same government after the next election) that can create such a reaction in someone who would ordinarily support them. I'm quite shocked, actually. To hell with party politics. This is beginning to feel like an existential threat.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Want!

Ah


That'll be one off the Tories and one more to Labour then.

 

[Randy McNob]

Starmer, it seems to me, is in the unusual position of not being a particularly effective Leader of the Opposition (I believe he would be a far better deputy) - but I think he would actually be a good PM - especially after the complete moral vacuum and chaos of the Johnson government.

Agree. He's no better or worse than David Cameron, how is Cameron electable and Starmer not?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Starmer, it seems to me, is in the unusual position of not being a particularly effective Leader of the Opposition (I believe he would be a far better deputy) - but I think he would actually be a good PM - especially after the complete moral vacuum and chaos of the Johnson government.

Just been chatting with Mrs T about who has been a 'great' PM in the past. The answer, surprisingly, was nobody or perhaps Churchill (during the war). There are three who had big personalities, Blair, Thatcher and Boris, all of whom won initially because the opposition were terrible and their personality attracted voters (perhaps less so for Thatcher in 79, but she certainly grew a personality fairly quickly thereafter). And yet....the bigger the personality the more rancour and hatred it engendered. I know people who still hate Thatcher (I suspect I'm one of them), and others (on the left more than the right) who hae Blair and, of course, wrt Boris you can guess the rest.

And yet MacMillan and Wilson are almost forgotten. Britain 'never had it so good' under MacMillan. And my recollection of the 60s was a time of great change and progress, employment still high, and a 'national concensus' on many issues.

And there are, of course, events. Sunny Jim would have won in 78 had he gone to the country, but he carried on and the bloody unions decided to shit on him and us, and we had the Winter of Discontent.

What we remember about leaders is so influenced by the distortion of the retrospectroscope, our own personal circumstances and our confirmation bias.

So, back to your point, yes, the rather unassuming man, Starmer, may make a good PM, despite his rather ascetic demeanour on the opposition front bench.

 

[GT49er]

Just been chatting with Mrs T about who has been a 'great' PM in the past. The answer, surprisingly, was nobody or perhaps Churchill (during the war). There are three who had big personalities, Blair, Thatcher and Boris, all of whom won initially because the opposition were terrible and their personality attracted voters (perhaps less so for Thatcher in 79, but she certainly grew a personality fairly quickly thereafter). And yet....the bigger the personality the more rancour and hatred it engendered. I know people who still hate Thatcher (I suspect I'm one of them), and others (on the left more than the right) who hae Blair and, of course, wrt Boris you can guess the rest.

And yet MacMillan and Wilson are almost forgotten. Britain 'never had it so good' under MacMillan. And my recollection of the 60s was a time of great change and progress, employment still high, and a 'national concensus' on many issues.

And there are, of course, events. Sunny Jim would have won in 78 had he gone to the country, but he carried on and the bloody unions decided to shit on him and us, and we had the Winter of Discontent.

What we remember about leaders is so influenced by the distortion of the retrospectroscope, our own personal circumstances and our confirmation bias.

So, back to your point, yes, the rather unassuming man, Starmer, may make a good PM, despite his rather ascetic demeanour on the opposition front bench.

No 'great' for Clement Attlee then? Shame ..................

 

[Randy McNob]

Greatest PM

 

[portslade seagull]

I don't see anyone forcing a leadership challenge ("Split! Split!"), forcing these MPs to stand (I really doubt Cooper sees herself as the right fit, and Nandy has already tried once and got a massive 16% of the vote), and them actually winning a leadership challenge. None of this is remotely likely. I am not a particularly active member but I don't have the sense my fellow members are as fickle and quixotic as you seem to imagine.

Would having either of these as labour leader tip the balance for you enough to vote labour?

To be honest Corbyn going was enough but Starmer doesn't have that voter appeal that's required

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

No 'great' for Clement Attlee then? Shame ..................

The NHS, indeed. However labour bottled it, under pressure from the medics, and allowed consultants to parasite the NHS for private practice forever after. I couldn't believe what I was seeing when I came back to the UK in 86. A consultant cardiologist where I worked was one of the first (if not the first) to be sacked, and he was an unbelievable shit and should have been booted out years before. I appreciate that politics is the art of the possible, but still....

Attlee also kept rationing for too long. This is all before my time, but didn't Churchill get back in largely by promising to bin rationing? Oh the irony - labour 'austerity' doing for them.

Attlee's grandson, the third earl, is a conservative.

Attlee was also a one term PM so can't be considered in the same bracket as Thatcher and Blaire. I was discussing how certain personalities seem to be remembered as special, however. Perhaps Attlee was more important and, dare I say it, a force for the good than Thatcher and Blair.

As for Johnson, I can only hope he's found out and becomes unelectable more quickly than Blair and Thatcher became unelectable. I have modest hopes in that regard.

 

[GT49er]

The NHS, indeed. However labour bottled it, under pressure from the medics, and allowed consultants to parasite the NHS for private practice forever after. I couldn't believe what I was seeing when I came back to the UK in 86. A consultant cardiologist where I worked was one of the first (if not the first) to be sacked, and he was an unbelievable shit and should have been booted out years before. I appreciate that politics is the art of the possible, but still....

Attlee also kept rationing for too long. This is all before my time, but didn't Churchill get back in largely by promising to bin rationing? Oh the irony - labour 'austerity' doing for them.

Attlee's grandson, the third earl, is a conservative.

Attlee was also a one term PM so can't be considered in the same bracket as Thatcher and Blaire. I was discussing how certain personalities seem to be remembered as special, however. Perhaps Attlee was more important and, dare I say it, a force for the good than Thatcher and Blair.

As for Johnson, I can only hope he's found out and becomes unelectable more quickly than Blair and Thatcher became unelectable. I have modest hopes in that regard.

Shortages more than rartioning, I think - a ration coupon was no bloody use to anyone if the desired objects just weren't there to be had. I guess after the war, people were wanting miracles from Attlee's government - sure, they got them too - the NHS (flawed as it was, but art of the possible, as you say), the welfare state, gas, electric, water and transport brought into public ownership, but maybe people didn't feel the benefits soon enough, or wanted more, or different miracles. Still the best government we ever haf, IMHO.
The other reason, of course, that Attlee only had one term in office - and it's not likely to be a very popular fact in some quarters - is votes for women. One of the interesting things I learned whilst studying for my politics degree in the 1970s, as shown by numerous demographic studies into voting patterns, voting practice, etc, was that from the end of the war up to and including 1970, every General Election in Britain would have returned a Labour Government - if we hadn't given women the vote!

N.B. Note to any potential mouth frothers. I am NOT advocating taking it away from them!

 

[Hamilton]

I won't be voting for them, but it will still be the Tories, or it will be hung.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Shortages more than rartioning, I think - a ration coupon was no bloody use to anyone if the desired objects just weren't there to be had. I guess after the war, people were wanting miracles from Attlee's government - sure, they got them too - the NHS (flawed as it was, but art of the possible, as you say), the welfare state, gas, electric, water and transport brought into public ownership, but maybe people didn't feel the benefits soon enough, or wanted more, or different miracles. Still the best government we ever haf, IMHO.
The other reason, of course, that Attlee only had one term in office - and it's not likely to be a very popular fact in some quarters - is votes for women. One of the interesting things I learned whilst studying for my politics degree in the 1970s, as shown by numerous demographic studies into voting patterns, voting practice, etc, was that from the end of the war up to and including 1970, every General Election in Britain would have returned a Labour Government - if we hadn't given women the vote!

N.B. Note to any potential mouth frothers. I am NOT advocating taking it away from them!

Very good post. Thank you for that.

When I was in my teens and early 20s, the conservatives certainly seems to fit with some women's preferences; nice men in suits, charmers like Paul Channon, Peter Carrington, Alan Clark, Cecil Parkinson and Ronald Allen*, not smell shouty working class types in donkey jackets with mad bulging eyes and comb-overs. Winners. Better providers.

On a related tack, if I may, I have always felt that some people get put off voting labour because they don't see themselves as labourers. Sounds a bit silly, perhaps. But the horny-handed sons of toil isn't a club many of us want to join. I'm sure Mr Tony would have changed the name of the party to 'New Party' had he got all of his way

*David Hunter of Crossroads Motel