Backing Blair

2 braincells you say? Probably (and hopefully) not. I think a lot of people see Blair as the least worst option and Howard the worst worst option. As for Kennedy, I'm not sure he's taken very seriously outside his party. Howard is a most unpleasant man and has revelled in taking the Tories further to the right to nullify the position now taken by Labour. He seems to think that middle England is crying out for a return to Maggie's days and although there are still quite a few that shed a tear for the old girl, he'll never win an election on that platform.

does it matter who is? I see no change.

everytime i see tony blair on the tele i think of bart simpson and i start laughing..........

My MP is Charles Clarke and I checked out his voting record in the past term in government - just to check I would be voting for someone I wanted: How Charles Clarke voted on key issues in the 2001-2005 parliament (From Public Whip) : Very strongly for introducing foundation hospitals. see speeches, votes Very strongly for introducing student top-up fees. see speeches, votes Very strongly for Labour's anti-terrorism laws. see speeches, votes Very strongly for the Iraq war. see speeches, votes Quite strongly for introducing ID cards. see speeches, votes Quite strongly for the fox hunting ban. see speeches, votes Moderately for equal gay rights. see speeches, votes Hmmm. Well, moderately for equal gay rights is better than not at all - but still, I'd like to know what counts as moderate... very strongly would have been nicer. Quite strongly for fox hunting ban - okay. Ummmmm.... other than that.....what should I do, eh?

Pray :)

Ha ha! Apparently, it's pointless even thinking about voting for Blair in my area. Conservatives in 1st place and LibDems in second. Frankly, I don't see much difference between them all at this point. Blair lost his vision sometime back in the late 90s; the other parties are just as useless, if not worse. What happened to Paddy Ashdown?

He got caught with his pants down.

What? Paddy? With his pants down? Shurely shome mishtake.

No, the Paddy Pantsdown thing didn't seem to hurt his reputation too much, though. As a member of the Labour Party, I'll be voting for Tony (or his representative in my area, at least). I still reckon Labour's the lesser evil and a few of my friends are candidates in obscure, unwinnable constituencies. I agree a reduced majority's likely but my hunch is that Blair will be around for a year or two yet.

Blair will win again. That is my prediction. It will be a close run thing with the Liberal democrats doing particularly well, but Labour will triumph with a reduced majority (at least that is what I sincerely hope) . Do not write off come-back kid Blair yet... many a man would have stumbled long ago with the scrutiny that he has been through. I think in time he will come to be regarded as one of the greatest of British Prime Ministers.. . but then I like making rash predictions.

If greatness is earnt through longevity, then I'm sure history will be kind to Blair. Certainly (John Smith's demise aside), Blair was the only Labour leader who was electable in recent times, but to do it (and stay there) he has had to sell his soul to the middle ground. Maybe that's what he always intended to do or maybe he is a serial pragmatist, turning any which way to stay ahead of the polls, all the time forgetting why he was there in the first place. [%sig%]

I don't think Blair will win. I believe both the others will lose.

i actually think it's getting to the point when there's no valour in attacking blair anymore. i mean, you look at the simpering-classes all moaning because tony isn't socialist enough, and then they all advocate scurrying off to vote for the lib dems - a party that has never proved itself noble in any of its main policies, or the tories led by michael howard, both alternatives that will place this country further away from any kind of social egalitarianism if they get in. so i don't care if it's tony blair, my vote's still going to the labour party.

A common-sense view if ever I heard one. Would anyone in their right mind vote for that twat Howard?

Can we send Colorado Governor, Bill Owens over to run? You'd love him.

"Maybe that's what he always intended to do or maybe he is a serial pragmatist, turning any which way to stay ahead of the polls, all the time forgetting why he was there in the first place." I don't think you can say that at all after the Iraq war... he is a pragmatist and is happy to compromise here and there as a good politician should... unless he truly believes in something, then he has shown he is prepared to go all the way.... whatever the consequences. Do you think he would have stood a chance of winning the next election if he truly believed the war was the right thing to do, but had bowed to pressure instead? Some people don't know integrity when it is in front of their faces. What many Old Labour supporters often complain about is the lack of an overarching idealogy... I happen to think that is a Good thing. The idealogical trap means in the end you lack flexibility and cannot move with the times... it is the lazy and more cowardly way to do things to fall on set ideas when the complex modern world demands that you react quickly and with conviction as events appear... any leader worth his salt has got to adapt and change to circumstances. It is funny, there was this survey on Newsnight where they presenetd various politicians speaking and the audience had to indicate second by second whether they felt they trusted the speaker..... Invariably Blair had the lowest rating of them all. And yet, when asked to judge which of the politiacns they would trust to manage in a big crisis... eg a series of bomb explosions in London. Most of them chose Blair. Hmmm... Head says one thing, the heart says another. Weird that. Who says media brainwashing has no effect on the masses. When it comes to the crunch, on election day. People will vote Blair/Labour. I certainly will.

A vote for Blair is a vote for George Bush. America thanks you.

Bush may not be great but he is better than that forgetable Democrat you could have had, whatshisname?

I never will forget ole whatshisname.

Maybe they should just do away with the party system altogether, so you vote for the person with the most vision without being affiliated with a particular party; I wish they'd do that in the States. My mother is what I'd call a fake Republican; she disagrees with the Republicans on almost everything except social responsibility and taxes. The problem, certainly in the States (and here I agree with doing away with overarching ideologies), is that recently people have tended to vote one way or the other based on _specific_ issues, i.e. abortion, stem-cell research, Iraq, whatever, instead of whether or not the bozo they are electing is actually capable of running a country. It seems more, how do I say this, watered-down in the UK, but surely voting for the lesser of three evils is hardly the way to take a country forward.

"Maybe that's what he always intended to do or maybe he is a serial pragmatist, turning any which way to stay ahead of the polls, all the time forgetting why he was there in the first place." Gerry, I only said 'maybe'. Just a couple of ideas to swirl around. I agree all leaders need to be pragmatic to a degree and in a strange way, I think Blair was being pragmatic by being so dogmatic about the Iraq war. I do believe that he truly believed in the need to invade Iraq, but I wonder if he would have been so vehement in his stance if he had realised how strong the public disquiet would have been on this issue. Of course, we'll never know. I'm not anti-Blair, per se, I'm just fascinated as to what motivates him and how he copes with the situations that he is presented with. Not a proper hobby, but it amuses me.

Surely Blair was aware that 250,000 protesters (or whatever the number was) were marching all over the UK to make their views known....

Yes, but only after he had dug his trench and refused to come out.

I just meant that like Bush in America the incumbents have more media power - especially since bashing the Beeb.

Well, I guess you can admire his tenacity...

No government has ever come under such scrutiny as Blair's over the past few years... we just seem to accept this now, but this was not always so in secretive Britain... In terms of information access, this has been the most open establishment ever... Through the multitude of enquiries, a media hell bent on finding destructive stuff to fit their antiwar agenda... and what have we come out with? Ok, some mistakes where made, emphasis made on things that should not have... and yet at the end of the day no serious issues of integrity that could have truly rocked government. No administration is perfect, but on the scale of decisions that have been taken over the past few years it is astounding that nothing more substantial has not come out... I think that says something for this government.... and they have not done too badly on the economy, schools, hospitals etc Each of these institutions is much improved in real terms compared to the wreck the Conservatives left less than a decade ago. I just think this election should be a no contest... why do people appear to be so miserable... just familiarity I guess, and the effect of the media. For goodness sake, This shower of Conservatives! Can you imagine Howard stepping back into power. God Forbid, The Tories need at least another 5 years in the wilderness.

personally, I see no great difference between labour and the conservatives.

I agree, Liana. It's all just spin, nowdays.

There's a huge difference, Liana... Labour is in power!

Does anyone with more than 2 braincells REALLY prefer Howard to Blair? Apart from my terrorist-in-law.