ChatterBank24 mins ago
Prime Minister Questions
just watching Ed Milliband versus Cameron and Milliband is being battered by the PM. Regardless of politics and leanings, this guy is not up to the job!!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by TheNovice. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
i'm afraid in the end regardless of politics, looks/youth and charisma seem to be more improtant traits (think blair, obama, cameron, sarkozy). And as shallow as it sounds, milliband only has one of those three traits (plus a great big disadvantage in that voice). However, all current party leaders have pretty punchable faces IMO)
Menzies campbell would have made a better leader than clegg imo, but is seen as too old; david davis would possibly have been better than cameron, but again too old. I couldn't imagine churchill getting in now
Menzies campbell would have made a better leader than clegg imo, but is seen as too old; david davis would possibly have been better than cameron, but again too old. I couldn't imagine churchill getting in now
http://www.private-ey...ction_link=lookalikes
My personal fave...but yours is very cute too,Gromit.. ;-)
My personal fave...but yours is very cute too,Gromit.. ;-)
No, he isn't up to the job of being leader simply because he doesn't come across as a man in charge, he comes across as a back-room boy who has suddenly been put in the spotlight. He doesn't his points across clearly. Clarity of expression is vital in the job, because it suggests clarity of thought and purpose.
'Charisma' is not vital, nor is good looks, but looking and being confident, clear and decisive is. I'm sure he's very good in committees, but a good committee man (or anyone who thinks they achieve anything efficiently!) is not the ideal leader. Even Clem Attlee, who looked a modest, uncharismatic, man, was decisive in manoeuvering, to his own way, the otherwise warring, powerful, factions in his own party, and with great skill; the Emperor Claudius of British politics!
'Charisma' is not vital, nor is good looks, but looking and being confident, clear and decisive is. I'm sure he's very good in committees, but a good committee man (or anyone who thinks they achieve anything efficiently!) is not the ideal leader. Even Clem Attlee, who looked a modest, uncharismatic, man, was decisive in manoeuvering, to his own way, the otherwise warring, powerful, factions in his own party, and with great skill; the Emperor Claudius of British politics!
He's so obviously pathetic that I wonder if his election was fixed somehow?
If Labour have a plan, it could be to leave him there until a few months before the election, then bring back his big brother, who will look good by comparison.
Labour can't do much at the moment, anyway, as they have no real alternative policy.
Would any Labour supporters care to confirm or deny?
If Labour have a plan, it could be to leave him there until a few months before the election, then bring back his big brother, who will look good by comparison.
Labour can't do much at the moment, anyway, as they have no real alternative policy.
Would any Labour supporters care to confirm or deny?