I'm no fan of Blair/Labour new or old but Blair was elected in 1997 because the public wanted change, in the end politics gets overridden by a desire for something different. That is not to say that His Tonyness didn't offer something new, he did. He had the Bottle to continue the process started by the WWB and slaughtered the sacred cows of sociaism, clause 4 for example, he and others in his team recognised that the public would never trust socialism again and thus set about, to some extent, out torying the Tories and I'm sure many will recognise Tory thinking in the first Blair governement. Indeed, who did TB have a 1-1 with as soon as he got into no 10? Yes I'm afraid so mikey! ditto Brown! Every now and again the electorate yearn for change, but not at any cost. MrsT in 1979 offered it, as did Blair in 1997. Blair did have some good stuff but a lot was over shadowed by being Bush's poodle in Iraq etc and also by the mess they made of education and filling the town halls with various "consultants" for problems we didn't even realise we had! labour have always been softer on immigration and may well pick up some votes that way but I don't think it's a primary reason for them getting elected. Though the 600,000 town hall non jobs were probably mostly Labour voters.