ChatterBank5 mins ago
Something of the night
could ABers list the pros and cons of Michael Howard ( once described as the most loathsome human to walk Gods green earth, recently described as a political heavyweight and safe pair of hands) running the tory party.
(question arises as i am intrigued by the sudden shift in description of him as soon as he looked like being leader......)
(question arises as i am intrigued by the sudden shift in description of him as soon as he looked like being leader......)
Answers
1 to 10 of 10
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by incitatus. 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 --
I think being a good tory leader and having an evil streak could go hand in hand? I've said it before and i'll says it again...Politicians, they are all (with one or two notable exceptions) two faced, lying scumbags.....
ON a headstone...Here lies a tory MP, a devoted husband and a honest servant to the public.....on seeing this the small child asks his mum why they buried three men in the one grave.
The 'transformation' is, indeed, truly amazing, I! This was the vampire-man a few years ago ("something of the night about him")...and also the Secretary of State for Employment who 'achieved' almost unprecedented records of unemployment, if I remember rightly...and also a key figure in the implementation of Poll Tax.
Certainly, he's a good Commons performer, but then so was William Hague. I wonder whether he'll avoid answering a Jeremy Paxman question posed 17 times this time around!
If the Conservatives can tolerate his fixed, oleaginous smirk, they're welcome to him. Personally, I believe they will remain unelectable until they do what Labour did...ie elect a leader on the 'opposite' wing of the party from the 'natural' old-style wing. In other words, they need to choose someone on their left-wing. The problem is that the average age of party members is apparently greater than mine...66...so what chance is there of that? Good luck to 'em, I say...but only ironically, you understand.
It's truly amazing that after all the talk following both the 1997 & 2001 defeats of renewing themselves, building a party fit for the 21st century, appealing to the young etc etc, that the Tories should turn to such a stalwart of the Thatcher/Major years. But it's also a sign of how far New Labour has moved to the right that a dinosaur like Howard can be seen as a viable opposition leader.
QM is right. The best tactic would have been to choose someone from the left of the Party. That would mean Ken Clarke. He was regularly shown to be popular with the electorate and The Times described him as 'the people's choice' for leader. However the 'grassroots' dislike him because he is 'pro-Europe'; these are people who still seem to think we have an Empire ( we did when they were young !).So the parliamentary party has appeased them a little; the MPs have to explain the decision to their own local membership , after all. Only if the Party understood that it must win the middle ground, where the mass of uncommitted voters are, would it choose someone to the left. At least they have avoided the local parties deciding; those old birds chose IDS, contrary to the judgment of the MPs.
1 to 10 of 10
