I can't understand this. Do you really think the Tory party or any other front bencher of either main party if in the same position would not have joined the US in both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
What somebody else may (or may not) have done is irrelevant - as Colin Powell said “if you break it, you own it.” so Blair and his government will always be responsible for their decisions. Which is as it should be in a democracy.
What somebody else may (or may not) have done is irrelevant - as Colin Powell said “if you break it, you own it.” so Blair and his government will always be responsible for their decisions. Which is as it should be in a democracy.
It's not irrelevant at all because people speak as if this was 'Blair's war'. I accept that he takes responsibility for the decisions as they were ultimately his but why should we pretend that everything would have been so different with anyone else feasible in charge?
There's one thing accepting and apportioning responsibility and another living in a world of make-believe because we didn't like the decision that was made.
It's not irrelevant at all because people speak as if this was 'Blair's war'. I accept that he takes responsibility for the decisions as they were ultimately his but why should we pretend that everything would have been so different with anyone else feasible in charge?
I agree it may be a tad unfair but that is life. Nobody believes that Obama would have made any decisions different from Shrub, but Iraq and Afghanistan will always be attributed to Shrub. If you want the power then when the decisions need to be made you need to take responsibility for those decisions. saying that somebody else would have made the same decision just doesn't cut it I'm afraid.
Please someone tell me this is some kind of joke?! I bet Cherry has been in his ear, she's probably in need of more cash and the higher profile of having her hubby back in power would bring! Mind you there is a tiny part of me that thinks he's Gods gift compared to Brown and Cameron!
Blair is still very much the dynamic politician that Ed Miliband will never be. If there were to be a leadership challenge it would most likely be between Blair and David Miliband. I see no one else who would be seen as a viable challenger for the leadership. Cruddas is too left wing. I wonder if the Labour membership would vote for Blair again? I suspect he remains more popular than some give him credit for.
The best years of recent times was Blair's first term in office. Mainly because they didn't really do anything of note (that stands out to me at least).
Some interesting responses. I was expecting a little more defence by those of you who voted for his party. Does this mean Blair is the most universally disliked ex-PM of all time? At least Mrs T still has a significant percentage of people who believe she was a good thing.
Some interesting responses. I was expecting a little more defence by those of you who voted for his party. Does this mean Blair is the most universally disliked ex-PM of all time? At least Mrs T still has a significant percentage of people who believe she was a good thing.
I think Blair's established voter popularity, like Thatchers, both of whom won multiple general elections with convincing victories, mean their detractors have to try and scream and shout harder than ever to pretend none of that happened, matter or count.
I suspect he is so far removed from reality that he cannot comprehend what the vast majority of Britons feel about him.
If you are surrounded by supporters all doing well on the back of his money making and all telling him how wonderful he is it's maybe not surprising he thinks he's great.
The best years of recent times was Blair's first term in office. Mainly because they didn't really do anything of note (that stands out to me at least).
Apart from taking a big "bribe" from "F1 Bernie" which should have scuppered him but which he managed to squirm out of just as he successfully did later on in his career.
I suspect he is so far removed from reality that he cannot comprehend what the vast majority of Britons feel about him.
If you are surrounded by supporters all doing well on the back of his money making and all telling him how wonderful he is it's maybe not surprising he thinks he's great.
I commented on this a while back when Mandelson returned to government.
Despite my opinion of the pair of them, the feeling I got in discussions with people of various political bents was 'at least you know what you're getting with them'.
While I'm not sure if Blair could ever get the backing from the party right now (many people rejoined after Blair stepped down), I suspect that at the polls, he would get more support than if it were Ed Miliband, purely on the basis that people remember the boom era.
Iraq, dodgy dossiers, dodgy dealings etc etc. wouldn't come into it so much outside of people who know about politics - what most of the electorate will remember is getting tax credits and their house prices going up, and how it all went away when Blair left.
People may scoff, but I think he'd get a lot of support from the public if he ever decided to go ahead with this, despite the inevitable replies to this about Iraq, 'sold the gold', deficit etc. People who aren't interested in politics only care about the peddled perception of the person, and Blair was always presented as sympathetic, which much of the criticism of him firmly recorded as 'conspiratorial mutterings'.
People may scoff, but I think he'd get a lot of support from the public if he ever decided to go ahead with this, despite the inevitable replies to this about Iraq, 'sold the gold', deficit etc.
I would agree with this - especially as he has (quite rightly) shifted the blame for the economic failures onto Calamity Brown, the main bugbear remaining is Iraq and that is fading into history.
Like Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair polarized opinions and in those circumstances you always get the critics making the most noise, with supporters not liking to say anything because they know they will get abused. If he was running for PM he would still get a huge amount of support. People keep forgetting that he still won a big majority at the height of the Iraq war unpopularity. Do I wish he was Prime Minister now? Absolutely.
People deny Blair's popularity because it's convenient. If the man was leader of either main party tomorrow and called a snap election a week later, the party whom he lead would see a comfortable majority of about 40 seats or more.
Comments
What somebody else may (or may not) have done is irrelevant - as Colin Powell said “if you break it, you own it.” so Blair and his government will always be responsible for their decisions. Which is as it should be in a democracy.
It's not irrelevant at all because people speak as if this was 'Blair's war'. I accept that he takes responsibility for the decisions as they were ultimately his but why should we pretend that everything would have been so different with anyone else feasible in charge?
There's one thing accepting and apportioning responsibility and another living in a world of make-believe because we didn't like the decision that was made.
I agree it may be a tad unfair but that is life. Nobody believes that Obama would have made any decisions different from Shrub, but Iraq and Afghanistan will always be attributed to Shrub. If you want the power then when the decisions need to be made you need to take responsibility for those decisions. saying that somebody else would have made the same decision just doesn't cut it I'm afraid.
I think Blair's established voter popularity, like Thatchers, both of whom won multiple general elections with convincing victories, mean their detractors have to try and scream and shout harder than ever to pretend none of that happened, matter or count.
Rest of the country: "Oh no you wouldn't!"
When has the wishes of the people ever bothered him?
Not a big fan of democracy then I see.
If you are surrounded by supporters all doing well on the back of his money making and all telling him how wonderful he is it's maybe not surprising he thinks he's great.
Best chance he's got is asking his god for help!!
Apart from taking a big "bribe" from "F1 Bernie" which should have scuppered him but which he managed to squirm out of just as he successfully did later on in his career.
Not called Teflon Tony for nothing.
Emperors new clothes spring to mind.
Cherie: Oh yes you will.
Despite my opinion of the pair of them, the feeling I got in discussions with people of various political bents was 'at least you know what you're getting with them'.
While I'm not sure if Blair could ever get the backing from the party right now (many people rejoined after Blair stepped down), I suspect that at the polls, he would get more support than if it were Ed Miliband, purely on the basis that people remember the boom era.
Iraq, dodgy dossiers, dodgy dealings etc etc. wouldn't come into it so much outside of people who know about politics - what most of the electorate will remember is getting tax credits and their house prices going up, and how it all went away when Blair left.
People may scoff, but I think he'd get a lot of support from the public if he ever decided to go ahead with this, despite the inevitable replies to this about Iraq, 'sold the gold', deficit etc. People who aren't interested in politics only care about the peddled perception of the person, and Blair was always presented as sympathetic, which much of the criticism of him firmly recorded as 'conspiratorial mutterings'.
Quite.
I would agree with this - especially as he has (quite rightly) shifted the blame for the economic failures onto Calamity Brown, the main bugbear remaining is Iraq and that is fading into history.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-second-coming-of-tony-blair-7900015.html