There's absolutely no way of knowing how well John Smith would have done if he'd lead Labour into a general election. He might have won, he might not.
I highly doubt he would have had such a huge majority, and I highly doubt he would have won 3 elections on the trot.
Slag off Blair all you like (I don't very much like the man myself) but there's absolutely no denying that he does know what he's talking about when it comes to winning elections.
Yes, Blair does know how to win elections, in the same way as Sepp Blatter does.
I actually believe that there was once a decent human being inside that shell we know as Tony Blair. But power and everything that goes with it is an addictive drug. Blair abandoned all principles to be seen on the world stage alongside Bush and his cohorts.
It's made him a fortune, so providing he can still sleep at night, who's to say he was wrong ? I just wish he would go away and enjoy his ill-gotten gains.
My unreserved apologies to platelet, I had assumed they were stating opinion rather than reporting on a verifiable, linkable story.
It's still rot though - I hope ;-) There's no real 'source' to the story, just some unnamed MPs, and I cannot believe that even the Blairites would be so stupid and so selfish as to attempt a coup three weeks into a new leader's reign. They may as well simply disband the entire party for all the good it will do them in the eyes of the public...
It's okay. To be fair my tongue was very firmly in cheek with the idea that anyone would bring Blair back, so it's understandable why you'd dismiss it.
As to if there's a quick coup attempt? This really depends on the conversations to be had in the hotel rooms of Brighton during the conference, and to an extent the brass balls required to basically dismiss the whole democratic process. What you would need I think is someone who pulled out of the race early to change his mind - to give the excuse that if he hadn't chukad it all in things would have been different.
Will they really find 47 MPs willing to gamble with taking the unions on that quickly, I honestly don't know - but I do think they'll try.
Undoubtedly, he would have. America was going to war with or without the UK.
He would not - at the very least without the lies perpetuated under the Blair government - he would not have got the support. Colin Powell was waving that evidence in the UN to get other countries involved.
He would not - at the very least without the lies perpetuated under the Blair government - he would not have got the support. Colin Powell was waving that evidence in the UN to get other countries involved.
Former leader of the party, winner of 3 consecutive general elections...
...yeah nothing to offer STFU Tony, I say in my pants with corn flakes in my beard sitting in front of the laptop - you've nothing to offer!!
....now where's that pizza menu?
Yeah, we might be sitting in our pants in front of a laptop. But at least we haven't got the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children on our conscience. So we can have a wash and shave off that beard, while still facing ourselves in the mirror.
The left's obssession with Iraq is infuriating. Whether it was legal, illegal; if they needed a second resolution or not - what relevance does it have?
Rome burns while Nero decides to obsess over the nuances of something that happened 12 years earlier.
The party is fresh-off it's second consecutive general election defeat, the only living person to have won an election as leader of that party makes a speech. The response is to rehash old favourite arguments about Iraq. No wonder the left are in a state.
One sure thing that will happen as a result of what Blair has said is that even more Labour voters in Scotland will move to the SNP.
Which actually means nothing at all for Scotland as they are a monopoly already, but ensures a Conservative government for Britain for as long as we wish.
For once, put aside your opinions of Blair and look at what he is saying. The words and meanings seem very sensible, regardless as to who is saying them.
This^^
I hate hate hate Blair, hate his politics, his party and his war mongering BS
However....was he not one of the greatest Labour party leaders?
On this one occasion he might be right
The left's obssession with Iraq is infuriating. Whether it was legal, illegal; if they needed a second resolution or not - what relevance does it have?
Rome burns while Nero decides to obsess over the nuances of something that happened 12 years earlier.
The party is fresh-off it's second consecutive general election defeat, the only living person to have won an election as leader of that party makes a speech. The response is to rehash old favourite arguments about Iraq. No wonder the left are in a state.
This^^
I hate hate hate Blair, hate his politics, his party and his war mongering BS
However....was he not one of the greatest Labour party leaders?
On this one occasion he might be right
To be honest I might disagree with Labour but I detest the Blair government but have to concede that in winning so many elections he was successful - even if that was down to a favourable boundaries and the failure of the Conservative Party to become an alternative.
Listening to him might be sensible - left wing politics has become increasingly unpopular in this country - it is not going to go back on that.
The left's obssession with Iraq is infuriating. Whether it was legal, illegal; if they needed a second resolution or not - what relevance does it have?
Rome burns while Nero decides to obsess over the nuances of something that happened 12 years earlier.
The party is fresh-off it's second consecutive general election defeat, the only living person to have won an election as leader of that party makes a speech. The response is to rehash old favourite arguments about Iraq. No wonder the left are in a state.
Maybe it's because we're still living with the consequences of invading Iraq ?
I don't think it's only "the left" that are obsessed (as you put it) with Iraq. The rise of ISIS has put the decision to get rid of Saddam Hussein firmly back on the agenda.
I find it very sad. As someone who objects to the Tory cuts it really, really irritates me that we're going to have 10 years of Tory rule, at least, and the only thing the left have to offer as the single mum on tax credits faces real cuts to her income is:
"........it was an illegal war, there wasn't a second resolution"
I find it infuriating that people who pretend to care about people suffering at the hands of this government want to do nothing about it other than re-hash their favourite hobby-horse arguments rather than actually take steps to ensure the Labour party are in a position to compete in 5 years time.
The left's obssession with Iraq is infuriating. Whether it was legal, illegal; if they needed a second resolution or not - what relevance does it have?
Rome burns while Nero decides to obsess over the nuances of something that happened 12 years earlier.
The party is fresh-off it's second consecutive general election defeat, the only living person to have won an election as leader of that party makes a speech. The response is to rehash old favourite arguments about Iraq. No wonder the left are in a state.
Would you be brave enough to say that to a soldier who has lost a limb in Iraq? Are you big enough to say that to a widow with young children who will never see their father again? The relevance is that millions of peoples lives have been lost or damaged greatly.
Which actually means nothing at all for Scotland as they are a monopoly already, but ensures a Conservative government for Britain for as long as we wish.
Go Nicola.
What it will do is garner more votes for independence come the next referendum which will be sooner rather than later.
Would you be brave enough to say that to a soldier who has lost a limb in Iraq? Are you big enough to say that to a widow with young children who will never see their father again? The relevance is that millions of peoples lives have been lost or damaged greatly.
The soldier who lost a limb in Iraq would most likely say it for him. Last time I looked no one forces people into the military and as for millions of lives, perhaps an equal amount of lives might have been saved. Perhaps, as hindsight is 100%.
Blair was an excellent politician in his day but his day is over, unless he's planning on making a comeback. However no,other Labour leader has his experience of winning elections.
I think the left really does need to get over The Iraq war and concentrate on something more tangible like policies folk are willing to vote for and looking to the future rather than the past.
Gotta love Tony. He actually thinks that people who will vote for Corbyn will listen to him and then not. There's no other explanation for his words, unless he's secretly backing Corbyn.
He's just bought Corbyn another bunch of votes, for no other reason than the vindictive dislike of Blair. How daftly counter-productive.
What it will do is garner more votes for independence come the next referendum which will be sooner rather than later.
Totally disagree as more folk voted no out of economic reasons that merely not wanting to vote Labour would change. If anything those economic reasons are worse than they were before the referendum. A dislike of Tony Blair isn't going to dent that much with sensible folk.
The soldier who lost a limb in Iraq would most likely say it for him. Last time I looked no one forces people into the military and as for millions of lives, perhaps an equal amount of lives might have been saved. Perhaps, as hindsight is 100%.
Blair was an excellent politician in his day but his day is over, unless he's planning on making a comeback. However no,other Labour leader has his experience of winning elections.
I think the left really does need to get over The Iraq war and concentrate on something more tangible like policies folk are willing to vote for and looking to the future rather than the past.
Sure nobody forces anyone into the military and thanks for stating the obvious but it seems like you do not care that our servicemen and women were sent to their deaths on the basis of a lie. There is a lot more to being an excellent politician than just winning elections.
Sure nobody forces anyone into the military and thanks for stating the obvious but it seems like you do not care that our servicemen and women were sent to their deaths on the basis of a lie. There is a lot more to being an excellent politician than just winning elections.
Oh I certainly care about our servicemen and women and for the record I certainly think the Iraq war was the wrong thing to do at a time when we should have concentrated on Afghanistan.
I also agree that there is a lot more to being an excellent politician than winning elections, except the politicians might disagree there.
Nonetheless, if there any Labour politician more experienced that's Blair at getting Labour into power I haven't seen them.
Would you be brave enough to say that to a soldier who has lost a limb in Iraq? Are you big enough to say that to a widow with young children who will never see their father again? The relevance is that millions of peoples lives have been lost or damaged greatly.
The holocaust was terrible yet if someone brings it up in the debate about the budget it's nonsense to say to someone who questions its relevance "would you say that to a survivor or someone who lost their loved ones in the gas chambers?"
It's an utter nonsense when the debate is what direction Labour should take to think talking about how awful Iraq was, the horrors of the holocaust, the injustice of the war of the roses or how much of a shit William the Conquerer was, is relevant to anything.
Not every debate has to include you going through your repertoire of 'things i like to talk about'
Gotta love Tony. He actually thinks that people who will vote for Corbyn will listen to him and then not. There's no other explanation for his words, unless he's secretly backing Corbyn.
He's just bought Corbyn another bunch of votes, for no other reason than the vindictive dislike of Blair. How daftly counter-productive.
So true. The staggering arrogance is still there, yet is in a way both pathetic and tragic.
He sincerely believes he is relevant and holds sway with the people who will be voting in this leadership election.
And in fact he does.... in that people will act directly opposite to his strictures.
Comments
Yes, Blair does know how to win elections, in the same way as Sepp Blatter does.
I actually believe that there was once a decent human being inside that shell we know as Tony Blair. But power and everything that goes with it is an addictive drug. Blair abandoned all principles to be seen on the world stage alongside Bush and his cohorts.
It's made him a fortune, so providing he can still sleep at night, who's to say he was wrong ? I just wish he would go away and enjoy his ill-gotten gains.
It's okay. To be fair my tongue was very firmly in cheek with the idea that anyone would bring Blair back, so it's understandable why you'd dismiss it.
As to if there's a quick coup attempt? This really depends on the conversations to be had in the hotel rooms of Brighton during the conference, and to an extent the brass balls required to basically dismiss the whole democratic process. What you would need I think is someone who pulled out of the race early to change his mind - to give the excuse that if he hadn't chukad it all in things would have been different.
Will they really find 47 MPs willing to gamble with taking the unions on that quickly, I honestly don't know - but I do think they'll try.
He would not - at the very least without the lies perpetuated under the Blair government - he would not have got the support. Colin Powell was waving that evidence in the UN to get other countries involved.
...yeah nothing to offer STFU Tony, I say in my pants with corn flakes in my beard sitting in front of the laptop - you've nothing to offer!!
....now where's that pizza menu?
They went to war WITHOUT a second UN resolution.
Yeah, we might be sitting in our pants in front of a laptop. But at least we haven't got the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children on our conscience. So we can have a wash and shave off that beard, while still facing ourselves in the mirror.
Rome burns while Nero decides to obsess over the nuances of something that happened 12 years earlier.
The party is fresh-off it's second consecutive general election defeat, the only living person to have won an election as leader of that party makes a speech. The response is to rehash old favourite arguments about Iraq. No wonder the left are in a state.
Which actually means nothing at all for Scotland as they are a monopoly already, but ensures a Conservative government for Britain for as long as we wish.
Go Nicola.
This^^
I hate hate hate Blair, hate his politics, his party and his war mongering BS
However....was he not one of the greatest Labour party leaders?
On this one occasion he might be right
Well said 👍🏻
A good post.
To be honest I might disagree with Labour but I detest the Blair government but have to concede that in winning so many elections he was successful - even if that was down to a favourable boundaries and the failure of the Conservative Party to become an alternative.
Listening to him might be sensible - left wing politics has become increasingly unpopular in this country - it is not going to go back on that.
Maybe it's because we're still living with the consequences of invading Iraq ?
I don't think it's only "the left" that are obsessed (as you put it) with Iraq. The rise of ISIS has put the decision to get rid of Saddam Hussein firmly back on the agenda.
I find it very sad. As someone who objects to the Tory cuts it really, really irritates me that we're going to have 10 years of Tory rule, at least, and the only thing the left have to offer as the single mum on tax credits faces real cuts to her income is:
"........it was an illegal war, there wasn't a second resolution"
I find it infuriating that people who pretend to care about people suffering at the hands of this government want to do nothing about it other than re-hash their favourite hobby-horse arguments rather than actually take steps to ensure the Labour party are in a position to compete in 5 years time.
Would you be brave enough to say that to a soldier who has lost a limb in Iraq? Are you big enough to say that to a widow with young children who will never see their father again? The relevance is that millions of peoples lives have been lost or damaged greatly.
What it will do is garner more votes for independence come the next referendum which will be sooner rather than later.
The soldier who lost a limb in Iraq would most likely say it for him. Last time I looked no one forces people into the military and as for millions of lives, perhaps an equal amount of lives might have been saved. Perhaps, as hindsight is 100%.
Blair was an excellent politician in his day but his day is over, unless he's planning on making a comeback. However no,other Labour leader has his experience of winning elections.
I think the left really does need to get over The Iraq war and concentrate on something more tangible like policies folk are willing to vote for and looking to the future rather than the past.
You and I want the same thing remember
He's just bought Corbyn another bunch of votes, for no other reason than the vindictive dislike of Blair. How daftly counter-productive.
Totally disagree as more folk voted no out of economic reasons that merely not wanting to vote Labour would change. If anything those economic reasons are worse than they were before the referendum. A dislike of Tony Blair isn't going to dent that much with sensible folk.
Oh I certainly care about our servicemen and women and for the record I certainly think the Iraq war was the wrong thing to do at a time when we should have concentrated on Afghanistan.
I also agree that there is a lot more to being an excellent politician than winning elections, except the politicians might disagree there.
Nonetheless, if there any Labour politician more experienced that's Blair at getting Labour into power I haven't seen them.
The holocaust was terrible yet if someone brings it up in the debate about the budget it's nonsense to say to someone who questions its relevance "would you say that to a survivor or someone who lost their loved ones in the gas chambers?"
It's an utter nonsense when the debate is what direction Labour should take to think talking about how awful Iraq was, the horrors of the holocaust, the injustice of the war of the roses or how much of a shit William the Conquerer was, is relevant to anything.
Not every debate has to include you going through your repertoire of 'things i like to talk about'
So true. The staggering arrogance is still there, yet is in a way both pathetic and tragic.
He sincerely believes he is relevant and holds sway with the people who will be voting in this leadership election.
And in fact he does.... in that people will act directly opposite to his strictures.
It put me in mind of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzcWzRQTO0k
... I love the robotic faux guffaws as Hague is thinking "Get her indoors QUICK!"