Gordon Brown to win re-election in 2010!

[swee'pea99]

"Always keep a hold on nurse
For fear of finding something worse."

Hillaire Belloc
​

Written off a month ago, here's oor Gordon striding the world stage as The Man of The Hour. Firmly back in his comfort zone, lauded by Nobel Prize economists, valued at last by the hoi polloi as a safe pair of hands (not to mention the Labour Party..."Thank God we never managed to turf him out - imagine if 'Banana Boy' Milliband had been in charge!")...could 'Prudence' Brown pull it off yet and win the next election?

 

[barq]

He seems to be in his element at the moment, but of course we don't know how bad things are going to get. For most of us the credit crunch is still an abstract concept; all that changes when people start loosing their jobs, taxes go up, services get cut, etc...

It is hard to see him winning an election, but would he contemplate a government of national unity if things got bad enough?

 

[Smokin Joe]

He seems to be in his element at the moment, but of course we don't know how bad things are going to get. For most of us the credit crunch is still an abstract concept; all that changes when people start loosing their jobs, taxes go up, services get cut, etc...

That sums it up. Brown's future will be decided by how high unemployment goes and how far living standards fall, all unknown at the moment but it doesn't look good.

 

[girofan]

People vote with their wallets, not their brains!

 

[Mortiroloboy]

Better the devil you know, I say.

 

[yenrod]

If he doesnt its because of a system that makes for imo stupid changes of gov. that are not really neccesary.

A centre-left gov. is basically the way that should always be.

My only recollections of a con. gov. are a government with the idealogy & practice of 'the rich reap the benefits and the regular people (whom are the majority in this country) playing the also-rans - yet for some reason when they vote the ****ers in they can't figure out thats how, its gonna be !

Whereas the Lab. Gov. are an everybody party.

Now, ok, whats happened has has happened and recently the shadow chancellor was trying to whip up opinion about Brown has ****ed the economy etc...yet its a global 'epidemic' casued thru the fact or contributed towards that much of the orlds money is banked thru america - cant the tories just shut up. they are mostly hyping thiings to rediculous distraction and I know for a fact that the country WOULD NOT have as many people in employment if they 'where in power' (this term is the biggest load of sh@te ive ever heard from the media end of) and a great many other negative items.

Prior to 97 it want great. Funny thing was: inever voted in Labour as I was in Italy - but I do know they where quite pleased the UK had become red along woth most of Eurpoe

I'll be voting to keep the country fair and out of the hands of the bosses who it appears cannot manage their companies to reap as much from the people as possible !

Lets not forget that, it was industry in the form of the financial sector that overcooked the books; the labour goverment just gave a stable opportunity for LONG TERM STABILTY.

And as we've seen recently, the markets DO NOT being DUMMED down by the goverments - until they realised that as the US & UK & EUROPE are together then they've got to tow the line.

[stands down off soap-box to...]

 

[meenaghman]

Living in NI whose MP doesn't sit in Westminster I've no bloody say in the matter anyway.. f**k all chance of anyone else getting in.
From an outsider (ie used to Ireland and PR system) I dont understand the system of government in UK. A party can claim 35 or so percent of the vote get elected with a majority of > 100 in Westminster. The proponents of this system say that it guarantees strong government hm is that the strong government of Thatcher, so strong that their back benchers got bored and told Major to takeover.. or Labour whose backbenchers wanted Brown after years of Blair. Then there's the "MPs relationship with his constituents". From what I see there's an alien concept to most Irish people ie often an MP is brought in from a different area to become MP for a constituency to have a safe seat rather than a connection with the area. Multi-seat PR (STV) is the way to go in my opinion. Otherwise one is left then with an unelected chamber to attempt to curb the enthusiasms of the "strong government". Some serious political reform needed I fear. OK what if BNP get a seat. Then surely thats then something which needs to be addressed, rather than at the moment it seems hidden and bubbling underneath the surface..and ironically because there's no chance of political representation, then those parties and supporters resort to other means. It would also give a voice to minorities in certain areas but, conversely that would or should mean that if those minorities have a political voice they don't need all other political parties to bend themselves in knots attempting to be a catch all afraid of actually saying anything and pandering to the PEECEE brigade.

To get back to the question.. Labour has moved to the right. It has however done some decent things, min wage and investment in infrastructure in education health etc. I still feel it was very naieve in PFI contracts in many places (these are officially off the books). Alot of money was spend that was one of sums of cash, (eg pension funds 5bn and 3G telecom licences 20bn) which seems to have been eaten up by the NHS etc. The distribution of the money has gone to the baby boomer generation and older rather than to anyone younger. (ie voters ) Despite the fall in house prices etc.. they're well above 2006 levels and so are wages. Nobody forced anyone to take out a loan or mortgage, its just a cultural thing to own ones house (whereas one rents in Germany) so one cannot be too critical. The big problem is going to be the bill. GBrown has broken many of his prudence fiscal rules which means the UK per capita has biggest national debt of G8, biggest personal debt of G8 and banks were leveraged more than any other G8 nation (meaning bail out was bigger / more NB in Britain). The baby boomers and the pensioners are the current main political classes so therefore its the others that will bear brunt of the tax hits.
2 party politics means its blue or red. A very divisive class structure means that theoretically only 60-80 key seats count in an election, and the rest of the country is held to ransom over the demographic there in.
No wonder shag all turn up to vote. If a monkey can beat the man brought back to parliament as the saviour of the economy in a mayoral contest, then what hope is there. The tories are attempting to sound earnest but it doesn't become them. Brown did invite members of other parties to the cabinet which was a first step. I think some serious constitutional reform is needed if UK is to remain UK in next 50 years.

 

[swee'pea99]

I'd agree on the whole. I have never had, in any real sense, a vote, having always lived in safe constituencies. It's always seemed bonkers to me that elections are decided by floating voters in marginal constituencies, with most peoples' votes being to all intents and purposes meaningless.

As to the original question, I do find the novelty of the current situation kind of intriguing: as a rule, dire economies are bad news for incumbent governments/parties (look at McCain's current woes, tarred with the economic ineptitude of his fellow-Republican President), but over here, Brown's stock seems to rise with every economic disaster....'no time for a novice' and all that.