The Rt Hon Gordon Brown MP PM

[oolon]

Radio 4 is saying Osborne might be not be chancellor, insted Ken Clark with Vince Cable will take the treasury jobs! The big beast will be back.

[Phage]

I still value Alistair over Vince.

[Phage]

For a moment, just a moment, I was wondering if I'd had a sense of humour failure or my irony circuit had short-circuited and I was missing it. But I don't think so.

Thank him? Like hell I will. As far as I'm concerned, he's a pompous and arrogant incompetent and by far the worst Chancellor in living memory. And his record as PM isn't much better, but his real damage was as Chancellor.

Even if we end up with a Lab-Lib coalition, my year has already been made. Finally, the Labour party have managed to find a way to ditch this nasty, bullying and hypocritical (bigotgate) asshole.

Good riddance to some of the worst rubbish in modern political history.

And that's the polite version of what I think of him.

Heh. Now there's something we completely agree on !

[oolon]

I still value Alistair over Vince.

Is it the eyebrows that does it?

[Flibb]

Bt the way, I dont like Gordon Brown, I believe he lied about the economy, lied about military funding, the last of which really erks me due to the stetement he just made.

[Kata]

Well, this thread went well, santa. Good work!

[santa claus]

Well, this thread went well, santa. Good work!

Gawd, my stalker's turned up (with the only pointless contribution in the thread).

Shouldn't you be elsewhere delivering advice throughout Europe on volcanic ash? You are the authority on the subject after all..

[Kata]

Gawd, my stalker's turned up (with the only pointless contribution in the thread).

Shouldn't you be elsewhere delivering advice throughout Europe on volcanic ash? You are the authority on the subject after all..

It's ok, they have finally adopted the approach to ash that I was advocating all along, so my work is done Now it's back to watching you ignore almost every post that disagrees with you

For something as "on-topic" as many other replies, I'll contribute my opinion that Brown has been as much use as a chocolate teapot and deserves no thanks; and I shall resist any urge to gloat over the fact that Labour are out in the cold, as predicted by the more enlightened members here

[santa claus]

Now it's back to watching you ignore almost every post that disagrees with you

Bordering on obsession? And simply not true; for example, Saracen and I have many disagreements - it doesn't stop us frequently having an adult exchange of views.

For something as "on-topic" as many other replies, I'll contribute my opinion that Brown has been as much use as a chocolate teapot and deserves no thanks; and I shall resist any urge to gloat over the fact that Labour are out in the cold, as predicted by the more enlightened members here

I don't recall anyone predicting that a coalition government between the failed-to-achieve-a-majority Conservatives and the did-much-worse-than-they-thought-they-would LibDems. We are now governed by a coalition of losers. I'd put the gloating and enlightenment on ice for now if I were you. Let's see where it all ends up.

[Saracen]

....

I don't recall anyone predicting that a coalition government between the failed-to-achieve-a-majority Conservatives and the did-much-worse-than-they-thought-they-would LibDems. We are now governed by a coalition of losers. I'd put the gloating and enlightenment on ice for now if I were you. Let's see where it all ends up.

Well, initially I'd have predicted a ruling coalition between Martians and Green Glob-creatures from Cygnus as being more likely .... but as the talks went on, I did begin to seriously wonder.

What I will say is that I think it's a momentous challenge and a very ballsy thing to do. Tories and LibDems? Who'd a thunk it?

As for where it ends up, I agree, let's see. It will be hard, and will face some real challenges. At the moment, they've done the easy bit, which was getting the agreement. Now they've got to put it into practice without resorting to bickering.

What gives me some hope that it might work is that it'll certainly hold for a while, and if it then blows up, it'll probably result in another General Election, and the reaction of the electorate will be unpredictable as hell. The LibDems especially may well suffer as Labour voters that voted tactically to keep the Tories out realise just how their tactical voting worked out ().

Cameron and Clegg might get credit for having given it a good old attempt, or they more likely will get the blame and find their political careers (at least, eat the top) permanently ended. A likely result, IMHO, is polarisation of the two old parties and the LibDems being heavily squeezed. What electoral effect that has remains to be seen. It might revitalise Labour, but it may also split Labour and LibDem sufficiently in enough marginals, and give people a taste of hung Parliaments, that it puts the Tories over the top on their own as a majority Parliament.

The thing is, we know how people voted last time, but not why.

Much has been said about people voting for a hung Parliament, but did they really want this? Some no doubt did, and some certainly didn't. I for one voted tactically, as an anti-Brown vote. Would I vote anti-Labour now Brown's gone, or vote Pro-somebody? I don't know. I'd have to look to see how was standing on what basis and platform. And I'd bet I'm not the only one that might change how I voted if the reason I voted that way had changed.

The one thing we can absolutely be sure of is that we absolutely can't be sure of what would happen in another election, if it was three weeks from now, let alone if the coalition lasts a year or two.

But if they can make it stick, we might have just witnessed the biggest fundamental change in British politics since they gave ordinary people the vote. I hope.

[santa claus]

Tbh I don't object to Cameron's appointment but wth is Nick Clegg doing in there as dep PM. His party was rejected and he becomes number 2? Oh, hang on, I get it now - he's a number 2

[Saracen]

Tbh I don't object to Cameron's appointment but wth is Nick Clegg doing in there as dep PM. His party was rejected and he becomes number 2? Oh, hang on, I get it now - he's a number 2

Classic line, santa.

But the "rejected" bit somewhat depends on how you measure it.

Their seats might have dropped, but their vote increased by some 840,000 or more .... compared to Labour losing more than 960,000.

To put it another way, they were closer in numbers of votes to Labour than Labour were to the Tories.

To point out another factoid from the election figures, the Tories got both a higher share of the vote and a much higher number of votes this time than Labour did in 2005, and yet Labour got a 35 (ish) seat majority and the Tories are 20 seats short.

So, either the Tories deserved an overall majority, or Labour have only been in majority government for the last 5 years because of in-built bias in the system because of constituency demographics and sizes.

By just about any rational measure, if the LDs were rejected, so were Labour. The Tories might not have had an overall mandate to govern, but they sure had more of a mandate than Labour. They emphatically had the right to seek to put a government together, and even Gordon Brown said that. So the reason Clegg is in government as #2 is that the Tories approached him, which was eminently their right to do, and invited him. If a stable government was to be formed, the Tories and LDs was about the only game in town. Even if Labour and LD had managed to cobble something together, the arithmetic meant it was very unlikely to be stable, and given the dire situation the country is in, we need stable government much more than we need partisan party politics.

Despite today's mutual love-in, I'm not convinced this coalition can work. But I sure hope to hell it can.

[peterb]

Tbh I don't object to Cameron's appointment but wth is Nick Clegg doing in there as dep PM. His party was rejected and he becomes number 2? Oh, hang on, I get it now - he's a number 2

Definitely one of your best lines! (Echoing Saracen!) If the Conservatives didnt win the election, Labour surely lost it, and had a Labour-Lib-dem coaltion or partnership emerged, I don't think the electorate (other than die hard abour supporters) would have been best pleased and they still wouldn't have commanded an overall majority without the support of the minor parties - and that would have been like herding cats - so I would have expected another election within 12 mons - with both Labour and he Lib dems getting a drubbing.

It remains to be seen how this coaltion works out - unchartered waters and early days. To my mind, it seems that the Conservatives will move slightly left (which won't please the right wing of the party) while the Lib-dems will move slightly right (which won't please their left wing) - so the greatest danger comes from within the parties at the moment. But the make up of the cabinet is (I think) quite clever so provided party discipline is maintained it may stand up.

However, there is little doubt that tough times ie ahead (as they would have under Labour) - how that will be reflected in the next election (whenever it comes) is probably impossible to predict at this range, and certainly not before the policies of this Government have been presented and implemented.

[oolon]

It remains to be seen how this coaltion works out - unchartered waters and early days. To my mind, it seems that the Conservatives will move slightly left (which won't please the right wing of the party) while the Lib-dems will move slightly right (which won't please their left wing) - so the greatest danger comes from within the parties at the moment. But the make up of the cabinet is (I think) quite clever so provided party discipline is maintained it may stand up.

There is nothing like being in power and getting even some of you policies into law to keep the troops happy.

[badass]

If I was that inept for 3 years - I would have got the sack 2.5 years ago.

He wasn't inept for 3 years. He was inept for 13 years. He did a far better job as prime minister than he did as chancellor. Now that's saying something.

Oh and he had no integrity. Just a huge ego and a complete lack of understanding of economics.

Lucky for you lot, he is still going to be my MP. URGH.

He is a great example of confusing; dedication with bloody mindedness, prudence with grumpiness and leadership with bullying.

He was not prudent
When will people learn that just because someone says they are prudent continuously like a broken record does not make them prudent. How is increasing government debt and future payment obligations every year he was in power in any way prudent?