Does anybody else think that major political figures should be euthanised, rather than retired? For their own good if nothing else.
Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter, it is hard to think of any whose post-office machinations have improved their reputations, rather than further shredding them.
Does anybody else think that major political figures should be euthanised, rather than retired? For their own good if nothing else.
Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter, it is hard to think of any whose post-office machinations have improved their reputations, rather than further shredding them.
Osborne should distance himself from Blair. The alternative is, like Cameron's referendum, a lose-lose situation. He either fails, or succeeds but by working as/for Blair.
His ability to disrupt Brexit can only be reliant on the Legal system and possible challenges to delay the process, which of course he will have the resources to fund.
In the long run, the only way to totally stop it is to form a pro EU party and win a GE, nothing short of that would provide the mandate necessary to reverse the previous decision. Labour cannot turn back from. Brexit, without Scotland they don't have the core support to survive that credibly. So it would have to be a new party, and even Blair isn't delusional enough to think he can achieve that.
Even if he could create the organisation, it would be as successful in parliament as UKIP.
He's a bit low on self-awareness that Tony Blair, is he not? The number of people in Britain who think "What we need now is the insight and wisdom of Tony Blair" is vanishingly low, I suspect.
Does anybody else think that major political figures should be euthanised, rather than retired? For their own good if nothing else.
Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter, it is hard to think of any whose post-office machinations have improved their reputations, rather than further shredding them.
Gore?
The Clinton Healthcare Access Initiative does great work.
Bush junior has enhanced his reputation a lot by not machinating!
Nothing wrong with Tony Blair, he was a great PM who understood the British people like no other.
Sure he made mistakes, like not sacking brown in 2001, but otherwise I don't get the hate.
He was a shallow and ultimately frivolous man, who convinced himself that his prejudices were insights. You can read up on, for instance, the buildup to the war in Iraq, and how much he "knew" about how the Iraqi people were crying out for liberal democracy.
Nothing wrong with Tony Blair, he was a great PM who understood the British people like no other.
Sure he made mistakes, like not sacking brown in 2001, but otherwise I don't get the hate.
No, he conned the British into thinking their were richer they they were with ridiculous spending, poor policy, and by encouraging cheap money. And when it came to an end, he'd already escaped, leaving McBroon to clear up the mess on his own.
And then there's Iraq, and the repercussions of his middle east policy, which has cost millions of people their homes and hundreds of thousands their lives, and caused the largest humanitarian crisis since 1945.
He was the worst snake oil salesman to ever occupy no10
He's a bit low on self-awareness that Tony Blair, is he not? The number of people in Britain who think "What we need now is the insight and wisdom of Tony Blair" is vanishingly low, I suspect.
I've actually met a few people who say the only way they'd ever vote labour again is if Tony Blair came back. I personally don't understand it but they do exist!
The Kippers will have a field day. Another referendum would see a LEAVE majority of two to one.
Another referendum would have to spell out the Leave option, this would likely split Leavers into two groups - 'too far' and 'not far enough'.
That's intellectually appealing for some but the consequences of out, in the widest sense, winning, and perhaps winning easily, but also losing could be quite interesting.
The Kippers will have a field day. Another referendum would see a LEAVE majority of two to one.
Another referendum would have to spell out the Leave option, this would likely split Leavers into two groups - 'too far' and 'not far enough'.
Wishful thinking. If it's a choice between any deal and remain, those who switch to remain would be insignificant. The real question is how many who were convinced by the government's leaflet now see that document as the ridiculous propaganda that it was, and will simply vote to leave based on anti establishment sentiment.
Nothing wrong with Tony Blair, he was a great PM who understood the British people like no other.
Sure he made mistakes, like not sacking brown in 2001, but otherwise I don't get the hate.
Would be interested to see his polling numbers inthe pb.com survey...
My suspicion is that the hate is more based in online forums and among the corbynite left than among the general public
I think the man in the street, who is largely uninformed about how government is supposed to work, will possibly see that era as his best years, when he was raking it in effortlessly. But those who understand how that was achieved, and how the proper working of government was undermined, will always see that era as a total disaster
"Twenty-five California counties chose Donald J. Trump for President of the United States, while 33 went for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And seventeen of the 21 California counties proposed for the “State of Jefferson” went for Trump, most by more than 10 percent.
19 of the proposed 21 California “State of Jefferson” counties currently have active petitions to form the 51st state, according to soj51.net. Of the 25 that went for Trump, 24 voted for him by more than 10 percent — and in 14 of those counties, Trump outperformed 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, according to the Sacramento Bee...
I personally I have never been all that stressed out about Iraq; I supported the war before hand. Sure there wasn't any WMD, but Saddam spent a decade being ambiguous about the topic. The whole was his fault.
Making a wrong decision about one thing doesn't make you a liar, it makes you human. I detest that corbyn and the rest of the ragtag social justice warriors have done to the labour party off the back of it.
The Kippers will have a field day. Another referendum would see a LEAVE majority of two to one.
Another referendum would have to spell out the Leave option, this would likely split Leavers into two groups - 'too far' and 'not far enough'.
We have already voted to Leave. Any further referendum would have only two options: accept the deal to Leave negotiated by the Govt., or refuse that deal and leave on WTO terms.
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
Reading the piece more carefully it is apparent that even Osborne can see this for the steaming heap of oudure that it is - "only consulted Blair about paid speaking engagements".
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
It would have more support if it was led by someone less hated.
Reading the piece more carefully it is apparent that even Osborne can see this for the steaming heap of oudure that it is - "only consulted Blair about paid speaking engagements".
what do you expect him to say? he's hardly going to confirm anything
If the remainers do hold a majority position in the Commons, could they collude and add an amendment to any substantive legislation that would overturn the result of the referendum if passed?
I personally I have never been all that stressed out about Iraq; I supported the war before hand. Sure there wasn't any WMD, but Saddam spent a decade being ambiguous about the topic. The whole was his fault.
Making a wrong decision about one thing doesn't make you a liar, it makes you human. I detest that corbyn and the rest of the ragtag social justice warriors have done to the labour party off the back of it.
Still, things can only get better from here....
+1 Saddam had done enough things in the past that he had to be removed. My annoyance is with my own assumption that thought had been done into what to do once the battle was won.
Looking back should have known better and realised that no thought would have been given to what to do afterwards. So you can see why people who supported the original invasion now regret supporting it.
If the remainers do hold a majority position in the Commons, could they collude and add an amendment to any substantive legislation that would overturn the result of the referendum if passed?
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
But of course, it's opponents would simply point their cameras towards Syria, Libya, Iraq, and the refugees in Lebanon and Turkey and remind everyone how that all started.
The British would turn away in justified revulsion. .
"Twenty-five California counties chose Donald J. Trump for President of the United States, while 33 went for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And seventeen of the 21 California counties proposed for the “State of Jefferson” went for Trump, most by more than 10 percent.
I don't think that should be that surprising; it's the left behind vs the winners from globalisation. It's manufacturing vs silicon valley. That being said, you could theoretically see similar splits in other large states which went the other way: Pennsylvania and environs vs the rest of Philadelphia; Raleigh-Durham, and the Research Triangle vs the rest of North Carolina.
Does anybody else think that major political figures should be euthanised, rather than retired? For their own good if nothing else.
Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter, it is hard to think of any whose post-office machinations have improved their reputations, rather than further shredding them.
John Profumo raised millions for charity, specifically Toynbee Hall. He turned up one morning and asked to help with cleaning.
Herbert Hoover saved thousands of children in Germany from malnutrition or worse by organising a system of free school meals in 1945.
Neither were exactly fully rehabilitated but then they were starting from a very low base.
Or we could mention Taft, who became a justice of the Supreme Court after a presidency that wrecked the Republican Party. Or Major, and his work with cricket charities helping disadvantaged children.
There are plenty of examples out there. It's just more fun to talk about the ones that are lazy, unpleasant or curiously wealthy despite doing no work - like Edward Heath.
The Bliar creature is delusional, but GO is waiting in the wings in the off-chance that TM falls over. GO's relegation to the backbenches (for which he has no-one to blame but himself) is bad for the future of my place of work, but for me that it the only downside to his demise.
The EU's future depends on the results of elections in key Western European countries in the next 12 months. It is to be hoped that HMG doesn't reveal too much of a hand regarding its approach to Brexit until the outcome of these elections is known. For example, if MLP wins in France and Merkel loses, the European political scene will be very different.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
I don't hate him, but I do think that the nature of politics, at least in the U.K., has turned against people leaving government and returning. The last significant figure I can think of (and I stand to be corrected) is Churchill and I think it it would be a stretch, although not beyond the imagination of some, to place WW2 and Brexit adjacent to each other. Churchill returned to an existing, his, party, where he was already an MP. Blair is some distance from that. Would the Labour Party want him back? I don't know, you tell me.
"Twenty-five California counties chose Donald J. Trump for President of the United States, while 33 went for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And seventeen of the 21 California counties proposed for the “State of Jefferson” went for Trump, most by more than 10 percent.
19 of the proposed 21 California “State of Jefferson” counties currently have active petitions to form the 51st state, according to soj51.net. Of the 25 that went for Trump, 24 voted for him by more than 10 percent — and in 14 of those counties, Trump outperformed 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, according to the Sacramento Bee...
That would stamp Trump's name in History wouldn't it - create a 51st State. (The fact that it would hamstring California in the EC going from +55 to (+14) is incidental)
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
It would have more support if it was led by someone less hated.
There isn't anyone in any of the parties that I can think of with sufficient political experience and appeal. Blair is extremely good when he is being interviewed. Whether he could survive the social media/WikiLeaks era is a different question, though.
The people most agitated by Iraq are for the most part left wing activists. For lots of people now I don't think it is a massive issue.
Its nice that he (or his spokesman) is calling Corbyn a nutter. Good to see people speaking their minds, but for what its worth I don't think Corbyn is the nutter, just many of his followers.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
Have to say Jonathan I think Square Root is correct. Yes, Tories and Corbynites hated him because he nearly destroyed them. But they only made up less than a third of the population. Everyone else hated him because he was a liar and the only British PM ever to be interviewed by the police.
If the remainers do hold a majority position in the Commons, could they collude and add an amendment to any substantive legislation that would overturn the result of the referendum if passed?
I Would Have Thought that Not To Be A Valid Amendment To, I Presume, A Bill Whose intent Was Brexit. If any post Brexit bill, presumably it'd need to be a more obvious and substantial act I'd guess. But I'd have thought legally the Commons could find a way if it wanted. But to dare to do so and face the consequences? Unlikely to say the least.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
I don't hate him, but I do think that the nature of politics, at least in the U.K., has turned against people leaving government and returning. The last significant figure I can think of (and I stand to be corrected) is Churchill and I think it it would be a stretch, although not beyond the imagination of some, to place WW2 and Brexit adjacent to each other. Churchill returned to an existing, his, party, where he was already an MP. Blair is some distance from that. Would the Labour Party want him back? I don't know, you tell me.
Home would be one example, Heseltine another. Hague perhaps a third.
None of those three ever left politics entirely to live the life of am international jet setter.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
Have to say Jonathan I think Square Root is correct. Yes, Tories and Corbynites hated him because he nearly destroyed them. But they only made up less than a third of the population. Everyone else hated him because he was a liar and the only British PM ever to be interviewed by the police.
I have to agree with Jonathan. I never liked blair, he was smarmy as hell and I grew to politicall awareness around Iraq. But plenty of people liked him and his time in office, and if he were truly as hated as people claim, he would not have been as successful, people are being wishful because they disliked hua success. Even now I come across people who say we need a Blair type.
Is his stock lower than it was, yes. Is he what the public wants now, probably not. But the comparison with thatcher is Apt. If Blair were as hated by nonpartisan as well partisans there would have been no Blair era. And that he is more disliked now than when hE was in office doesn't change that and even now some like him.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
All that needs to be known about Blair was that such was the relief when he went that even Brown seemed popular.
BROWN.
Much like Thatcher and Major. MAJOR!
Both Thatcher and Blair were disliked, they were not disliked because they were weak.
Major won an election.
SDPers never understand how distrusted Blair is - police interview, Iraq, scheming with/against Brown, blamed (quite rightly) for much of what is ill with immigration today, too close to Europe.
But interesting you bring Thacher up. No one thought in 2001 - you know what we need, Maggir back. Politics had moved on as well as her being unpopular....
Miss Plato, reminds me of when there was some Daily Mail comment on the BBC and Newsnight had three people on who all worked for the BBC (not full-time employees, but appeared often) who all agreed the story was rubbish and the BBC was wonderful. Very NTNON Points of View.
Blair's right though, Theresa May is a lightweight. Another u turn from her today.
Off topic, Strictly in Blackpool was awesome.
Personal high point for me, apart from seeing Natalie Lowe's knickers, was telling Jamie Redknapp 'I thought your wife was literally on fire on the dance floor tonight'
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
I don't hate him, but I do think that the nature of politics, at least in the U.K., has turned against people leaving government and returning. The last significant figure I can think of (and I stand to be corrected) is Churchill and I think it it would be a stretch, although not beyond the imagination of some, to place WW2 and Brexit adjacent to each other. Churchill returned to an existing, his, party, where he was already an MP. Blair is some distance from that. Would the Labour Party want him back? I don't know, you tell me.
Home would be one example, Heseltine another. Hague perhaps a third.
None of those three ever left politics entirely to live the life of am international jet setter.
That's fair enough. From my understanding though none of them had real aspirations to become a leader again which is what I was driving at.
My wider point re Blair was that much of Brexit is around constitutional implications (however dressed up). If there was an area that the Blair administrations were noticeably weak it, it was constitutional change, its significance and its consequences.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
All that needs to be known about Blair was that such was the relief when he went that even Brown seemed popular.
BROWN.
Much like Thatcher and Major. MAJOR!
Both Thatcher and Blair were disliked, they were not disliked because they were weak.
Major won an election.
SDPers never understand how distrusted Blair is - police interview, Iraq, scheming with/against Brown, blamed (quite rightly) for much of what is ill with immigration today, too close to Europe.
But interesting you bring Thacher up. No one thought in 2001 - you know what we need, Maggir back. Politics had moved on as well as her being unpopular....
Good point. In 2001 a Thatcher return would have been absurd. Part of that is due to political fashion as you imply.
But if in 2000 the govt had self destructed as Cameron's just did, if Blair had been replaced by Harman and the govt had created a constitutional clusterfuck on the scale of Brexit, who knows what might have happened.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
All that needs to be known about Blair was that such was the relief when he went that even Brown seemed popular.
BROWN.
Much like Thatcher and Major. MAJOR!
Both Thatcher and Blair were disliked, they were not disliked because they were weak.
Major won an election.
SDPers never understand how distrusted Blair is - police interview, Iraq, scheming with/against Brown, blamed (quite rightly) for much of what is ill with immigration today, too close to Europe.
But interesting you bring Thacher up. No one thought in 2001 - you know what we need, Maggir back. Politics had moved on as well as her being unpopular....
She was however still very influential in the Conservatives. Hague won in 1997 due to her overt backing. Her rumoured support for IDS surely had s bearing on his squeaking through to the membership.
Blair would only influence Labour negatively. If he had the sense to come out and enthusiastically endorse Corbyn, saying how great he is and how he is completing a grassroots revolution Blair started, Corbyn's position with the membership would drop faster than Bill Clinton's trousers.
But Blair, for all his many strengths particularly in communication and campaigning, is very bad at political tactics. That's why he needed Brown, who was terrible at C&C but a real down and dirty political street fighter. If they worked together instead of against each other, they would have been one of the most formidable political pairings of all time, up there with Lenin and Trotsky. Fortunately perhaps, Brown's ego meant that would never happen.
The trouble with the BBC is that they don't have anyone who didn't put forward a pro-remain stance. Maybe they should hire someone from Breitbart.
Absolutely. Actually it's more than that - they have no-one who even understands why anyone would have voted to leave such a wonderful institution anywhere in the building, nor where to look to find any! It's the same in the US right now, where no-one in NY and LA who works in television understands either what the hell just happened, or why that was the case.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
Have to say Jonathan I think Square Root is correct. Yes, Tories and Corbynites hated him because he nearly destroyed them. But they only made up less than a third of the population. Everyone else hated him because he was a liar and the only British PM ever to be interviewed by the police.
I have to agree with Jonathan. I never liked blair, he was smarmy as hell and I grew to politicall awareness around Iraq. But plenty of people liked him and his time in office, and if he were truly as hated as people claim, he would not have been as successful, people are being wishful because they disliked hua success. Even now I come across people who say we need a Blair type.
Is his stock lower than it was, yes. Is he what the public wants now, probably not. But the comparison with thatcher is Apt. If Blair were as hated by nonpartisan as well partisans there would have been no Blair era. And that he is more disliked now than when hE was in office doesn't change that and even now some like him.
Where do you live? Because I have to say that wasn't my experience in Wales, or Gloucestershire, or here in Cannock. Indeed, most people were suspicious of Cameron because he was too like Blair.
Unlike many former PMs, his reputation has sunk still lower after leaving office (money-grubbing with dictators, complicated tax arrangements seemingly designed for avoidance purposes, JP Morgan directorships, international and monied jet-setting).
Blair is a perfect symbol of everything that is wrong with the EU and the modern world. He is our Hillary, with his own whiff of dodgy deals and dirty money. and nepotism. After what has happened across the Atlantic, it seems beyond stupid to even suggest Blair could return and win.
It is what he has done after his Premiership -- just as much as the disastrous consequences of some of his decisions during his time as PM -- that dooms this.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
Have to say Jonathan I think Square Root is correct. Yes, Tories and Corbynites hated him because he nearly destroyed them. But they only made up less than a third of the population. Everyone else hated him because he was a liar and the only British PM ever to be interviewed by the police.
I have to agree with Jonathan. I never liked blair, he was smarmy as hell and I grew to politicall awareness around Iraq. But plenty of people liked him and his time in office, and if he were truly as hated as people claim, he would not have been as successful, people are being wishful because they disliked hua success. Even now I come across people who say we need a Blair type.
Is his stock lower than it was, yes. Is he what the public wants now, probably not. But the comparison with thatcher is Apt. If Blair were as hated by nonpartisan as well partisans there would have been no Blair era. And that he is more disliked now than when hE was in office doesn't change that and even now some like him.
Where do you live? Because I have to say that wasn't my experience in Wales, or Gloucestershire, or here in Cannock. Indeed, most people were suspicious of Cameron because he was too like Blair.
Yup. Down here in Dorset too. May will be immensely electorally popular in the provinces.
Blair would have lasted weeks if the press had done its job over the Ecclestone million. (Blair himself thought his number was up.) Instead, we had a press that - at least in his first four years - thought we had our very own version of JFK's Camelot, and were prepared to forgive and forget to an extraordinary degree.
In this time of uncertainty and strife, with the public wanting change- any change at all- what Tony Blair thinks the country wants is more EU, more Osborne and more Blair. I'm sure he's onto a winner.
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
It would have more support if it was led by someone less hated.
Bearing in mind that he's basically the British version of Bill Clinton, it's a little bit amazing that he can watch the damage caused by the failure of the Clintons to just fuck off and do some charity work or something and take that as a sign that he needs to fuck back *on*.
Blair was a remarkable politician 20 years ago, returning the Labour to power from the depths of despair. He was a large part of why I joined the Labour party, and a mesmerising speaker when I saw him live. The day after the 97 election was bliss to be alive after the greyness and euro-squabbling of the Major years.
I kept faith in 2001, as I had generally approved of the first government. I sent my party card back after the appalling war mongering in the run up to the second Gulf war, and also the increasing privatisation of the NHS.
I would happily vote for a centrist Labour party again, but I wouldn't piss on Blair if he was on fire. What we see in the Middle East refugee crisis is the direct outcome of his policies, and his lack of implementation of a possible A8 migration freeze contributed more than anything else to the Leave vote. Ditto the Euro Constitution and giving up part of the budget rebate.
His lack of understanding of why the country voted for Leave is why he should have no part in a continuity Remain campaign.
The Kippers will have a field day. Another referendum would see a LEAVE majority of two to one.
Another referendum would have to spell out the Leave option, this would likely split Leavers into two groups - 'too far' and 'not far enough'.
We have already voted to Leave. Any further referendum would have only two options: accept the deal to Leave negotiated by the Govt., or refuse that deal and leave on WTO terms.
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
It would have more support if it was led by someone less hated.
Bearing in mind that he's basically the British version of Bill Clinton, it's a little bit amazing that he can watch the damage caused by the failure of the Clintons to just fuck off and do some charity work or something and take that as a sign that he needs to fuck back *on*.
The Brexit crisis makes a difference. It must be unedifying and frustrating to see a govt so at sea and know you can do a better job.
I doubt Blair is seeking a return to the front line himself, but is almost certainly hoping to nudge things.
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
It would have more support if it was led by someone less hated.
Bearing in mind that he's basically the British version of Bill Clinton, it's a little bit amazing that he can watch the damage caused by the failure of the Clintons to just fuck off and do some charity work or something and take that as a sign that he needs to fuck back *on*.
The Brexit crisis makes a difference. It was be unedifying and frustrating to see a govt so at sea and know you can do a better job.
Remind us how well Blair's master-plan of giving away half the Rebate in order to reform the CAP worked.
Looks to me like he is testing the water for SPD2. It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
It would have more support if it was led by someone less hated.
Bearing in mind that he's basically the British version of Bill Clinton, it's a little bit amazing that he can watch the damage caused by the failure of the Clintons to just fuck off and do some charity work or something and take that as a sign that he needs to fuck back *on*.
The Brexit crisis makes a difference. It must be unedifying and frustrating to see a govt so at sea and know you can do a better job.
I doubt Blair is seeking a return to the front line himself, but is almost certainly hoping to nudge things.
Problem with that is that Blair is pretty much out of surrogates. Are there any Blairites left now?
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
I don't hate him, but I do think that the nature of politics, at least in the U.K., has turned against people leaving government and returning. The last significant figure I can think of (and I stand to be corrected) is Churchill and I think it it would be a stretch, although not beyond the imagination of some, to place WW2 and Brexit adjacent to each other. Churchill returned to an existing, his, party, where he was already an MP. Blair is some distance from that. Would the Labour Party want him back? I don't know, you tell me.
Back in what sense? He's a member, he sent £1000 to help the campaigns of numerous MPs last year (I know 2015 seems a long time ago!). As a leader? No.
He remains arguably the most fluent political commentator of our time, and out here in the East Midlands provinces I know plenty of people, Labour and non-Labour, who miss his involvement. But because new parties under FPTP have the killer disadvantage that we all know, I see his role primarily as an effective leader of a fierce anti-Brexit campaign on the lines that Jonathan Freedland suggested yesterday (can't find the link) - uninhibited by the "we must respect the verdict" position of most Remainers active in the major parties. To favour reversing the decision is a perfectly legal stance and at present its de facto leader is Tim Farron, who just doesn't cut through the media as Blair still does.
OT on Trump's data operation, nothing massively surprising but basically: Individually-targeted Facebook ads, and in the last week lots of attack material on Hillary to lower her turnout in swing states.
FWIW I think the Blair return is unlikely to happen, let alone succeed, but the intriguing thing about Blair is that it just possibly might.
Blair is simply the litmus paper test for the King in waiting across the water. One safe seat retirement with a promise of ermine for the trouble and a quick parachute drop is all it takes. Desperate times for Labour may require desperate last ditch measures .
The political scene in such a format would look considerably different. With many more centralist and possibly softer EU policies that could well draw in many Remainers as well of all political views, Edward David Milliband steps into the breach as the saviour.
Blair was a remarkable politician 20 years ago, returning the Labour to power from the depths of despair. He was a large part of why I joined the Labour party, and a mesmerising speaker when I saw him live. The day after the 97 election was bliss to be alive after the greyness and euro-squabbling of the Major years.
I kept faith in 2001, as I had generally approved of the first government. I sent my party card back after the appalling war mongering in the run up to the second Gulf war, and also the increasing privatisation of the NHS.
I would happily vote for a centrist Labour party again, but I wouldn't piss on Blair if he was on fire. What we see in the Middle East refugee crisis is the direct outcome of his policies, and his lack of implementation of a possible A8 migration freeze contributed more than anything else to the Leave vote. Ditto the Euro Constitution and giving up part of the budget rebate.
His lack of understanding of why the country voted for Leave is why he should have no part in a continuity Remain campaign.
And that's before we get to Blair giving free rein to Brown's creation of a 'mastercard economy'.
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
I don't hate him, but I do think that the nature of politics, at least in the U.K., has turned against people leaving government and returning. The last significant figure I can think of (and I stand to be corrected) is Churchill and I think it it would be a stretch, although not beyond the imagination of some, to place WW2 and Brexit adjacent to each other. Churchill returned to an existing, his, party, where he was already an MP. Blair is some distance from that. Would the Labour Party want him back? I don't know, you tell me.
Back in what sense? He's a member, he sent £1000 to help the campaigns of numerous MPs last year (I know 2015 seems a long time ago!). As a leader? No.
He remains arguably the most fluent political commentator of our time, and out here in the East Midlands provinces I know plenty of people, Labour and non-Labour, who miss his involvement. But because new parties under FPTP have the killer disadvantage that we all know, I see his role primarily as an effective leader of a fierce anti-Brexit campaign on the lines that Jonathan Freedland suggested yesterday (can't find the link) - uninhibited by the "we must respect the verdict" position of most Remainers active in the major parties. To favour reversing the decision is a perfectly legal stance and at present its de facto leader is Tim Farron, who just doesn't cut through the media as Blair still does.
Wow Nick. 'Perfectly legal stance'.
Lets not worry about the moral and democratic problems with it, eh?
Unlike many former PMs, his reputation has sunk still lower after leaving office (money-grubbing with dictators, complicated tax arrangements seemingly designed for avoidance purposes, JP Morgan directorships, international and monied jet-setting).
Blair is a perfect symbol of everything that is wrong with the EU and the modern world. He is our Hillary, with his own whiff of dodgy deals and dirty money. and nepotism. After what has happened across the Atlantic, it seems beyond stupid to even suggest Blair could return and win.
It is what he has done after his Premiership -- just as much as the disastrous consequences of some of his decisions during his time as PM -- that dooms this.
Unlike many former PMs, his reputation has sunk still lower after leaving office (money-grubbing with dictators, complicated tax arrangements seemingly designed for avoidance purposes, JP Morgan directorships, international and monied jet-setting).
Blair is a perfect symbol of everything that is wrong with the EU and the modern world. He is our Hillary, with his own whiff of dodgy deals and dirty money. and nepotism. After what has happened across the Atlantic, it seems beyond stupid to even suggest Blair could return and win.
It is what he has done after his Premiership -- just as much as the disastrous consequences of some of his decisions during his time as PM -- that dooms this.
Good article in the LRB that ends precisely on the point you make:
FWIW I think the Blair return is unlikely to happen, let alone succeed, but the intriguing thing about Blair is that it just possibly might.
Blair is simply the litmus paper test for the King in waiting across the water. One safe seat retirement with a promise of ermine for the trouble and a quick parachute drop is all it takes. Desperate times for Labour may require desperate last ditch measures .
The political scene in such a format would look considerably different. With many more centralist and possibly softer EU policies that could well draw in many Remainers as well of all political views, Edward David Milliband steps into the breach as the saviour.
We need Blair in these times just as much as we need Fox, Johnson and Davies. With the difference that Blair is unlikely to get near a position of responsibility
Tories and Corbynites share a common hatred of Blair because he defeated them.
People hate Blair because he was a devious untrustworthy PM, its got nothing to do with losing to him.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
I don't hate him, but I do think that the nature of politics, at least in the U.K., has turned against people leaving government and returning. The last significant figure I can think of (and I stand to be corrected) is Churchill and I think it it would be a stretch, although not beyond the imagination of some, to place WW2 and Brexit adjacent to each other. Churchill returned to an existing, his, party, where he was already an MP. Blair is some distance from that. Would the Labour Party want him back? I don't know, you tell me.
Back in what sense? He's a member, he sent £1000 to help the campaigns of numerous MPs last year (I know 2015 seems a long time ago!). As a leader? No.
He remains arguably the most fluent political commentator of our time, and out here in the East Midlands provinces I know plenty of people, Labour and non-Labour, who miss his involvement. But because new parties under FPTP have the killer disadvantage that we all know, I see his role primarily as an effective leader of a fierce anti-Brexit campaign on the lines that Jonathan Freedland suggested yesterday (can't find the link) - uninhibited by the "we must respect the verdict" position of most Remainers active in the major parties. To favour reversing the decision is a perfectly legal stance and at present its de facto leader is Tim Farron, who just doesn't cut through the media as Blair still does.
And back in the East Midlands, where my family house is, I know plenty of people who would absolutely disagree with you.
When has anybody suggested reversing the stance is illegal? Anti-democratic perhaps, but illegal?
Back is in the sense of control, as you are well aware.
Comments
Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter, it is hard to think of any whose post-office machinations have improved their reputations, rather than further shredding them.
* I would not trust the dark-web to be as secure as it is hyped so no rifling about for me.
:waves-hello-at-mi5:
Osborne should distance himself from Blair. The alternative is, like Cameron's referendum, a lose-lose situation. He either fails, or succeeds but by working as/for Blair.
Teaming up with Tony Blair.
Hur hur hur......
Everything the voters hate about politics, in one easily discarded package.
In the long run, the only way to totally stop it is to form a pro EU party and win a GE, nothing short of that would provide the mandate necessary to reverse the previous decision. Labour cannot turn back from. Brexit, without Scotland they don't have the core support to survive that credibly. So it would have to be a new party, and even Blair isn't delusional enough to think he can achieve that.
Even if he could create the organisation, it would be as successful in parliament as UKIP.
The number of people in Britain who think "What we need now is the insight and wisdom of Tony Blair" is vanishingly low, I suspect.
Sure he made mistakes, like not sacking brown in 2001, but otherwise I don't get the hate.
Bush junior has enhanced his reputation a lot by not machinating!
We need some polling.....
And then there's Iraq, and the repercussions of his middle east policy, which has cost millions of people their homes and hundreds of thousands their lives, and caused the largest humanitarian crisis since 1945.
He was the worst snake oil salesman to ever occupy no10
The real question is how many who were convinced by the government's leaflet now see that document as the ridiculous propaganda that it was, and will simply vote to leave based on anti establishment sentiment.
My suspicion is that the hate is more based in online forums and among the corbynite left than among the general public
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/11/19/trump-won-state-jefferson/
"Twenty-five California counties chose Donald J. Trump for President of the United States, while 33 went for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And seventeen of the 21 California counties proposed for the “State of Jefferson” went for Trump, most by more than 10 percent.
19 of the proposed 21 California “State of Jefferson” counties currently have active petitions to form the 51st state, according to soj51.net. Of the 25 that went for Trump, 24 voted for him by more than 10 percent — and in 14 of those counties, Trump outperformed 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, according to the Sacramento Bee...
Making a wrong decision about one thing doesn't make you a liar, it makes you human. I detest that corbyn and the rest of the ragtag social justice warriors have done to the labour party off the back of it.
Still, things can only get better from here....
Blair thinks he's Luke Skywalker.
Lol
Ben
BBC risks bias claim as TV chief who sailed on Bob Geldof's pro-EU boat set to host Brexit show.
https://t.co/7U7AsHDVva https://t.co/qjiopZn0Zg
Blair and Osborne. Competing for the lack of political self awareness award? Just wow. This would probably put the Tories on 50%
Edited extra bit
B+O would attract all the hard line remainers from left and right. Majority in the H of C? Full steam ahead and damn democracy
It is not a totally ridiculous idea. Stranger things have happened and we are in unprecedented times where anything is possible. Blair is probably the only person that could lead such a project, and it would have a lot of support.
If the remainers do hold a majority position in the Commons, could they collude and add an amendment to any substantive legislation that would overturn the result of the referendum if passed?
Looking back should have known better and realised that no thought would have been given to what to do afterwards. So you can see why people who supported the original invasion now regret supporting it.
The British would turn away in justified revulsion. .
Herbert Hoover saved thousands of children in Germany from malnutrition or worse by organising a system of free school meals in 1945.
Neither were exactly fully rehabilitated but then they were starting from a very low base.
Or we could mention Taft, who became a justice of the Supreme Court after a presidency that wrecked the Republican Party. Or Major, and his work with cricket charities helping disadvantaged children.
There are plenty of examples out there. It's just more fun to talk about the ones that are lazy, unpleasant or curiously wealthy despite doing no work - like Edward Heath.
BROWN.
The EU's future depends on the results of elections in key Western European countries in the next 12 months. It is to be hoped that HMG doesn't reveal too much of a hand regarding its approach to Brexit until the outcome of these elections is known. For example, if MLP wins in France and Merkel loses, the European political scene will be very different.
(The fact that it would hamstring California in the EC going from +55 to (+14) is incidental)
The people most agitated by Iraq are for the most part left wing activists. For lots of people now I don't think it is a massive issue.
Its nice that he (or his spokesman) is calling Corbyn a nutter. Good to see people speaking their minds, but for what its worth I don't think Corbyn is the nutter, just many of his followers.
Both Thatcher and Blair were disliked, they were not disliked because they were weak.
None of those three ever left politics entirely to live the life of am international jet setter.
Is his stock lower than it was, yes. Is he what the public wants now, probably not. But the comparison with thatcher is Apt. If Blair were as hated by nonpartisan as well partisans there would have been no Blair era. And that he is more disliked now than when hE was in office doesn't change that and even now some like him.
SDPers never understand how distrusted Blair is - police interview, Iraq, scheming with/against Brown, blamed (quite rightly) for much of what is ill with immigration today, too close to Europe.
But interesting you bring Thacher up. No one thought in 2001 - you know what we need, Maggir back. Politics had moved on as well as her being unpopular....
Off topic, Strictly in Blackpool was awesome.
Personal high point for me, apart from seeing Natalie Lowe's knickers, was telling Jamie Redknapp 'I thought your wife was literally on fire on the dance floor tonight'
My wider point re Blair was that much of Brexit is around constitutional implications (however dressed up). If there was an area that the Blair administrations were noticeably weak it, it was constitutional change, its significance and its consequences.
How many British soldiers died as a result of the lies told about the IRAQ war? How many Iraquis ?
But if in 2000 the govt had self destructed as Cameron's just did, if Blair had been replaced by Harman and the govt had created a constitutional clusterfuck on the scale of Brexit, who knows what might have happened.
Blair would only influence Labour negatively. If he had the sense to come out and enthusiastically endorse Corbyn, saying how great he is and how he is completing a grassroots revolution Blair started, Corbyn's position with the membership would drop faster than Bill Clinton's trousers.
But Blair, for all his many strengths particularly in communication and campaigning, is very bad at political tactics. That's why he needed Brown, who was terrible at C&C but a real down and dirty political street fighter. If they worked together instead of against each other, they would have been one of the most formidable political pairings of all time, up there with Lenin and Trotsky. Fortunately perhaps, Brown's ego meant that would never happen.
Unlike many former PMs, his reputation has sunk still lower after leaving office (money-grubbing with dictators, complicated tax arrangements seemingly designed for avoidance purposes, JP Morgan directorships, international and monied jet-setting).
Blair is a perfect symbol of everything that is wrong with the EU and the modern world. He is our Hillary, with his own whiff of dodgy deals and dirty money. and nepotism. After what has happened across the Atlantic, it seems beyond stupid to even suggest Blair could return and win.
It is what he has done after his Premiership -- just as much as the disastrous consequences of some of his decisions during his time as PM -- that dooms this.
Much to TSE's disdain....
The courts will give Hollyrood a veto on Brexit, thus forcing Leavers the awkward descision of either remaining or destroying the Union.
*Calm down we're leaving but the lolz on that would be epic.
But no longer.
Agreed. Thatcher wasn't hated because she lost.
I kept faith in 2001, as I had generally approved of the first government. I sent my party card back after the appalling war mongering in the run up to the second Gulf war, and also the increasing privatisation of the NHS.
I would happily vote for a centrist Labour party again, but I wouldn't piss on Blair if he was on fire. What we see in the Middle East refugee crisis is the direct outcome of his policies, and his lack of implementation of a possible A8 migration freeze contributed more than anything else to the Leave vote. Ditto the Euro Constitution and giving up part of the budget rebate.
His lack of understanding of why the country voted for Leave is why he should have no part in a continuity Remain campaign.
I doubt Blair is seeking a return to the front line himself, but is almost certainly hoping to nudge things.
He remains arguably the most fluent political commentator of our time, and out here in the East Midlands provinces I know plenty of people, Labour and non-Labour, who miss his involvement. But because new parties under FPTP have the killer disadvantage that we all know, I see his role primarily as an effective leader of a fierce anti-Brexit campaign on the lines that Jonathan Freedland suggested yesterday (can't find the link) - uninhibited by the "we must respect the verdict" position of most Remainers active in the major parties. To favour reversing the decision is a perfectly legal stance and at present its de facto leader is Tim Farron, who just doesn't cut through the media as Blair still does.
https://medium.com/@MedicalReport/how-the-trump-campaign-built-an-identity-database-and-used-facebook-ads-to-win-the-election-4ff7d24269ac#.ubz8ljfst
The political scene in such a format would look considerably different. With many more centralist and possibly softer EU policies that could well draw in many Remainers as well of all political views,
EdwardDavid Milliband steps into the breach as the saviour.Lets not worry about the moral and democratic problems with it, eh?
http://www.lrb.co.uk/2016/11/14/rw-johnson/trump-some-numbers
When has anybody suggested reversing the stance is illegal? Anti-democratic perhaps, but illegal?
Back is in the sense of control, as you are well aware.