And whatever people think of him, he's the only Labour leader to have won an election in the last 45 years.Tony Blair being knighted is worth every penny for the enormous social media meltdown from the hard left and hard right last night.
Tony Blair being knighted is worth every penny for the enormous social media meltdown from the hard left and hard right last night.
The most successful Labour PM ever in terms of election-winning abilities.
English labour have never been the same either…
Good point! That was a time when the Royals came in for a lot of flak.
As many of the auditory and visual cues we would normally rely on are not visible in written text, I recommend the use of the "
" emoticon/smiley for such posts, to avoid confusion 
And I'll retort that he's the only Labour leader who has made them electable in the last 45 years. It rather depends what you want from Labour: getting in to Government and having a chance to change things, or standing in the wilderness ranting and raving about left-wing policies that the majority of the population don't want.
I reckon the answer would be 'yes but with a much smaller majority'. When Smith died they were polling in the high 40%s while the Tories were in the high 20%s. Major was at war with the b@stards over Europe, it was the time of sleaze mark 1, Cash of Questions, Aitken and the collapsed libel case; Black Wednesday had also damaged confidence in the Tories as a safe pair of hands. Major didn't have the personality to overcome all those setbacks. A smaller majority would have done Labour good because it would have kept potential dissidents focussed. Smith would have been less likely to veer towards some of Blair's 'middle way' thinking. As Home Secretary, Blair would have been able to implement much of the reforming legislation the '97 government put into place. What would happened post Smith - no idea.
I think you are right. Howard (or someone similar) was right for '97, someone with experience, who commands (some) respect, get the party back on the straight and narrow. Step down for Hague, who would have got more respect in the country after a few years in a senior shadow post. Miss out the Quiet Man.
But equally contentious!
The award given to Blair is within the gift of the queen not the government
I wonder if you were around to vote at the time. Perhaps you missed all of the good work the Blair governments delivered in making life better for real people after years of Tory damage.
I think we know it was the exact opposite with Blair playing the populist ''people's princess'' card. It could well be that Prince Philip, known for his dogmatic views on certain matters, was instrumental in Blair having to wait until after his death. John Major's eight year wait for the honour was probably caused by the ripples on the reports of his affair with Edwina Currie to die down: he was mercifully quiet on the subject, no doubt to the distress of the publicity-seeking Currie.
True, the obsequiousness by some to this war monger, I find quite baffling. Not taken in by his sharp talk one bit - a conniving, machiavellian character who should be locked up.
Even the ones who can't win an election get a knighthood quite often, like Sir Quiet Man, who's never piped down since he was 'awarded' one, trumpeting how successful Brexit has been.
Even the ones who can't win an election get a knighthood quite often, like Sir Quiet Man, who's never piped down since he was 'awarded' one, trumpeting how successful Brexit has been.
Oh, yes, realise that, but you get rewarded however useless you are, so long as a political party kids itself that you've got what it takes to win power. Win-win for said politician. Utterly shameless.
It is one of the great unknowns, i suspect the Tories in the mid-90s were in such a bad state as long as Labour had a leader who was even vaguely competent they'd have won. Smith would probably have won though not as big a majority as Sir Tonty Blair.
