Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
well theres a bit of both. Blair deserves a large share. but Brown could have made more changes after he took up the job, and didn't, staying in thrall to the Blairite policies.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Fri Jun 5th, 2009 at 02:07:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
the biggest mistake was his hesitation in (and ultimate failure to) calling a snap election in the autumn of 2007.

But it's fair, in a way, that he was ultimately brought down by his indecision.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Fri Jun 5th, 2009 at 04:43:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Jerome a Paris:
the biggest mistake was his hesitation in (and ultimate failure to) calling a snap election in the autumn of 2007.

what difference would it have made? it wouldn't have hammered the tories that much, and apart from a feelgood factor, pretty easily seen through by anyone with a clue, what would it have done to protect the UK from the rot in the financial system, or the worldwide credit crunch, or the placing too many eggs in the City's basket?

brown is perfect as hapless captain of a sinking ship.

all that's missing is a bottle of tanquerai.

if i see him saying one more time in the fruity voice how the banking system need to be more ethical, i'm going to scream!

duh, what was it all those years when you were chancellor of the exchequer? dumb, blind, crooked or incompetent? we get to choose...

course, when fury at tony had reached boiling point, he played the role of unflash harry, the calm, reasonable, wise one, uncle gordo, not too bright, but basically trustworthy, who was going to set us to rights.

can you laugh and hurl at the same time?

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sat Jun 6th, 2009 at 08:24:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
is that Brown might have won then. Who knows what he would have actually done if he had had real electoral legitimacy?

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sun Jun 7th, 2009 at 10:15:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
don't you believe brown was not an innocent bystander while the abuse preceding the credit crunch was occurring?

if he had had interesting policies, policies that really looked to the future, rather than merely pretending to, electoral legitimacy wouldn't have been so important. the policies would have made sense to more people, and would have started getting traction by now.

instead we got 'we didn't see it coming' (yeah right...)

instead we got selling us the idea of nuclear energy, and downplaying renewables, we got more coddling financial trickster-whizzkids in the city, we got more deaths in afghanistan, we got bleating platitudes, ossified ineffectiveness personified.

ok, he took the brits out of iraq, maybe he deserves more props for that.

with respect, your question itself is an excursion into pure tail-wag-the-dog territory!

this whole 'timing the elections' thing smacks of puerile politics, as if the energy-wave of novelty, (still intact public image as Great Leader!) was more important than the policies the man was promoting...

it's short term political maneuvering, as if divorced from reality.

people aren't nearly as stupid as the blairs and browns of this world think.

we knew iraq would be a clusterfuck, informed bloggers (such as yourself, one of the very best, imo) have been warning about the crunch for 5 years +, all that time wasted enriched his buddies in banking and multiplied the pain felt by the generations in hock his policies create.

i think a lot more of the public distrust brown than ever, whatever old labour cred he established has been long consumed by his naked hard-on for tony's power, the power he fretted and schemed on for years.

as for wearing that power, he's right of john major!

substituting pompousness for statesmanship, and hoping people won't know the difference. duh.

the little grey men rule england, but i think that era is about over.

once out of politics, i wouldn't be surprised if he reverted to a much more genial, positive side to his character.
 power, and his addiction to it, have simply brought out the worst in him. present circumstances would test any leader in his shoes, it's true, but i can't believe there aren't much more intelligent, and most importantly able people in labour's ranks.

as an man, there are a lot worse in politics, his predecessor for example, but as a prime minister, he's hopelessly out of his depth, and it shows.

a stooge for the banksters, inadequate for the role of leading the UK out of the most difficult period since ww2.

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sun Jun 7th, 2009 at 05:35:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Not to mention that he could have made changes *before* Bliar left. What did he do for 10 years while Tony was selling out Britain to the Americans? At the very least he could have changed his own job description...

--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
by martingale on Sat Jun 6th, 2009 at 05:09:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
He was riding the bubble, running an irresponsibly pro-cyclical fiscal policy and pushing "Public-Private Partnerships" for funding public services which have left most local health an education authorities in a financial hole.

The brainless should not be in banking. — Willem Buitler
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Jun 6th, 2009 at 05:21:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Impeachment gets real

by ARGeezer - Jan 17
23 comments

A Final Warning

by Oui - Jan 10
112 comments

Environment Anarchists

by Oui - Jan 13
4 comments

More Spanish repression

by IdiotSavant - Jan 6
8 comments

Occasional Series