http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005 by the authors Mon, 9 May 2005 01:33:53 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149960 Thanks Sliver. Much cleaer. I just didn't get it. 149960@blogcritics.org Mon, 9 May 2005 01:33:53 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149518 >>Blair has already said he's going in this term That just means he's already said he's going to resign before the next election. The win is historic because its the third successive win by Labour which has not happened before but its also a defeat in that he lost 100 seats. The historic importance is diminished somewhat because it would have taken a more than 10% swing to the Tories across the entire country the actual national swing was just over 2%. The Tories increase was almost entirely a recapturing of the core votes it had lost to UKIP. The campaing they ran also inflated the success of other even further right wing parties such as the BNP, a neo-fascist party. It will be an easier reach in the next General Election, but there is no certainty when that will be. Terms last up to five years but tend to last no more than four. In Blair's own constituency the father of a military policeman that died in Iraq stood and got over 4,000 votes and in his acceptance speech pummeled Blair (metaphorically), and the reaction was evident to anyone that saw it. The anti-war sentiment gained the Liberal Democrats a 10% rise in their vote and more than significant gains against Labour. The anti-war stance isn't confined to the left wing its pervasive throughout the spectrum. 149518@blogcritics.org Sat, 7 May 2005 04:22:13 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149342 39 percent did not turn out, more than the 21 percent of the 44 million who voted for Labour. Rj - it was more than Iraq. Other than Iraq, Labour lost on issues that would have got Bush more votes if he took the flip side - immigration and taxes among them. I respect Tony Blair like I respect John McCain. A true core sense of right and wrong and honesty in front of the public - missing in most politicians. But sometimes that gets deliberately "forgotten" for the sake of .. I'm not sure what. 149342@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 16:04:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149337 Well, there is a media spin about it all. Bush and Howard and Blair all supposedly won DESPITE their support for the liberation of Iraq... And if they had lost? It would have been BECAUSE of their support for the liberation of Iraq... 149337@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 15:52:24 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149332 I haven't seen any word on turnout. (Or is voting compulsory like in Australia?) Higher or lower than last time? Not seeing a lot of commentary yet (surprise surprise) that Bush got a major re-election win; then Howard got an historic re-election win and now Blair gets a historic win, but with slight diminishment. Seems like a repudiation of the anti-war Left's message to me. 149332@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 15:48:19 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149322 >>Blair has already said he's going in this term Sorry sliver - what does that mean? Did you skip a word? colloquialism? 149322@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 15:27:06 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149311 Blair has already said he's going in this term. There are around 50 Usual Suspects who bring his actual working majority for his more extreme measures, such as ID cards, down to around 15-16. Yes, the British know the difference between voting for the candidate and voting for the party but in a peculiar way they manage to do both at the same time. Only by doing that would you have the very skewed results that you had last night. In one constituency there's a 27% swing to the Liberal Democrats, but that doesn't count in all marginals. It was a very peculiar voting pattern that managed overall to conform exactly to the polls and exit polls but in individual constituencies to be wildly off beam. 149311@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 15:08:03 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149310 Blair is toast within the year. And the Tories look good in the next election (2010?)... 149310@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 15:07:10 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149289 I think you may be writing Blair off too soon. He's a personable fellow with foreign policy positions which appeal to Torries and a do-nothing domestic policy with the trappings of Labour values. That's hard to beat in a parliamentary system where any form of extremism tends to get slapped down hard. Plus, Britain has its own, growing 'slient majority' who are fed up with national weakness, pandering and rising crime and economic problems. Blair may not be the kind of leader they want, but he;s the kind they're willing to settle for. Dave 149289@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 13:42:45 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/06/035705.php#comment-149262 Dead on accurate. People may make their decision on the person, but in reality people vote for the party. Any feeling on whether the British people realize this? Just curious. I have a feeling most do. 149262@blogcritics.org Fri, 6 May 2005 12:35:38 EDT