The next Prime Minister?

**Chris** · 13-11-2003, 12:07

Having watched Michael Howard wiping the floor with Blair in Prime Minister's Question Time yesterday, I can't help thinking Labour is facing a serious challenge for the first time in six years.

What do y'all think? Is British politics about to get more interesting, and could the Tories now possibly even win an election?

Xaccers · 13-11-2003, 12:12

We can only hope

I thought he was very dynamic and got in a few good shots.
His TB dossier shows he was prepared for TB bringing up the past, which seemed to make TB rather uncomfortable.

**Russ B** · 13-11-2003, 12:12

Michael Howard will never be PM. Why?

You show me the last time a bald(ing) PM was voted in.

I'm serious! There was a study a few years ago which said slapheads will never get in to Downing Street: apparently the public distrusts baldies in positions of power, thus Kinnock never really had a chance, William Hague....well, one of the reasons he didn't get in would have been down to his hair-loss and more recently IBS...

nighthawk · 13-11-2003, 12:35

Missed an option in the poll.

4. Always Voted Tory & will again

Bex · 13-11-2003, 12:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ D

Michael Howard will never be PM. Why?

You show me the last time a bald(ing) PM was voted in.

I'm serious! There was a study a few years ago which said slapheads will never get in to Downing Street: apparently the public distrusts baldies in positions of power, thus Kinnock never really had a chance, William Hague....well, one of the reasons he didn't get in would have been down to his hair-loss and more recently IBS...

thats an interesting theory russ, i'd like to see the study/findings

i have actually found since i studied philosophy it is more interesting watching the politicans conferences, it means i can see the hiden premises and rip about their arguments..sad arent i :p

edit: i clicked the wrong damn button in the poll

i dont like labour because i dont like the fact they got rid of the student grants and now means im a couple of thousand pounds in debt

gazzae · 13-11-2003, 12:41

Was Churchill not bald?

and Callaghan was balding was he not as was Douglas-Home. Attlee was bald as well.

Ramrod · 13-11-2003, 13:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by nighthawk

Missed an option in the poll.

4. Always Voted Tory & will again

damn right!

Ramrod · 13-11-2003, 13:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by gazzae

Was Churchill not bald?

and Callaghan was balding was he not as was Douglas-Home. Attlee was bald as well.

In the days before mass media

Bex · 13-11-2003, 13:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

In the days before mass media

call me a

but why does that make a difference??

i wish someone would explain to me why baldness= non-trust worthiness?
to be fair, who can trust a politician anyway? bald or otherwise :p

trebor · 13-11-2003, 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by bexy

thats an interesting theory russ, i'd like to see the study/findings

i have actually found since i studied philosophy it is more interesting watching the politicans conferences, it means i can see the hiden premises and rip about their arguments..sad arent i :p

edit: i clicked the wrong damn button in the poll

i dont like labour because i dont like the fact they got rid of the student grants and now means im a couple of thousand pounds in debt

when you sit and watch 2 or more politicians discuss anything it easy to see
why not much ever get archived

I have never forgiven the conseratives for the poll tax which turned into the council tax. that little brain wave they had cost me over Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£250 a month more than I was paying. it is now Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£450 more than the current ratable value of my house, so if I was still paying rates I'd be Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£450 a month better off, dam those conserative ***tards.

Nemesis · 13-11-2003, 13:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by bexy

call me a

but why does that make a difference??

i wish someone would explain to me why baldness= non-trust worthiness?
to be fair, who can trust a politician anyway? bald or otherwise :p

Cynical view .... or what.

In a recent poll, it was stated that the British Public were unlikely to vote in a balding leader ... however, there were balding leaders in the past, Churchill, Macmillan. The point then, when they were in charge, the Media was very different to now. Most communication was via radio, word of mouth, newspapers etc. I wouldn't be suprised if people didn't know what these people looked like.

There was a tendancy to believe the words spoken, and the text printed, and trust that, rather than make the decision on a leader based on his head of hair.

We have become a fickle lot ...

Bex · 13-11-2003, 13:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemesis

Cynical view .... or what.

In a recent poll, it was stated that the British Public were unlikely to vote in a balding leader ... however, there were balding leaders in the past, Churchill, Macmillan. The point then, when they were in charge, the Media was very different to now. Most communication was via radio, word of mouth, newspapers etc. I wouldn't be suprised if people didn't know what these people looked like.

There was a tendancy to believe the words spoken, and the text printed, and trust that, rather than make the decision on a leader based on his head of hair.

We have become a fickle lot ...

ok was the poll specifically questions such as "would you vote a bald man into parliment" or was it "would u vote mr bald man x"??? this makes a huge difference....also the wording of it would have been important as to how it was answered..it could be possible that the question was a leading question, ie was worded in such a way that people sub consciously picked up the negativeness being ascribed to bald men......

personally, i wouldnt have a problem voting in a bald guy, as long as he wasnt smarmy and could actually look people in the eye when he spoke

trebor · 13-11-2003, 13:57

Bexy you may like to read this taken from
http://www.parliament.the-stationery...t/60517-15.htm
17 May 1996 : Column 1231

schools, what did the Labour party do? It opposed it. When the Government introduced the Education Act 1980, which brought in parental choice and provided information through testing, the Labour party voted against it. When the Government introduced the Education Reform Act 1988 and the national curriculum, the Labour party opposed those measures.
When the Government introduced the Education (Student Loans) Act 1990 and top-up loans for students, what did the Labour party do? It opposed those measures. When the Government introduced the Education (Schools) Act 1992--which made it easier for schools to become grant-maintained and brought in the Funding Agency for Schools for England--the Labour party opposed it. When the Government brought in the Education Act 1994, which reformed initial teacher training--the very issue that I was talking about, and about which Labour Members agreed with me--the Labour party opposed it

**Russ B** · 13-11-2003, 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by gazzae

Was Churchill not bald?

and Callaghan was balding was he not as was Douglas-Home. Attlee was bald as well.

In recent times.....

Bex · 13-11-2003, 14:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by trebor

<snippty snip>When the Government introduced the Education (Student Loans) Act 1990 and top-up loans for students, what did the Labour party do? It opposed those measures.

ok i know this is off topic, but if they opposed it why was it bought in?

and russ if u are now talking about in recent times, you should have stipulated that in your post to begin with :p