Teiz wrote on May 10^th, 2010 at 7:16am:



There's a significant difference. If a PM resigns mid-term due to some crisis (as Thatcher did in 1990, although the crisis in question was more to do with internal division as opposed to one which affected the electorate), then you have a point.

The transition between Blair and Brown wasnt as a result of some political turmoil (even though there was no love lost between them). They had agreed years earlier that (subject to winning elections) Blair would step down for him eventually, and the electorate knew in 2005 when they voted that Blair would not serve a full term.

There was actually talk of a leadership challenge to Brown last year. Had they replaced him then and STILL not have gone to the polls despite TWO leadership changes since the last election, then I think the public outcry would have been deafening.

Anyway, he's just now announced his intention to step down as Labour leader by the time of their party conference in the autumn. He'll stay as PM until a 'stable government' is formed

http://news.bbc.co.uk/

Gazza wrote on May 10^th, 2010 at 5:46pm:


Nothing like a "proper"  fistafight on TV...
Everybody talking- no one listening.....

are we done here?

" Britain's David Cameron becomes PM; Brown out  "


" LONDON – Conservative leader David Cameron became Britain's youngest prime minister in almost 200 years Tuesday after Gordon Brown stepped down and ended 13 years of Labour government.

Cameron said he aims to form a full coalition government with the third-place Liberal Democrats after his Conservative Party won the most seats but did not get a majority in Britain national election last week.

The 43-year-old leader said it would be "hard and difficult work" to govern as a coalition but added that Britain had serious economic issues to tackle. Cameron visited Buckingham Palace and was asked to form a government by Queen Elizabeth II less than an hour after Brown tendered his resignation to the monarch.

Cameron and Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg's pact would be the first coalition government since World War II.

Arriving at London's Downing Street hand in hand with his wife Samantha, Cameron said he believed that Britain's "best days lie ahead."

Hundreds of onlookers, many of them booing, crowded the gates of Downing Street to watch on, as Cameron swept into his new home less than 90 minutes after an emotional Brown had made a farewell address.

"We have some deep and pressing problems — a huge deficit, deep social problems, a political system in need of reform," Cameron said. "For those reasons, I aim to form a proper and full coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats."




http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100511/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_britain_election

Hard to say, to be honest. Its been so long since we've had a coalition government formed in the immediate aftermath of an election. Last time was during WW2. Hopefully, like then, they can put national interest above party politics at a time of crisis. Tv journalists seem to be hopeful they could make it last four years.

My guess is that they'll do fine. The economy is too big a mess to make a fuss about party politics. Governments simply cannot afford to fuck up in this situation. But since UK parties aren't used to coalitions, I guess it's gonna be interesting.

Honky Tonk Man wrote on May 12^th, 2010 at 3:46am:



An appropriate image and an appropriate name for a PM who fucked us up the keester and left us in the shit!

It's the Dave & Nick Show....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8678370.stm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAaWvVFERVA

this is why the  english never wrote down their constitution and thank god for  that

god save the queen

we mean it man