He won three uncontested General Elections, the first of which had been in the bag since Britain left the ERM, years before almost anyone had ever heard of Tony Blair.
Never mind, "Who else should have won?" No one else even wanted to win. On no occasion did anyone else make the slightest effort to win.
Not even when, in 2005, any half-competent Opposition would have wiped the floor with Blair. The choice not to do so was conscious and intentional.
2015 is shaping up to be the General Election that 1997 could have been if John Smith had lived, or if Bryan Gould had become Leader.
But if there is one thing on which the entire political spectrum is agreed, then it is that Labour should have won in 1992.
UKIP's and the Conservative Right's hatred of the Major years and of all their consequences cannot mean anything else.
While anyone still squawking that that loss gave Labour the chance to become New Labour (and the New Labour position was always that it had been a good thing that Labour had lost) is now an object of complete and utter derision.
"It is that Labour should have won in 1992". Nobody agrees with that. Peter Hitchens was delighted that-through the Jennifer's Ear episode-he played a small part in stopping Labour in 1992.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that Major was bad does not in any way mean that European Commissioner Kinnock would have been any better. If you think disdain for Major implies love of Commissioner Kinnock you don't get it.
The point was that the Tories should have picked another leader. Had Norman Tebbitt not been looking after his injured wife, there would have been a much better Prime Minister in 1992.
Everyone apart from the remaining Blairite and (if there are any) Majorite diehards must, by definition, think that Labour should have won in 1992. It is the only logic of any of their positions, and most certainly of yours.
DeleteWell done on really riling the loony right, Mr. L.
Delete"The point was that the Tories should have picked another leader"? The point is that the moon should have been made of green cheese. It wasn't, they didn't.
Either Major or Kinnock had to be PM in 1992, which should it have been? If not Kinnock, must be Major. Either Cameron or Miliband must be PM in 2015, which should it be? If not Miliband, must be Cameron.
Tebbit would not have beaten Heseltine and definitely would not have won a General Election. An even less sympathetic or popular version of the PM who had had to be got rid of because everybody hated her, inside her party and out.
Good luck for the New Year.
And to you.
DeleteVery well-said, all round.
No one was going to replace Thatcher with Tebbit, either as Party Leader or as Prime Minister. Kinnock's huge lead in her last days would have gone up even further.
Faced with that prospect, Heseltine would instead have strode into Number 10, although he would still have lost in 1992, despite having put up quite a fight.
Under Tebbit, the Tories would have been pulverised. But they would never have given it to him, anyway.
Still, give him his due. He now tells the truth about food banks.
If I may quote you directly:
"The point was that the Tories should have picked another leader"? The point is that the moon should have been made of green cheese. It wasn't, they didn't.
Either Major or Kinnock had to be PM in 1992, which should it have been? If not Kinnock, must be Major. Either Cameron or Miliband must be PM in 2015, which should it be? If not Miliband, must be Cameron.
Spot on.
Tebbit supported Major for leader, all the Thatcherites did, so did Thatcher herself. There was no "disdain" from them then or during the 92 campaign, quite the reverse.
ReplyDeleteLike how Tories loved Thatcher at the time (bloody funny way of showing it) or Thatcher was a Eurosceptic PM (another bloody funny way of showing it), this "disdain" for Major has been made up after the event.
Keep up the good work.