Are there any British subscribers who can give me an unbiased idea

[othermeans]

of what the British public is feeling right now about what is happening in Iraq? For instance the taking of British hostages, the use of British troops, etc. Secondarily what is the feeling of the electorate regarding Blair's chance for re-election? I read the on-line British newspapers but I can't really get a feeling for how the British public really thinks about what is happening.

[Englander]

1. Well, I can only give you a biased idea.....

The hostage story is on every front page,every news channel;

The LibDems are anti-war and seem to be only Party on the up;recent by-elections in safe Labour seats,won 1,nearly won second;

Blair's re-election? the General election is,sadly, already won;Tories are finished for prob. another 10 years,and LibDems have nae chance;

Upcoming barometers of mood; by-election in Hartlepool,which is next door to Blair's seat next week
and anti-war march on October 17

http://www.stopwar.org.uk/

I would hope that people can see this is a foul-up of mythical proportions and their PM should be impeached and prosecuted.

[Mr Creosote]

2. Well that's a silly question

because we're all as biased as hell. But I'll try my best. First off, I have yet to meet anyone who has any idea at all why your election is even close, and that includes me. Secondly, I have yet to meet anyone who doesn't think that Blair lied about WMD. But, nevertheless, there are some people (a fairly small minority) who think that the war was a good thing - Saddam being so evil and all that (torturing and murdering prisoners, murdering civilians - a sort of middle-eastern Dubya really).
On the re-election thing, although we had some fun with figures on another thread, everybody believes that Blair will win again. For anything else to happen there needs to be a collapse in turnout (probable) and a lot of intelligent tactical voting (improbable). The best hope is for a hugely reduced majority, with Blair reliant on "Old" Labour for support.
As for the hostage thing (biased bit coming through) if someone wants to work building an American military base in Iraq they've chosen to put themselves in harms way. I grieve more for the 15,000 Iraqi civilians who have died for oil and Halliburton.

[T_i_B]

3. Blair has a landslide majority

and the biggest opposition party are the conservatives, who are still unelectable really (and who also supported the Iraq war). As such Blair is likely to win the next election regardless, which is part of the problem really as to all intents and purposes Blair's landslide majority has made him less accountable then he should be.

Here are the results from the last general election to give you an idea.

Labour - 413 seats
Conservatives - 166 seats
Liberal Democrats - 52 seats
Others - 28 Seats

http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/

[LeftishBrit]

4. Almost everyone I know here is anti-war...

And certainly did not see any reason for Britain going in with Bush, without UN support. Most are even more anti-war now, and think that Blair is both crazy and a liar. Nonetheless, he'll probably win the election, because Howard is even worse, and the Liberal Democrats aren't a well-organized party in most areas, though they are doing well in my constituency.

[non sociopath skin]

5. Most folk I talk to see Blair as anything but crazy....

... they see him as a rather arrogant machine politician. The Iraq war is unpopular but fading as an issue here in the North East, though the hostage crisis may resurrect it.

Howard is seen as yesterday's man, head of a party which hasn't got its act together and has little new to offer. He will offer a right-wing platform in order to outflank Tory voters who have deserted to far-right parties like the UKIP and BNP.

The Lib Dems are seen as a protest vote. I suspect that if you asked most people who voted for them what they stood for, they wouldn't know.

Suspect that the Lib Dems may win Harlepool faux de mieux. Mandy was not popular there and there's general resentment about his Promotion to Glory. The Libs may well pick up a couple of seats here: they took Newcastle City Council and at least one of the newly-gentrified areas may sway that way.

I see Blair winning with a smaller but not worryingly small (to him) margin. And a third term which sees a further rightward swing in British politics.

Sorry. I do TRY to be optimistic ...

The Skin

[baby_mouse]

6. Well, I can't really be unbiased, or imagine an unbiased position, as such

The reason being, ultimately, you either have opinions, or you're unbiased.

:-)

However, *I* think it's understood by politicos and disinteresteds all about that Blair's broken the "gentleman's agreement" that governs resignation from office. Impeachment hasn't happened here for, ooh a long time, the last time I glimpsed an article I think it's over a century at least, but I didn't really absorb the information. He's really, REALLY overstepped the mark. His own party pretty much loathes him. They really only ever saw him as a means to an end, anyway.

I think a lot of people are pinning hopes on Gordon Brown. He's Old Labour, and as I understand it, the Labour Party itself is mostly of the view that he will, of course, be Prime Minister one day, and I wonder if Tony's avoiding stepping down so that the party doesn't look weak and indecisive before the election. I really don't think it would matter if Gordon *did* take over just before the election, in fact I think it might even increase the majority, he's an absolutely superb Chancellor, unequalled really. I do think that Blair will win the election so that Gordon can then take up the reins at a more leisurely pace mid-term.

Tony Blair, I think, really only went ahead with supporting Bush because he wanted to show on the world stage that he could work with a Republican President, that's how he thinks.

I'm a fan of Gordon's. I get the impression that he's more interested in reality than politics, if you understand what I mean, and he really does strike me as the sort that no amount of prodding, dancing about issues, goal-post shifting or game-playing on behalf of any other statesman in ANY other country would would faze.

Just MHO

[LeftishBrit]

7. I'm biased too!

Blair thinks he walks on water. When I said that many of my friends thought he was crazy, I meant as in a megalomaniac who believes his own lies; not that he lacks political survival skills (unfortunately).

He's a true successor to Maggie Thatcher. She really moved the political centre to the right, so that Blair is probably to the right of some of his Tory predecessors; and also turned political and managerial thuggery into virtues rather than vices; 'making tough decisions' that can harm others into a routine measure rather than an unusual crisis measure; and refusal to compromise or change as the ideal, rather than a serious weakness (Maggie: "You turn if you like -the lady's not for turning!"; Tony: "I have no reverse gear!") Tony's probably better than Maggie- almost anyone is. But not very much better.

I think there were unsuccessful impeachment attempts in the first half of the 19th century, but I don't think anyone has been successfully impeached here for much longer than that - probably over 250 years. Tony deserves it, but I don't think it will happen.