The thing is Joe, what people are pointing out is that the general public do not elect a Prime Minister, they elect a party and the party decides its leader.

To be fair, the influence of American ideas and media campaigns has always tampered with that idea and thee are still people going round saying the previous Prime Minister Gordon Brown was never elected. Such ignorance is mainly due to lazy misunderstanding what it means when they are let loose in a polling booth, and to be fair, because journalists try to see similarities in systems so compare a Prime Minister to a President..

Did you know? Thanks to trashy US soap operas being beamed into homes for years and years, British Telecom had to add 911 to do the same as 999, the national emergency number because younger people assumed 911 meant emergency after being raised on popcorn television.

Well, politics can mean the same too.



On this debate, I agree Steve, and further, I think him at the despatch box for a couple of years will enliven political debate which is a good thing, but in the same way the people trusted Churchill in war but rejected him come peace, the UK electorate don't need a Tory press to see the flawed logic in quantitive easing in times of growth, nationalisation without compensation and incomes policy. Parts may have merit, but if you want a mix n match to achieve success, those eligible to vote may as well vote Andy Burnham.

The only Labour platform that has secured government in the last forty years has been a moderate one. And then some...