in what way? and do you mean "ever"?
2006-10-12 13:53:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by tsmith007 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
New Labour were totally unelectable during the late 80s and early 90s. Thatcher went quite far right with her policies and painted the left (Labour at that time) as a party who could not manage the economy, and that would let trade unions rule the country again (as they did in the late 1970s - winter of discontent)
Tony Blair totally reformed the Labour party, and he had the support back then to do it. He re-wrote clause 4 which had previously been fundamental to Labour - it gave trade unions a huge amount of power over the party. He marginalised this. He also accepted principles of the market economy and invigorated the party. He did what Cameron hopes to do now to the Tories.
So yes, he did dominate the party at one point. However, it seems that you can become too close to the situation. He still wants to be the central figure in the party, even though outsiders can see that his time is up.
I think people can slate him all they want for the bad things that he has done, but without him the political landscape in Britain would be very different.
2006-10-17 18:15:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by ikklemonster 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I hear that once a month Tony Blair and the boys have an S & M party, that he pulls out the whips and chains and makes everyone call him master. But it's just a rumour at this point.
2006-10-12 20:55:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by Gent Of Style 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes, but they have had to put up with him because the rest of them are unelectable. However, he has been a disaster for Britain, his desire to hand Britain completely over to the EU, and his social engineering policies (probably his wife's as well), represent a long term disaster for this country. I have often wondered if it was a Scottish agenda to destroy England forever.
2006-10-15 09:02:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Veritas 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Blair couldn't dominate a paper bag.
2006-10-12 21:01:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Kyle 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
intimidated his party, he did'nt allow anyone to disagree with him, a subdued version of margaret thatcher. do you know his wife, cherie once chaired a cabinet meeting.
all this so called unpleasantness between him and gordon brown is psychological nonsense to bring out sympathy for brown with the british people.
neither have been good for this country. it's wake-up time!
some conservative need to get off their holier than thou platform to win the next election. cameron is doing fine and his humour is paying off in parliament, but he needs to get policies defined. He can't rely on people being pissed off with blair and new labour to get the big job. the others need to follow cameron in his laid back style, but this isnt 1979, tories have to climb down from their ivory tower and get into real life, and stop telling the people they have to eat cake, or else, or to get on their pushbikes to travel to london to find work. swing left enough to be human. we don't want the old guard righties in any more than we want the old guard lefties.
2006-10-12 23:09:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by Calamity Jane 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Considering he has moved boundries for voting purposes and placed ethnic candidates in ethnic areas he has a government of 'yes men...and women'! So of course he has dominated! Anyone who disagrees with his lame policies gets kicked out! Is that democracy (Like he keeps telling us it is)????? Or is it dictatorship?
2006-10-13 13:25:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by kbw 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
He is a war criminal and so are the bum lickers around him that he chose
As soon as the thickos realised he sacked them.
So the plain answer is yes
2006-10-13 02:42:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by green man 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
On the face of it yes - behind the scenes Greaseball Brown is in charge.
2006-10-13 04:20:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
YES his last birthday party. sorry,couldnt resist
2006-10-12 20:59:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by bongo 2
·
0⤊
0⤋