Who thinks Gordon Brown is a ambitious 'usurper' and 'why'?

Question

I,personally, think, Gordon Brown should not have become Prime Minister;
after al....John Prescott WAS THE Deputy Prime Minister...he should have taken over,automatically, like in the USA!
Then there should've been a General Election...don't you think!!
That way, everyone involved would've had a fairer chance at being elected!!!

Answer 1

First of all, Brown is a Marxist.
Second, the British electoral system is very similar to Soviet or German Nazi.
The public doesn't decide who will be a PM. That's called an usurpation, you are right.

The most progressive electoral system now exists in Russia: General Election.

Answer 2

Its a fact that Brown should not have been allowed just to take over has prime minister without a general election!.

I don't like brown at all.. Has to whether Prescott should have become PM .. Jeez god help us!..

I won't be for anyone in the next general election.. i just dislike the whole kit and caboodle.. no matter what party!.

Answer 3

Gordon very cleverly got rid of all his potential opposition by promising them Ministerial Office,like Milliband. Having been endorsed by the votes of his party Brown automatically became leader and prime minister. There was no necessity for a general election. Just thank your lucky stars we didn't end up with Prescott.

Answer 4

John Prescott blotted his copy book a long time ago. He was never seriously in the running. Gordon Brown cannot be described as a 'usurper' as it was always taken that he would succeed TB.
You don't seem to have an understanding of the rules that govern party leadership issues. The public do not decide on who leads a political party. It's an internal party matter.

Answer 5

There is nothing fair,honest or just about this government. They are not running the country for the benefit of the whole population but for the benefit of a few metropolitan types.
A good example of this attitude to the public can be seen with the BBC, and how they manipulated the footage of the Queen to show her in a bad light.
When Gordon Brown was Chancellor, it was said that everything that the government did was passed across his desk for approval. He is still spinning situations to favour himself and the Labour Party.
Unfortunately, he is a weak man with a tendency to bolt when things get rough, it will be interesting to see how he gets on in sticky situations.
There is no a coat of paint between Labour and the Tories. In a situation like this, a small political party could gain ground. The UK Independence Party of the BNP!.
Interesting times.

Answer 6

If the public got a vote on who should be labour leader...that would mean that the tories (in the country) could pick the biggest pillock going, to run the Labour Party.. and the tories would walk every single election.

Major didn't call a election..(when he became leader) so why should brown?

Answer 7

Gordon Brown looks like a teen,he want to show hisself better...so and Mi-6 done this scandal with lugovoy and Litvenenko,so do you know why?....because one day of 1930-th they already done this....it was UK-USSR documents scam,so but it was false,but government must go away and conservators again come back to power,if leiborists would not find murder(Berezovskiy) Gordo Brown will fail his seat of Prime Minister.....

Answer 8

It's the system! Deputy leader was made up by Thatcher to give Hessletine a job. I know that's not how it's spelled. but I hate him anyway. And Brown who taxed the poor and give to the rich!

Answer 9

Who, with the best will in the world, knows enough to cast a really informed vote? To have any real meaning, elections need to be rigged.

Answer 10

the labour party decide who is their leader

the country decides who is prime minister

vote him out at the next election