Monday, 8 June 2009

How Did Gordon Brown Become More Unpopular Than Bush?

Gordon Brown with his pal George Bush

So, what have these two fellas got in common? Well judging from the results of the European Elections quite a lot! They say that those who ride together, die together and Gordon Brown is definitely on the life support machine! Before Bush lost the last election he was hugely unpopular in the USA and abroad. In fact, he was so unpopular he couldn't wait to leave. Obama's Inauguration was hailed as the most peaceful Presidential handovers in recent times with Bush and Obama waving goodbye to one another enthusiastically, both content with their new found positions. However, despite Bush's turmoil he could still argue to being popular in many states in the US. He can still say that he won one election (the second one is debatable).

The labour party under Gordon Browns leadership finished third behind UKIP nationwide, polling a humiliating 15 per cent of the vote. It came fifth in dozens of areas including the South East of England, behind not only UKIP, the Tories and Liberal Democrats, but also the Greens. To add salt to the wound Gordon Brown has lost so many Ministers in such a short space of time he has started to make Bush's record look good. Gordon Brown has lost six senior Ministers in the past week and many are plotting to get him removed.

This is ironic considering that Gordon Brown not too long ago was the main instigator of the group that put pressure for Tony Blair to leave. And that's really the point. Some may argue that Gordon Brown is in this position because he is clearing up Tony Blair's mess. And some others may argue that those ministers who have resigned and the ones that are putting pressure for him to stand down are disloyal. This may be so, but honestly how can anyone feel sorry for him when not long ago he was one of the plotters himself. There's an old adage 'be careful how you treat people on your way up because you'll meat them on the way back down'. I think someone forgot to tell him this!

Bush for all his faults still managed to keep his party together. Gordon Brown on the other hand has brought about Labour's worst collapse in living memory and become so unpopular he has managed to outshine Bush.


  1. It's difficult to compare Bush and Brown- the political systems are completely different.

    Bush doesn't have to have 'control' of the GOP-that's the party chairman's job- whilst Brown needs to have control of Labour becuase he's PM and leader of the party.

    And the Republicans were in a mess leading up to Bush's departure too- McCain was trying to be more centrist in his policies whilst Palin appealed to the right of the party. They had no clear purpose between them.

    Also, you must remember that Brown wasn't no 'johnny just come' challenger to Blair- he saw the job of Labour leader, and PM, as his for a number of years- remember the deal for Blair to step aside and Bown to take over?
    That was always the plan- Tony just got too used to the job and didn't want to let go!

  2. When Obama was running for President David Cameron tried to promote himself as a British Obama, even though he is the leader of The Conservative Party, the UKs version of the GOP. So in that respect I think it is fair to make the comparison.

    And I agree that the GOP was in a mess. But this post is not about saying their not, I'm just saying that the Labour party is more in a mess. Which is a fair point considering they received the worst results in an election since the early 1900s.

  3. Hi Agnes

    I agree with the previous comment that you cant really compare Bush and Brown as the political systems in the UK and the US are so different.

    I think overall Brown is a very principled a decent man, but there are many aspects of his personality and character that are and have proved to be a hinderance to his time as Prime Minister.

    What Brown has failed to do is this. Labour are in their 3rd term of office, and in partnership with Tony Blair, Brown has been running the government since 1997. What he hasn't done is create a new sense of purpose and vision for his government, which after 3 terms is very difficult to do. The public get bored with governments and seeing the same old faces.

    I certainly don't think he is trying to clean up Blair's mess as he was partly responsible for most of it. People forget that Brown was just as much a creater of New Labour as Blair, but this fact seems to get lost at times.

    Secondly there is his character, he's a very private person (nothing wrong with this) but the many positive aspects of his private character do not shine through to the public. This is something which Blair and Cameron were and are much better at.

    Also his communication skills with his own colleagues are aslo suspect, hence the number of resignations last week.

    I think Brown has shown he is the wrong leader for the Labour Party and also the country. If it wasn't for the weakness of the cabinet he would have been removed last week.


  4. I think Labour perhaps need a new leader...ok, yeah they do. But like you I do not feel so sorry for Brown in terms of the plotters when he did the same to Blair. I think Blair was a better Prime Minister and he had a better personality/temperament for the job than Brown. But Brown really wanted it soooo, we have to suffer! I think Brown is PRECISELY the correct person to deal with the 'mess'. He did help create it and he seems smart enough to find the best way out.

    Who would you rather him or David Cameron (Mr. New-Age Tony Blair but without a sound 'fake Brown' to partner him at the top?!).


Related Posts with Thumbnails