retired_senegalg

The perception at the time was that Brown had decided that if the polls were right, he would call an election. The polls got slightly concering for him (4 points iirc which is still enough for a comfortable Labour majority) and, in the media/public eye, he bottled it.

That's what's changed.

runronnirun

pretty much only Docker actually thinks this is the case. i doubt GB will be particularly worried.

DebSchiff

And the fact that a million people would be disenfranchised because the lists haven't been updated yet.

Either way Brown would have taken flack, it's just this way he takes the flack and will keep the job for a couple more years. Essentially, he should have kept his idiot minions from creaming themselves in public about his election plans, then this apparent crisis would never have happened.

retired_derek

someone quote this for docker please, i am on his ignore list </BLOCKQUOTE>

there you go mate.

retired_senegalg

pretty much only Docker actually thinks this is the case. i doubt GB will be particularly worried. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think it's deniable that it's been a very bad week for Brown. The effect will be negative, although how negative I would agree is debatable.

retired_senegalg

someone quote this for docker please, i am on his ignore list </BLOCKQUOTE>

I counteract your Sun quote with the Times' 'magpie budget' headline.

Newspaper quote top trumps would be quite fun.

Ventil

Here's a link from the Sun detailing all the reports about GB is last few weeks.

Can't find anything about that, can find quite a lot about how badly he has got it wrong.

But what's wrong with taking one little point and using it as a basis of a debate....?

runronnirun

pretty much only Docker actually thinks this is the case. i doubt GB will be particularly worried. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think it's deniable that it's been a very bad week for Brown. The effect will be negative, although how negative I would agree is debatable. </BLOCKQUOTE>

don't even think it's debatable. by the time the election does eventually come round, people will not give a flying f**k.

retired_janearific

The perception at the time was that Brown had decided that if the polls were right, he would call an election. The polls got slightly concering for him (4 points iirc which is still enough for a comfortable Labour majority) and, in the media/public eye, he bottled it.

That's what's changed. </BLOCKQUOTE>

You say he bottled it, but would it have been wise for him to go for an election now without the time to prepare ?? This was the Tories best chance of winning a general election and they are just p!ssed off that Brown was in control of the decision. I am sure Cameron would have done exactly the same thing if he was in Brown's shoes. He took the sensible option, fair play to the guy.

retired_senegalg

The perception at the time was that Brown had decided that if the polls were right, he would call an election. The polls got slightly concering for him (4 points iirc which is still enough for a comfortable Labour majority) and, in the media/public eye, he bottled it.

That's what's changed. </BLOCKQUOTE>

You say he bottled it, but would it have been wise for him to go for an election now without the time to prepare ?? This was the Tories best chance of winning a general election and they are just p!ssed off that Brown was in control of the decision. I am sure Cameron would have done exactly the same thing if he was in Brown's shoes. He took the sensible option, fair play to the guy. </BLOCKQUOTE>

1. They had 3 months to prepare.
2. If they needed time to prepare, why were they even considering it.
3. It's the apparent reasoning for the decision more than anything else that leads to people considering him to have bottled it.

If he'd called it off before the polls turned, nobody would have said he was bottling it.