Why are prime ministers who win elections unpopular?

Question

blair won 3 elections, thatcher won 3 they must have been popular or they wouldn't have won so many elections. Yet i see hatred and dislike by lots of people to them, why is this?

Answer 1

Thatcher - destroyed the welfare state, lost many, many people their jobs.

Blair - well that's easy, 1 word: Iraq.

Brown hasn't won or lost an election and hes incredibly unpopular.

the reason, i would ponder, is that everyone hates politicians, and justifiably so. in addition, it is the party who wins the election, not the individual. We don't just vote for the PM, like Americans with their presidents. You may support the party, but not the leader.

Answer 2

The reason why Prime Ministers become unpopular is that when they are not in office they can say what they like - when they are in power they have (in the case of Thatcher) presided over the demise of Britain's manufacturing industry, throwing millions on the dole, sold off our council houses and privatised and cut our public services. In the case of Blair - he went to an unpopular war in Iraq, carried on privatising and cutting services and selling off council houses.

I don't think either were ever that popular. Thatcher got into power in 1979 due to disillusionment with Callaghan's Labour government. By 1983 she was unpopular, but went to war with the Falklands, prompting her re-election on the back of a jingoistic campaign. It was not until the anti-poll tax campaign of 1990 that Thatcher was forced to go, by the anger of the people, and a mass campaign headed by Militant Labour (source 1).

Blair tried to sell himself as something different, but of course carried out Thatcherite policies on getting into power. The economy is also largely to blame for Labour's unpopularity at the moment and for John Major's downfall at the start of the nineties, with allegations of sleaze and Black Wednesday and the ERM fiasco.

We need a new party to stand up for the working class (source 2 below) - because if anyone thinks Cameron will be any different, then they haven't learnt anything from the last 30 years of politics in Britain.

To answer your point about defence -  the cnwp would cut things like Trident (cost £76 billion) and spend the money on public services.

However, it is at this stage a campaign for a new party - not a new party. This may change soon, though. The PCS and RMT trade unions are organising a conference where they will discuss standing candidates themselves - hopefully we will get an alternative in place for the next election.

Answer 3

Well it was the nation who voted them in to do the job. The dislike kicks in when things go wrong and there are nasty decisions to be made, right or wrong, we should stick by our leaders through thick and thin. After all, they are making 'all' decisions for us voters. Hamish

Answer 4

why should we vote a party of hungry doggies and not the leader itself? isn't politic alway about leadership qualities? imao....simple answer : so that these doggies can survive as easy as abc while their leader is just their scape goat. yeah? right ah.

Politic is always about leadership! otherwise why would there are only 2 presidential seats only and not a group of doggies?

I dun vote cos Doggies bite back on us who has been paying taxes and why should i vote where i do not benefit it at all. look at my life, i work for myself and i earn for myself. call police, they say they can't help! but a big shot speaks up, it's immediately done. haha...I rather feed a group of men by myself than a full of rubbish governments!

Answer 5

ur only as popular as ur last election, well unless ur gordon brown then u were never elected by the public

Answer 6

Firstly, they didn't win with the support of the majority of the people. I believe Thatcher never got more than 38% of the electorate to vote for her.

Secondly, after the election is won government's don't give a d**n about democracy. Thatcher made mass unemployment and job insecurity structural against overwhelming public opposition; she also ran down the health service and public education system, equally  unpopular; installed a massive road building program and on and on. Blair took Britain into an illegal war that never had approval ratings above 10%; and with Gordon Brown he  promoted Public-Private Partnerships, a form of backdoor privatisation that is widely distrusted by the population; he also made massive attacks on civil liberties through anti-terrorist legislation and new social-class laws, none of which had popular support.

Thirdly, governments oppress those who oppose them - which strengthens opposition to them. A good example is Thatcher whose Tory party was deeply unpopular in Scotland. With never more than a few seats to lose in an election she dumped on Scotland throughout her reign - the trialling of the expected to be unpopular poll-tax a year early is the most famous example. Her war on trade unions is another example of opposition oppression.

Finally I'll mention the media, whose roll in shaping political debate by framing information, ignoring alternative voices, and limiting debate means that winning elections is not so difficult with their support - it's well known that Tony Blair's success in winning office came after substantial courtship with the media barrons, especially Rupert Murdoch - before Blair the media repeatedly portrayed Labour as unelectable.

RESPONSE:

Thank you for spotting a hole in my argument and giving me a chance to fill it. While undoubtedly Thatcher and Blair had, and still have, numerous supporters I think many became disillusioned even while they continued winning elections. A major part of the explanation for this is the dearth of choice in the political arena. Imagine that you are surrounded by a bounty of fresh healthy food to choose from freely. You can eat whatever you want. If you're not a fan of cabbage and sprouts you might not choose to eat them too often. But let's imagine there's a famine, and only the cabbage and sprout crops are brought to market. Now you would still choose to eat wouldn't you? And maybe if you hate cabbage more you'd mainly eat sprouts, or viceversa. That's pretty much how it works in our electoral system. Without proportional representation a vote for a minor party is largely seen as a wasted vote - which explains why they never amount to much. It's also why there's so much negative political advertising and mudslinging. Many people vote, not for a party, but rather  against the party they don't want to win. The phenomenon of tactical voting is built on this. That's why I mentioned the role of the media in creating perceptions. Under Michael Foot and Michael Howard Labour and the Conservatives were both largely portrayed as unelectable. Fear is often the deciding factor.

Answer 7

Consider that no party has won an election with over 50% of the vote since the war, I'd hardly consider any one of them popular.  Moreover, we elect MPs to constitute the House of Commons, a portion of which forms the government - so appeal of the party leader may only be a small factor in voting.

There's also the case of not really loving any politician, but choosing the least worst out of a bad lot.

Answer 8

The reason why Prime Minister is not popular i dunno but take a good look at the Singapore government Dog's doing and have a very good LOL at it.

The one and only country which has so many multiple heads to run a small country called Singapore. HAHAH plus world no 1 feeding doggies run stray around the country. e.g. coffeeshop and hawker centre!

There is no king and queen in Singapore so what the F we need a Prime minister for? imao. therefore the world practices are country with no king and queen, it will be the president and the vice president of the country. where on earth, a country has president yet has a prime minister yet a country has 2 ministers mentor, hahahahha...

f**t the British colony government system cos we had independented so it;s our own government system now. imao, if follow UK system, then why not the law of UK 2? imao.

imao oh yes, our Singapore President is a Indian and look by me just a puppet with no power at all! hahahahha because Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong makes the call at all times. Funny, ain't the presidencies run the sovereignty of the countries? LOL!

This is my country called SINGAPORE!

Answer 9

didn't their career paths are short lived? hee hee that's why all freedom countries like USA etc,except Singapore! their presidentials are 4 years each and x 2 = 8 years. hee hee... excuse me, what is 3?

Answer 10

The unpopularity of Margaret Thatcher must not be confused with the unpopularity of Gordon Brown! Margaret Thatcher sorted out problems which she inherited from both previous Labour and Conservative Governments and which had been a thorn in every ones side for years!

With Gordon Brown;His unpopularity is caused by gross stupidity,negligence and incompetence in his handling of the nation's finances!