Who is/was our worst prime minister in recent times?
Poll: Who is/was our worst prime minister in recent times?
Total Members Polled: 318
Discussion
Simple light hearted poll.
I wouldn't say there was a bright light among any of this lot, David Cameron seemed to cause the least harm, right up to the point he trusted the public to make an important decision. Then we had a string of ditherers, liars and incompetents. Ending in whatever we currently have. Od course kicking it all off was Brown, a man who instilled so little enthusiasm or trust in anyone listening to him that if he said grass was green you would want to go out and check if you were still awake.
I wouldn't say there was a bright light among any of this lot, David Cameron seemed to cause the least harm, right up to the point he trusted the public to make an important decision. Then we had a string of ditherers, liars and incompetents. Ending in whatever we currently have. Od course kicking it all off was Brown, a man who instilled so little enthusiasm or trust in anyone listening to him that if he said grass was green you would want to go out and check if you were still awake.
Of those, Theresa May.
The obvious answer (Truss) was not in for long enough to do any really lasting damage. Starmer hasn't been in office or yet done enough to give a fair assessment.
May presided over a complete shambles of the Brexit negotiations, tried to straddle both sides of the debate without really making the argument for compromise that she did as an ex-PM (a role she does very well IMO), alienated her natural allies on day one while secretly plotting to turn on her newfound allies in the ERG while they were busy stabbing her in the front. The 2017 campaign was a disaster and she spent most of her premiership a lame duck due to her own poor decisions.
The obvious answer (Truss) was not in for long enough to do any really lasting damage. Starmer hasn't been in office or yet done enough to give a fair assessment.
May presided over a complete shambles of the Brexit negotiations, tried to straddle both sides of the debate without really making the argument for compromise that she did as an ex-PM (a role she does very well IMO), alienated her natural allies on day one while secretly plotting to turn on her newfound allies in the ERG while they were busy stabbing her in the front. The 2017 campaign was a disaster and she spent most of her premiership a lame duck due to her own poor decisions.
Brown mainly did his damage as Chancellor.
I have voted for Bojo the Clown as any damage Starmer does can also be attributed to him. If anyone destroyed trust in politics it is him, for promising one thing and then doing another.
Truss wasn't really around long enough to matter. Might as well blame the lettuce that outlasted her.
I have voted for Bojo the Clown as any damage Starmer does can also be attributed to him. If anyone destroyed trust in politics it is him, for promising one thing and then doing another.
Truss wasn't really around long enough to matter. Might as well blame the lettuce that outlasted her.
Has to be Boris.
Whilst those before him all failed in various ways they at least had respect for the office.
Boris totally disrespected it and has now set the tone for behaviour going forward. We'll see less ministers or even PMs resign in disgrace over misdemeanors that would normally see them go without much prompting.
Now bad behaviour is to be condoned and defended.
Whilst those before him all failed in various ways they at least had respect for the office.
Boris totally disrespected it and has now set the tone for behaviour going forward. We'll see less ministers or even PMs resign in disgrace over misdemeanors that would normally see them go without much prompting.
Now bad behaviour is to be condoned and defended.
silentbrown said:
In terms of long-term damage to the country's reputation, for me it's got to be Johnson. Truss had the keys taken away pretty swiftly, thank god.
No fan of May, but she was handed an utter sh*t sandwich. Which I suspect is largely why Johnson chose not to stand then.
Hard to disagree. May was at the mercy of a Tory party fuller of No fan of May, but she was handed an utter sh*t sandwich. Which I suspect is largely why Johnson chose not to stand then.
s who had no interest beyond furthering their own career or lining their own pockets. She got the job because no one else wanted it at the time.Truss was crap, but at least the grown ups had the sense to take away the crayons before she had a chance to do too much more damage. Although obviously all those people (my parents included) who had house sales/mortgage deals fall through might disagree, there obviously is a strong case for her.
Don't understand the votes for SKS considering he's only been in office a few months, really a bit soon to judge, but I guess this is PH.
Brown was pretty bad.
Cameron was fine really, till he dropped that one bk.
Agreed May didn't really get the chance to shine, she probably would have as well, but that first time she flip flopped it was all over.
Bojo was horrific. It wasn't the incompetence or the dishonesty, it was the lack of appreciation of his incompetence and dishonesty. If someone knows they are wrong you can work forward, if they don't realise you can't.
Truss. She's probably the most useless first minister in all history. Talk about being on the spot and blurting which then causes chaos.
Rishi was not that bad. But the writing was on the wall. Hostile public, not a likeable person but trying too hard to be likeable. At the end he was playing the better the devil you know card. He didn't have time to really create his playing field.
I voted for Starmer. When they got in you knew there was going to be some pain, and the question for me was whether they would hit us in the first budget or leave it till the second having built their warm and cuddly image. Instead they seem to revell in upsetting the middle ground. But they don't really seem to be pleasing or helping anyone, the unions have definitely been the big winners so far, but I'm not seeing any evidence of those on the bottom rungs being pulled up, or even the pretence of. So based on the fact he seems to enjoy sticking two fingers up at the country, I voted him. But Boris would have been a close second.
Cameron was fine really, till he dropped that one b
k.Agreed May didn't really get the chance to shine, she probably would have as well, but that first time she flip flopped it was all over.
Bojo was horrific. It wasn't the incompetence or the dishonesty, it was the lack of appreciation of his incompetence and dishonesty. If someone knows they are wrong you can work forward, if they don't realise you can't.
Truss. She's probably the most useless first minister in all history. Talk about being on the spot and blurting which then causes chaos.
Rishi was not that bad. But the writing was on the wall. Hostile public, not a likeable person but trying too hard to be likeable. At the end he was playing the better the devil you know card. He didn't have time to really create his playing field.
I voted for Starmer. When they got in you knew there was going to be some pain, and the question for me was whether they would hit us in the first budget or leave it till the second having built their warm and cuddly image. Instead they seem to revell in upsetting the middle ground. But they don't really seem to be pleasing or helping anyone, the unions have definitely been the big winners so far, but I'm not seeing any evidence of those on the bottom rungs being pulled up, or even the pretence of. So based on the fact he seems to enjoy sticking two fingers up at the country, I voted him. But Boris would have been a close second.
wildoliver said:
Simple light hearted poll.
I wouldn't say there was a bright light among any of this lot, David Cameron seemed to cause the least harm, right up to the point he trusted the public to make an important decision. Then we had a string of ditherers, liars and incompetents. Ending in whatever we currently have. Od course kicking it all off was Brown, a man who instilled so little enthusiasm or trust in anyone listening to him that if he said grass was green you would want to go out and check if you were still awake.
I think you've nailed it. I wouldn't say there was a bright light among any of this lot, David Cameron seemed to cause the least harm, right up to the point he trusted the public to make an important decision. Then we had a string of ditherers, liars and incompetents. Ending in whatever we currently have. Od course kicking it all off was Brown, a man who instilled so little enthusiasm or trust in anyone listening to him that if he said grass was green you would want to go out and check if you were still awake.
Mr Penguin said:
May presided over a complete shambles of the Brexit negotiations, tried to straddle both sides of the debate without really making the argument for compromise that she did as an ex-PM (a role she does very well IMO), alienated her natural allies on day one while secretly plotting to turn on her newfound allies in the ERG while they were busy stabbing her in the front. The 2017 campaign was a disaster and she spent most of her premiership a lame duck due to her own poor decisions.
I think May was a close second to Bojo the Clown. That "backstop" she tried to get through parliament was downright treasonous. You are talking of awful PM followed by awful PM. Not surprising the likes of Cameron and Sunak don't look so bad by comparison.
Starmer is shaping up to be another awful one, but he cannot yet beat May and Bojo.
wildoliver said:
Simple light hearted poll.
I wouldn't say there was a bright light among any of this lot, David Cameron seemed to cause the least harm, right up to the point he trusted the public to make an important decision. Then we had a string of ditherers, liars and incompetents. Ending in whatever we currently have. Od course kicking it all off was Brown, a man who instilled so little enthusiasm or trust in anyone listening to him that if he said grass was green you would want to go out and check if you were still awake.
Probably would have been worth including Blair as well I'd have thought? While Cameron was the person who finally pushed the self destruct button, the building blocks that made that happen ultimately all happened under Blair's watch with EU expansion to the eastern european states and subsequent immigration here. I wouldn't say there was a bright light among any of this lot, David Cameron seemed to cause the least harm, right up to the point he trusted the public to make an important decision. Then we had a string of ditherers, liars and incompetents. Ending in whatever we currently have. Od course kicking it all off was Brown, a man who instilled so little enthusiasm or trust in anyone listening to him that if he said grass was green you would want to go out and check if you were still awake.
on the existing choices, kind of hard to decide between Truss for sheer incompetence, Johnson for destroying any semblance of seemly government or Cameron for taking what was always (very badly judged) gamble by believing that whatever the result it would settle things rather than further split opinions into where we are today.
silentbrown said:
No fan of May, but she was handed an utter sh*t sandwich. Which I suspect is largely why Johnson chose not to stand then.
He tried to stand and Gove let him down.If Johnson had been PM instead of May at that point there would have been BINO and everything would have carried on as normal.
At the time most brexiteer MP had resigned themselves to the fact Brexit would be whatever Boris said it was and that would have been BINO.
https://shows.acast.com/dansnowshistoryhit/episode...
I wrote a very long post last time this subject came up, but the completely borked PH search function and Google has failed to resurrect it.
In brief, I posited that PMs can be judged on policy, competency, character and legacy. You can competently implement awful policies (and that's a somewhat subjective view - I don't think anyone would deny that, say, Thatcher and Blair were both pretty competent administrators of their respective political projects, whether or not you liked the results) and vice versa.
My answer was that while Truss was the worst from a basic competency/policy point of view, and Johnson from the sheer moral damage he did to the UK's institutions and politics (by his personal actions and the demolition ball he took to the Conservative Party), the overall Wooden Spoon has, IMO, to go to Cameron.
His basic policy approach (austerity, retrenchment of the state, trickle down economics) was not only wrong (and judged to be in many quarters even before it was implemented) but was incompetently implemented and not remotely effective even when measured against its own terms and aims.
Numerous decisions were made that continue to bear unpleasant fruits in all sorts of policy areas, from energy to policing to healthcare to housing.
Day-to-day government was not especially competently managed.
His hubristic decision to offer an EU referendum (that he didn't personally want to offer but equally didn't believe he'd actually lose) opened the door for everything else that followed - no Johnson without Cameron. No Truss. No Sunak. No Corbyn. No Starmer.
I strongly disagree with the OP that Cameron 'caused the least harm'. He caused a huge amount of civic, systemic and literal human harm, and set things up to enable the circus parade that came afterwards.
The Cameron government was one of the most bitterly destructive administrations in modern British political history, and it wasn't even creative or transformative destruction (as the Thatcher governments could be argued to be by their supporters). Just ideological vandalism of an entire nation-state to the detriment of its ordinary citizens, who were near-universally left poorer, sicker, more precarious, more anxious and more divided than before.
In brief, I posited that PMs can be judged on policy, competency, character and legacy. You can competently implement awful policies (and that's a somewhat subjective view - I don't think anyone would deny that, say, Thatcher and Blair were both pretty competent administrators of their respective political projects, whether or not you liked the results) and vice versa.
My answer was that while Truss was the worst from a basic competency/policy point of view, and Johnson from the sheer moral damage he did to the UK's institutions and politics (by his personal actions and the demolition ball he took to the Conservative Party), the overall Wooden Spoon has, IMO, to go to Cameron.
His basic policy approach (austerity, retrenchment of the state, trickle down economics) was not only wrong (and judged to be in many quarters even before it was implemented) but was incompetently implemented and not remotely effective even when measured against its own terms and aims.
Numerous decisions were made that continue to bear unpleasant fruits in all sorts of policy areas, from energy to policing to healthcare to housing.
Day-to-day government was not especially competently managed.
His hubristic decision to offer an EU referendum (that he didn't personally want to offer but equally didn't believe he'd actually lose) opened the door for everything else that followed - no Johnson without Cameron. No Truss. No Sunak. No Corbyn. No Starmer.
I strongly disagree with the OP that Cameron 'caused the least harm'. He caused a huge amount of civic, systemic and literal human harm, and set things up to enable the circus parade that came afterwards.
The Cameron government was one of the most bitterly destructive administrations in modern British political history, and it wasn't even creative or transformative destruction (as the Thatcher governments could be argued to be by their supporters). Just ideological vandalism of an entire nation-state to the detriment of its ordinary citizens, who were near-universally left poorer, sicker, more precarious, more anxious and more divided than before.
Edited by 2xChevrons on Tuesday 17th September 12:07
Truss, but not really there long enough to count. Has to be Boris, who utterly squandered a vast majority but taking nothing seriously. We knew he was a buffoon when he was chosen, but he seemed hell bent t on self destruction by partying and getting caught and being too ‘ courageous’ in pursuit of green agenda
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff