It seems pretty clear cut to me.

1979 - 'unelected' Labour PM leading a discredited government and presiding over a knackered economy
1979 - Tories elected to put it right, albeit the treatment was painful

2010 - 'unelected' Labour PM leading a discredited government and presiding over a knackered economy ....

Is there a box on the voting slip where you select the PM? I must have missed it all these years.

Ok, the PM was not the leader who led the ruling party to victory at the election. Not quite as snappy, I grant you.

What is all the unelected crap about? We have a parliamentary system, a party is elected to government not a president.

Lets have a look at Prime Ministers since the war and whether they came to power straight after a GE:

Brown - No
Blair - Yes
Major - No
Thatcher - Yes
Callaghan - No
Wilson - Yes (x2)
Heath - Yes
Douglas-Home - No
MacMillan - No
Eden - No
Churchill - Yes
Attlee - Yes

So - 50% did and 50% didn't.

I don't think any leader has gone into an election saying they wouldn't serve a full term (vote for me but I might resign in a couple of years).

Everyone will have a different opinion about how Brown has done the job and he is certainly less popular than Major was before the 1992 election. The point I'm making is judge PMs on their performance, not whether they assumed office at the beginning or middle of a Parliament.

You don't think the tories are trying to make this election about personalities do you? Surely they would want to focus on policies rather than just about David Chameleon vs. Gordun Brun? That would be the sort of strategy Tony Bliar and his spin masters would concoct. The press won't fall for that surely?

Quote: DHM "You don't think the tories are trying to make this election about personalities do you? Talking of spin masters, I think the Leeds marketing dept have their job done for them en.tackfilm.se/?id=1265986566684RA66

Quote: DHM "You don't think the tories are trying to make this election about personalities do you? Talking of spin masters, I think the Leeds marketing dept have their job done for them en.tackfilm.se/?id=1265986566684RA66

FWIW I think that Brown's record as chancellor is poor, presiding over a boom built on easy credit and rising public sector spending. The public sector is bloated and needs to be tackled. For all his faults, Blair was a better PM and could have achieved much more if Brown had not been seeking to undermine him.

Mind you, I'm biased

I do indeed and I disagreed vehemently with that war.
But the tories would have done the same whilst licking Bush's arris even more ... I am merely highlighting where the differences are.

Apparently not.
I wonder if his special advisor at the time (David Chameleon) regrets it?

Judging by the speed he plans to cut the deficit by slashing public spending it looks like he still believes in unemployment being a price worth paying.

So, that's David Cameron and Jedward.

Who next? Fred West? Gary Glitter?