The British elections

They're only four weeks away, and if you're a Briton who's voting, you've got three real options:

- Tony Blair, Labour: Centre-left overall, with far too many nanny-state tendencies, but an essential alliance with the United States et al for taking on terrorism.

- Michael Howard, Conservatives/Tories: Centre-right overall, and one of the few conservatives who not only believes in smaller government, but is making it a priority. Unfortunately he barely has a principled, solid stance, and is prone to John Kerry-esque flip-flopping for the sake of winning votes.

- Charles Kennedy, Liberal Democrats: Left, left, left. That's all that needs to be said, really.

Now like Arthur Chrenkoff, I'm thankful I don't have to vote in this election for the reasons he gives:
In many ways my heart says Tony and my (conservative) head says the Tories. I've voted right my whole life and could never imagine not doing so, so thank God I'm not faced with a similar choice here in Australia.
Patrick Ruffini sums up the conservative case for Blair:
I were over there, I'd hold my nose and vote Labour, to secure the Anglosphere re-election hat-trick (Howard, Bush, and now Blair), to postpone the hostile left-wing takeover of New Labour for another election cycle, and to allow the Tories to find a true modernizer in the spirit of Thatcher with a clear shot at Labour in 2009 or 2010. What would happen if on May 6th, the headlines read, "Blair Defeated" or "Blair Seriously Weakened?" Though much of the danger passed with the re-election of George W. Bush, it would surely be treated as another Spain.

When it comes to choices like this, this war is not just an issue. It is the only issue. For that reason, and that reason alone, Blair remains the best choice for the next four years.
Really, it comes down to a choice: is your vote for or against Blair? Like any election after a controversial war, or featuring an incumbent (in this case both are part of the scenario), it's as much a referendum on the performance of the incumbent as anything else. And that situation is made even greater by the fact that the second party, the Tories, haven't really done much. They were sort-of for the Iraq war, then against it, then sort-of for it again and now they've been against it for a fairly long time. As much as I'd like to support a party that actively believes in cutting 15% of the politicians because the Brits have too many, I can't support them over a crucial ally in the biggest issue of my lifetime: The War On Terror.

So with that, I'd like to urge all the British readers of this blog who would normally vote conservative to go with the only leader who understands how to combat terrorism: Tony Blair.

No comments:

Post a Comment

All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them