May 7th

[Roger Mellie]

...and he couldn't even win a majority against the worst PM we've ever had.

That's the thing, people often class John Major as an unsuccessful PM, but he actually won an election and with the highest popular vote since the war, over 14 million votes which translated into a measly 20 odd seat majority. Yet Bliar in 97 got less votes than Major did in 92, yet his majority was over 150 seats.

As for Broon, he knew full well why the Tories lost in 97, the house price crash as a result of the ERM crisis. That was back in the days when the Tories had no problems with letting housing bubbles go pop. However, Broon threw the kitchen sink at propping up house prices after the financial crisis. Nearly worked, he didn't quite get the same drubbing as Major and Co got during 97.

[Gumbo Robot]

Who would they be?

Emily Thornberry is one. She was screeching at Peter Hitchens on QT the other night for demonizing single mothers on council estates (which he wasn't) "I was raised by a single mother on a council estate.... How dare you...shame on you..." etc.

Got some brass neck this girl. This is the same Emily Thornberry who had to resign as a result of that sneering tweet which showed a white van outside a George Cross adorned council house in Rochester during the by election a few months back.

[Roger Mellie]

Emily Thornberry is one. She was screeching at Peter Hitchens on QT the other night for demonizing single mothers on council estates (which he wasn't) "I was raised by a single mother on a council estate.... How dare you...shame on you..." etc.

Got some brass neck this girl. This is the same Emily Thornberry who had to resign as a result of that sneering tweet which showed a white van outside a George Cross adorned council house in Rochester during the by election a few months back.

[Zero Liability]

Who would they be?

You can follow this for their backgrounds: www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01528.pdf

This US-based link (which is equally applicable to the UK or any other western democratic system) underscores my point as to why I think a working class background is by and large meaningless: http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-la...ng-class-87478

And this underscores why it's mostly just a PR exercise: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/generalelecti...ng-in-britain/

I'd be more willing to accept this argument if it could be shown how such a background leads to better policy and leadership. To me, it seems like the individuals you mentioned (Thatcher, Major) had a bit more than just humble origins.

Also, according to this the "traditional working class" is barely 15% of the population: SAGE - the natural home for authors, editors and societies - About us

So if we were to assume MPs should exist in proportions reflective of the populational makeup, it'd take another 10% or so of a working class background, but again I wonder for what benefit?

My issue with them isn't their background but the fixation on short-termist policy and vote-whoring, which are system-driven. I think the political pressures to maximise voter buy-in on them are the same irrespective of that background. Particularly if you're an individual lacking in the ability to empathise (and I see no reason to assume those of a working class background are any more likely to possess this ability; politicians as a class tend to attract sociopaths), the background will simply be turned into a hook to capture more voters, irrespective of whether you intend for there to be any follow through.

If anything, too much of a commonality of a background is what has allowed politicians in democratic countries to perpetuate the illusion that it is rule of, for and by the people, when in reality it is nothing of the sort. They should always be subjected to scrutiny and suspicion.