@Jack: Was just listening to that song today, didn't know I'd be taking the quiz though. Always loved that song because my first name is Heath, so when I was a child (I'm an American to boot), I thought it was so cool; although my last name isn't Heath, so I tolerated that part.
25, not bad at all :) . Interesting fact: Spencer Perceval is the only British PM to have been assassinated, shot while he was walking into the house of commons (yeah, that's the only reason I know about him...)
9/53 Like a true brit! got the 5 most recent, lloyd george, churchill and some earls by accident. Good thing I'm a Biochem student and not doing history.
After getting Cameron, Blair, Thatcher, Churchill and Chamberlain....I was down to Guy Fawkes and Robin of Locksley. :-) Should have remembered Disraeli and Robert Peel, though. If not for Peel, there'd be no "bobbies", IIRC.
I'm belgian and I remembered only 8, some famous ones like Disraeli, Lloyd George and Churchill and most of the recent ones (from Thatcher but I had already forgotten the existence of Gordon Brown...).
It's an old thing. Back when Barons and Lords had way more power in our country. Now, to be PM all you need is to be the leader of the party with the most seats.
As an American I could name 11, but honestly why would I keep up on the politics of another country when I'm busy keeping up with my own? Still willing to take your quiz despite the snark
As a Brit I can name all the US Presidents in order so why shouldn't Americans know something about the UK? Your language and legal system and the largest segment of your population come from the UK...
They definitely had real names too: Earl of Wilmington = Spencer Compton; Duke of Newcastle = Thomas Pelham-Holles; Duke of Devonshire = William Cavendish; Earl of Bute = John Stuart; Marquess of Rockingham = Charles Watson-Wentworth; Duke of Grafton = Augustus Fitzroy; Earl of Shelburne = William Petty; Duke of Portland = William Cavendish-Bentinck; Lord Liverpool = Robert Banks; Jenkinson; Viscount Goderich = Frederick John Robinson; Duke of Wellington = Arthur Wellesley; Earl Grey = Charles Grey; Lord Melbourne = William Lamb; Earl of Derby = Edward Smith-Stanley; Earl of Aberdeen = George Hamilton-Gordon; Lord Palmerston = Henry John Temple; Marquess (not Marquis) of Salisbury = Robert Arthur Talbot Gascoyne-Cecil; Earl of Rosebery = Archibald Philip Primrose
I got Bonar Law from my Canadian mother who would occasionally tell me that as he was born in New Brunswick, he was the only prime minister not born in the UK. I thought he was important until I noticed that no Brits ever seemed to have heard of him. I can't believe I forgot Spencer Perceval, as I was curious about the only assassinated prime minister.
Why are saying most Americans only know 3? How do you know that's true? I knew 15. And I imagine most people from ANY non-UK country would only know a few.
Maybe to entice you to take the quiz and prove him wrong? Since 94+% of test takers got Churchill, Blair, Cameron and Thatcher.. and 87% got Brown.. I'd wager most Americans know at least 4. Or at least most Americans taking this quiz do. Average score is 21.
Maybe. I think given enough time to think about it most could come up with at least 3. Churchill, Chamberlain, Thatcher and Blair are all pretty famous in America.
Is it just coincidence, or are prime ministers not allowed to serve 2 consecutive terms? I noticed that multiple prime ministers on the list serving more than once are never consecutive. Thanks
I believe this is wrong. My understanding may be imperfect, but from what I know the Prime Minister is not directly elected. They are simple the leader of the party with the most seats in the House of Commons. People vote for representatives in the House of Commons like Americans elect Congressmen. The non-consecutive terms you see are not the result of term limits but rather the natural outcome of swings in power between competing parties. For a more analagous comparison look at the history of the president pro tempore of the Senate. It was Robert Byrd in the 101st-103rd Congresses. Then Republicans gained a majority and it became Strom Thurmond. Democrats took over again in the 107th and it was once again Byrd, and then Thurmond, and then Byrd, and then Ted Stevens, and then Byrd again who finally died.
In Australia, Federal parliament has 150 seats, and the country is split into 150 electorates. In each electorate, 1 candidate (usually Labor or Coalition) gets elected, filling the 150 seats. Whichever party out of Labor or the Coalition gets the most candidates elected wins, and their leader becomes Prime Minister. I assume that the system in the UK works the same. In the US, does everyone just vote for who they want to be President, and then you have separate elections for the other federal politicians?
Yes Steve, that's (almost correct). The US holds federal elections every 2 years. Presidents are elected every 4. American citizens vote directly for who they want to be president and vice president (they come as a package deal since 1864. Prior to this the president and VP were elected separately, and before 1804 the VP was simply the runner-up in the presidential election); after they vote, then the president is selected by the electoral college, which contains electors from each state. These electors tend to vote the same way as the voters from their state vote, but it's a bit of an overcomplicated system and you can end up wit cases where a presidential candidate wins in the electoral college even when they lost the popular vote (as was the case with George Bush in 2000). Senators and Representatives in the House are elected by their constituents directly by popular vote. They have nothing to do with who occupies the White House, though (some) are elected at the same time.
update: Donald Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million votes, but still won the presidency due to the very out-dated electoral college system, saddling the US with its worst president in history. This thing is very overdue to be repealed.
@Kalbamut, yes that is how the system works, and explains why you see the non-consecutive terms. I would add that in more recent years, a party leader who fails to win re-election usually resigns, and are replaced by someone else which is why you see this less often recently.
No, several have served multiple consecutive terms. Thatcher served 11 years, Blair served 10 years, Lord Liverpool (1812-27) served 15 years, Pitt the Younger for 17. They continued as Prime Minister through three or more election victories. There are no term limits, becaue the Prime Minister is the leader of the party with the most seats, so how long he or she serves (subject to the will of the electorate) is up to them or their political party. Non-consecutive terms are much more common in British politics than American. In the recent election, three losing party leaders resigned. This practice is only a recent development, and throughout history party leaders who lost an election often held on to their leadership posts and won next time, causing a plethora of non-consecutive terms (such as Wilson winning in '74 after losing in '70, and Gladstone repeatedly alternating with Disraeli and Salisbury from the 1860s through to the 90s).
I posted a comment here but it was deleted, maybe because the comment I was responding to was deleted. The Prime Minister is the leader of the party that has most seats in the House of Commons. The entirety of the House of Commons is elected in a general election with one MP (Member of Parliament) representing each constituency (an area that is occasionally redefined, and should have a population roughly equal to other constituencies - currently the average is about 100 000). If the same party wins many consecutive elections and it doesn't replace its leader the PM can serve as long as they want. General Elections are every five years by default but if 2/3 of the House of Commons vote for an early General Election then there will be one, as happened last year when Theresa May decided she wanted a bigger majority and called an early election. Labour agreed to it and the parliament ended after two years of power. In the next election Labour gained 30 seats and there was a hung parliament
I'd heard of more than I got, but still did pathetically for a Brit. I haven't been around that long, though - I imagine people older than me would simply remember people before Major being in office.
23/53 and I'm British. Got every one from Asquith to present day, all later than that were complete guesses I suppose. Don't really see the need to know them, happy with the ones I did get.
Joejoe needs a hug. Making comments about the supposed ignorance of Americans only makes you yourself look ignorant. I cannot for the life of me understand why none of you America-bashers ever sense the irony in your "Americans are bad because think they are so much better than everyone else. How dare they? Now here's why we're so much better than Americans..." rants. It would be amusing if it weren't so sad.
Americans only know 3 because they are humans much like any other, and they care about things that are relevant to their own lives. Brits can name more than 3 US presidents because US presidents are more relevant internationally. But how many kings of Nepal can you name?
So extremely bored of this cliche that Americans are more ignorant of the world than anyone else. It's just so laughably demonstrably false. I've been traveling through Europe and the Near East for nearly 2 years now. I get asked all the time where I drove my car from and when I say "Bahrain," I think... of the hundreds of Europeans who asked me that question, maybe ONE has known that Bahrain was a country or where it was located. When I tell *Europeans* that I am in Thessaloniki, or Odessa, or Minsk, or Vilnius, or Riga, I can't believe it but the most common response is "where?" You don't even know you're own continent! Americans don't know where Vilnius is, either, but they know Las Vegas! (same population)
I can't help it that American cities are more famous than yours. There's no good reason for you to not have heard of Thessaloniki, Odessa, or St Petersburg. Meanwhile Minsk, Vilnius, and Riga are all national capitals and I've lost count of how many times I've read some indignant European complaining that every micronation of Europe is important to know because they are sovereign nations, unlike US states. But if this were true then it is disproven by their own ignorance of said sovereign nations as like I mentioned whenever I was in some major city in Eastern Europe at least half the Europeans I spoke to in other countries didn't know where I was.
someone: if you ask any American where Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, or Vancouver is I bet 95% would at least be able to tell you Canada. A similar proportion would know that Mexico City, Juarez, or Tijuana were in Mexico. I had people in neighboring countries in Eastern Europe not know where I was when I was in some of those cities I listed.
36, not bad for a "simple Southern farmer". OK, I have a degree in history. Also, Downton Abbey helped. A few names tripped me up- I typed gallstone several times before correcting to Gladstone.
That's a really bad excuse in my opinion. Just because they don't teach you about certain things in school (say British prime ministers or politics in other countries) doesn't mean that you can't read and educate yourself about it! I'm from Sweden and they didn´t teach us all about the British prime ministers either, but a new quite a few from reading history, news and books about the world. You should do the same!
It would be interesting to see quiz stats based on quizzers' countries. Maybe add "home country" when registering as a user, or maybe the system could work that out anyway?
That's not true. Maybe they didn't in your history classes, or maybe you just weren't paying attention, but I know for a fact when I was in school we at least learned the names of Winston Churchill, Neville Chamberlain, and Margaret Thatcher. I also distinctly remember Pitt the Elder/Younger coming up, as well as the Duke of Wellington, and I think maybe Disraeli. I recall learning about the Balfour Declaration so we probably read his name, too.
Did you learn in school that the Duke of Wellington was prime minister? I definitely remember learning in some detail about his victory at Waterloo, but I don't recall learning he was prime minister. I was surprised to see him on this list only because it seems like something my teachers should have mentioned when discussing him, even if the focus was on his military exploits.
We've replaced the worst PM in living memory with a man who was our worst ever foreign secretary. Fail, abysmally, at one job and have your party decide you are the ideal man to run the country. Genius. This can only end well.
I think it reasonable that Americans would know Prime Ministers who had a lot of contact with Americans because of world events. The best example of this is the relationship between Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt, but all of the World War Prime Ministers are reasonably well known for various reasons (Asquith, Lloyd George, Chamberlain, Churchill and Atlee). Thatcher and Blair received ample American press coverage, and John Major was a principal American ally during Desert Shield/Desert Storm.
Honestly everyone should be able to figure out there was a guy named Peel from looking at the political parties key. Guessing "Smith" gets you another free one.
Don't half these putzes have their own name or do they just want to be remembered to history as the same Duke of Potsie as the ones a century prior and in the future?
This Englishman got 44 but I think I was helped by the fact that my son had to do some research on British PMs a few days ago. Never knew homework could have a positive effect.
Funny that so many people in the comments have to state that they are american. In other quizzes you dont see nearly as many comments saying, "but im not american" (mostly none, but sometimes a few)
This will need an update in a month or two as Theresa May is resigning this Friday. She will remain prime minister until the new Conservative Party leader is elected.
I think the average American over 30 would at least know Churchill, Thatcher, Blair and May. With many being able to name Cameron, Brown, Chamberlain, Major, Disraeli, and Boris. And a few being able to name some others.
I heard it said that Boris only pretends to be stupid, so as to be endearing or as a political ploy. Trump tries (and fails) to look smart, but is in reality spectacularly stupid.
^ This I agree is the main difference between them. I'm not sure which one is scarier, Trump because he is so stupid, or Boris because he's actually pretty clever in some ways, but plays dumb to fool everyone.
I hope that Mr. Johnson will finally table all this Brexit nonsense and get to the people's business which is bringing forward the much needed motion of declaring Oasis the greatest British band since The Beatles and that Liam Gallagher can sod right off.
It is at least partially because he was one of the leading figures in the campaign to leave the EU. Jeremy Hunt supported remain. And there is the Trump-ness aspect as well. There are many similarities between Johnson and Trump, though obviously Trump is worse.
I guess many people support him because "politicians are all corrupt and politics is a farce anyway". They feel that guys like Trump and Johnson "bring some fresh air" and construe their lack of manners and low intellectual level as "being honest".
Johnson does not have a 'low intellectual level' - he was educated at Eton and Oxford! He is actually a very intelligent man who convincingly plays a person more stupid for the popularity - a difficult act to pull off!
Common tactic by fascists and other dishonest people. Liars will try to get you to believe that everyone lies. The corrupt will try to convince you that everyone is corrupt. Those detached from reality will try to get you to believe in alternative facts or that everything is subjective and partisan.
He's hugely popular amongst Conservatives, though detested by many of them too. Last poll I saw found him still to be the most popular Conservative in the country at large too, and the Tories are terrified of getting wiped out at the next election so, despite him being a loose cannon, they are playing it safe in a way. Not sure if his schtick translates at all internationally but he has a certain articulate but bumbling charisma that people here seem to warm to in spite of his many flaws and frequent gaffes. And after a string of charisma-free vacuums for PM it's totally possible that people will choose to vote for Bojo the clown come election time. Everything's felt like a circus for the last few years anyway...
Bojo or Corbyn. That's really not much of a choice at all. In an ideal world you would tell both parties to go away and come back with sensible leaders.
22/55, and Dutch. Pretty pleased, but i'll have to admit, i got some of 'm on guessing general British sounding names, or very vague memories (i studied history, but didn't focus on British political history......current one is 'fascinating' though. xD ).
54, stumbled as I began to type Boozy's name and ran out of time. First time I've managed to remember all the early nineteenth century aristos, doubt if I'll achieve that again :-/
I just learned via this quiz that Boris Johnson is now the prime minister of Britain.
I'm American, and I need to learn more about British Politics.
Im from Québec and I think its weird having «earl of» or «marquis of» when we have to put a family name as an answer
Lloyd George knew my father. Father knew Lloyd George.....
I need to move to Canda, who wants to join me?
So extremely bored of this cliche that Americans are more ignorant of the world than anyone else. It's just so laughably demonstrably false. I've been traveling through Europe and the Near East for nearly 2 years now. I get asked all the time where I drove my car from and when I say "Bahrain," I think... of the hundreds of Europeans who asked me that question, maybe ONE has known that Bahrain was a country or where it was located. When I tell *Europeans* that I am in Thessaloniki, or Odessa, or Minsk, or Vilnius, or Riga, I can't believe it but the most common response is "where?" You don't even know you're own continent! Americans don't know where Vilnius is, either, but they know Las Vegas! (same population)
Looked at wikipedia throught though, LOLLL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gascoyne-Cecil,_3rd_Marquess_of_Salisbury
Of course, they aren't exactly the same, but they do have their similarities
Hopefully for our prime minister
54, stumbled as I began to type Boozy's name and ran out of time. First time I've managed to remember all the early nineteenth century aristos, doubt if I'll achieve that again :-/