Talk:Prime minister–designate

message: At present the article states however only a select few have been labelled with that term by the media. - That doesn't seem to stack up with a comprehensive search.  I would suggest that there are different hoops in different countries to jump through before moving from PM elect to PM but being named as such by the media is not one of them.  Hence I am removing the assertion.  If want to reinstate please supply a citation from a reliable source.--Matilda formerly known as User:Golden Wattle talk 23:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, this is NOR, but it's the only time I've ever heard it used anyway - but then again, I've only seen one change of government since my birth (being a toddler doesn't count!) Auroranorth (!) 09:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media term? 

message: This is confusing a lot of terms, especiall as usage across the world is all over the place.
"Prime Minister-in-waiting" and "Prime Minister-designate" in the UK at least tend to be terms used to refer to opposition leaders trying to present themselves as potential Prime Ministers - e.g. "Bloggs [leader of the Concrete Party] looks like a Prime Minister-in-waiting, Smith [leader of the Mortar Party] doesn't look like a Prime Minister-in-waiting at all" (from recollection "Prime Minister-designate" was the term used by the SDP-Liberal Alliance to indicate which party leader would be Prime Minister were they to win the election), and to a lesser extent a government minister widely tipped to be a future PM (e.g. "At the 2005 Labour Party Conference Gordon Brown sought to cement his position as Prime Minister-in-waiting") not someone between an election and taking office.
Most of this confusion comes because there is rarely an official term in use and everyone's trying to apply the conventions for directly elected officials to a post that is formally appointed. Timrollpickering 14:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That crystallises the essence of the debate.  In Westminster-style democracies, there is no official term for an opposition leader who's just won an election but has not been sworn in as PM yet.  Well, technically he's still the Leader of the Opposition, but that no longer reflects political or electoral realities. We have to call him or her something, so an unofficial term gets used by the media and others.  That a term such as "Prime Minister-elect" is unofficial, and that it's technically incorrect, don't alter the fact that the term is widely used (at least in Australia) and is thus the appropriate "jargon" of political discourse here.  In other countries, "Prime Minister-designate" may be the jargon.  Whatever term or terms are actually generally used should be reflected in Wikipedia, not what some editors think should be used.  --  JackofOz 15:03, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish I had something better than OR at this late date, but my ex-partner used to work in the Prime Minister's Office in Ottawa. The rule there was that a leader of the party who had won an election in a parliamentary system but had not yet been sworn in was always to be referred to as the "prime minister designate", not and never under any circumstance whatsoever the "prime minister elect". The title of "office-elect" was only used for officeholders who had been directly elected by voters, such as the US president. Using the phrase "prime minister elect" would have got a staff member a reprimand. --NellieBly (talk) 20:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Messy 

message: Prime Minister-designate is clearly more used than Prime Minister-elect is used. Therequiembellishere (talk) 15:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Name Change?