He talked a lot, made some questionable decisions, but put steel into the backbones of his people and when the chips were down, committed his people to take part in the most amazing invasion of all time. Way to go.
A demagogue, a plagiarist and a war monger who is more responsible than Hitler or Stalin for the second world War. If Nuremberg was meant to be anything but a show trial Churchill, Stalin and Truman would have been swinging from the gallows. There were no good guys, and England and the USA are the most militaristic and imperialist powers in human history.
Churchill proved himself an excellent wartime leader, but a conservative aristocrat (in terms of his manner) who despised and undervalued "liberal socialism". He failed to realize that the drastic social reform was imperative. He looks more like a Victorian-era statesman than a typical 21st century politician. His stern and serious appearance were a stark contrast with the humorous and easygoing Clement Attlee who ended up winning the heart of the majority of the British in the AD 1945 election.
Churchill actually had a lively sense of humour and wasn't always stern and serious; I suspect that you are inferring too much from a famous photograph that was made when he had very little reason to be jolly. He wasn't a conservative aristocrat either in spite of his aristocratic descent, he was a political adventurer who was widely distrusted by such people because he was so erratic and ambitious. It is often forgotten that he served as a minister in Asquith's Liberal government before the First World War, which ranks with that of Attlee as one of the great reforming governments.
Yeeh , i don't like the guy but he had a way with words
My personal favorites
sitting next to a very prim lady who chided him for being drunk
"maam , I'm drunk and you are ugly , but tomorrow I shall be sober "
invited to a high society diner , the hostess commented
"should you be my husband I would serve you poison "
"my lady , should I be your husband , I would drink it !"
That’s an interesting suggestion, he never seems to get mentioned in regard to the events of May/June 1940. Well, not in anything I’ve read but he was only 43 at the time. I imagine he was too young to be PM by the standards of that era.