SparklyKid - // He speaks for the majority. Only a fool would not recognise his popularity. A well educated great speaker. //
I have to take issue with a couple of points there -
I don't believe 'Tommy Robinson' speaks for the majority, I also dispute that he is actually that popular, in real terms, let's not confuse a high media profile with popularity, the two are not necessarily synonymous. For example, millions of people know who Rolf Harris is, that doesn't make him a welcome addition to any dinner party.
I would also argue that 'Tommy' is 'well educated', or a 'great speaker'. I think he is well educated in the specific areas in which he makes his living - which is racially based agitation and incitement, and similarly, I think he speaks well about them, but that does not make him well educated or a great speaker outside those narrow parameters.
And that brings me to my actual response to the OP -
I believe that 'Tommy Robinson' comes from the same background, and has similar skills, to Jeremy Corbyn. Neither are politicians, both are professional agitators, which makes them vocal as opposition to government, but it means that they have less than no clue about how the political system, and indeed democracy and the legislative process works.
This would mean that either of them would be floundering and seriously out of their mutual depth, were they required to actually make workable decisions, as opposed to simply standing on the side-lines shouting loudly about how badly everyone else is doing things. That's easy - government and actual responsibility are not, and neither of them is fit for either.