Ventriloquist dummies or Liberal Democrats

[Tooting Gull]

I voted Lib Dem in the last election, because Labour had no hope in my constituency. I'll never do that again, tactically or otherwise. How some of them have signed up to what's going on, or manage to avopid squirming in PMQs, is unbelievable. Clegg was in the wrong party to start with. What some people will do for a bit of power.

For the Tories, fair enough, they had their manifesto, okay I disagree with most of it, but you know where you stand, and a lot of people voted for it.

 

[withdeanwombat]

The idea with electral reform is to turn labour into the third party. AV, the little impact it will have will be a Lib dem gain and a Tory and Labour Loss.

Recalibrating constituency numbers on the other hand to even them up will hit Scotland, wales ie Labour hard.

To be fair they do have their own parliaments now and Labour have been rigging the electrol system for years.




See my post above, the Idea that LIbdems are leftists who cant quite stomach labour is a fallacy.

This may be the idea,but it is yet to float.CMD's lot will vote against it,as probably Labour which leaves us,guess where?

I suspect the Tories have no enthusiasm for the LibDems and the idea that there will be an Alliance v Labour at the next election is a bit of a pipe dream.The Tories may expect an outright win next time,with Labour second and the Liberals back to hiring a taxi to take their MP's to the House.

We'll see how much of a fallacy the majority of Libs as left of centre is - it will only be tested at another election,but though I respect your opinion I think you are wrong.Time will tell,and you can berate me then if you prove to be correct.

Gerrymandering is,of course,in the hands of those who hold power,and govts are then only overturned when they are so awful that even with the cards in their favour they lose.Which is why New Labour came in in the first place,and why the Tories should easily have won outright in May,and failed because of poor leadership in a bad campaign.

 

[beorhthelm]

...These are not normal times and these are not normal politicians.
Some economists say the cuts are going much further and deeper than is necessary.

rubbish, its exactly the same as when Labour came in back in 97 and you see the same pattern in the London mayor, the US, France and everywhere they elect. promises made are compromised in the realities of having to fit into reality: opposition is very very easy. witness how Labour are say how this and that should be done to sort such and such problem when up until only 2 months ago they had the power to make that change.

the economsits you speak of are those with the contrarian opinion. hearing some wonk say how the government is doing everything fine is boring, the media will dig out whoever makes an interesting noise that fits the mood. the reality is there's a expectation managment going on, the cuts will not be as far as being made out, the plan is in place to settle the markets. also, watch the NHS budget come into the firing line, as everyone including Labour is saying it shouldnt be ringfenced at the expecne of others. once enough rope has been taken, the government will acknowledge the groundswell of opinion and cut 5-10% of the health budget, while reducing the need to cut deeply elsewhere, looking like they've responded to popular concern. this is called politics.

 

[beorhthelm]

We'll see how much of a fallacy the majority of Libs as left of centre is

not really a fallacy, people seem to forget Labout have moved substantially to the right and coverd the old ground of the Liberals. if you look at them historically, the Liberals were always a party of the conservative-with-a-social-conscience and share far more idologicaly with the Conservatives than the Labour movement. for example, to Liberals taxation as a method of re-distribution of wealth is a means to an end, while for the Labour movement its an end in itself.

the expected "gerrymandering" is necessary if there is to be any form of PR, it can hardly work with the current disparity between constituency sizes. i was previously aware not all were the same, but its quite astonishing that while Isle of Wight is over 100k voters many others are below 60k. any support for PR in any form has to support boundry changes to rectify this, a reality Labour would have faced if they had kept to their manifsto pledge on the matter (which they wouldnt have - watch them campaign for "no")

 

[West Hoathly Seagull]

I voted Lib Dem in the last election, because Labour had no hope in my constituency. I'll never do that again, tactically or otherwise. How some of them have signed up to what's going on, or manage to avopid squirming in PMQs, is unbelievable. Clegg was in the wrong party to start with. What some people will do for a bit of power.

For the Tories, fair enough, they had their manifesto, okay I disagree with most of it, but you know where you stand, and a lot of people voted for it.

What constituency are you in, TG? Tooting and Mitcham and Morden are both safe Labour seats (well if the Tories couldn't take Tooting this time, they are unlikely to for some time), with the Tories in second place with the Lib Dems way behind, with Wimbledon a safe Tory seat now, with Labour in second place. The only Tory-Lib Dem marginals in the area are Sutton and Cheam and Carshalton and Wallington, which both stayed Lib Dem. Neither is that close to Tooting, though I suppose C and W borders it in the north.

 

[RexCathedra]

....this is a savage Tory govt. imposing their agenda aided and abetted by the LibDems

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it -- good and hard. ." H. L. Mencken

 

[Tooting Gull]

What constituency are you in, TG? Tooting and Mitcham and Morden are both safe Labour seats (well if the Tories couldn't take Tooting this time, they are unlikely to for some time), with the Tories in second place with the Lib Dems way behind, with Wimbledon a safe Tory seat now, with Labour in second place. The only Tory-Lib Dem marginals in the area are Sutton and Cheam and Carshalton and Wallington, which both stayed Lib Dem. Neither is that close to Tooting, though I suppose C and W borders it in the north.

Good knowledge - but I don't live there any more! Runnymede, Philip Hammond, now Transport Sec.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Strange how quickly Labour supporters forget how Brown and co completely f***ed the country and now want to blame the Lib Dems

 

[withdeanwombat]

Strange how quickly Labour supporters forget how Brown and co completely f***ed the country and now want to blame the Lib Dems

I think you have morphed into a different argument here.

It's funny how non Labour voters have ignored the fact that the current economic problems transcend Britain's borders,and how many countries followed Brown's ideas to try to ease their own problems.It isn't a case of blaming the LibDems for those problems - certainly not caused by LibDems-but blaming them for putting in a Tory dominated Alliance which is pretty largely putting in Tory policies whilst feeding a few crumbs to the LibDems.Don't forget,many voters,though a minority,supported Labour plans for a slower cut,slower recovery than the Tory deep cut fingers crossed policy (LibDems amongst them) ;and the Tories were in a minority,too.

It's what the LibDems said compared to what they did that has caused the debate over the LibDems.In my constituency their stategy was Labour cannot win here.Vote LibDem to keep the Tories out.It's an argument that cannot be used again,and people I've spoken to have differing views:some will vote for a proper tory next time,some will go back to Labour.I haven't spoken to anybody who will vote LibDem next time.

It would be good to see LibDem MP's crossing the floor,but most of them are now junior ministers (filing clerks) in government (one of the few crumbs),so I'm not holding my breath.

And the Tories will oppose AV,as will Labour,so the Liberals can get their party conference in a telephone kiosk again.Well done Nick.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I think you have morphed into a different argument here.

It's funny how non Labour voters have ignored the fact that the current economic problems transcend Britain's borders,and how many countries followed Brown's ideas to try to ease their own problems.It isn't a case of blaming the LibDems for those problems - certainly not caused by LibDems-but blaming them for putting in a Tory dominated Alliance which is pretty largely putting in Tory policies whilst feeding a few crumbs to the LibDems.Don't forget,many voters,though a minority,supported Labour plans for a slower cut,slower recovery than the Tory deep cut fingers crossed policy (LibDems amongst them) ;and the Tories were in a minority,too.

It's what the LibDems said compared to what they did that has caused the debate over the LibDems.In my constituency their stategy was Labour cannot win here.Vote LibDem to keep the Tories out.It's an argument that cannot be used again,and people I've spoken to have differing views:some will vote for a proper tory next time,some will go back to Labour.I haven't spoken to anybody who will vote LibDem next time.

It would be good to see LibDem MP's crossing the floor,but most of them are now junior ministers (filing clerks) in government (one of the few crumbs),so I'm not holding my breath.

And the Tories will oppose AV,as will Labour,so the Liberals can get their party conference in a telephone kiosk again.Well done Nick.

The banking crisis was indeed international and I don't blame Labour entirely for it. Many of their other policies have helped bring the country to the edge of bankrupcy ( assisted by the banks ).

So the Lib Dems couldn't form an alliance with Labour because Labour were refusing to conceide to a referendum ( and judging by Lord Mandlesons account, Brown wasn't keen to step down ). This left them with two options - leave a Tory minority government and have no say what so ever, or form an alliance with the Tories and get some of their ideas and policies enacted. This was their only chance in a centry to do this. I don't believe anyone in their position wouldn't have taken that opportunity. Of course that means going back on some election pledges but that's what happens in coalition government. Anybody they really thought it would be different is either very naive or stupid.

 

[withdeanwombat]

The banking crisis was indeed international and I don't blame Labour entirely for it. Many of their other policies have helped bring the country to the edge of bankrupcy ( assisted by the banks ).

So the Lib Dems couldn't form an alliance with Labour because Labour were refusing to conceide to a referendum ( and judging by Lord Mandlesons account, Brown wasn't keen to step down ). This left them with two options - leave a Tory minority government and have no say what so ever, or form an alliance with the Tories and get some of their ideas and policies enacted. This was their only chance in a centry to do this. I don't believe anyone in their position wouldn't have taken that opportunity. Of course that means going back on some election pledges but that's what happens in coalition government. Anybody they really thought it would be different is either very naive or stupid.

Hmm.Somewhat,though of course I disagree with the main thrust of this.

The LibDems could have opted to keep their powder dry,and agree to back the Tories on non contentious issues,or ones that they did not absolutely oppose.It would have meant a minority govt that had to behave carefully,and yes,it would have meant an early GE.But the LibDem reputation would have been unsullied and they could have gone into it with honest arguments honestly delivered.Now Tory LibDems will vote Tory - why not? -and Labour LibDems will vote Labour - why not ? and the LibDems will fall into the sofa lining to be found in forty years time.

 

[beorhthelm]

The LibDems could have opted to keep their powder dry,and agree to back the Tories on non contentious issues,or ones that they did not absolutely oppose.

i think the rationale was that such a position would lead to accusations of being the Tory's poodle, while having no power. This way, while those accusations still fly they at least have some real power. and make no mistake, they do have some significant power, you only need to see the upset on the Tory right to see that. of course Cameron has neatly created a excuse to provide both the right of his party and the electorate... very clever really. i dont think he's done this cynically, but its certianly helps push things through when Liberals are the ones controling the execution of the budget and the policital reforms.

 

[glasfryn]

you only have to look at George Osbourne's budget speech to see how sneaky the tories are shameron shuffled up seats so he was immediately behind Osbourne and could not be seen all you could see in the TV shot was Osbourne flanked by two Lib-dems one of which was their leader
all politicians are basically barstards who are there to line their pockets apart from the few who are there for the good of the people of this country.







Brown now on a long holiday sipping tea with a wry smile on his face.

glad to be away from the backstabbing.

 

[withdeanwombat]

i think the rationale was that such a position would lead to accusations of being the Tory's poodle, while having no power. This way, while those accusations still fly they at least have some real power. and make no mistake, they do have some significant power, you only need to see the upset on the Tory right to see that. of course Cameron has neatly created a excuse to provide both the right of his party and the electorate... very clever really. i dont think he's done this cynically, but its certianly helps push things through when Liberals are the ones controling the execution of the budget and the policital reforms.

Hmm.It's a yes,but moment.

Yes,but the LibDems would have had the real power to end a Tory minority govt.In Alliance that's harder to do without crossing the floor,which would now look like taking their bat home rather than controlling.It's a weaker position,I think,and my belief is that the LibDems have been snookered by the Tories,which is probably why there is as yet little complaint from the Alan B'stards on the conservative wide right.

 

[Dandyman]

not really a fallacy, people seem to forget Labout have moved substantially to the right and coverd the old ground of the Liberals. if you look at them historically, the Liberals were always a party of the conservative-with-a-social-conscience and share far more idologicaly with the Conservatives than the Labour movement. for example, to Liberals taxation as a method of re-distribution of wealth is a means to an end, while for the Labour movement its an end in itself.

the expected "gerrymandering" is necessary if there is to be any form of PR, it can hardly work with the current disparity between constituency sizes. i was previously aware not all were the same, but its quite astonishing that while Isle of Wight is over 100k voters many others are below 60k. any support for PR in any form has to support boundry changes to rectify this, a reality Labour would have faced if they had kept to their manifsto pledge on the matter (which they wouldnt have - watch them campaign for "no")

Boundry changes could simply mean multi-member constituencies rather than the AV, fixed term parliament and attacking urban voters stich-up that the Con-Dems are plotting. The difference in constituency sizes is more a reflection of the difference between urban, suburban and rural seats than anything else and the idea that eliminating seats is about "democracy" rather than party advantage is laughable.

A top-up Additional Member system like Scotland or multi-member seats would be better IMO than the cynical AV option which seems to promise little than ending up with representatives that were no ones first choice.

 

[Danny-Boy]

As we all know,the Liberals are a total disgrace whose only saving grace is that the media have to describe the government as "Alliance" when everybody really recognises it as a Tory govt.It's sickening to see these brown-nosers being head patted by CMD and Lightweight George,who,as the puppeteers have their other hands up the puppets' rear end.

Can't wait for the next election to see these two faced no-hopers disappear down the electoral drain,and my local MP can expect a warm welcome should he trespass on my property.The party conference could be interesting for once as this shower of *hite try to explain themselves to folk totally opposed to conservatism in any form.

I take it your local MP is now the Minister for Local Transport...

 

[The Oldman]

What about Norman Baker? Before becoming Transport Minister always advocating Public Transport against car travel and the need to support rural communties. Now, according to today's Times, advocating withdrawal of bus subsidies to rural areas.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Hmm.It's a yes,but moment.

Yes,but the LibDems would have had the real power to end a Tory minority govt.In Alliance that's harder to do without crossing the floor,which would now look like taking their bat home rather than controlling.It's a weaker position,I think,and my belief is that the LibDems have been snookered by the Tories,which is probably why there is as yet little complaint from the Alan B'stards on the conservative wide right.

After the recent elections a prominent local Tory activist shouted to me out of his limo "See you in six months!" That was the nightmare scenario Cleggy and co avoided by going into a formal coalition.

If there had been another election, as Harold Wilson called in 1974, there would probably have been an overall Tory majority and all the rightwingers in their Party would have had the real power.

 

[Danny-Boy]

What about Norman Baker? Before becoming Transport Minister always advocating Public Transport against car travel and the need to support rural communties. Now, according to today's Times, advocating withdrawal of bus subsidies to rural areas.

Interesting that he was not appointed Minister for Railways. But then under protocol he would not have been allowed to promote the Uckfield-Lewes rebuilding scheme as it is in his own constituency (partially).

I'm surprised the Government have not introduced some form of levy on bus-cards for 60+, most people I know with them would be prepared to buy one for (say) £20 a year.

 

[BLOCK F]

The banking crisis was indeed international and I don't blame Labour entirely for it. Many of their other policies have helped bring the country to the edge of bankrupcy ( assisted by the banks ).

So the Lib Dems couldn't form an alliance with Labour because Labour were refusing to conceide to a referendum ( and judging by Lord Mandlesons account, Brown wasn't keen to step down ). This left them with two options - leave a Tory minority government and have no say what so ever, or form an alliance with the Tories and get some of their ideas and policies enacted. This was their only chance in a centry to do this. I don't believe anyone in their position wouldn't have taken that opportunity. Of course that means going back on some election pledges but that's what happens in coalition government. Anybody they really thought it would be different is either very naive or stupid.

Correct.I am just grateful that Labour are out of power and can do no more damage to the country by spending money we cannot afford.At least there is a sense of reality about the Government now.
Anyway,it will give sickening individuals like Mandelson and Blair time to promote their 'memoirs' and bitch away to their hearts content!