Red Ivor told me..........

[Silent Bob]

But another way of looking at it is that more people voted for the more liberal lib dems and conservatives than the more authoritarian labour party.

That's true, and that's why it's up to the Lib Dems to decide who they work with (if any). Though personally I think they've more in common with Labour.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

That's true, and that's why it's up to the Lib Dems to decide who they work with (if any). Though personally I think they've more in common with Labour.

Clearly the Liberals have more in common with the Labour party. I cannot see how Clegg can go back to his party, supporters and voters and justify getting into bed with the Tory party. Had I voted for Clegg I'd be horrified he was siding with Cameron. I also think that the usual divisions in the Tory party will come to the fore very very shortly.

I personally think that Clegg and the Labour party will do the deal. Do not read too much into the ongoing Tory talks. Clegg has to be seen to have had sincere dailogue with both parties.

 

[Bozza]

It's too early to say.

Although you did say 3 days ago...

If the number of Lib Dem seats is as low as predicted, Clegg will be DESPERATE to do a deal with whoever will offer him a deal that involves electoral reform.

CMD will think he'll have enough of a mandate to avoid having to do any deals.

Welcome to a Lib/Lab government ... next week.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Indeed I did, Bozza. But that was when the exit poll result was announced and well before Cameron agreed to talk with Clegg.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I think Cameron may well find out, rather sooner than he wants, that he is the next member of the exclusive club of Tory Party leaders who never became prime minister.

David Cameron faces Tory party anger | Politics | The Observer

 

[tedebear]

I think Cameron may well find out, rather sooner than he wants, that he is the next member of the exclusive club of Tory Party leaders who never became prime minister.

David Cameron faces Tory party anger | Politics | The Observer

Rather than Labour Prime Ministers who were never voted in?

 

[BLOCK F]

Miliband or Johnson for Prime Minister, Clegg for Deputy Prime Minister.

Brown for the role of "great statesman, doing the decent thing, in the national interest".

Great statesman,my arse..Anyway it would be a national disgrace if the wretched Labour party clung to 'power' in this way.So much for integrity,eh!Another unelected P.M.and a load of clapped out no hopers in the Cabinet.
The country is in the financial shit and a Labour Government is NOT the way to get out of it.
Looks like democracy is dead amongst some Labour supporters.
Labour should do the decent thing and go honorably into opposition,elect a new leader,get rid of the deadwood and learn how to become an effective constructive opposition before the country even starts to consider giving them any power again.They have had 13 years,have lost the support of the majority of the electorate and left the country in a mess...they have to go!

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

It's not a football match.
Conservatives got the most votes of a single party, but more people voted for left leaning parties than right.

Very true.

This was the Election that nobody won. The Tories came first, Labour lost Power, but nobody won.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Rather than Labour Prime Ministers who were never voted in?

What about Anthony Eden, Harold Macmillan, Alec Douglas-Home, John Major?

All became Tory Prime Ministers simply by a decision of the Conservative Party to change the party leadership. Each of them subsequently called a general election. Douglas-Home lost his election, the others won theirs.

Likewise Brown. He's just lost his.

If Miliband or Johnson now became prime minister, most likely it would be as a result of a deal with the LibDems that had, as a key part of the deal, an agreement that an election would be held as soon as a new, fairer electoral system had been introduced.

 

[Harty]

Block F

All well and good but look at the voting figures.

65% of turnout 44 million electorate of which 10 million voted for the Tories.

So less than 25% of the total electorate voted for Cameron and co, not such a clear mandate after all?

 

[franks brother]

There are massive differences between LD and Cons. In fact In some areas LD is more radical than Labour.
Something has to give. If Clegg accepts the trivial offer he has had from Cameron he will not be able to keep his party together.If Cameron concedes more he will have 50+ of his own up in arms.
On the other hand if Clegg declines Cameron he will risk being accused on propping up an unpopular PM. If he insists Brown goes you would have another "unelected" PM

 

[BLOCK F]

I never cease to be amazed by some of the Labour supporting members of this board.....breathtaking ability to ignore facts and collectively put heads in sand!
Do you really believe that Labour have genuinely earned the chance to stay in charge of this country for a minute longer, regardless of whether or not a 'deal' could be cobbled together with other parties?
For crying out loud,the Conservatives got more seats and more votes than Labour,so butt out!

 

[pasty]

Block F

All well and good but look at the voting figures.

65% of turnout 44 million electorate of which 10 million voted for the Tories.

So less than 25% of the total electorate voted for Cameron and co, not such a clear mandate after all?

All well and good, but 36.1% of those that voted did.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

No party in government has EVER changed its leader to coincide with a general election. It's the way the UK constitution works.

Just as a matter of interest, tedebear ... when Paul Keating became prime minister of Australia, how long was it before the next general election took place? Likewise Billy McMahon?

Both nations have the same system. Neither of them elects a prime minister.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

Rather than Labour Prime Ministers who were never voted in?

Changing leaders mid term isn't unusual:

1902 AJ Balfour (Con)
1908 AA Asquith (Lib) - Won in 1910
1916 Lloyd George (Lib) - Won in 1918
1923 Stanley Baldwin (Con) - Won in 1924 and 1935
1937 Neville Chamberlain (Con)
1940 Winston Churchill (Con) - Won in 1951
1963 Sir Alec Douglas Home (Con)
1976 Jim Callaghan (Lab)
1990 John Major (Con) - Won in 1992
2007 Gordon Brown (Lab)

On that count three Conservatives and two Labour have become PM without an electoral mandate without having won either before or after.

 

[pasty]

I never cease to be amazed by some of the Labour supporting members of this board.....breathtaking ability to ignore facts and collectively put heads in sand!
Do you really believe that Labour have genuinely earned the chance to stay in charge of this country for a minute longer, regardless of whether or not a 'deal' could be cobbled together with other parties?
For crying out loud,the Conservatives got more seats and more votes than Labour,so butt out!

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Cameron & Clegg will agree a deal before the markets open tomorrow. That means no time for Gordon to get involved, thank god.

 

[Jim in the West]

I can't believe LibDems would do a deal with the Tories....if cards are played right, we'll have proportional representation in a few months, and the Conservative Party will be consigned to the scrap heap for a long time to come.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I never cease to be amazed by some of the Labour supporting members of this board.....breathtaking ability to ignore facts and collectively put heads in sand!
Do you really believe that Labour have genuinely earned the chance to stay in charge of this country for a minute longer, regardless of whether or not a 'deal' could be cobbled together with other parties?
For crying out loud,the Conservatives got more seats and more votes than Labour,so butt out!

I'd be happy to butt out, if you will agree to accept that none of Cameron's core policies have a cat in hell's chance of being implemented, because they will be voted down in parliament.

At least this round of wheeler-dealing gives the politicians a chance of achieving some sort of coherent government, built on compromise, maybe, but at least capable of delivering something.

 

[Harty]

I never cease to be amazed by some of the Labour supporting members of this board.....breathtaking ability to ignore facts and collectively put heads in sand!
Do you really believe that Labour have genuinely earned the chance to stay in charge of this country for a minute longer, regardless of whether or not a 'deal' could be cobbled together with other parties?
For crying out loud,the Conservatives got more seats and more votes than Labour,so butt out!

But really with;

The illegal war
The economic crisis
Record high petrol prices
One of the most unpopular PM's in living memory
And bigot gate



And the Tories still couldn't win.

Clearly enough of the electorate have concerns over Cameron