1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why the lib-dems are shit

Discussion in 'UK politics, current affairs and news' started by butchersapron, Apr 19, 2010.

  1. shagnasty

    shagnasty two legs bad four legs good

    Their going to loose a lot of face over the lord reform.I expect to see a lot libdems say it didn't matter anyway
     
  2. redsquirrel

    redsquirrel Exterminate Russell Davis

    Is it? On what evidence?
     
  3. cesare

    cesare in a cereal box

    It was looking likely that neither the Tories or Labour could form majorities at the last GE, tbf.
     
  4. redsquirrel

    redsquirrel Exterminate Russell Davis

    Yes but since then the LibDem vote has totally collapsed. And there's probably still 3 years to go before an election is called.

    I'm not writing off the possibility that there have to be another coalition after the next GE but I don't think I'd call it likely.
     
  5. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    There hasn't been a poll pointing towards a hung parliament for ages now. Probably last 6 months have all shown a labour majority.
     
  6. Delroy Booth

    Delroy Booth Off to join the SPGB. Have fun. Banned

    I've got a feeling the boundary review might change that. The tories can be relied upon to get 35% or so of the British electorate to vote for them, and I reckon they're banking on that basic tory vote, coupled with a bit of creative gerrymandering, being

    I also expect a really nasty election campaign from Cameron and co, based on anti-immigrant dog-whistle racism and the demonisation of anyone who uses the welfare system. We don't know what the effect of a full on right-wing PR hate campaign on these lines will have on the polls yet, coz it isn't underway.
     
  7. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    The boundary changes are not going to make that much a difference - plus 10-15 to the tories at most. The tory bedrock vote is estimated (by the pollsters that is) at circa-25-26%. They polled 36% at the last election. Their current polling is just above that bedrock vote, and this before things get worse. They are not going to poll 35% in even worse conditions. And even if they did, labour on 40% plus (have been for months) is enough to ensure a labour majority regardless.

    Nice to see a bit of faith in your fellow humans.
     
  8. Delroy Booth

    Delroy Booth Off to join the SPGB. Have fun. Banned

    Just a quick one, if the Tory Core vote is now 25-26% then sweet jesus, how the mighty have fallen. I remember reading something from my A-level government and politics class, that was written in the early 90's, that estimated the "Core" Tory vote during Thatcher at being 40%!

    Either way I suspect the bedrock vote of somewhere in the mid 30's is probably what they'll get, and i reckon they've been planning their strategy, and these boundary changes, on the basis that's what they're probably going to get.
     
  9. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Hard to see how they had a bedrock that was equal to the size of their highest vote in the decade and 10% above what they received in 97. Bedrock means people who will vote tory and will only vote tory - it doesn't mean people who have voted tory.
     
    Spanky Longhorn, shagnasty and cesare like this.
  10. youngian

    youngian Well-Known Member

    Falling turnout and neither main party being able to capture much more than 40 per cent of the vote any more. Any future majorities are more likely to be formed through arithmetical flook than any legitimate mandate.

    When one party capured more than 45 per cent of the vote and the other around 35 per cent, there was some kind of legitimacy to form a majority government under FPTP.
     
  11. redsquirrel

    redsquirrel Exterminate Russell Davis

    Hang on you're conflating two separate things there - what has any lack of "legitimate mandate" got to do with the the likelihood of the next government being a coalition?

    Moreover, as BA has pointed out the current polling data doesn't back up your assertion. Labour have been ~40 for months, while the LibDem vote has dropped through the floor.
     
  12. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Untermensch, and proud!

    Unfortunately, the result would have been barely different with AV in place (the alternative we were offered), so any alternative system would need to be full PR. Nothing else would do much but help our three mainstream parties to cement themselves in.
     
  13. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    So they have got none of the things clegg had on his chamberlain style piece of paper (including short money, the theiving cunts), they've lost deposit in three bye elections if my count is correct- the tories not wanting to be remembered as the party who fucked the NHS were willing to give ground and they fought a battle over a chamber most people don't know what does and don't care anyway except for the few times they block something nobody wanted and this makes news. Collapsing votes all over the shop, desperate appeals to labour etc, they really are completely done. Fighting for scraps with the fringe parties when they don't lose deposits. Maggotry
     
  14. youngian

    youngian Well-Known Member

    I agree, without going into an anorak discussion about the best form of PR, if FPTP and its variant AV cannot produce a majority government any more than its whole rationale is invalid.
     
  15. taffboy gwyrdd

    taffboy gwyrdd Embrace the confusion!

    It's way too far out from the scheduled election to predict a tory or labour overall majority, or lack of one. But the stats are always against hung parliaments.

    Labour are reasonably head at the moment it's true, but it's mid term and to be expected.

    Normally speaking elected parties get a 2nd term in this country but the tories weren't strictly elected and the sense of uselessness has more in common with late 2nd and 3rd term governments.

    Despite my general disdain for Labour I have never thought Miliband was as big a problem for them as many say. I think he has a handle on some of what went wrong in the party but spends too much time listening to wonks. That said, I can see him as PM.
     
    shagnasty likes this.
  16. taffboy gwyrdd

    taffboy gwyrdd Embrace the confusion!

    There was a good piece going round on Twitter about 10 promises in the Coalition Agreement that the tories had broken.

    But the biggest LD fuck up for me was the terms and timing of the voting reform referendum. This was the goal of a generation, not just of LDs either.

    And they accepted a shit system that would be hard to pitch and little time to do it. Should have been thorough reviews at least as detailed as the one Roy Jenkins did which Labour kindly binned.

    Instead, the party with most to gain from their generational ambition got the issue kicked into the long grass for a generation. Now that's what I call shit.

    When I ask myself "how did this happen?" I look at the fact that their crack negotiation team was headed up by the charisma vacuum that is Danny Alexander (crack as in supposedly "highly skilled", not drug addled). I'm not convinced he could convince New Orleans to invest in flood defences.

    I know a few LDs - 2 councillors (1 stepped down this year) and a key local organiser who I got to know as the excellent convenor of our local No2ID

    I've put it to all of them, politely, that I can see why they started in the coalition (not that I would have done) but that perhaps they had rings run round them by the tories.

    LDs have not been in power for nearly a century. The tories have had the whip hand over this country and indeed a massive empire for the majority of recent centuries.

    Might that indicate that they are rather adept at duping people?

    Not a single response from my orange correspondents but one FB friend lost.

    The LDs have long since been too right wing for me, but I view the demise in their credibility with sadness more than mirth or even anger. This is hundreds of years of a well meant English/British tradition trampled in the mud for the ambition of a few and the gullibility of quite a few more.

    Anyhow, I couldn't find that link before cracking on with a belated estate newsletter, but I did find this gem from not long ago down memory lane. An "oh dear" experience from the opening shot.

     
  17. Delroy Booth

    Delroy Booth Off to join the SPGB. Have fun. Banned

    Taffboy, you need to do a bit of history. The Lib Dems were always this shit, there has been no demise, they've never been any good ever.
     
  18. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    So it looks like every single one of Clegg's dearly-held negotiation points has gone completely down the shitter as Lords reform is set to be dropped according to BBC news. Well done Nick.
     
  19. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    You're a bit late on this. Clegg has just formally said they've given it up btw. Clown shoes. Double clown shoes.
     
  20. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Even better, Clegg begged Cameron for a ...wait for it...referendum on Lord's reform. Not much you can say to that :D
     
  21. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    And now he formally says he's opposing the boundary changes. But he says 'pushing the pause button'.
     
  22. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Even in this they're dishonest - the boundary changes were in return for the AV referendum not lords reform. They're lying/he's lying/they're liars.
     
  23. Pickman's model

    Pickman's model Putting the FU in fun

    surely this thread has failed to live up to the promise in the title. rather than identifying several concrete areas in which the lib dems are shit, the water's been muddied by the sheer volume of lib dem fuckwittery
     
  24. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    I just heard clagg crying on the radio about coalitions being based on mutal trust etc, like its a sexual relationship.Well, his party is royally fucked. If they manage to oppose the gerrymandering effectively I'll be entirely astonished
     
  25. Lo Siento.

    Lo Siento. Second As Farce

    How do you negotiate in coalition when your partner knows an election will wipe you out? You can't.
     
  26. Pickman's model

    Pickman's model Putting the FU in fun

    if they get past the next election without at least two suicides by unseated mps i will be astonished
     
  27. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Again - he's lying - he made AV the price for boundary reform. Not Lords reform or general trust.
     
  28. Meltingpot

    Meltingpot On hiatus

    True VP, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas - full PR would mean each of the two largest parties saying goodbye to dozens of its MPs after the next election. That's why they'll never allow it.

    It makes as much sense for politicians to be asked to decide upon things such as voting systems, boundary reform etc. as to ask either the goalie or the penalty taker in a game of football where the penalty should be taken from; i.e. none at all. Yet we still do it.
     
  29. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    So AV,Lords reform, Short money- what else have we that clegg has failed to deliver to the party faithful?(a diminishing band)
     
  30. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Just to make sure: Clegg lied three times that Lords reform was not linked to boundary changes. Which makes him pope and cable jesus.
     

Share This Page