Without wishing to offend anyone here, I feel from your comment above that you are a perfect example of what I was talking about in my post. You've bought into the Tory/media party line like so many have and you are judging Nick Clegg and his entire party based on one issue that was entirely out of his hands. Shame that. This is a Conservative led coalition we are currently living in, not a Liberal government which some people don't appear to take into account, particularly regarding the tuition fees issue. If tuition fees is such a big issue then why would you be happier (assuming you would vote Tory if you were over here, I may be wrong) putting your tick in the box of the party who actually proposed and forced through the hike to 9k a year? Makes no sense to me, sorry.
The Lib Dems will suffer annihilation for a very good reason -It was Labour voters that put them in the position to do a deal. My family all voted LD in 2010,I persuaded them to because the LD's were in second place and Labour a distant third . This time round we will all vote Labour regardless of the fact that they stand no chance of winning. The LD's are going to be mightily smitten by this withdrawal of the tactical vote. It would not surprise me if they lost more than half their seats. They are currently polling in the 7-8% range compared to 23% in 2010. JR- I have not noticed personal insults. KEMP and myself had a little spat but he didnt take offence and neither did I. He is entitle to his view which is that the Tories will be best for him and his business. I just happened to take a different view.
The idea that the lib Dems will be "wiped out" is a Tory/Labour diehard pipe-dream. And you can see why it's in their interests, but it shouldn't fool anyone. It's entirely press-manipulated. They will take a big hit at this election, but their heartland support is too strong for them to be wiped out - they're not thinly spread like UKIP or Greens. They'll most likely be the third largest party still with around 30-35 seats and so probably form part of the next coalition. The idea that voters "never forget" certain u-turns is so risible as to not be worth discussing. Time and again politics has proven that voters have very short memories.
Annihilation =/= lose more than half their seats CT. As I say, yours is wishful thinking from a dogmatic labourite. Anyone with any knowledge of polling trends knows that
Rob Psephology has been a lifelong hobby. I have the definitive volumes covering every GE back to 1970. I would put my interest before party loyalty. LD voter support has stabilised at around 8% and has been there for a long while now. My own guess is that they will have 15seats. What is your guess? We will see who is closer.
My guess is 30 seats - see above. That would still be a massive loss of support. Frankly, I don't care if that's wrong. It's meaningless to me, and I won't be swinging my dick if it's right. My only point is that all this united Labour/Tory desperation to see Lib Dems destroyed is all because they want to restore their duopoly. It's too late. Anyway 15 seats is not an annihilation, either, given that they will most likely be the fourth largest party if they still have those seats and unless Labour want to risk an uproar by going into coalition with the SNP, it will mean the LDs will still have a route in! So I still don't get the "annihilation" comment - pipe-dream. Two things - currently polling on 8% or thereabouts has them getting 25 seats. If you're so confident that 8% will hold, where do you get 15 seats from? Also, as psephologist, you must be aware of the failure of polling trends to pick up those in power, usually the "secret vote". Those who say they are not committed because they see in the papers it's not cool and then go voting for Tories/Lib Dems anyway. It's exactly what happened in 2010 - Labour did nowhere near as badly as polls showed they would right up until the election.
Another thing - the Lib Dems are the only party who purport to be middle ground. They've been squeezed by Labour and Tories gravitating towards the centre to the point where they're almost indistinguishable save for rhetoric. With the rise of UKIP and Greens, you can see the Labour and Tory party's lurching back to the extremes. That opens up a gap. Swings and roundabouts isn't it.
Nobody seems to have picked up on the crux of my post that started this discussion about the Lib Dems, that being the fact it wasn't a "u-turn" on tuition fees, rather a compromise in exchange for the opportunity to be able to influence a great many other issues as part of a coalition, all be it as the minority partner. The Tories to be fair to them played that all beautifully, and the simple fact nobody blames them for the increase to 9k despite the fact it was their policy is testament to this. The Tories have reneged on so, so many of their promises it is quite simply staggering that Nick Clegg has been destroyed by one issue that he could do precious little about. Didn't Gordon Brown turn down the opportunity of a coalition with the Lib Dems first?
I don't disagree, but from a political perspective I don't think it matters what happened - only what people believe. Given that these things are forgotten rapidly, I shouldn't worry about it. The problem for the Lib Dems is it's the only real "u-turn" they've had to do, unlike normal governing parties. That brings the spot light on it because there's no other ammo. My view is the voting population is nowhere near as thick as the papers like to think, and will end up perceiving it much as you do - that whoever is in power has very little choice but to go back on some of their pre-election promises when reality hits.
LD's are well to the left of Labour at grass roots level,the old beards and sandals brigade,and that's just the women. Ashcroft poll if Sheffield Hallam put Labour in front of Clegg. You are obviously hoping that 8% will be unevenly spread. I stick by 15.
? What an odd post. You don't even know who I'm going to vote for! Surely you know full well that the Lib Dem vote is never evenly spread? That's exactly what's given it the advantage that other minor parties haven't had. And what's the relevance of Clegg's seat? I fully expect that to be one of the 20 odd that will go. You still haven't explained your logic to me - you say it's 8%, based on the polls, and you obviously suggest that the polls are reliable. So why do you not rely on the polling predictions for seats? Where've you got 15 seats from? And how is having 15 seats being "annihilated"?
Sadly I have to disagree with you on this, I think there a lot more "thick", uninformed or plain too lazy to read past the headlines people out there than you give credit for, which is (in my opinion) manna from heaven for the Tories. And no, I am most definitely not talking about anybody on here Politics nowadays is less about actual policies and driven by image, spin and the media - how else can you explain the sheer popularity of Boris Johnson for example? The bloke is a complete arse, who has failed to deliver on so many things he promised and yet the masses love him because of some cleverly staged photo shoots that make him look "a bit funny". How many people are aware that he fathered a love child during the previous mayoral campaign by the way? That story was buried away from the public, but look it up as it did happen - can you imagine the **** Ed Milliband would be on the end of if he did anything like that? I wouldn't necessarily want him as PM, but I'm certain Milliband is nowhere near as bad a guy or as big a muppet as the media would have us believe, he's just got no chance with the way his public persona has been pulled to pieces and made to look a fool, it's pretty shocking if you ask me. I'd trust him over pretty much any of the Tories if you ask me, Ed Balls is still a cock though. Oops, looks like I'm straying into the left v right debate here - probably time to leave it!
I didn't say I knew who you would vote for but if I had to guess I would rule out Tory,Labour and UKIP. My hunch is based on recent polls and by elections. To me the LD's look like a party in meltdown. I would bet that if they had polled LD voters on a coalition with Cameron it would have been rejected by about 3:1. All we can do is wait for May 8. I'm pretty sure I will be here saying "I told you so".
It's a bit of a fix - I am definitely non-commital, but I would always be defaulting to Labour. I'm in that bizarre situation where the sitting MP is absolutely brilliant, but she's leaving and so the new Labour candidate is as much of an unknown as any of the others. I suspect I will vote Labour but I truly haven't made up my mind. The only thing I can't comprehend is those who are stalwart [Tory/Labour/anything] it seems to me that everybody's circumstances change, so I find it odd that voting is so tribal. But then that's probably just me. Anyway, back on topic, the trouble is you are saying you have a "hunch". But I have just shown it can't be based on recent polls - which put LDs on c.25 seats (at 8%). By-elections are notorious for being absolutely useless predictors of anything. Norwich North was not even the exception that proved the rule - it anticipated a Tory landslide and yet nothing of the sort arose. So you see I don't understand what your hunch is based on at all. Polls which you are referring to contradict your assertion that the LDs will be annihilated. And as I say, history shows that governing parties do better in forthcoming elections than expected. So which is it? Are you basing your prediction on a hunch? If so, fair enough and I will be the first to applaud your prediction if it comes true. But you can't claim it's based on any psephological analysis because all the current polls/predictors are against you.
You make a fair point, and I do sometimes think that, but I try to stay a bit more positive. I take heart, like I said, from the 2010 election. Brown received plenty of justifiable criticism, but also a lot of it went way overboard - in the end, despite opinion polls suggesting he would be crushed, it was actually quite a narrow defeat. So while there's a seeming popularity about the latest fad (e.g. Johnson) I'm only prepared to be pessimistic about our fellow countrymen when push comes to shove
In a lot of the southern counties it is generally a clear choice between Tory & LD's. So normally you would expect LD's to be picking up seats in this election rather then losing them, particular with UKIP erroding the Tory vote. Whilst I believe that the LD's have limitted the effect of what the tories would have liked to have done I'm not sure what they as a party what they gained from being in coalition. I think a second term of a tory / LD coalition will potentially be the end of the LD's as a the third / fourth party in Biritish politics. Indeed they may well lose third party status to the SNP this time around.
I quite like Mr Milliband, some of the more recent article appearing cast him in a much more favourable light. But it does highlight the fact that most people seem to base their votes on media portrayals/images of party leaders rather than on their ideologies. On the issue of image- How the **** anyone could vote for Cameron based on personality issues and looks is beyond me, he is clearly a contemptible individual with a look of smug glee that makes me want to (fill in any reasonable or unreasonable behaviours)
That reminds me, if anyone on here wants to know more about basing their vote on ACTUAL policies, do this: https://voteforpolicies.org.uk/ It's a good starting point for figure out how you may wish to align yourself for the next GE.
Rob, In 1997 I predicted a 160 seat majority for Labour. It was way off the scale and ended up being just 4 seats out. I still have the `1992 Election book in which I marked the individual seats I thought Labour would win.
