If you don't like democracy move to Iran and stop bitching. I dislike the FPTP system but at least it's a form of democracy. Plaid and others whinging about this spectacular Conservative win is laughable. The Tories won 11 seats in Wales, taking Gower and Brecon in the process so enough people agreed with their views to vote for them. The bottom line is that fear of the SNP in England shifted people away from UKIP back to the Tories and that helped deliver the majority. Labour's loony left policies were rejected by the British public many many years ago and that's why Blair moved the party to the right, although that proved to be a disaster for this country. Milliband's own brother has now said that the shift to the left was a massive mistake and he's correct. Couple of brilliant highlights for me: George Galloway biting the dust after running a nasty campaign in Bradford; Danny Alexander's fat ginger ass is out the door; Douglas Alexander and Jim Murphy losing brilliantly for Labour in Scotland; some big Lib Dems getting the boot. But the best one was Ed Balls's face when he received the people's verdict on a track record of serial incompetence. Priceless. Judging by some of the comments here many of you must have been tearing your hair out last Thursday. Yet another moment to savour. The next problem for the Tories will be Europe where I predict that nothing will be gained in the 'renegotiation' (Merkel has already said that) and they will then have some major defectors to UKIP who are now the third biggest party on % vote (more than LD's and greens combined). The Scots will eventually want and get independence (thus removing the fear factor in England) and the people will vote to get out of the United States of Europe once and for all, provided the process isn't completely stitched up before anyone votes. Eventually, we WILL get our country back and this is just the start. I wasn't planning on coming back here but I just couldn't resist. ****ing brilliant. Happy days and adios
A friend of mine actually knows him, and he is quite a successful businessman, and he won't lose business over this, partly because most of his customers agree with him
Argued for what you believe in? You started a thread by posting some headline points from a Lib Dem manifesto and then made the comment “You know it makes sense. Discuss”. Discuss means to give sides to a debate. I gave the opposite side of the debate to yourself. In my first post I stated “This election will see them consigned to the margins of politics”. I was correct, as were several other posters who predicted the demise of the Lib Dems. Your post above and throughout this thread shows you have failed to understand the consequences of Cleggs actions while others, including myself have clearly set out why the Lib Dems would fail – and WHY. You still blame “that hate filled hypocritical bollocks from the media and the Labour party” but as I pointed out in one of my posts, the Lib Dem Party had “lost the TRUST of the voters it had in 2010” That isn’t the politics of spite (you do that well with your own posts). This is the politics of reality, not that of someone blinkered by party dogma. The Lib Dem party was doomed to fail – whatever was in their manifesto. You will do well to read todays article in The Guardian written by your very own Lord Steel, former leader of the Liberal Party from 1976-1988 entitled “Six Ways Nick Clegg steered the Liberal Democrats to Disaster”. In fact it looks as though he has been reading this thread because everything that was pointed out to you has been repeated by Lord Steel in his article. Of the six points he raises, point 4 is most relevant to this thread: “The most obvious reason, for which he [Clegg] later made fulsome apologies, was the about-turn on student fees, after which, as Anne Perkins wrote in this paper on Saturday, it was “almost impossible to get across the achievements that Lib Dems could reasonably be proud of”. I would delete the “almost”. I remember some time later getting dark looks at a party meeting when I said that “a laundry list of alleged achievements in the coalition will not wash”. And so it proved. The reason this volte face was catastrophic was nothing to do with student fees. That this was widely misunderstood was clear from the “lines to take” issued to us all from party HQ. We were urged to ask forgiveness for one thing we had got wrong against so many other things we had done well. That missed the point – at a stroke, we had lost trust as a party, one of the few tangible assets we had especially after the Kennedy/Campbell decision to oppose the invasion of Iraq. The pledge was not just in our manifesto – every candidate, including Clegg, had campaigned on the issue. You cannot publicly promise something in an election and then do the opposite and get away with it. So how did it come to be dumped? One explanation I have heard is that Clegg never thought the policy was correct but felt saddled with it by party conference. If true, I have considerable sympathy because in my day I had the leader’s veto over anything in the manifesto. That useful but undemocratic provision was swept away in the party’s new constitution. But it is not an adequate excuse for the disaster that engulfed us. It became obvious to those of us campaigning for the Scottish parliament elections the following May that we were beginning to suffer serious losses as a result. The full article can be viewed here - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/11/nick-clegg-liberal-democrats-disaster-coalition Steel understandably talks about recovery. Clegg now has five years of penance sitting on the backbenches with the Scottish Nationalists, planning on a strategy of how to resurrect his political career. Personally, if I were in charge of the Lib Dems, I would encourage Clegg to leave the party. People don’t forget. While Clegg is associated with the party it is stigmatized, or even “Cleggmatised” with the tuitions fee episode. In order for the Lib Dems to make a full recovery he needs to be offloaded. So back to your original point in the OP. “You know it makes sense. Discuss”. The answer, as correctly surmised by several posters on here, is basically “It doesn’t matter if it makes sense because no f****r believes you” – this conclusion is fully supported by the 2015 election results, supported by Lord Steels article.
Great post there PGF, though I'm sure it will be sidelined by our resident Lib-Dem representative, 'The Right Honourable Terror Balls'.............
Over half of the Scottish electorate 'still' don't want independence, this is not my judgement of the General Election, this is what I know working with them. The 'no' voter majority still detest the SNP & that 'cvnt' Sturgeon!! Not my words....
Stumpy, Neither the Labour Party or the Tories have done anything wrong on this one. The boundaries are reviewed periodically, this is necessary....it's complicated, there is no right or wrong answer on what makes the perfect constituency. Read more here; http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/boundary-reform (Taken from that site) Who is responsible? The four national Boundary Commissions are the independent bodies responsible for reviewing constituency boundaries in the UK. After the last proposals failed to get through Parliament, new reviews will be held in 2015 in time for approval in 2018. The government of the day has the discretion whether to pass their recommendations through parliament or not and perhaps this should be altered....but as it stands neither side have done anything wrong. When the last review concluded we needed less MPs and constituencies that were more equally balanced (they will never all have an equal no. of voters in each) most people would have agreed with those conclusions. The Lib Dems blocked it for good reasons, see below... Lib Dems to block boundary changes The coalition Government is under unprecedented strain after Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg made clear he intends to exact revenge on rebel Tory backbenchers who wrecked his plans for House of Lords reform. PUBLISHED: 12:28, Mon, Aug 6, 2012 | UPDATED: 06:50, Sat, Nov 1, 2014 please log in to view this image Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said the Conservatives had 'broken the contract' between coalition partner [PA] The Liberal Democrat leader said he would now be ordering his MPs to block proposals to re-draw the parliamentary boundaries, which some experts believe could hold the key to an outright Conservative victory at the next general election. At a Westminster news conference, Mr Clegg confirmed he was dropping his House of Lords Reform Bill, after being informed by David Cameron that an "insufficient number" of Conservative MPs was prepared to back the legislation. But despite accusing the Conservatives of having broken the "contract" between the two parties, he insisted the Lib Dems would continue to work with them in coalition. Labour said the announcement was a "humiliation" for the Government which had left the coalition's ambitious programme of constitutional reforms "in tatters". Mr Clegg said he was acting "reluctantly" after the Prime Minister made clear he was unable to reverse the revolt by 91 Tory backbenchers last month which forced the Government to abandon the crucial timetable motion limiting Commons debate on the Lords reform bill. "The Conservative party is not honouring the commitment to Lords reform and, as a result, part of our contract has now been broken," he said. "Clearly I cannot permit a situation where Conservative rebels can pick and choose the parts of the contract they like, while Liberal Democrat MPs are bound to the entire agreement. "Coalition works on mutual respect; it is a reciprocal arrangement, a two-way street. So I have told the Prime Minister that when, in due course, parliament votes on boundary changes for the 2015 election I will be instructing my party to oppose them." The collapse of the constitutional reform programme is a bitter blow for the Lib Dems who had been pinning their hopes on Lords reform after their drubbing in the referendum on AV voting for parliamentary elections. However it also represents a setback for the Conservatives who had been predicted to gain up to 20 seats as a result of the boundary changes - which could be the difference between an overall Tory majority and another hung parliament at the next general election.
"most"? So he'll lose some then. Does he have in depth political conversations with all of his customers then? What about new potential customers whose voting habits he is not familiar with? Seems like a dumb move to me
PGF WE HAVE HAD 37 PAGES OF POLITICAL DISCUSSION! Just thought I'd point that out. You say you put the "opposite side of the debate" to the policy I put up in the opening post...I have to disagree. You didn't debate the policy. You haven't rubbished any Lib Dem Policy or put forward either your own solutions or those of a party you support. You just stated that we were unlikely to get any votes because of the Tuition Fee nonsense....and repeated this again and again and again. We're on page 37 and you are still banging on about it. What you have stated was/is not news to anybody...for the last 5 years you could probably find a TV clip from every week with someone making the same point as you with huge applause from the audience in response. You are free to bang on about that and I am free to point out the good things the Lib Dems have done. I am also free to point out that the fact that you and others won't let that drop is because you are so ****ing angry that we went into government with the Tories...even though we did things to frustrate the Tories in government, blocked increased privatisation of the NHS etc.....if those who hate the Tories believed in the things the Labour party say they believe in they would have supported the Lib Dems in this endeavour and gave credit, but the hatred of the Tories trumps all and so we are tarred with the same brush. This is the politics of spite. You have indulged in it on this very thread. I, and I would guess most of the Lib Dems, do not hate anybody. The Tories, and every other political party for that matter, are just people who disagree with me. Not scum, not racists, not whores, not evil etc. ....which brings me back (again, yawn) to your point on tuition fees and the lack of trust. All government, all politics is about reaching a compromise with those who might not agree with you in order to progress ideas you have and would like to be seen given a try. This process has traditionally gone on within the red and blue parties but coalition government has brought some compromises we made into focus for the public....usually they don't notice that the government of the day hasn't been able to get everything through that they promised in the manifesto (usually because of dissenting factions within their own party). So no, I don't think the Lib Dems have done anything heinous, unprecedented or broke their pact with the voters AS THEY HAD A VERY GOOD REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO DELIVER ON THIS POLICY, THEY DIDN'T WIN....THEY WERE 56 MPS IN A COALITION, A JUNIOR PARTNER I don't agree that we should get rid of Clegg after he soldiered on trying to deliver policy that helped the poor of this country and offered the electorate the opportunity for real change whilst putting up with ridicule and spite from the frankly, ignorant, infantile, sections of our society. I believe in doing the right thing. We'll be back. A new Liberal Democrat is joining the party every 39 seconds right now...good people, people who believe in something.
Perhaps you should list a series of rules before you post a future thread - one that will inevitably lead to a conclusion that will satisfy your own political leaning - because it is obvious that is all you wanted from this thread. You can bang on about how wonderful the Lib Dems are and their policies. I merely stated the most pertinent FACTS. TRUST IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN POLICY. You failed to deliver on your most important mandate last time - READ LORD STEELES WORDS. So you have now got thousands of people joining the party already? I have seen that in several Lib Dem articles - obviously the latest "line to take" from HQ.
Why would I do that, I'm happy with people posting whatever they want. I argue my case forcefully, I don't whine when other people argue their case forcefully. There are no "conclusions" to be reached from this thread. Everyone argues for what they believe in (or not in your case) and anyone reading who is undecided or finds some of the arguments convincing make their own minds up. Like I said, 37 PAGES OF POLITICAL DISCUSSION GENERATED. If you have a problem with that it's your problem. If it is a "FACT" that "TRUST IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN POLICY" why did the Labour party receive more votes than the Lib Dems? After all, they are a party that is supposed to represent the working man but ditched their principles to win elections under Blair and Brown. After all, they were the ones that took this country to war on a lie. They lied to parliament and they lied to the British people. After all, they bailed out the banks without reforming the sector, without any provisos on pay, without making it clear that the State now has the controlling stake and so calls the tune. After all, they didn't raise taxes on the rich throughout their reign....we did. Why did the Tories get back in after promising to "cut immigration to the tens of thousands" and then failing? Why did they get back in after stating in their last manifesto that there would be no expensive reorganisation of the NHS and then doing just that just a few months into office? How have the Tories got away with promising a referendum on the Lisbon treaty and then doing a U-turn? http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-a...treaty-u-turn-haunts-cameron-s-europe-long-ga Lord Steele is like your nan who has never driven a car in her life giving helpful road safety tips from the back seat. He has never been in the position that Clegg and co. found themselves in 2010. He has never taken part in coalition negotiations, he never saw ONE(!) of his policies implemented in this country. He is merely stating the obvious (like yourself), voters bought into the "you can't trust the Lib Dems, look what they did on tuition fees" line. Why did they concentrate on that and not the examples from above from the other parties? Because a coalition helps to bring such compromises into focus. Because the other parties and their supporters pushed this line in order to increase their own vote. and because the electorate are not very sophisticated on politics, they only pay attention at General Elections in the main....they've already forgotten a lot of Labour and Tory crimes, but interested parties made damn sure the public weren't going to forget on tuition fees. Which is ironic really as the Lib Dems didn't break any manifesto pledges. THEY DIDN'T WIN. With only 56 seats they successfully got 75% of their manifesto through and offered the electorate a chance at real long term change with the AV referendum....something voters are only now waking up to.....and as some reporter stated on Question Time last week; Who introduced Tuition fees? Labour Who increased Tuition fees? Labour Who commissioned a report which stated that Tuition fees should go up further (with no limit)? Labour Who wanted to implement the recommendations of this report? the Conservatives Who capped tuition fees and secured amendments so that the average student pays less, later (when they earn more) than they did under Labour? the Liberal Democrats. The Libs could have scrapped tuition fees if the public bothered to vote for it but if people want to carry on sucking up the **** and people like you PGF want to carry on spreading it then go right ahead. It's a free country. The problem with the people of this country is that they vote for style over substance every time.
Should we be doing better? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32608772 Countries ranked on maths and science 1. Singapore 2. Hong Kong 3. South Korea 4. Japan (joint) 4. Taiwan (joint) 6. Finland 7. Estonia 8. Switzerland 9. Netherlands 10. Canada 11. Poland 12. Vietnam 13. Germany 14. Australia 15. Ireland 16. Belgium 17. New Zealand 18. Slovenia 19. Austria 20. United Kingdom 21. Czech Republic 22. Denmark 23. France 24. Latvia 25. Norway 26. Luxembourg 27. Spain 28. Italy (joint) 28. United States (joint) 30. Portugal 31. Lithuania 32. Hungary 33. Iceland 34. Russia 35. Sweden 36. Croatia 37. Slovak Republic 38. Ukraine 39. Israel 40. Greece 41. Turkey 42. Serbia 43. Bulgaria 44. Romania 45. UAE 46. Cyprus 47. Thailand 48. Chile 49. Kazakhstan 50. Armenia 51. Iran 52. Malaysia 53. Costa Rica 54. Mexico 55. Uruguay 56. Montenegro 57. Bahrain 58. Lebanon 59. Georgia 60. Brazil 61. Jordan 62. Argentina 63. Albania 64. Tunisia 65. Macedonia 66. Saudi Arabia 67. Colombia 68. Qatar 69. Indonesia 70. Botswana 71. Peru 72. Oman 73. Morocco 74. Honduras 75. South Africa 76. Ghana
And despite all of what you have posted above, the electorate still don't vote Lib Dem Perhaps the party needs to be rebranded or even merged with another minor party to boost votes. "The Monster Raving Lib Dem Loonies" has a ring to it.
With a regard to the present voting system. It is not, has as been suggested, that people who vote for a particular party are disgruntled because that party did not get many seats it is because the system is unfair to those who live in a safe seat of what ever persuasion and do not support the party of the sitting MP. I have voted Liberal for most of my life but voted UKIP this time as I am in favour of the Common Market as a trading area but not the European Union.. I have lived in a safe Labour seat all my life so once again my vote means nothing. There are millions like me. In fact under the first past the post system on votes cast we are always going to have a minority government. I cannot remember a referendum about changing the system and wonder if it was a vote for MPs only in which case it was no surprise that there was no change. People say there is no interest in politics any more. I think this thread disproves that.
But the lib dems lost seats, they lost the trust of the electorate, they lost the trust of people who voted for them, you may call it a hate vote Terror. But its not its a fact that people didn't want the liberals in their constituencies. And lets remind what they lost, 27 of them to the tories http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...s-have-lost-their-seats-2015-general-election
Terror you will not be bouncing back any time soon, it took you decades to get where you were before this election, and now you are a non entity as a party, and will stay there for some considerable time in my view, get used to it..............
