an election where your vote counts

[Spindles]

I have a number of friends who are libdem activists and they have, at least, taken the wise decision to stand firm to their beliefs and state them clearly, rather than bending in the wind of public opinion. In the long run that is their best hope.

I still stand firm in my belief that, in terms of the general election, UKIP's position will have an effect on the Tory vote similar to how the Labour vote was split by the SDP in '83. In percentage terms UKIP's gains could be seen to have come exclusively from parties of the right (the combined drop in vote of the BNP and Conservatives is equivalent to the gains made), with Labour and the Greens making gains from disillusioned Libdems.

Many socialists are looking to the Greens as a serious vote these days, their own gains have been ignored in the media.

[Joshuwarr]

I think the Lib Dems still have things to offer as a party, but until Clegg and Alexander go, I won't be able to look past the Orange Book right-wing economics and the lies of the leadership.

[pink_triangle]

The funny thing about the lib dems is for all their flaws, my instinct is that if they hadn't have gone into coaltion, we would now have a majority tory government and things would be even worse than they are now.

I don't know how they will ever get over the tuition fees debacle. They seemed to fight so hard for constitutional reform, but just threw the students under the bus.

[kaosmark2]

I understand and sympathise completely. We are doing our best to get Clegg out at the moment but the loyalists think it would make no difference and the people would still not trust. For many that would be true, but I honestly can't buy the argument that the public would trust Clegg less than, say, Vince Cable...or even Tim Farron who has never been afraid to vote against the government (tuition fees, bedroom tax etc)

[kaosmark2]

The funny thing about the lib dems is for all their flaws, my instinct is that if they hadn't have gone into coaltion, we would now have a majority tory government and things would be even worse than they are now.

I don't know how they will ever get over the tuition fees debacle. They seemed to fight so hard for constitutional reform, but just threw the students under the bus.

[lost]

The funny thing about the lib dems is for all their flaws, my instinct is that if they hadn't have gone into coaltion, we would now have a majority tory government and things would be even worse than they are now.

I don't know how they will ever get over the tuition fees debacle. They seemed to fight so hard for constitutional reform, but just threw the students under the bus

[kaosmark2]

Obviously it was a major manifesto pledge

[LJS]

Nope. It wasn't a manifesto pledge. Each MP signed a pledge to PERSONALLY as a MP vote against any tuition fee rises. That's not a "we promised this but the party ended up in a situation", they signed it that no matter what, they would go into parliament and vote against it. They're portraying it as "just a difference from a manifesto", but it's not, it's far more than that.

Edited May 26, 2014 by LJS

[kaosmark2]

You cannot go into a coalition & do everything you said you would do.

We have never really worked out coalitions in this country.

[Ed209]

Tuition fees really was the killer for lib dems. They could have, and in many cases have, gone back on many other manifesto pledges, but at the point of the 2010 election they really were the party that most appealed to students and young people. They positioned themselves as such. Going back on that specific one pledge was the thing that killed them. While many lib dem voters aren't happy that they formed a coalition with the tories they can see that they have had a softening effect on policy making. However, they will never be forgiven for tuition fees. That will be round Clegg's neck for the rest of his political career, and is the very reason I will never vote for a lib dem party while he is leader.

Edited May 26, 2014 by Ed209

[eFestivals]

The funny thing about the lib dems is for all their flaws, my instinct is that if they hadn't have gone into coaltion, we would now have a majority tory government and things would be even worse than they are now.

Yep, I agree. There'd have been another election if there'd not been a coalition, and the tories would have won that hands down I reckon. And most people seem to be being a bit daft about what a minority coalition partner is able to achieve within govt.

But the LibDems swtill fucked up. Because of their pre-election promises, there were two red lines for them that they should not have given up in the way they did.

The first was tuition fees. While they might not have achieved free for all, allowing a tripling of fees was too-at-odds with their promises.

But the biggest was PR. It's been the LibDems main platform for 30+ years, and given that the decision would be taken by the electorate in a referendum, there was no excuse whatsoever to allow Dave Moron to warp that into an AV referendum. In a democracy the people decide.

[eFestivals]

This'll be the takeover of Dutch bank ABN Ambro, which happened five months after the letter of support was sent.

What actual assistance was provided ?

None as far as I know. It was merely the case that Alex egged on Fred and Scotland's bank was bankrupted by Scotsmen working in Scotland (and nothing to do with the City of London AT ALL) and egged on by Scotsmen.

But if Scotland had already been independent, we KNOW from Alex's words of 2007 where he was more right wing than the tories that bank regulation in iScotland would have been more-lax than in London, and so iScotland would be more financially fucked than any other European country.

In 2007 Alex said "We are pledging a light-touch regulation suitable to a Scottish financial sector with its outstanding reputation for probity, as opposed to one like that in the UK, which absorbs huge amounts of management time in 'gold-plated' regulation."

But Scotland will always take better decisions, yeah?

Edited May 27, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

None as far as I know. It was merely the case that Alex egged on Fred and Scotland's bank was bankrupted by Scotsmen working in Scotland (and nothing to do with the City of London AT ALL) and egged on by Scotsmen.

But if Scotland had already been independent, we KNOW from Alex's words of 2007 where he was more right wing than the tories that bank regulation in iScotland would have been more-lax than in London, and so iScotland would be more financially fucked than any other European country.

In 2007 Alex said "We are pledging a light-touch regulation suitable to a Scottish financial sector with its outstanding reputation for probity, as opposed to one like that in the UK, which absorbs huge amounts of management time in 'gold-plated' regulation."

But Scotland will always take better decisions, yeah?

[eFestivals]

City of London cleared of any responsibility for banking crisis.

It was Scots working in Scotland.

Yeah, so it was!

For RBS, yes it was.

I know that's an uncomfortable truth for yes-ers, but so many inconvenient facts are.

[eFestivals]

The thing that has come out of the elections for me is how little people vote for parties based on actual policies....

the BBC (Newsnight, I think) did an experiment within the last ten(ish) years, where they got an average bunch of people and polled them for their voting intentions. They came out at around something like the average party support of the time.

They then gave these people a morning of 'politics teaching' (given by a politics lecturer, or something), and then half a day talks & questions from each of the tories, labour, and the libdems. And then they polled them again.

There was a huge shift in voting intentions, as these people wised up about where their views actually sat against the parties policies.

[Guest]

I was listening to yet another debate about why so many people voted for UKIP. The main parties' reason seems to be that it was a protest vote, which shows how blinkered the parties are (to me). I think at least part of the reason is that there are still lots of people 'afraid' of foreigners. They simply don't want them here. Some people resent others simply moving in to their 'area' from another 'area', they're outsiders. Whether that constitutes racism, or whatever you want to call it, is irrelevant.

It makes perfect sense to me why many previous tory voters like them, and the idea that labour represents anything vaguely left-wing or socialist went out the window a while ago. Labour voters can be just as narrow minded and bigoted as anyone.

Voters expectations are being lowered all the time. They promise all kinds of bollocks and then fail to deliver. Blame the outsiders. It's piss easy copy for the press to keep churning out.

The only reason for anything any more is does it make money? Even that's not enough.. is the profit big enough? If you make a profit but it wasn't as mahoosive as last years, then you're failing.

[eFestivals]

Surely this all plays into Cameron's hands a bit now...

With both the French and the British electorate sticking two fingers up to Europe. Cameron's regeneration stance is going to become a winning hand. His positioning in Europe just became a lot stronger ??

Perhaps, but I don't think it's guaranteed.

For example, the European consensus might be that every country should have the same opt-outs that the UK already has (as far as i'm aware, we have by-far the greatest number), as those extras will be enough to appease their own populations.

The smartest negotiators will be those who enter the room without saying they want anything - because they'll then be able to 3extract a price from those who do.

So that's not going to be Dave, and that much IS guaranteed.

[eFestivals]

I was listening to yet another debate about why so many people voted for UKIP. The main parties' reason seems to be that it was a protest vote, which shows how blinkered the parties are (to me). I think at least part of the reason is that there are still lots of people 'afraid' of foreigners. They simply don't want them here. Some people resent others simply moving in to their 'area' from another 'area', they're outsiders. Whether that constitutes racism, or whatever you want to call it, is irrelevant.

It makes perfect sense to me why many previous tory voters like them, and the idea that labour represents anything vaguely left-wing or socialist went out the window a while ago. Labour voters can be just as narrow minded and bigoted as anyone.

Voters expectations are being lowered all the time. They promise all kinds of bollocks and then fail to deliver. Blame the outsiders. It's piss easy copy for the press to keep churning out.

The only reason for anything any more is does it make money? Even that's not enough.. is the profit big enough? If you make a profit but it wasn't as mahoosive as last years, then you're failing.

Nah, you're over-complicating things.

None of the main three offer any vision of anything better. They only offer minor management, where each tweak is at best going to keep things much the same.

While it's bullshit, Farrage offers a vision. He says that once those nasty foreigners aren't coming over here taking our benefits, and True Brits like him are the ones running the country, all problems will disappear and the great will be back in Britain like what it used to be.

And it's so much easier to believe that bollocks than commit yourself to the hard work of improving your life by your own efforts. It's a kind of politics to match today's celebrity culture, where people want to be famous but don't care what they're famous for. It's not high achievement that counts, it's high recognition.

Meanwhile, back on planet earth, lovely Nigel once said...

There's no need to worry about the nigger vote. The nig-nogs will never vote for us.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-party-become-frankensteins-monster

[Guest]

Nah, you're over-complicating things.

None of the main three offer any vision of anything better. They only offer minor management, where each tweak is at best going to keep things much the same.

While it's bullshit, Farrage offers a vision. He says that once those nasty foreigners aren't coming over here taking our benefits, and True Brits like him are the ones running the country, all problems will disappear and the great will be back in Britain like what it used to be.

And it's so much easier to believe that bollocks than commit yourself to the hard work of improving your life by your own efforts. It's a kind of politics to match today's celebrity culture, where people want to be famous but don't care what they're famous for. It's not high achievement that counts, it's high recognition.

Meanwhile, back on planet earth, lovely Nigel once said...

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-party-become-frankensteins-monster

[viberunner]

a case can very easily be made to easily show that political views in Scotland are almost 100% identical to the rest of the UK.

[viberunner]

Gosh over 28% of the votes in so-called left wing Scotland went to Ukip, the Tories and the bnp.

Guess that puts that lie to bed then.

[russycarps]

Or that, including the mainstream right wing parties, 72% of the electorate expressly voted against the right wing?

[eFestivals]

Yes, which is why you saw UKIP doing as well in Scotland as they did in England NO WAIT WHAT

oh, wait .... a 10% surge to UKIP all around the UK.

The rest of the fruitcakes who voted for them in rUK voted for other parties in Scotland - not because they think differently, because a fruitcake is still a fruitcake even when it's made in Scotland.

As the opinion poll of attitudes in Scotland bore out when published last week.

[LJS]

oh, wait .... a 10% surge to UKIP all around the UK.

The rest of the fruitcakes who voted for them in rUK voted for other parties in Scotland - not because they think differently, because a fruitcake is still a fruitcake even when it's made in Scotland.

As the opinion poll of attitudes in Scotland bore out when published last week.

[eFestivals]

n the 2009 European elections, UKIP got 16.5% of the vote in the UK as a whole, and 5.2% in Scotland a gap of 11.3%. In this years election the tallies were 27.5% in the UK and 10.5% in Scotland a gap of 17%.

Opinions are much the same in Scotland as they are in the rest of the UK, as I keep on saying.

(and it's worth bearing in mind that non-'native'-British immigration into Scotland is lower than the UK average)

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/if-there-were-a-referendum-on-eu-membership-tomorrow-would-you-vote-to-stay#line

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/what-are-your-views-on-immigration-to-the-uk

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/the-scottish-government-has-proposed-increasing-immigration-levels-if-scotland

Edited May 27, 2014 by eFestivals