Tonight's televised debate

[Moriarty]

this is to much fun.

 

http://www.slapometer.com/

 

im on something like 350 slaps for brown and cameron

[Moriarty]

CLEGGSTAR IMPRESSES AS CHOCOLATE FACE DAVE LOSES HIS SCRIPT.

[Coco]

I would prefer to vote for a party who stopped the boom and bust economy, who gave autonomy to the Bank of England to stop manipulation of the economy in the run up to an election and who have a proper economist in charge over a party whose entire election message seems to consist of:

 

 

There has been no end to boom and bust. The Government ran a pro-cyclical fiscal policy for 6 years of above trend economic growth and licensed an enormous rise in personal debt at the same time. The result was the inevitable bust - the biggest ever.

 

As for stopping manipulation of the economy prior to an election by the Government - the Government is currently running the largest deficit pork barrel spending bonanza ever seen in this country. And the Bank of England have been printing funny money for the first time ever for the last year. The country has never seen anything like this attempt to bounce the economy into an election.

 

I presume that you are talking of Brown as a proper economist. Brown is not an economist - he studied history at university and then took ten years to write a doctorate about a few years of Scottish Labour Party history.

 

On the debate - I think that Brown and Cameron were trying to save a bit of firepower for the later debates. Clegg will clearly have won more support last night.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I would prefer to vote for a party who stopped the boom and bust economy, who gave autonomy to the Bank of England to stop manipulation of the economy in the run up to an election and who have a proper economist in charge over a party whose entire election message seems to consist of:

 

We'll give you a police force/nhs/education system/immigration policy you deserve (delete as suits you and we'll tell you how we're going to achieve this later), vote for change blah blah blah.

 

The tories have had 13 years in opposition to prepare for government and they're still miles away from convincing anyone they are ready to do so.

 

Cameron will have lost ground tonight.

 

 

With fractional reserve banking, booms and busts are guaranteed. The only question is to what extent either are mitigated.

[Charlie-Brown]

With fractional reserve banking, booms and busts are guaranteed. The only question is to what extent either are mitigated.

 

Fractional reserve banking, interest rate manipulations & currency manipulations, excess credit creation beyond the levels of capital formation all contribute to boom & bust economic cycles.

[Gorgiewave]

With fractional reserve banking, booms and busts are guaranteed. The only question is to what extent either are mitigated.

 

 

Fractional reserve banking, interest rate manipulations & currency manipulations, excess credit creation beyond the levels of capital formation all contribute to boom & bust economic cycles.

 

Right lads, come right ahead with WTF fractional reserve banking is.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Right lads, come right ahead with WTF fractional reserve banking is.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Reserve_Banking

 

Here's an easy starter for 10.

[Gorgiewave]

http://en.wikipedia....Reserve_Banking

 

Here's an easy starter for 10.

 

 

Are you a banker, Geoff (literally)?

 

I still picture you as David Brent.

[jambos are go!]

Oh Happy Day!!!!

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Are you a banker, Geoff (literally)?

 

I still picture you as David Brent.

 

 

 

No, I'm employed in financial services but I've never been a banker.

 

And I don't think I could dance as badly as David Brent, even if I tried!

[Patrick Bateman]

The vast majority of what was debated isn't relevant to Scotland. Still, I wonder how many people even know which matters are devolved and which are reserved.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

The vast majority of what was debated isn't relevant to Scotland. Still, I wonder how many people even know which matters are devolved and which are reserved.

 

 

Indeed. How many people walking around the devolved nations are saying "I liked that Clegg on education" for example?

[Gorgiewave]

The vast majority of what was debated isn't relevant to Scotland. Still, I wonder how many people even know which matters are devolved and which are reserved.

 

 

Indeed. How many people walking around the devolved nations are saying "I liked that Clegg on education" for example?

 

Surely Scottish (or NI or Welsh) people would prefer good education policies in England? It won't benefit them or their children directly, but they can still help to get the party with the best policies (even if relevant only in England) in.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

There seems to be a general agreement that the scores on the doors were:

 

1. Clegg

2. Brown

Cameron DNS

 

Call Me Dave suffered from the fact that he never talked about policy, he just spoke in cliches and banged on about "values". Any nob can stand up and say 'I want a better health service and firmer discipline in schools'. Details please.

[Malinga the Swinga]

There seems to be a general agreement that the scores on the doors were:

 

1. Clegg

2. Brown

Cameron DNS

 

Call Me Dave suffered from the fact that he never talked about policy, he just spoke in cliches and banged on about "values". Any nob can stand up and say 'I want a better health service and firmer discipline in schools'. Details please.

 

Nope, you have it wrong. Clegg did ok,but he will never ever be PM as Lib Dems will never get in power. DC did nothing good or bad, but as they are concentrating efforts down South, where election will be decided, that is all he had to do, while GB was a disaster as usual. The man is a walking advert for voting anyone but Labour.

 

Lib Dems will get a few Labour seats, Tories will win enough marginals down South and then get eelcted, and Brown will vanish from the world of politics.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Nope, you have it wrong. Clegg did ok,but he will never ever be PM as Lib Dems will never get in power. DC did nothing good or bad, but as they are concentrating efforts down South, where election will be decided, that is all he had to do, while GB was a disaster as usual. The man is a walking advert for voting anyone but Labour.

 

Lib Dems will get a few Labour seats, Tories will win enough marginals down South and then get eelcted, and Brown will vanish from the world of politics.

 

That's almost certainly true but Cameron was laughable last night. Detailed policies - none. Meaningless bollocks - aplenty. Funny thing is I was going to vote for the Tories but it's pretty clear that they're a bunch of chancers.

[Malinga the Swinga]

Why does Dc get a slagging for being a Toff, when Clegg comes from the same sort of background, but has simply decided to hide it well. Went to private school in Westminster, then studied in Cambridge, came from aristocracy in grandfathers side, and has parentage in banking. This is all classical Tory upbringing, and he was a Tory for a while, before jumping ship to Lib Dem.

 

He and Cameron are actually very similar, one just admits to being posh, while the other hides it.

[Patrick Bateman]

Surely Scottish (or NI or Welsh) people would prefer good education policies in England? It won't benefit them or their children directly, but they can still help to get the party with the best policies (even if relevant only in England) in.

 

Why should we be motivated to interfere with something going on in another country? These matters are for the English people to decide, Scotland decided them in 2007.

[Danny Wilde]

Surely Scottish (or NI or Welsh) people would prefer good education policies in England? It won't benefit them or their children directly, but they can still help to get the party with the best policies (even if relevant only in England) in.

 

Really ? Plainly the good people of England haven't yet woken up to the Wast Lothian question. But they'd certainly wake up to it if the Conservatives were returned as the largest party/share of the vote - but with a Lab/LibDem coallition taking over the levers of power. How are they going to feel when a block of 40 to 50 Scottish Labour and LibDem MPS in that coallition, are sitting in the chamber passing legislation on English NHS hospital funding ... on English education policy. How happy will they be to see Jimmy McNumpty (Glasgow Central) deciding what happens to the education of kids in Milton Keynes ?

 

Do you really think thats right ? The devolution settlement hasn't been thought through properly, and a Westminster Lab/LibDem coallaition would be both non-representaive and hugely undemocratic for England. Ironic given how much the LibDems constantly bang on and on about democracy and fairness.

[Moriarty]

Why does Dc get a slagging for being a Toff, when Clegg comes from the same sort of background, but has simply decided to hide it well. Went to private school in Westminster, then studied in Cambridge, came from aristocracy in grandfathers side, and has parentage in banking. This is all classical Tory upbringing, and he was a Tory for a while, before jumping ship to Lib Dem.

 

He and Cameron are actually very similar, one just admits to being posh, while the other hides it.

 

I don't think that he really does hide that hes posh. Its maybe not as obvious as Cameron but hes hardly trying to come over like a working class geezer.

[Moriarty]

 

[Cairneyhill Jambo]

http://www.slapometer.com/

[Sterling Archer]

 

 

I wasn't sure if I'd heard him right at the time. I think that was a bit of a mistake. What's wrong with saying I met a man?

[Glamorgan Jambo]

Interesting debate last night. Clegg did very well however expect him to come under scrutiny in the next week (especially the years he spent as a conservative and his role in emptying Kennedy and Campbell and his detailed tax cutting projections).

 

Cameron did okay and I guess is keeping his powder dry for the later debates when hopefully the ridiculous restrictions in the format will be opened up a bit.

 

Every single poll I've seen though shows Brown coming last. It was his big chance last night and to an extent he did better than I expected and better than the likes of Mandelson and Balls feared. His most natural style is when he's wading through pages and pages of 'tractor producton statistics'. I would presume people are looking closely at his stats as we've seen on many occasions that these aren't always 100% truthful (Emily Maitlis had found 3 porkies by 10.40 on Newsnight). However he really looks like yesterdays man now.

[I P Knightley]

There seems to be a general agreement that the scores on the doors were:

 

1. Clegg

2. Brown

Cameron DNS

 

Call Me Dave suffered from the fact that he never talked about policy, he just spoke in cliches and banged on about "values". Any nob can stand up and say 'I want a better health service and firmer discipline in schools'. Details please.

 

 

Not in any of the papers or reports I've seen anywhere other than on JKB.

 

I could only bring myself to watch it for about 10 minutes and got the feeling that Clegg would have come out on top of the polls simply as a novelty. His performance had no particular "wow" factor - in fact, during the bit I saw, he was stumbling a bit for words and repeated that we have a "financial black hole" a couple of times, each time saying it as if it was a revelation.

 

No. I think the only reasons he's heading the polls are (i) that he isn't Brown or Cameron and (ii) he didn't say anything daft.

[The Mighty Thor]

Not in any of the papers or reports I've seen anywhere other than on JKB.

 

I could only bring myself to watch it for about 10 minutes and got the feeling that Clegg would have come out on top of the polls simply as a novelty. His performance had no particular "wow" factor - in fact, during the bit I saw, he was stumbling a bit for words and repeated that we have a "financial black hole" a couple of times, each time saying it as if it was a revelation.

 

No. I think the only reasons he's heading the polls are (i) that he isn't Brown or Cameron and (ii) he didn't say anything daft.

 

He more likely to be leading the polls on the debate because Brown didn't cover himself in glory and 'Call me Dave' hasn't got anything to say in terms of policy. Nothing. Zippo. Nada.

 

As soon as it came to matters of policy Brown mumbled uncomfortably as he's accountable for 13 years of not a lot and Cameron burst forth with soundbite tourettes with his 'jobs tax' et al. If Clegg and to a degree Brown want to dismantle Dave they will have it very easy. Keep it off the personalities and keep it on the policies. Do that and Dave is stuffed.

 

The Tories have a big big problem and that is their whole campaign strategy is about ridiculing Brown. Scratch the surface of that and there ain't a lot else there.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

The Tories have a big big problem and that is their whole campaign strategy is about ridiculing Brown. Scratch the surface of that and there ain't a lot else there.

 

Yup. All the cliches:

 

"A better health service"

"More police on the streets"

"Tougher discipline in schools"

"Support our armed forces"

"Clean up politics"

 

And on it went. I can't remember him giving specific details about how he'd achieve any of it. Any muppet could have filled in for him last night.

[jambos are go!]

Interesting debate last night. Clegg did very well however expect him to come under scrutiny in the next week (especially the years he spent as a conservative and his role in emptying Kennedy and Campbell and his detailed tax cutting projections).

 

Cameron did okay and I guess is keeping his powder dry for the later debates when hopefully the ridiculous restrictions in the format will be opened up a bit.

 

Every single poll I've seen though shows Brown coming last. It was his big chance last night and to an extent he did better than I expected and better than the likes of Mandelson and Balls feared. His most natural style is when he's wading through pages and pages of 'tractor producton statistics'. I would presume people are looking closely at his stats as we've seen on many occasions that these aren't always 100% truthful (Emily Maitlis had found 3 porkies by 10.40 on Newsnight). However he really looks like yesterdays man now.

 

Well heres the result of the Sky news quoted from your fellow anti Brown poster Simon Says @post 248

 

All change it seems, GB has surged past them - dissapointing for me as the guy is a liar but as I never watched it, I do not know how he performed on the day - will still never vote for the lying incompetent oaf though. The Sky news poll is a major poll BTW.

 

GB - 35%

NC - 33%

DC - 32%

 

Pretty close.

 

 

Congrats to Clegg for doing so well. But folk will be voting for a Prime Minister and that can be only Brown or Cameron. Cameron did not do the business IMO. More votes for Lib Dems means more losses for the Tories rather than Labour in view of the boundary IIRC. Cameron must win the next debate clearly or panic may set in.

 

Browns chances of remaining Prime Minister Were enhanced IMO.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Browns chances of remaining Prime Minister Were enhanced IMO.

 

How depressing is that

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Well heres the result of the Sky news quoted from your fellow anti Brown poster Simon Says @post 248

 

All change it seems, GB has surged past them - dissapointing for me as the guy is a liar but as I never watched it, I do not know how he performed on the day - will still never vote for the lying incompetent oaf though. The Sky news poll is a major poll BTW.

 

GB - 35%

NC - 33%

DC - 32%

 

Pretty close.

 

 

Congrats to Clegg for doing so well. But folk will be voting for a Prime Minister and that can be only Brown or Cameron. Cameron did not do the business IMO. More votes for Lib Dems means more losses for the Tories rather than Labour in view of the boundary IIRC. Cameron must win the next debate clearly or panic may set in.

 

Browns chances of remaining Prime Minister Were enhanced IMO.

 

Are you sure?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/liberaldemocrats/7597522/General-Election-2010-Liberal-Democrats-surge-after-Nick-Cleggs-TV-debate-performance.html

 

This poll is a shocker for Labour!

[jambos are go!]

Are you sure?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/liberaldemocrats/7597522/General-Election-2010-Liberal-Democrats-surge-after-Nick-Cleggs-TV-debate-performance.html

 

This poll is a shocker for Labour!

 

 

And the Sky poll was a shocker for the Tories. The polls are all over the place a concensus seems to be growing that Cameron should have done better. Still think but am no longer as ceratin that the Tories will be the largest party. But in a hung Parliament Labour pledge on the Alternative vote might well keep Brown in No 10. Do you agree?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

And the Sky poll was a shocker for the Tories. The polls are all over the place a concensus seems to be growing that Cameron should have done better. Still think but am no longer as ceratin that the Tories will be the largest party. But in a hung Parliament Labour pledge on the Alternative vote might well keep Brown in No 10. Do you agree?

 

 

I doubt that actually. Unless the Libs get STV they would be utterly bonkers to buy that one. Brown and Labour ("I agree with Nick" seems to be the catchphrase of the debate) seem to think they can make a cosy consensus with the Dumbs - welcome to Alliance Mark II (we know where that one ended!)

[Glamorgan Jambo]

And the Sky poll was a shocker for the Tories. The polls are all over the place a concensus seems to be growing that Cameron should have done better. Still think but am no longer as ceratin that the Tories will be the largest party. But in a hung Parliament Labour pledge on the Alternative vote might well keep Brown in No 10. Do you agree?

 

Don't worry things are getting back on track.

 

A survey of 4,000 people's voting intentions put the Lib Dems on 35 per cent, just behind the Tories on 36 per cent with Labour trailing on 24.

 

Source: ITV/ComRes

 

The pound has had a real howler today following this debate.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Don't worry things are getting back on track.

 

A survey of 4,000 people's voting intentions put the Lib Dems on 35 per cent, just behind the Tories on 36 per cent with Labour trailing on 24.

 

Source: ITV/ComRes

 

The pound has had a real howler today following this debate.

 

 

But, Sir Vince would be the people's chancellor...!

[Sterling Archer]

Interesting take on things.

 

http://blogs.news.sky.com/washingtonnotebook/Post:a94c55de-22ac-46de-9a70-0220fe0aa943

 

 

 

As an American who has coached scores of candidates for debates - some of whom you may very well know - I was really looking forward to the Brits crack at something we Yanks have considered a 'right of passage' in any presidential election season since Kennedy vs Nixon back in 1960.

 

I was not disappointed. This historic and long overdue debate was as exciting as it was surprising.

 

However, if there were any fireworks I certainly didn't see or them.

 

There were also no gaffes - which is good news for the candidates.

 

Although I may not be totally equipped to critique their policy proposals, I do feel qualified to share my views on their performances.

 

The biggest challenge the candidates all faced - after avoiding a major mistake - is to be themselves in front of the entire nation.

 

The issues in the UK as in the US are basically the same: there simply is not enough money to meet the needs of an ageing population in tough economic times and meet the competitive challenges posed by societies who have no real social safety net.

 

As in the US the candidates did their best to dance around the stark reality of this problem - too many needs and not enough cash.

 

Each in their own way tried to put their own version of a positive spin on the difficult challenges ahead without addressing just how they would make these tough choices without significantly raising taxes or cutting services to the bone.

 

We have all been to this dance before.

 

I was rather surprised and pleased to see that the three party leaders made no direct assaults upon each other and maintained a civil tone.

 

Much tamer in nature than most of the PMQ's I have witnessed!

 

They also did a fair job of actually answering the questions.

 

Nick Clegg was clearly the best speaker - connecting with the audience, presenting his ideas clearly and effectively challenging both Mr Brown and Mr Cameron on the issues.

 

Mr Clegg is comfortable in his own skin and gained the most from this opportunity to show off his skills on a level playing field.

 

If anyone can claim the Obama mantle of change, Mr Clegg came the closest in style - cool and self-confident - as he seemed to truly enjoy this debate experience.

 

The other two, for the most part, seemed like they would rather be anywhere else including the waiting room of their dentist's office than in Manchester this evening.

 

What is perhaps most remarkable is neither Mr Clegg nor Mr Cameron managed to ever effectively challenge Mr Brown on why he had not delivered on his promises for the last 13 years.

 

Mr Brown was better than expected in selling his accomplishments and putting his challengers on the spot.

 

He was as personable as I have ever seen him - even effectively using a bit of humour to soften his image.

 

His command of the issues, his longer term view, and experience came through but it may not be enough to overcome his negative baggage.

 

Mr Cameron looked the most nervous and uncomfortable. He also appeared a bit overcoached by his expensive American consultants and handlers.

 

He looked straight ahead avoiding facing his challengers even when they were directly addressing him - affecting a rather cold and detached persona.

 

Almost all of Mr Cameron's responses included the same solution - eliminate waste - a bit of a Johnny one note.

 

He sounded like he was given a copy of the Republican National Committee's talking points.

 

Neither Mr Clegg nor Mr Brown effectively challenged David Cameron on the fact that eliminating waste may end up eliminating more jobs.

 

In their closing remarks it seemed that the summaries didn't really reflect upon the actual back and forth of the debate itself.

 

Mr Clegg did his party proud and at the very least voters may take another good look.

 

Mr Brown did better than expected but expectations were low and he has a lot of history to overcome.

 

Mr Cameron said he had hopeful and exciting plans - it is a shame he did not share them with the audience during the give and take segment.

 

The choice of future Prime Minister is a very personal one for voters.

The candidates have two more chances to capture the hearts, minds and imaginations of the British voters.

 

And next Thursday it is show time once again!

 

 

 

[Danny Wilde]

The LibDums in alliance with Labour is the only likely electoral pact on the table. Despite last nights jousting, theres just enough common ground to cobble an agreement together.

 

But I don't see any way in this world that Brown could continue as Prime Minister. The price of the pact - if Labour are that desperate (and they are) - would be Browns departure. And for all the pre-election phony solidarity in the Labour party, the fact remains he's been the target of more plotting, failed coups and internal revolt than any prime minister I can remember, even Major. And for the LibDums, they'd perpetually be seen as the dupes who were hoodwinked into facilitating a 4th term Labour govt under Brown - an act of future political and electoral suicide.

 

Browns departure from office (after a few crocodile tears and hearty tributes) would be a blessing for most of the Labour party, a fresh start. Who would take his place I dunno, but thats a whole other question.

[Private Hudson]

Interesting take on things.

 

http://blogs.news.sk...70-0220fe0aa943

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good post. Interesting to see that an unbiased observer pretty much agrees with the general consensus.

[Glamorgan Jambo]

The LibDums in alliance with Labour is the only likely electoral pact on the table. Despite last nights jousting, theres just enough common ground to cobble an agreement together.

 

 

 

Not sure I agree with that. Something that will come under scrutiny in the near future is Clegg's role in the removal of Kennedy and Campbell. Kennedy, despite his drink problem, was a tremendously popular figure with the public. However Clegg and his cohorts wanted him out due to his leftward stance more than his health issues. At the time Kennedy was booted out Clegg had only been an MP for a few months so wasn't yet a credible candidate, when Campbell continued with a lot of Kennedy's policies, Clegg the backroom operator, saw him out also. Clegg is quite right wing in a lot of his views and I do believe has a few influential enemies in the LDs. I'm sure he's not ruled out an arrangement with either party.

[Danny Wilde]

Not sure I agree with that. Something that will come under scrutiny in the near future is Clegg's role in the removal of Kennedy and Campbell. Kennedy, despite his drink problem, was a tremendously popular figure with the public. However Clegg and his cohorts wanted him out due to his leftward stance more than his health issues. At the time Kennedy was booted out Clegg had only been an MP for a few months so wasn't yet a credible candidate, when Campbell continued with a lot of Kennedy's policies, Clegg the backroom operator, saw him out also. Clegg is quite right wing in a lot of his views and I do believe has a few influential enemies in the LDs. I'm sure he's not ruled out an arrangement with either party.

 

Of course that would be interesting as he's had a clear run through the middle as the token good guy - so yes, more scrutiny required. He tossed aside Camerons comment about the ?2.5 million donation from Michael Brown, saying they'd been cleared of wrongdoing in accepting it. I forget the details but they certainly held onto it, so that rather takes the moral high ground away about Ashcrofts donations.

 

Tory/LibBum alliance as you say can't be ruled out but it would be a strange beast and might involve more compromise than the generally radical grass-roots would be prepared to go with. They could end up hating him for it. Would certainly be an interesting test of their own desire to get any power sharing thats going, and they'd run the risk of looking like political prostitutes.

 

Clegg is still just flirting of course, fluttering his eyelashes and knocking back advances. But if he were to make the wrong choices with the wrong party post-election, then they could set themselves back by several years, maybe an electoral term or two.

[shaun.lawson]

Not sure I agree with that. Something that will come under scrutiny in the near future is Clegg's role in the removal of Kennedy and Campbell. Kennedy, despite his drink problem, was a tremendously popular figure with the public. However Clegg and his cohorts wanted him out due to his leftward stance more than his health issues. At the time Kennedy was booted out Clegg had only been an MP for a few months so wasn't yet a credible candidate, when Campbell continued with a lot of Kennedy's policies, Clegg the backroom operator, saw him out also. Clegg is quite right wing in a lot of his views and I do believe has a few influential enemies in the LDs. I'm sure he's not ruled out an arrangement with either party.

 

I think this is mostly nonsense. Clegg is left wing - way left of Vince Cable or David Laws, a bit to the left of Chris Huhne; and beyond that, in case you hadn't noticed, the Lib Dems' manifesto is mostly to the left of Labour, as it's frequently been since 1997.

 

Kennedy was removed because he could not do the job. Sure, he was popular with the public - but only because he was regarded as "Chatshow Charlie". In other words, no-one took him seriously as a politician: what future is there for any party with such a figure as its leader? Kennedy fought an excellent campaign in 2001, a poor one in 2005; but much more importantly, at a time the Tories were In Deep **** under their mindbogglingly incompetent leader, the Lib Dems had the chance to finish them off and change British politics for good. They failed completely. There was no vision, no ideas - and that stemmed from the top.

 

Kennedy had no clue how to take the Lib Dems any further. Combined with an alcohol problem which seriously impaired his ability to do the job, and led to his staff lying and lying again in order to cover for him, this meant he had to go. The moment Cameron became Tory leader, Kennedy's leadership was finished; and Clegg, as the rising star of the party for many years (people were saying as much a good decade ago), should have succeeded him then, instead of biding his time while Ming the Merciless made a complete Hibs of it.

[Ulysses]

....at a time the Tories were In Deep **** under their mindbogglingly incompetent leader, the Lib Dems had the chance to finish them off and change British politics for good. They failed completely. There was no vision, no ideas - and that stemmed from the top....

 

That might make sense in the real world inhabited by Liberal Democrats, but in the cartoon world that everyone else lives in it makes no sense.

[Big D]

If they are to the left of anyone, why are they endorsing the same "needs based assessment" as the other London parties regarding funding Scotland? Surely the peoples of Scotland are best placed to decide how our massive potential resources are best developed and spent to meet our "needs". Means tested benefits. Not very left wing. But what can you expect of a Party that shored up the Labour and Unionist lie machine for 8 years.

[shaun.lawson]

That might make sense in the real world inhabited by Liberal Democrats, but in the cartoon world that everyone else lives in it makes no sense.

 

I'll say it again: there was no vision and no ideas. The Lib Dems had a historic opportunity which probably won't come along again for decades; they squandered it completely.

[shaun.lawson]

If they are to the left of anyone, why are they endorsing the same "needs based assessment" as the other London parties regarding funding Scotland? Surely the peoples of Scotland are best placed to decide how our massive potential resources are best developed and spent to meet our "needs". Means tested benefits. Not very left wing. But what can you expect of a Party that shored up the Labour and Unionist lie machine for 8 years.

 

I was furious about means tested benefits when they were first brought in. But now, especially given the cuts which are needed, I don't see the alternative. I agree with abolishing Child Trust Funds in the case of families who can well afford to set up their own one too.

 

But - nobody earning under ?10,000 per year should have to pay income tax. That's left wing, and it's the Lib Dems who are proposing it, not Labour. Meanwhile, the Lib Dems argued for years and years that those earning above ?100,000 should pay 50% income tax. When Labour finally copied it, it was a typical fudge with a ludicrously high threshold of ?150,000.

[Big D]

I was furious about means tested benefits when they were first brought in. But now, especially given the cuts which are needed, I don't see the alternative. I agree with abolishing Child Trust Funds in the case of families who can well afford to set up their own one too.

 

But - nobody earning under ?10,000 per year should have to pay income tax. That's left wing, and it's the Lib Dems who are proposing it, not Labour. Meanwhile, the Lib Dems argued for years and years that those earning above ?100,000 should pay 50% income tax. When Labour finally copied it, it was a typical fudge with a ludicrously high threshold of ?150,000.

 

I wasn't referring to individual taxation, I was talking about the rape of a countries resources to fund a 35 year bankrupt Union, and the complicity of a supposedly liberal organisation in the perpetuation of this fraud.

[shaun.lawson]

I wasn't referring to individual taxation, I was talking about the rape of a countries resources to fund a 35 year bankrupt Union, and the complicity of a supposedly liberal organisation in the perpetuation of this fraud.

 

I think we can safely say you may not be the most objective witness in this debate, D.

[Ulysses]

I'll say it again: there was no vision and no ideas. The Lib Dems had a historic opportunity which probably won't come along again for decades; they squandered it completely.

 

I'll say it again: that view is not in alignment with the events that actually took place.

[Big D]

I think we can safely say you may not be the most objective witness in this debate, D.

 

Safe for you perhaps. I am safely using info from their own manifesto. I have an intelligent interpretation of their misplaced rhetoric, since logically they cannot justify their total disregard for their U.K. manifesto just to retain a small piece of power in Scotland. They have agreed with the other Unionists on a fundamental aspect of undermining devolution. Funding. The Liberal manifesto may as well be blank and handed out for "your thoughts here" in marginal English seats.

[shaun.lawson]

I'll say it again: that view is not in alignment with the events that actually took place.

 

Had the Lib Dems moved clearly and demonstrably left of Labour and been open about it, and courted the unions and disaffected Labour voters in a way they've always shied away from, I think they could've forced a historic realignment: even within the confines of First Past The Post. Instead, they didn't really do anything, which was the biggest pity of all.

 

I always go back to the SDP/Liberal Alliance's position in the polls when it was first formed. There is an appetite out there for something completely different, Uly; and if the Lib Dems aren't prepared to boldly seek and represent that alternative, what's the point of them?

[Ulysses]

I always go back to the Alliance's position in the polls when they were first formed. There is an appetite out there for something completely different, Uly; and if the Lib Dems aren't prepared to boldly seek and represent that alternative, what's the point of them?

 

Ah, the Alliance; another great wasted opportunity to break the mould of British politics. Or another myth, depending on your view.

 

The Tories hit rock bottom in 2001, just as the Labour Party did in 1983. In different ways, the third party got a benefit on both occasions. In 2005, a lot of people deserted Blair on the war issue, and the Liberal Democrats gained from that.

 

The pendulum doesn't revolt. It swings.