Tonight's televised debate

[shaun.lawson]

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.

 

No myth at all - it just required the will, organisation and know how to sustain it, which entirely understandably, the Alliance didn't have. Are the Lib Dems getting closer to having it now? I think so, yes.

[Gorgiewave]

No myth at all - it just required the will, organisation and know how to sustain it, which entirely understandably, the Alliance didn't have. Are the Lib Dems getting closer to having it now? I think so, yes.

 

 

I started rooting for Clegg last nght when he distanced himself from the other parties, saying "these two". I got a fluttering reminder of Obama. Michael Gove was ridiculous last night or this morning dismissing the Lib Dems as "eccentric" because of such policies as joining the euro, getting rid of the nuclear deterrant and an amnesty on illegal immigrants. The first is not the best way to get out of the recession, the second is a good policy to me (would America allow Britain to suffer a nuclear attack? No.) An amnesty on illiegal immigrants might be a good way of combating the recession, in that it might bring untaxed money to the surface.

 

Michael Gove was good when he was a columnist at The Times but sneering at Clegg for having a policy not in the "mainstream" (16 EU states disagree) while supposedly campaigning with a "change" and "hope" theme makes one wonder at his coherence or, more likely, honesty.

[Big D]

I started rooting for Clegg last nght when he distanced himself from the other parties, saying "these two". I got a fluttering reminder of Obama. Michael Gove was ridiculous last night or this morning dismissing the Lib Dems as "eccentric" because of such policies as joining the euro, getting rid of the nuclear deterrant and an amnesty on illegal immigrants. The first is not the best way to get out of the recession, the second is a good policy to me (would America allow Britain to suffer a nuclear attack? No.) An amnesty on illiegal immigrants might be a good way of combating the recession, in that it might bring untaxed money to the surface.

 

Michael Gove was good when he was a columnist at The Times but sneering at Clegg for having a policy not in the "mainstream" (16 EU states disagree) while supposedly campaigning with a "change" and "hope" theme makes one wonder at his coherence or, more likely, honesty.

 

Two years ago Vince Cable went on record as saying the Euro was wrong for the U.K. in the present circumstances. After a recession he and his top party executives admit they are wrong. Economics is not about the short run. UK suffers from short term politics due to the Medievel electoral system we champion. But we cannot possibly accept even shorter economic timescales from these economic opportunists as any sort of argument for being allowed anywhere near a government.

[shaun.lawson]

I started rooting for Clegg last nght when he distanced himself from the other parties, saying "these two". I got a fluttering reminder of Obama. Michael Gove was ridiculous last night or this morning dismissing the Lib Dems as "eccentric" because of such policies as joining the euro, getting rid of the nuclear deterrant and an amnesty on illegal immigrants. The first is not the best way to get out of the recession, the second is a good policy to me (would America allow Britain to suffer a nuclear attack? No.) An amnesty on illiegal immigrants might be a good way of combating the recession, in that it might bring untaxed money to the surface.

 

Michael Gove was good when he was a columnist at The Times but sneering at Clegg for having a policy not in the "mainstream" (16 EU states disagree) while supposedly campaigning with a "change" and "hope" theme makes one wonder at his coherence or, more likely, honesty.

 

Typical Gove. He's nauseating.

 

Anyway, YouGov have a poll in tomorrow's Sun; the first proper opinion poll since last night's debate. The figures are eyebrow raising:

 

Conservatives 33%

 

Liberal Democrats 30%

 

Labour 28%

 

There's surely no way the Lib Dems will maintain this, and it's only a one-off poll as things stand. But even more eyebrow raising is what the above result would do in terms of seats:

 

Labour 276

 

Conservatives 245

 

Liberal Democrats 100

 

If anything like the above actually transpired, if that didn't persuade people of the immediate need for electoral reform, and an end to the most stupid electoral system in the known hemisphere, nothing ever would. If Labour finished third in share of the votes yet were the biggest party, I think it'd precipitate something close to revolution.

[Ulysses]

No myth at all - it just required the will, organisation and know how to sustain it, which entirely understandably, the Alliance didn't have. Are the Lib Dems getting closer to having it now? I think so, yes.

 

At its peak, the Alliance secured 25% of votes. In 2005, the Liberal Democrats polled a little over 22%. But a lot of that could be attributed to people voting on the Iraq issue.

 

It isn't just a case of party organisation. On their worst day ever in a generation, Labour polled 28%. On their worst day in election history, the Conservatives polled 31%. Taking into account the vote share of smaller parties, the fact is that if both major parties had a meltdown in the same campaign and the Liberal Democrats did absolutely everything right, the best they could hope for is to poll around 31-32 percent. That's not because of the party's organisation; it's because of those pesky voters.

[shaun.lawson]

At its peak, the Alliance secured 25% of votes. In 2005, the Liberal Democrats polled a little over 22%. But a lot of that could be attributed to people voting on the Iraq issue.

 

It isn't just a case of party organisation. On their worst day ever in a generation, Labour polled 28%. On their worst day in election history, the Conservatives polled 31%. Taking into account the vote share of smaller parties, the fact is that if both major parties had a meltdown in the same campaign and the Liberal Democrats did absolutely everything right, the best they could hope for is to poll around 31-32 percent. That's not because of the party's organisation; it's because of those pesky voters.

 

I do hear you, and have argued myself many times that both Labour and the Tories can count on a hardcore of 30% who'd vote for a monkey in a red or blue rosette. But at its peak, the Alliance scored 50% in the opinion polls, which has to say something; and the more representation the Lib Dems secure on the ground through local government and coalitions in devolved Parliaments and assemblies, the more their position will improve.

 

It's limited, I agree: only because of our insane, completely undemocratic electoral system though.

[Big D]

At its peak, the Alliance secured 25% of votes. In 2005, the Liberal Democrats polled a little over 22%. But a lot of that could be attributed to people voting on the Iraq issue.

 

It isn't just a case of party organisation. On their worst day ever in a generation, Labour polled 28%. On their worst day in election history, the Conservatives polled 31%. Taking into account the vote share of smaller parties, the fact is that if both major parties had a meltdown in the same campaign and the Liberal Democrats did absolutely everything right, the best they could hope for is to poll around 31-32 percent. That's not because of the party's organisation; it's because of those pesky voters.

 

Err, only a small % of these pesky voters who have the democratic luxuury of living in swing seats. The rest of us are effectively disenfranchised. The fact that the LibDumbs continually whore their support to those who refuse to allow them to be involved in U.K. government shows that they are far too stupid to vote for.

[Gorgiewave]

Typical Gove. He's nauseating.

 

Anyway, YouGov have a poll in tomorrow's Sun; the first proper opinion poll since last night's debate. The figures are eyebrow raising:

 

Conservatives 33%

 

Liberal Democrats 30%

 

Labour 28%

 

There's surely no way the Lib Dems will maintain this, and it's only a one-off poll as things stand. But even more eyebrow raising is what the above result would do in terms of seats:

 

Labour 276

 

Conservatives 245

 

Liberal Democrats 100

 

If anything like the above actually transpired, if that didn't persuade people of the immediate need for electoral reform, and an end to the most stupid electoral system in the known hemisphere, nothing ever would. If Labour finished third in share of the votes yet were the biggest party, I think it'd precipitate something close to revolution.

Yep. "The normally phlegmatic British were aroused to a state of frenzied apathy."

 

I'm warming more and more to the Lib Dems by the minute.

 

Might I yet find a political home in Britain? Dr. S.L. (Temp. Anon.), have you?

[shaun.lawson]

Yep. "The normally phlegmatic British were aroused to a state of frenzied apathy."

 

I'm warming more and more to the Lib Dems by the minute.

 

Might I yet find a political home in Britain? Dr. S.L. (Temp. Anon.), have you?

 

My home is and always has been Britain; and my political home is and always has been the Liberal Democrats. Natural for a Hearts fan; the Lib Dems are the third force, after all...

[Moriarty]

My home is and always has been Britain; and my political home is and always has been the Liberal Democrats. Natural for a Hearts fan; the Lib Dems are the third force, after all...

 

 

This

 

This

and....

This

 

[Ulysses]

But at its peak, the Alliance scored 50% in the opinion polls, which has to say something...

 

At the time, it said that people were pissed off with the Tories while also realising that the lunatics had taken over the Labour asylum. The Falklands war, the decrease in inflation and the content of the Conservatives' 1983 manifesto put an end to that, though.

 

 

It's limited, I agree: only because of our insane, completely undemocratic electoral system though.

 

I'll get back to you on that.

[Big D]

Bigfeller: What happens to your analysis if the Scots and Welsh nationalists get more than 11 seats between them?

[shaun.lawson]

Bigfeller: What happens to your analysis if the Scots and Welsh nationalists get more than 11 seats between them?

 

Dunno! I'm just relaying what the BBC are saying.

[Big D]

Dunno! I'm just relaying what the BBC are saying.

 

BF. People used to believe what Goebells published and broadcast. You must be more intelligent than that answer suggests.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Two years ago Vince Cable went on record as saying the Euro was wrong for the U.K. in the present circumstances. After a recession he and his top party executives admit they are wrong. Economics is not about the short run. UK suffers from short term politics due to the Medievel electoral system we champion. But we cannot possibly accept even shorter economic timescales from these economic opportunists as any sort of argument for being allowed anywhere near a government.

 

 

The Euro could quite easily implode over the next few months. The IMF has touched down in Athens and now the speculators are moving on to Portugal. Meanwhile, the legality of this bailout is being challenged in the German constitutional court, because it is in breach of the Maastricht Treaty. No German involvement in the bailout = no Euro.

[shaun.lawson]

BF. People used to believe what Goebells published and broadcast. You must be more intelligent than that answer suggests.

 

The BBC employ brilliant psephologists, are rigorous and fair. In news and politics terms, they're a magnificent, world leading organisation. You must be more intelligent than to believe that the whole world is based on some Westminster conspiracy.

[shaun.lawson]

The Euro could quite easily implode over the next few months. The IMF has touched down in Athens and now the speculators are moving on to Portugal. Meanwhile, the legality of this bailout is being challenged in the German constitutional court, because it is in breach of the Maastricht Treaty. No German involvement in the bailout = no Euro.

 

But the huge problems within Euro economies rather give the lie to you continually blaming Brown for almost everything to do with the recession, Geoff.

[Big D]

The BBC employ brilliant psephologists, are rigorous and fair. In news and politics terms, they're a magnificent, world leading organisation. You must be more intelligent than to believe that the whole world is based on some Westminster conspiracy.

 

You still think the world is lead by Britain? Globe ain't pink no more. No I don't believe the world is lead by a london conspiracy, but I have the evidence that the U.K. certainly is. It's not me that is consistently pointing out the bias in BBC domestic political coverage. It is the national broadcasters of better democracies. They accept that on a world stage the BBC is peerless, so therefore can't understand their Nazi tendencies at the domestic level.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

But the huge problems within Euro economies rather give the lie to you continually blaming Brown for almost everything to do with the recession, Geoff.

 

 

Er no.

 

You have to ask why the UK was still in recession up to Q4 despite ?200bn (12% of GDP) of funny money being printed, VAT cuts, Quattro scrappage (!) etc and all the rest of it. The private sector in the UK has declined by over 10%, the public sector has continued to grow. Why? Because the three growth engines of the UK were property, banking and government spending from the taxes on them. The banks collapsed, the mortgage market dried up and Brown continued to spend, hence the mess.

 

The Euro's problem is that the one size fits all interest rate does not work with such divergent economic policies. German economics isn't acceptable to Club Med.

[shaun.lawson]

You still think the world is lead by Britain? Globe ain't pink no more. No I don't believe the world is lead by a london conspiracy, but I have the evidence that the U.K. certainly is. It's not me that is consistently pointing out the bias in BBC domestic political coverage. It is the national broadcasters of better democracies. They accept that on a world stage the BBC is peerless, so therefore can't understand their Nazi tendencies at the domestic level.

 

No, I don't think the world is led by Britain. I do, however, regard Al Jazeera and the BBC as the world's leading broadcasters. Here, both the Tories and Labour are forever accusing the BBC of bias, as do Israelis and Palestinians internationally. It's probably because they do their job properly that no-one's ever happy.

[Big D]

No, I don't think the world is led by Britain. I do, however, regard Al Jazeera and the BBC as the world's leading broadcasters. Here, both the Tories and Labour are forever accusing the BBC of bias, as do Israelis and Palestinians internationally. It's probably because they do their job properly that no-one's ever happy.

 

Of course hard labour and the con artists accuse media of bias, it's divide and rule politics. I think you'll find that the Unionists are delighted with the BBC's anti democratic reporting. It's those of us who hate media manipulation for narrow political outcomes who are rightly furious.

[Ulysses]

The BBC employ brilliant psephologists....

 

...and yet they can't get beyond uniform national swings?

[Big D]

...and yet they can't get beyond uniform national swings?

 

What is the point of promoting party %s in a fptp "democracy" if not to try to influence voting patterns? The BBC are not impartial. They are a major part of the problem, and we all pay.

[jambos are go!]

The rock solid nature of Labour's core vote would appear to be putting them in an extremely strong position according to this poll. If they could gain a point or two an outright majority could be possible. Just as well that Labour are promising electoral reform. Methinks that somebody in Labour has put some deep thought into the impact of the Boundary changes and the role of the Lib Dems. Hence the leadership debates and the promise of PR via the Alterative Vote. Mandelson? Only kidding - maybe.

[kitster]

The BBC employ brilliant psephologists, are rigorous and fair. In news and politics terms, they're a magnificent, world leading organisation. You must be more intelligent than to believe that the whole world is based on some Westminster conspiracy.

 

 

Really? That's why they've closed the door on Salmond in political debate? Even Sky realise how devolved politics in the UK is now and are giving him the opportunity to speak on matters that concern 5 million of us north of the border. Debates are a waste of time if you exclude many of the electorate and speak about issues that only concern England. The BBC is not how you describe it above and I for one resent paying my licence fee to be badly represented by them.

[Ulysses]

The rock solid nature of Labour's core vote would appear to be putting them in an extremely strong position according to this poll. If they could gain a point or two an outright majority could be possible. Just as well that Labour are promising electoral reform. Methinks that somebody in Labour has put some deep thought into the impact of the Boundary changes and the role of the Lib Dems. Hence the leadership debates and the promise of PR via the Alterative Vote. Mandelson? Only kidding - maybe.

 

The boundary changes favoured the Conservatives.

[Danny Wilde]

Really? That's why they've closed the door on Salmond in political debate? Even Sky realise how devolved politics in the UK is now and are giving him the opportunity to speak on matters that concern 5 million of us north of the border. Debates are a waste of time if you exclude many of the electorate and speak about issues that only concern England. The BBC is not how you describe it above and I for one resent paying my licence fee to be badly represented by them.

 

Mostly agree with that. The BBC is in various parts politically biased - certainly so in Scotland where its relationship with the Labour party is very cosy indeed. It patronises it viewers and pursues the news agendas that suits it.

 

I'd have hoped by 2010 that people are sufficiently aware that just because The BBC says this ... or The Times says that .. thats its factual, accurate and unbiased. Often, its not.

[Moriarty]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7599581/General-Election-2010-Nick-Clegg-wins-backing-of-RATM-Facebook-campaign.html

 

[kitster]

Mostly agree with that. The BBC is in various parts politically biased - certainly so in Scotland where its relationship with the Labour party is very cosy indeed. It patronises it viewers and pursues the news agendas that suits it.

 

I'd have hoped by 2010 that people are sufficiently aware that just because The BBC says this ... or The Times says that .. thats its factual, accurate and unbiased. Often, its not.

 

 

Many aren't though and that's the worry. The media is by nature very influential. I only want an open and fair debate and for nobody that affects our lives to be excluded from that. We have an SNP government who choose many policies for us. I fail to see how their leader is irrelevant in this election. They want our votes but fail to recognise the fact we have our own questions and issues? It's very patronising indeed.

[Therapist]

I fail to see how their leader is irrelevant in this election.

 

This is a national election and the SNP have no chance of forming, or even influencing, a government (thank God). It's right they should be excluded or we'll have all the other diddy parties demanding to be included.

[kitster]

This is a national election and the SNP have no chance of forming, or even influencing, a government (thank God). It's right they should be excluded or we'll have all the other diddy parties demanding to be included.

 

 

Trolling at its worst.

[Therapist]

Trolling at its worst.

 

No trolling about it. The SNP cannot influence or control the nation's economy, foreign policy, law and order policy, defence policy, etc etc. You may not like it, but it's a fact. A vote for the SNP in this election is a wasted vote.

[kitster]

No trolling about it. The SNP cannot influence or control the nation's economy, foreign policy, law and order policy, defence policy, etc etc. You may not like it, but it's a fact. A vote for the SNP in this election is a wasted vote.

 

You have no idea who I vote for. I dislike social exclusion being a Scot and I want Salmond grilled as well.

[Therapist]

I dislike social exclusion being a Scot

 

I have absolutely no idea what you're on about.

[Tiberius Stinkfinger]

You have no idea who I vote for. I dislike social exclusion being a Scot and I want Salmond grilled as well.

 

Me too, a bit of cracked peppercorn and a knob of butter, done.

[Therapist]

Me too, a bit of cracked peppercorn and a knob of butter, done.

 

Grilled Salmond would be far too fatty.

[Tiberius Stinkfinger]

Grilled Salmond would be far too fatty.

 

You better start helping out Mrs T in the kitchen guv, a good grilling and all the blubber will drip off.

[bighusref]

I have only seen part of the programme but it is on my planner. What has been very interesting is the groundswell of favourable opinions on Nick Clegg. Two more good performances and we could truly see a three part race.

[Gorgiewave]

You have no idea who I vote for. I dislike social exclusion being a Scot and I want Salmond grilled as well.

 

 

Therapist is right. The SNP will be lucky to get more than 10 of the c. 650 seats at Wetsminster = almost no influence.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Therapist is right. The SNP will be lucky to get more than 10 of the c. 650 seats at Wetsminster = almost no influence.

 

 

If there is a hung parliament, the power of holding 10 seats is magnified.

[Big D]

If there is a hung parliament, the power of holding 10 seats is magnified.

 

Hmm. So that would mean about 45 Labour and Unionist seats in Scotland. How embarrassing if we allow them back in on the narrow parochialism of a wasted Scottish Tory vote.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Hmm. So that would mean about 45 Labour and Unionist seats in Scotland. How embarrassing if we allow them back in on the narrow parochialism of a wasted Scottish Tory vote.

 

 

Each to their own. The point is that if the election produces even a very narrow majority for one party, every vote in the Commons becomes important.

[2NaFish]

the snp will almost certainly have a prearranged alliance with plaid cymru in the event of a hung parliament. i dont expect either to do particularly well, but between them they could hold 15 seats. This wont likely be decisive but will be very influential and to say a vote for the nats is a wasted one is clearly myopic.

[davemclaren]

No trolling about it. The SNP cannot influence or control the nation's economy, foreign policy, law and order policy, defence policy, etc etc. You may not like it, but it's a fact. A vote for the SNP in this election is a wasted vote.

 

 

Unlike a vote for the BNP?

 

No vote is wasted imo. If you only vote for a party that you think will win you are likely to end up with a corrupt, boring and stale 2 party system...oh wait!!

[Therapist]

Unlike a vote for the BNP?

 

I'm surprised to see you promoting them, Dave.

[Danny Wilde]

No trolling about it. The SNP cannot influence or control the nation's economy, foreign policy, law and order policy, defence policy, etc etc. You may not like it, but it's a fact. A vote for the SNP in this election is a wasted vote.

 

Your list is incorrect.

 

Justice and policing is a Scottish reserved matter.

[Gorgiewave]

Your list is incorrect.

 

Justice and policing is a Scottish reserved matter.

 

A matter which os not transferred is said to be "reserved". Those powers that have been transferred from Westminster to Holyrood are said to be "devolved".

[davemclaren]

I'm surprised to see you promoting them, Dave.

 

[Danny Wilde]

A matter which os not transferred is said to be "reserved". Those powers that have been transferred from Westminster to Holyrood are said to be "devolved".

 

Thanks for the correction. Regardless, the Scottish criminal justice system has always been an independent entity, quite seperate from its England and Wales counterpart.

[Glamorgan Jambo]

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.

 

I'm not convinced you live in the same world as the rest of us Shaun. Which party did Nick Clegg belong to before the LibDems? And what specifically did Campbell do to make a Horlicks of things? Do you not recall the disquiet about the left leaning from within the party about the time they were tring to empty Kennedy?

 

I'm not sure the Tories were in a huge mess with Michael Howard as leader either. Again what specifically did he do that was so wrong in his short spell at the helm against the most accomplished electioneer (Blair) since Thatcher.

 

My prediction is that 2005 will turn out to have been the nadir of the Lib Dems recent electoral fortunes.