Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#1
Last night N Clegg(remember him???) announced that people should not write off the lib dems after there 6th place defeat in the recent bye election.
You cannot help to be amused that out of this our Nick still thinks he has a chance at any future general election.
I do understand he has to rally the wounded troops but blimey mate.
Maybe our nick is getting the message his time is up
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#2
I agree Keith, the phrase 'none so blind as those that cannot see' springs to mind.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#3
JAN
On this we can agree, Our Nick sit's in a Sheffield seat and must find himself out of a job come the next election.
putting aside his co olition decision, and his manifesto being ripped up.
his decision on the sheffield steel whether correct or not, the people of sheffield will remember him
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#4
LOL - here we are 10 months into a government that is having to deal with a dreadful legacy and making the unpopular decisions necessary to put it right and you are writing off one part of the coalition already. There are 4 years to go and the benefits from these decisions will have had time to come through.
Did anyone realistically think polling would not get worse before getting better?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#5
BAZ;
People wrote off the lib dems the day they threw away there pledge prior to the election.
lib dems are finished as a party of any significance,
im sure baz the tories are rubbing there hands at the prospects of next election, but sadly i can see apathy ruling and the continued no overall control,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#6
We will see Keith.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#7
BAZ;
We certainly, over the years labour will re in vent itself re build and thus regain many seats it lost , the tories and labour will profit from the lib dems melt down.
ending up with no party having enough seats to take it on.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#8
"There are 4 years to go."
I admire your pluck Barry and yes they could go in any of those 4 years.
JanH, if I may...
"There are none so blind as those who will not see."
You are right though. Party Politics is mostly make believe and as with motion pictures their sets too are all front and a few props.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#9
One must remember that the Tories only share power as a result of them being propped up by a 6th rate political party. Also if the previous govt did so badly how come the voters didn't express their disgust by giving the Tories a landslide victory. They and the Lib Dems sneaked into power via the tradesmans entrance,
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#10
Something to do with the bias inbuilt into the electoral system Marek.
Compare the voting between the 2005 election in which Labour won a 65 seat majority and 2010 in which there was no overall majority.
In 2005 Labour's winning vote was a smaller proportion compared to the Conservatives indecisive 2010 proportion of the vote.
It does not end there
In 2005 the losing proportion of the vote for the Conservatives was higher than Labour's 2010 losing proportion of the vote.
With that inbuilt electoral disadvantage it is no wonder there was an indecisiive result iin 2010.
That is why a reduction in the number of MPs and an equalling out of the size of Parliamentary seats is so important for a healthy democracy. They also need to ensure that there are English votes only for English only laws.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#11
in other words
lets look for way the tories can get in through the back door
no matter how
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#12
No Keith - sort out the electoral system so Labour do not win by default because of a system skewed to suit their interests.
We need a much higher proportion of marginal seats and that is what the changes in seat boundaries and numbers are all about.
The way things are now it is Labour who can get in by the back door. The electoral numbers in my previous post show the bias currently in their favour.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#13
just to look at cleggies face and his body language when interviewed nowadays says it all.
he signed a faustian pact and there is nothing he can do about it, disliked and disrespected by everyone inside or outside of his party.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
#14
Barry,
It had nothing to do with electoral system bias, proportional vote or inbuilt electoral disadvantage.
Labour lost because of the expenses scandal, lack of action on the banker's bonus's and the manifesto lies from Tory and Liberals and it's the lies that are going to damage this con-dem government. These swift cuts that are being imposed, mainly on the poor, elderly, sick and unemployed, are showing the people or should I say, reminding the people of this country, just how un- caring and selfish you are.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#15
GaryC - please no you are simply deluding yourself if you think that, your arguments are simply not credable and you ignore the facts. Lets get back to the real world.
Unregistered User
#16
Gary my old friend, that was one of the most blinkered postings I've seen you post.
It's simple economics Gary.
You can't spend more than you have in income.
Borrowing is just not the answer.
Bankers did not make the decisions on public sector employment or debt.
Labour only had income for £3 out of every £4 spent.
Straight forward 25% difference which they had to borrow.
£176billion structural debt. That is without hidden PFI debt.
As they are now apologising for the decisions of the Brown economy , perhaps Labour supporters should catch on.
The only difference in debt policy now is the speed of repayment.
Conservatives believe it should be done sooner rather than later.
Labour believe the paydown should be slower, therefore the debt pain lasts longer.
That now is the only debate between the two.
How you do it & how long it takes.
That was the gist of a conversation I had with the Labour Shadow Local Government Minister two weeks ago.
Watty
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#17
paulw
not quite the full picture, but yep how you go about the present mess is coming down to the 2 ways
omn cleggy
yep he was a voice of desperation as howard says
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#18
Don't let this get you down GaryC. You shall ever be swimming against the tide with these two eminent word-smiths [I almost wrote 'polished-tu...', but stopped myself and settled for 'wo...', I can't think why]
As with any financial/investment wizards you meet or care to mention much of their schpiel will include speculation on future earnings/income that one "can safely borrow on". This was the downfall of GB, he listened and thought himself in-the-know, schmuck!
As ever it is best to follow the money. There are those firms trading under an array of initials who's job it was to sign-off on the bank's accounts etc. etc. Much thought could usefully be applied to their dealings. Check out the names of the big-donors to this party and...well that's it, you will probably only find them donating to the one party at the present time.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#19
there is a strong body of opinion that the speed and depth of the cuts will take us into double dip recession, with less income tax and v.a.t. coming into the the coffers the deficit can only widen.
i think the gvernment are banking on higher fuel rises guaranteeing a good tax take from that source.
#20
The LibDems fell on their sword as soon as they clasped the Tory Handshake. The only ones who didn't know it were the LibDems.