I'm bitterly disappointed by what's happening, EC. I dunno, I expected something with a bit more gravitas than this self-seeking tosh that's going on. It seems to reduce politics to the level of a horse fair, although after the cash for honours and the expenses-grubbing that's gone on, perhaps that's its true level. (Although that's a bit of a slur on horses!)
The Debate
- Thread starter Grey
- Start date
Shadow Leader
At the Start
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 9,884
Absolutely - he's running around like a dog with two dicks, loving it, the slimy weasel. He'd better make the most of it as once a deal is done with someone he'll get no say in anything!
EC1
On a break
in which case the coalition will end
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
I wonder if one of the prices Clegg has asked is that Cameron keeps the lunatic right away from the Cabinet. The country doesn't need to see the likes of Howard again. It certainly didn't vote for it.
EC1
On a break
think its been made very clear that Clegg has only one priority
BlazingWalker
At the Start
So............who's your money on for the next Labour leader??
Can't see any 'stand out' candidate!
How long are we thinking this CON/LIB coalition will last?? 18 months tops me thinks.
Can't see any 'stand out' candidate!
How long are we thinking this CON/LIB coalition will last?? 18 months tops me thinks.
trackside528
At the Start
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 5,377
Really interesting stuff. Miliband is surely the next Labour chief?
There's something distinctly unlikeable about Cameron for me. UK (or Irish) politics just doesn't carry the same intensity as it does in the US; there's just something about New Hampshire that you just can't beat!
There's something distinctly unlikeable about Cameron for me. UK (or Irish) politics just doesn't carry the same intensity as it does in the US; there's just something about New Hampshire that you just can't beat!
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
She made it clear yesterday that she will not run for the leadership, but will remain as deputy after the process is complete.
trackside528
At the Start
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 5,377
Clive's heart would not take Harman as leader. I really like Miliband actually; I could see him in charge of the country one day.
EC1
On a break
bloody hell- its sounds like the libs have really arse shagged the tories - they seem to have more policies of theirs in place than the tories
maybe its a Lib/Tory alliance..not other way
its definately the worse tory election "win"
now lets see what balls the pair of them have
maybe its a Lib/Tory alliance..not other way
its definately the worse tory election "win"
now lets see what balls the pair of them have
EC1
On a break
EC1
On a break
this alliamce will seriously damage the libs - people will view them as pseudo tories now they see how close they are that an alliance can be formed so cosily
i bet the lib grass roots are very pissed off
its a cracking result for Labour - new leader - fresh start - integrity intact - well as much as its possible for a politician to have any.
trackside528
At the Start
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 5,377
I thought you said you wern't on Facebook.*
What a complete an utter pain in the nuts Facebooks...
What a complete an utter pain in the nuts Facebooks...
My heart could cope but i would be worried aboutb the queues on the M4 around heathrow airport. Harry is spot on.
tonights result is a good one. Perfect in many ways. The leading party is in charge but at last there will be real pressure for a long overdue realistic voting system
the idea that it would mitigate against "strong goverment" is bollocks. "Strong goverment" is Stalin, castro, hitler and pol pot
Never underestimate chemistry in politics. Clegg couldnt stand Brown and that was that
tonights result is a good one. Perfect in many ways. The leading party is in charge but at last there will be real pressure for a long overdue realistic voting system
the idea that it would mitigate against "strong goverment" is bollocks. "Strong goverment" is Stalin, castro, hitler and pol pot
Never underestimate chemistry in politics. Clegg couldnt stand Brown and that was that
M
martin
Guest
I've read some bollox in my time including from myself but this thread is getting it's fair share, mind you there's been plenty in the media lately too. I don't know why I bother with people like most of you who won't and can't be reasoned with but here goes...
In order to understand the situation and get your guess-work to some degree of accuracy you will have to understand or have some concept of proper statesman behaviour or perhaps more on your level 'putting yourselves in their shoes'.
My guesswork is, the policies that the Lib Dems are obviously very interested in, like immigration and Europe (but have no current feasible policy that makes any sense), will obviously be written off for considerable future. On the other hand, the polcies that are half realistic will be met with some warmth and humility from the Conservatives.
How anyone could see Milliband running the country one day at this time is bizarre. No character, no charisma, yes a team player (and progressive politician/bureacrat), but only among his defunct political party so far, not the country.
Obviously all the above is coming from someone who voted Conservative and is pleased with the one-nation like way the party has driven itself into 10 Downing street, but some of the crap on here shows no judgement of character whatsoever. Last week we were determining what the British public think on immigration and Europe based on the Lib Dems poll rating before the election, and this week talking about a Labour revival after their Iron man has finally fallen on his sword.
Clivex is right on the chemistry score, and if you voted for Clegg based on him and what he said then you have to trust his judgement that Brown or any other Labour dipstick at the moment was no person to work or agree any progressive aims with.
ta.
In order to understand the situation and get your guess-work to some degree of accuracy you will have to understand or have some concept of proper statesman behaviour or perhaps more on your level 'putting yourselves in their shoes'.
My guesswork is, the policies that the Lib Dems are obviously very interested in, like immigration and Europe (but have no current feasible policy that makes any sense), will obviously be written off for considerable future. On the other hand, the polcies that are half realistic will be met with some warmth and humility from the Conservatives.
How anyone could see Milliband running the country one day at this time is bizarre. No character, no charisma, yes a team player (and progressive politician/bureacrat), but only among his defunct political party so far, not the country.
Obviously all the above is coming from someone who voted Conservative and is pleased with the one-nation like way the party has driven itself into 10 Downing street, but some of the crap on here shows no judgement of character whatsoever. Last week we were determining what the British public think on immigration and Europe based on the Lib Dems poll rating before the election, and this week talking about a Labour revival after their Iron man has finally fallen on his sword.
Clivex is right on the chemistry score, and if you voted for Clegg based on him and what he said then you have to trust his judgement that Brown or any other Labour dipstick at the moment was no person to work or agree any progressive aims with.
ta.
Last edited:
Very good post Martin. Thread needed it badly.
I tend to agree about Milliband. It just doesnt ring true does it? But if he doesnt lead the party, who does? Obviously Harman would be a disaster and Johnson always seems to take a step back (although i think he would be appealing to the electorate on a number of levels)
Browns big big misatke was not going to country when he took over. Not only did he almost certainly lose the mandate but he showed terrible indecision
I tend to agree about Milliband. It just doesnt ring true does it? But if he doesnt lead the party, who does? Obviously Harman would be a disaster and Johnson always seems to take a step back (although i think he would be appealing to the electorate on a number of levels)
Browns big big misatke was not going to country when he took over. Not only did he almost certainly lose the mandate but he showed terrible indecision
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
Wishful thinking on your part. The Tories in '97 this wasn't.
There is a very serious chance that this coalition will implode in a short period of time and Labour will take advantage . The Lib Dems really ought to have learned from history 1918-1922 and 1931-1939 that when they get into bed with the Tories they are the party that suffers .
They are so desperate for power however that they do not care . I suspect that the coalition will be torn apart as when things go wrong and with this ragbag of a Cabinet - (the return of that utter buffoon Iain Duncan Smith for example and Theresa May as Home Secretary) things will very soon - the Tory Right and the old SDP wing of the Lib Dems will be at each other's throats .
The Lib Dems will face an apocalypse at the polls - I suspect 60-70% of their vote prefers Labour to the Conservatives and next time a vote for the Lib Dems truly can be characterised as a vote for the Conservatives.
Labour showed a lot of nous on turning their back on coalition with the Lib Dems so long as they choose intelligently for their leader (i.e not Ed Balls ! ) and I suspect it will be David Miliband perhaps with Yvette Cooper as Deputy they will be back in sooner rather than later .
One shocking thing about this new alliance is their attempt to rig Parliament - apparently they propose that fixed term parliaments will only be dissolved by a 55% majority rather than 50% plus 1 . This is simply Stalinist - it is designed to keep in power a Tory/Lib Dem coalition without a majority if the Lib Dems split even though more than half of Parliament does not have confidence - in short this is a constitutional coup .
They should be careful though - I suspect ( and one needs to read the House of Lords judgment on the hunting ban legislation to see why) that the Supreme Court would declare this statute unlawful if it were not delayed in enforcement until after the next election.
They are so desperate for power however that they do not care . I suspect that the coalition will be torn apart as when things go wrong and with this ragbag of a Cabinet - (the return of that utter buffoon Iain Duncan Smith for example and Theresa May as Home Secretary) things will very soon - the Tory Right and the old SDP wing of the Lib Dems will be at each other's throats .
The Lib Dems will face an apocalypse at the polls - I suspect 60-70% of their vote prefers Labour to the Conservatives and next time a vote for the Lib Dems truly can be characterised as a vote for the Conservatives.
Labour showed a lot of nous on turning their back on coalition with the Lib Dems so long as they choose intelligently for their leader (i.e not Ed Balls ! ) and I suspect it will be David Miliband perhaps with Yvette Cooper as Deputy they will be back in sooner rather than later .
One shocking thing about this new alliance is their attempt to rig Parliament - apparently they propose that fixed term parliaments will only be dissolved by a 55% majority rather than 50% plus 1 . This is simply Stalinist - it is designed to keep in power a Tory/Lib Dem coalition without a majority if the Lib Dems split even though more than half of Parliament does not have confidence - in short this is a constitutional coup .
They should be careful though - I suspect ( and one needs to read the House of Lords judgment on the hunting ban legislation to see why) that the Supreme Court would declare this statute unlawful if it were not delayed in enforcement until after the next election.
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
can't really agree with any of that tbh..in fact none
Like to explain why EC1?
What absolute drivel. Are they really going to stand aside and not support either party? Leaving the goverment in limbo?
Have you had difficulty following events? Brown walked because they didnt really want a coalition anyway? Really makes sense that...
Labour is under threat now from the left within the party. the seamus milne tendency will see this as an opportunity to "reclaim their party" and i suspect the new leader may well be facing internal battles with the dim nutters on the far left that ruined their prospects throughout the eighties. This could especially come to light when the welcome and much needed cuts in the public sector non-jobs comes to pass
What absolute drivel. Are they really going to stand aside and not support either party? Leaving the goverment in limbo?
Have you had difficulty following events? Brown walked because they didnt really want a coalition anyway? Really makes sense that...
Labour is under threat now from the left within the party. the seamus milne tendency will see this as an opportunity to "reclaim their party" and i suspect the new leader may well be facing internal battles with the dim nutters on the far left that ruined their prospects throughout the eighties. This could especially come to light when the welcome and much needed cuts in the public sector non-jobs comes to pass
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 24,844
Mrs O is much more politically active than I am and my daughter has studied Politics at uni (she is also a member of the Labour Party, I should add, although not active) and both are saying much the same thing.
(
Well they would wouldnt they?
And if they are saying "much the same thing" can they perhaps give us an example of a leader who ditched his career to open talks to form a coalition which his party apparently didnt want anyway?
Obviosuly the standard of state education is as bad under labour as we had feared
Has anyone even considered that once the liberal leadership prove themselves in power, they might actually be taken more seriously as a party? The biggest drag on their support has been the assumption that they are not experienced or serious enough to govern
Well they would wouldnt they?
And if they are saying "much the same thing" can they perhaps give us an example of a leader who ditched his career to open talks to form a coalition which his party apparently didnt want anyway?
Obviosuly the standard of state education is as bad under labour as we had feared
Has anyone even considered that once the liberal leadership prove themselves in power, they might actually be taken more seriously as a party? The biggest drag on their support has been the assumption that they are not experienced or serious enough to govern
Last edited: