Ads

I comment on what I find interesting, within the rules, the same as everybody else. If you have a specific query for me then I’d be happy to discuss it. With regards to the concessions, I think everybody is aware that a consensus has to be reached and so ground must be given on both sides. Given the number of seats the conservatives won, I feel they have less to give. That said I wouldn’t be unhappy with some of the Liberal tax reforms with regards to the poorest people in society. You won’t find many conservatives complaining about tax breaks. What does worry me is whether it’s affordable and I have my doubts as to whether the Lib Dems loophole plans are actually workable. I’m also happy to see the Lib Dems idea’s on individual liberty, as I feel that our civil liberties have been greatly eroded in these past few parliaments. I agree with their armed forces pay increase, as defence is a key issue personally for me, but I don’t agree with their stance on Trident, which I’ve written a fair bit about already. I think a Strategic Defence review would be valid though and by all means discuss it. I would be strongly opposed to electoral reform if it means moving from a pluralist system to a proportional one. I don’t think it’s a critical issue and I don’t think they’ll get it from the discussions. I also disagree with them on Europe, but then I don’t see that as being an issue. By the same token, I feel a Conservative minority government could work as well, due to the problems any party would face in opposing the Conservative deficit plan at the subsequent election.

Says the man who supports Labour, who after the Jenkins commission came out simply brushed it under the carpet all those years ago. Perhaps an even greater irony being that Brown was part of the block of Labour MP's that did the sweeping. Are you living in some sort of parallel universe? Yes I voted Labour but does that mean that I have to swear to follow every one of their policies and actions? I notice that you use the word "support" - you treat this as some sort of game maybe? Or is this another Ads causing problems post? Sorry, I must be living in the parallel universe where you aren’t a solid Labour voter. I’m sorry if calling you a Labour supporter is offensive to you. Back to the point though, I find it rich to talk about Tory flip-flopping when we saw the great broom sweep of the Jenkins report following the 1997 victory. A commission that actually played down its recommendations in the hope that it would stand a greater chance of being implemented. If a landslide, 100 plus majority isn’t a mandate for reform, then God knows what is.

Conversely, if they don’t move into power after 90 years, as Portillio said, what would be the point of the party? A role in government could give the Liberals the sort of legitimacy that they crave. It will be interesting to see what happens with regards to Labour and how they try and re-build now that the Third-Way coalition vote has ended.

well if nothing else you proved my post to be correct ..Thanks :-) Apparently you get a side of outdated rhetoric with those blinkers.

Says the man who supports Labour, who after the Jenkins commission came out simply brushed it under the carpet all those years ago. Perhaps an even greater irony being that Brown was part of the block of Labour MP's that did the sweeping.

I think the Tories will go it alone, implement some very unpopular spending cuts and run into trouble with the unions/public opinion. Labour will have a new leader without the baggage of Brown and will say "look, same old Tories! Thatcher is back!" etc etc and will win back power in another election in 12 months. This was the Tories worst nightmare as they are **** either way. I think they'll form a coalition of sorts with the Lib Dems that will fail spectaularly with in 12 months. It will though have been long enough for the Tories to show that they are still the look after the few and **** over the many party they have always been and they will indeed have to call an election which they will lose. Its actually a massive relief how things have turned out as it ensures we don't have to endure the tories for anymore than 18 months and won't see them in power again for many, many years. Like I said previously a little short term pain for long term gain. I think you’ve badly misjudged the strength of Cameron’s position in all this. Whether we have a full Con/Lib coalition or just Lib support, when the second election does come around, I think the Conservatives will win the extra 19 seats they need. When the Conservatives open up the books and inform the public of just how deep we are in the shit, Labour will be buried by it.

Your post makes me want to go an buy a bottle of coke and listen to track 2 of Definitely Maybe while I’m on my way to get it.

Do you mean Will Straw? He was pulled out of the crowd for a bit of an interview. Yes I believe that was him.

He was an unnamed Labour party member who they were interviewing amongst the crowd. I see a Labour MP has called on Brown to resign.

The manifesto that was written when they already knew that they were losing? Why weren't they interested in the decade or so before they knew that they were going to lose so many seats? Of course, but don’t forget that at no point in the Labour manifesto does it mention a referendum of PR, it speaks of an Alternate Vote system, with is still a majority system. So this nonsense being spouted about progressive coalition is total garbage, as nobody voted for Labour on the basis of PR in electoral reform, as they weren’t and have never offered it. As I said, cynical opportunism.

What narks me is the cynical opportunism being displayed by the Labour party in a vein attempt to cling to power, where now they offer electoral reform.... after 13 years of enjoying power and having no interest whatsoever in altering the system. Desperate and indefensible opportunism.

Obviously you forgot or didn't bother to read the manifesto for Labour who included this - but carry on with your biased views Absolute nonsense. The record buries you. They’ve had thirteen years do introduce electoral reform and they weren't interested. Now Labour have lost, there has been an about face. This sort of cynical power mongering really boils my piss.

Looking at this demonstration now, they’ve got this Labour bloke on commenting about ‘progressive politics’ with regards to change. The opportunism really boils my piss. Who has been in government for the past thirteen years with sizeable majorities? Why has this only become a policy since you lost?

Why is it clap trap?

yeah good luck with that It's not a labour policy (and nor was it until around 01:30 this morning once it became apparent they were being spanked ) and it's only the libs that proposed it and based on their bad showing last night I somehow don't see them carrying as much weight as they believed they would Spanked, I don't see that really. "Call me Dave" stated the UK wanted change and he would deliver a knock out blow to Labour, if that's the Tory definition of a knock out blow then god help all of us, it's more of a limp wristed stroke of the face which kind of sums the party up as a whole I think. Labour has lost 85 seats, 6.5% of the vote and trail the popular vote by over two million. It’s a little more than a tickling.

No, but they’re the ones that underpin a parties core seats and the greater majority you had in ’05, the bigger the swing and so the harder to over-turn it in ’10. Personal factors can have an influence too.

And if it wasn't for the Unions millions... Zzzzzzzz there are no unions millions ...try and keep up. If you're going to be patronising, at least try and be accurate. I see a Union and I see a 7 figure sum. "Keep up" Quoted from the torygraph do you not accept the tory campaign had a substantially bigger budget than labour. Yes, probably the finest newspaper in the country for both news and sports. All hail Henry Winter. But anyway, politics is an expensive business; I have no problem with parties soliciting donations from party supporters. I’m just not keen on the hypercritical bleating.

Not in any real analysis. If it re-set to zero, then there would be no safe seats.

And if it wasn't for the Unions millions... Zzzzzzzz there are no unions millions ...try and keep up. If you're going to be patronising, at least try and be accurate. I see a Union and I see a 7 figure sum. "Keep up"

And if it wasn't for the Unions millions... Zzzzzzzz

Each party starts from the same base - i.e. zero - its not that a particular party has a few points head start because they won more seats. The facts are that despite a massive lead in the polls - wasn't it a record gap at one time - despite the millions that Ashcroft and similar people put in, despite a major campaign from most of the media including for the first time a UK TV broadcaster, despite a incumbent Gvmt that had been in pace for a very long time, despite a worldwide economic crisis, despite all of these Cameron was unable to do what for example Blair did in the 90's. Cameron is not an asset to the Tory party. He has basically failed to deliver - the Tory party last night looked like the Man City of UK politics Only that’s not the case. Support for a candidate doesn’t just re-set to zero, you’ve got to hope your campaigning in that constituency has instigated a big enough swing. The Conservatives have lost three seats tonight, Labour, at the moment almost 90- if the Conservatives had got themselves into gear in ’01 or ’05, then they wouldn’t have required such a large swing, and Labour’s vote collapsing in the North and Midlands would have lead to a Tory landslide. Its not the only factor of course, but it didn’t help them. There was no flood of change mood that could really be created with so many people distrusting all politicians. Cameron will in the next few days, if not today, become the next Prime Minister. He’s failed to deliver a majority, but then he’s seen a flood of votes and seats only bettered by 1997 in the past 80 years for any party.

I think the Conservatives should have won an outright majority, but ultimately, they’ve taken over 90 seats- that’s more than Thatcher took in ’79. The problem they always had was the low base they were starting off from in respect to Labours number of seats.

Correct. He should consider starting a coalition and then discard it while he clears his desk.

Who are you aiming that comment at? The Labour party and all those supporters that think that it’s the Conservatives that have blocked electoral reform... despite Labour having had three parliaments with very large majorities and yet surprisingly no movement on the issue in all of those 13 years.

I find these calls for electoral reform quite coincidental on the day that the Labour lose the general election.