Trout

iTrader: (1)

I think some of the posters on this thread are missing some of the harsh realities.

In the face of the most unpopular Prime Minister of all time, a deep financial crisis, a lingering recession - our hero in Blue could not convert a one time 20% poll lead into a Parliamentary majority.

The country got exactly what it voted for which is a statement of they don't know.

There is no right that one party should lead, merely tradition. In many progressive countries, coalition and moderation is the order of the day. And if Clegg gets his way, which he surely will, then every election will lead to this type of balanced moderation.

It is absurd that a party can garner 23% of the electorate and yet get less than 10% of the Parliamentary seats. Labour polled 3% more and got nearly five times as many seats.

Lib-Lab pact here we come!

97TURBO

Is it clear? 10 million votes, only 2 million more than Labour. So in a room of 5 people, only one of them wants a Tory government. Wheres the clarity in that

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

There you go again ... he could never do any right in your eyes.

If the economy is so dear to Clegg and Cameron's hearts why have they been dilly dallying for 4 days now? Maybe Brown thought they would have it sorted by now, but today gave them a helping hand. You can be sure the Tories are more than ever willing to give in to the Lib Dems now that they are talking to Labour and their main stumbling block to Lib-Lab pact is resigning.

Sadly they are all too wrapped up in themselves to do anything sensible for the good of the country of course which is why we are in this mess in the first place. Cameron is strutting around like he has the right to be PM when he doesn't as not enough people voted for him whether he likes it or not. Clegg is behaving like the unpopular fat kid at school when the tug of war teams are being put together. And Brown is so desperate to be PM for a few more months he is even prepared to commit political suicide .... in a few months time.

It's a pathetic state of affairs and no wonder the country is in a mess.

I hope the lot of them clear off and we can start again.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

He meant clear in SN world

Remember that poll in here that showed the Tories would get 11 times as many votes as Labour.... oh yes SN is the real world LOL

FlightMan

SN is a Tory boys wet dream. Now it's woken up the the messy reality!

Martin2005

I think Clegg has played a blinder here, no sooner has Brown announced his resignation and the beginning of formal Lib-Lab negotiations, than William Hague is offering a referrendum on AV PR.

The reality is though, it may well be mathematically and constitutionally OK the Labour and Liberals to form a government, morrally it just sucks. Clegg knows that, he knows he's going to get torn apart by the looney right leaning press if he does a deal with Labour, and by the electorate at the next election.

I noted there are many many senior Labour representatives arguing against doing a pact, and saying they should go quietly and with dignity into opposition, bloody right they should!

97TURBO

That will be very much the case if he side's with Cameron, his voting figures in the next Election will be abysmal.

RJMS

iTrader: (2)

To be fair the Tories offer may already have been on the table (there were rumours hinting at this) and the Brown resignation just made them decide to go public with it.

I totally disagree with "Clegg having played a blinder" I think he has made himself look like someone who has no real interest in what is right for the country (despite his protestations) but what suits him and his party. He is obviously prepared to at least consider supporting the totally morally bankrupt (possible) Lib-Lab coalition. Unless of course it is all a ploy.......

Edit: Should have read your post more thoroughly - you seem to be suggesting that he probably has no intention of actually teaming up with Labour in which case why go to the bother of pretending he might what does it achieve apart from getting rid of GB who would more than likely to have gone anyway?

Martin2005

You can see the bind he's in then

nick172sport

iTrader: (6)

as said before nick clegg reality tv simples

Martin2005

Just for a second try and consider the opposing forces EVERYONE in these negotiations are have to balance

CLegg has to bring his party with him, he has NO CHOICE HE CANNOT DECIDE ALONE, he HAS to bring 75% of his MPs with him on this. There is virtually ZERO chance of Liberal Dems agreeing to a pack with the devil (as they see it) and not getting a commitment PR. He's managed to get the Tories to make a massive concession, which by all accounts was a panic announcement following Brown's statement.

RJMS

iTrader: (2)

But the Tories are offering AV not PR. Better for the Lib-Dems as far as I can see from various forecasts but not as good as PR (for them) and even then it's only a referendum, not the Bill for AV that NL are proposing (followed by a PR referendum).

In fact IIRC correctly the Tories have shifted to the extent that they are now following NL's manifesto pledge in this area

Edit: And I definitely recall whispers on Sky/BBC regarding a referendum on electoral reform (don't think specifics were mentioned) before today.

Martin2005

One things for sure...they'll be civil war in the Tory ranks over this

RJMS

iTrader: (2)

Yes probably, but then again a referendum may not give the result that the Lib-Dems want. I personally would want to keep the present system (as lets face it) would a lot of the Labour party. At least with a referendum the great British public can decide (if they can be bothered) unlike on other major issues under NL (Iraq war, Lisbon Treaty etc.)

Gordo

errr - let's contrast this with the 2001 Blair victory:

2010
Cameron 10.707m votes (36.1%) = 306 seats
Brown 8.604m votes (29.0%) = 258 seats
Clegg 6.827m votes (23.0%) = 57 seats

2001
Blair 10.725m votes (40.7%) = 413 seats
Hague 8.357m votes (31.7%) = 166 seats
Kennedy 4.814m votes (18.3%) = 52 seats


Blair got only 2m more votes than Hague, but I don't remember anyone bleating about the huge inequity of his win. Cameron just got 36% - so in a room of 5 people 2 will want Cameron, but only 1 each will want Brown or Clegg.

Welcome to democracy - I can't remember the exact figures but it was also something along the lines of each Tory MP requiring an average of 48,000 votes, but each Labour one requiring half that many. Hmmmm.

I'm absolutely not suggesting we go full proportional representation (we'd never be able to get rid of a **** government, as we'd always have the same compromised bunch), but there is a lot to be said for being smarter about the way the system works - I'm a fan of not having one MP for a small poxy region - several for a larger region makes more sense (noone is really responsible for our area anyway - the council just ups the bill each year and cheerfully spends it, nothing to do with the MP).

I'm also a fan of Labour/Libs making a pact - they'll really **** the country up for more than just the current generation, exposing them for the loose financial idiots they are, and making them unelectable.

Gordo

RJMS

iTrader: (2)

You're right but it will cause so much pain. As much as I would like it to happen this way in some ways I really don't want this country to be bought to its knees like this. By all accounts the Tories are also offering fixed term parliaments. Hopefully 4 years (or whatever it will be) should be enough to at least start making things better.

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

Nothing like voting on a set of policies and then even though we get a party with a majority we don't get the policies.

It's all a mess and it's not about the country unfortunately it's about men ***** waving. Democracy is deeply flawed but it's the best option we have. The problem being everybody's vote is equal. They should weight the votes on a basis of age and salary. Be a better system.

Leslie

I doubt that he would have offered to step down without the infamous visit from the men in grey suits. He must have been offered a deal to stay in until the next conference.

A lib lab pact will mean we get the same old policies from NL plus an arguably even worse set from their companions.

I agree with F1MAN, we should have another election, it might just come up with a definite answer for a strong government without compromise which is what we desperately need. This country is very poorly placed since the destruction of our economy.

Les

scud8

iTrader: (1)

It's starting to look like Clegg doesn't think he can work with Gordon even for five months. It sounds like they have fundamental disagreements about how to deal with the deficit so the Con-Dem deal might be back on.

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

Clegg's like a **** teasing slag in a nightclub with 2am fast approaching!

EddScott

Its not just what Clegg wants though is it. Its what the Lib Dem party wants and they want the voting reforms (I don't know what the exact rules are but the number of votes required to get a labour or tory in a seat is much lower than the number required for a LibDem to get a seat) I can understand why they want this and you can see why the tories don't.

I do agree that if the LibDems side with Labour for a minority government, the LibDems are unlikely to get a seat on a bus let alone parliament. Its either tory or we vote again.

FlightMan

Cleggs played a blinder if you ask me.

Lee247

Just watching the news and it looks like it's Con-Dem. Talks over between Libs and Labs

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Is your for the talks being over between Lib/Lab or for the Lib/Con alliance.

The latter is as much as disaster waitng to happen as the former IMO.

Lee247

To be honest, C. I just wish they would all bugger off and start again with new people. As I told you, I have no confidence in any of them.
At least something seems to be happening, be it positive or not

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

That's how I feel. They should all go and we should start again