LibDems

[nicko31]

Lib Dems did the best they could in coalition they could in the circumstances.

Well the old cliche be careful what you wish for and now you have it!!!

 

[Mackenzie]

Simon Hughes gone after 32 years. Well done Nick Clegg for completely screwing the LibDems by getting into bed with the Tories.

Yep, their decision in 2010 left a lot of their voters unhappy. You reap what you sow.

 

[Perkino]

Th Libdems were the alternative vote, and along with the Conservatives made a good coalition helping to stabilise the economy and generate a platform for sustained growth for the future.

David Cameroon made Nick Clegg look a fool by not only ignoring his policy on tuition fees but reversing it. Although he did manage to negotiate a higher pay level before anyone ever starts paying it back meaning it's effectively a tax relief and that most people will never end up paying it back unless they earn over £50,000 a year.

Voters are often short-sighted in their views on policies and Clegg has made the best of his limited power but the Conservatives have hung him out as the guy to take the fall on any of their controversial policies. The Libdems have suffered hugely and unfairly but they are the best option for an alternative to Labour or the Tories.

 

[Norman Baker suck my lozenge]

What are going to do with all those placards that say "Winning here!"

They won't all fit down the toilet.

Bit like our clackers after the Palace debacle!

 

[Simster]

Why hasn't Nick Clegg resigned yet? A lot of good LibDem MPs have lost their seats because you.

**** off you useless tufty-haired principle-free sixth former tosspot.

 

[ditchy]

DC has, on paper, been presented with an open goal over the mediocre leadership of Ed Milliband yet, somehow he has fallen ass over tit six yards out. The Tories will win this not because they have good policies or a mandate from the people but,because the Labour party have lost so many seats in Scotland.

So why have they 304 seats vs labour 222 in England and Wales . Is that not people giving them a mandate .

 

[BLOCK F]

Why hasn't Nick Clegg resigned yet? A lot of good LibDem MPs have lost their seats because you.

**** off you useless tufty-haired principle-free sixth former tosspot.

Good morning Simster, I see you are in good spirits. Don't worry 'things can only get better'.
Seriously though, now Balls has gone and no doubt Milliband will fall on his sword, Labour must ditch the stale old guard, stop using the socialism word and promote their brighter more moderate MP's, if they are to gain credibility with the voting public.

 

[Simster]

Good morning Simster, I see you are in good spirits. Don't worry 'things can only get better'.
Seriously though, now Balls has gone and no doubt Milliband will fall on his sword, Labour must ditch the stale old guard, stop using the socialism word and promote their brighter more moderate MP's, if they are to gain credibility with the voting public.

Correct.

 

[Pavilionaire]

They have successfully destroyed their political future by hitching their horse to the Tory post. An exercise in futility.

That's a rather trite statement. Back in 2010 when the economy was bust, Labour had been defeated and the Tories were the largest party what the HELL were they supposed to do?

Tell me that, I want your answer. 5 years on the economy and UK are in good shape, they deserve some credit.

 

[Simster]

That's a rather trite statement. Back in 2010 when the economy was bust, Labour had been defeated and the Tories were the largest party what the HELL were they supposed to do?

Tell me that, I want your answer. 5 years on the economy and UK are in good shape, they deserve some credit.

With hindsight, announce to the country that the Tories wouldn't agree to a referendum on PR, not paid for tuition fees, so they couldn't form a government. Instead, they would allow the Tories to form a government with a supply and confidence arrangement.

And no, the economy was not bust in 2010. Borrowing was higher than we'd been used to but was hardly out of control. That's all.

 

[sten_super]

With hindsight, announce to the country that the Tories wouldn't agree to a referendum on PR, not paid for tuition fees, so they couldn't form a government. Instead, they would allow the Tories to form a government with a supply and confidence arrangement.

And no, the economy was not bust in 2010. Borrowing was higher than we'd been used to but was hardly out of control. That's all.

If they had a genuine shot at some power, and refused on a "point of principle" which I'd imagine a decent amount of their supporters didn't give a hoot about (PR), what do you think would have happened to their vote at this GE? It would have been clear that they were a protest party, without any will to actually enact any of their policies, and their supporters would have abandoned them in droves. It turns out that they were damned either way.

I saw a link to this on Twitter, and as much as it pains me to shove up a link to the Telegraph, I think this is pretty much spot on;
The Liberal Democrats have been punished for doing the right thing

 

[Simster]

If they had a genuine shot at some power, and refused on a "point of principle" which I'd imagine a decent amount of their supporters didn't give a hoot about (PR), what do you think would have happened to their vote at this GE? It would have been clear that they were a protest party, without any will to actually enact any of their policies, and their supporters would have abandoned them in droves. It turns out that they were damned either way.

I can't agree with this. That is pure guesswork on your part.

You say it would be seen as a "protest party", but it equally be seen as a "party that won't compromise on it's key principles for a whiff of power". If it happens again in 5 years time, I wouldn't think the Lib Dems would rush to work with the Conservatives given what their core vote clearly thinks of it.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Polling expert John Curtice says: "With 618 of the 632 seats in Great Britain declared so far, the Lib Dems have lost as many as 338 deposits."


He says the party has already lost more deposits than at any previous election. The closest was 319 in 1950 - on that occasion, the deposit was lost when a candidate polled less than 12.5% of the vote rather than 5%.

 

[Frampler]

The Lib Dems are no longer a protest vote of any kind - they were a party of Government and they paid the price for the Government's unpopularity with the centre left, losing many voters who had been attracted by their stance on the Iraq War and tuition fees. Conversely, the Lib Dems also lost voters on the right of centre for being seen to be too close to the Tories - they became indistinguishable and so voters went for the dominant party that was never going to enter coalition with Labour.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Your second paragraph answers your original question. Sold the principals of the party for 5 years of power.

Quite. Political pipsqueaks who are now back in the box they came from, having sold their principals and supporters down the river just so Nick Clegg could strut around like he mattered and even address the United Nations. They might as well disband.

 

[Simster]

Quite. Political pipsqueaks who are now back in the box they came from, having sold their principals and supporters down the river just so Nick Clegg could strut around like he mattered and even address the United Nations. They might as well disband.

You just worry about your own band of clowns who are too arrogant to pick a leader the electorate consider even remotely electable.

 

[sten_super]

I can't agree with this. That is pure guesswork on your part.

You say it would be seen as a "protest party", but it equally be seen as a "party that won't compromise on it's key principles for a whiff of power". If it happens again in 5 years time, I wouldn't think the Lib Dems would rush to work with the Conservatives given what their core vote clearly thinks of it.

Of course it's complete guesswork - as is your assertion that there would have been no impact on their vote. I suppose it's fair to say that, given the outcome that we've observed, they'd have been better off with the uncertainty of the alternative, but we don't honestly know what the response would have been to that option. As the link I posted suggested, I think that they've been punished for doing the right thing - turning down the chance at coalition would (IMHO) have looked churlish and left an unstable government beholden to their own right wing. They entered into coalition in good faith, chose their own 'red lines' and were then hung out to dry by the larger party and have been punished at the polls for it.

 

[El Presidente]

The electorate don't agree with either of you. They think the LibDems did a shit job and that's all that matters

I think the people who voted LD in 2010 think they did a shit job and that matters more. If you look at the LD demographic, they had a higher proportion of young voters, as well as those who work in education.

The tuition fees capitulation proved to be their Achilles' Heel.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I saw a link to this on Twitter, and as much as it pains me to shove up a link to the Telegraph, I think this is pretty much spot on;
The Liberal Democrats have been punished for doing the right thing

Interesting article. Not only is it spot on but Merkel's comments about small parties always getting punished in coalitions seems to bear out an international trend that has now happened here in the UK.

I don't understand the gloating of some voters at the demise of the Lib Dems - without them you have on the left the Greens with economically unsustainable policies, a shellshocked Labour party, an SNP party hell-bent on independence, a leaderless UKIP with just one MP and a Tory party with a licence to cut and a majority to pass through more austerity - all on the back of garnering just 36% of the vote.

 

[Questions]

Sell your soul to the devil and the day comes when you have to pay up.