Discussion
johnxjsc1985 said:
May's decision not to engage in a TV debate with the likes of Farron is spot on they have all to gain and she has all to lose.
I don't think that's so much "spot on" as "good for May".I honestly don't know who to vote for. The Tories have had their centre gutted and weren't doing the most amazing job of running things before they turned into a single issue party... as are, apparently, the Lib Dems all of a sudden. I mean the whole election is 'vote Tory/LD because... Brexit' and the only party talking about how the country is run seems to be Labour, which would have an amazingly weak cabinet.
I thought it was dire during the Brown years but looking at how Cameron has left us I don't actually think we'd be any worse off- at least we'd have a decent opposition and the country wouldn't be split into god knows how many pieces giving a government five years without a manifesto, that's for sure.
Deptford Draylons said:
Maybe the 48% are waiting for the GE to support the Libs ?
I think they've shot theselves in the foot by making this about Brexit. The Tories have basically stolen UKIPs voterbase by becoming UKIP themselves, and while May alienates centrists, there are many Tories who felt Cameron was too left-leaning himself. They've lost a little of their traditional support but Brexit has gained votes from the working and underclasses... and cenrist Labourites scared by McDonnel.I also wonder if we're becoming a bit American where the poor stick it to the liberal elite by voting in the conservative elite as though that is somehow more in their interests.
There's plenty of ammo to hammer the conservatives these past seven years and May's authoritarian bent even puts off many Tory voters. I think Clegg would have a better chance of rebuilding the party (if he survives- which other LD's are as high profile?), but the remainers are split by more things than just Brexit, so making it such a centrepiece won't help them scoop up the remain vote like the Tories are managing on the otherside.
Edited by glazbagun on Saturday 6th May 10:35
glazbagun said:
I think they've shot theselves in the foot by making this about Brexit. The Tories have basically stolen UKIPs voterbase by becoming UKIP themselves, and while May alienates centrists, there are many Tories who felt Cameron was too left-leaning himself. They've lost a little of their traditional support but Brexit has gained votes from the working and underclasses... and cenrist Labourites scared by McDonnel.
I also wonder if we're becoming a bit American where the poor stick it to the liberal elite by voting in the conservative elite as though that is somehow more in their interests.
There's plenty of ammo to hammer the conservatives these past seven years and May's authoritarian bent even puts off many Tory voters. I think Clegg would have a better chance of rebuilding the party (if he survives- which other LD's are as high profile?), but the remainers are split by more things than just Brexit, so making it such a centrepiece won't help them scoop up the remain vote like the Tories are managing on the otherside.
Clegg has already gone, the other weasel is the leader now.I also wonder if we're becoming a bit American where the poor stick it to the liberal elite by voting in the conservative elite as though that is somehow more in their interests.
There's plenty of ammo to hammer the conservatives these past seven years and May's authoritarian bent even puts off many Tory voters. I think Clegg would have a better chance of rebuilding the party (if he survives- which other LD's are as high profile?), but the remainers are split by more things than just Brexit, so making it such a centrepiece won't help them scoop up the remain vote like the Tories are managing on the otherside.
Edited by glazbagun on Saturday 6th May 10:35
glazbagun said:
Deptford Draylons said:
Maybe the 48% are waiting for the GE to support the Libs ?
I think Clegg would have a better chance of rebuilding the party (if he survives- which other LD's are as high profile?), but the remainers are split by more things than just Brexit, so making it such a centrepiece won't help them scoop up the remain vote like the Tories are managing on the otherside.Edited by glazbagun on Saturday 6th May 10:35
Both Clegg and Farron don't want the UK to leave the EU, but spout the message that it is possible to leave as long as the compromises the UK make with the EU in effect still keep us in the EU but dressed in camouflage.
The Lib-Dems need another 'name' to take them forward, there is no 'name', the brand that includes the word Democrat is tainted by both Clegg and Farron.
FWIW there's a theory that says Farron's problem isn't Brexit, it is being too timid on Brexit. If ever there was a time to go all-in, this is it. What has he got to lose? The current electoral maths is *very* unkind to the LDs.
Both major parties are essentially pro-Brexit now - it *will* happen under them.
If Farron said "vote for us, we'll stop this nonsense on day 1" then *that* would be a position.
Instead he sits on the fence, proclaiming himself a bit Eurosceptic and promising another Referendum. Who wants that?
This was his one chance in my view, and he's fluffed it. And that is rather sad.
Both major parties are essentially pro-Brexit now - it *will* happen under them.
If Farron said "vote for us, we'll stop this nonsense on day 1" then *that* would be a position.
Instead he sits on the fence, proclaiming himself a bit Eurosceptic and promising another Referendum. Who wants that?
This was his one chance in my view, and he's fluffed it. And that is rather sad.
skwdenyer said:
FWIW there's a theory that says Farron's problem isn't Brexit, it is being too timid on Brexit. If ever there was a time to go all-in, this is it. What has he got to lose? The current electoral maths is *very* unkind to the LDs.
Both major parties are essentially pro-Brexit now - it *will* happen under them.
If Farron said "vote for us, we'll stop this nonsense on day 1" then *that* would be a position.
Instead he sits on the fence, proclaiming himself a bit Eurosceptic and promising another Referendum. Who wants that?
This was his one chance in my view, and he's fluffed it. And that is rather sad.
As much as I agree we have to stick with Brexit for better or worse, I think you're right. May is the Brexit candidate. Ruth up north is the Union candidate. If Tim came out guns blazing for Remain he wouldn't be PM but he'd eclipse Labour and do better than what's happening now.Both major parties are essentially pro-Brexit now - it *will* happen under them.
If Farron said "vote for us, we'll stop this nonsense on day 1" then *that* would be a position.
Instead he sits on the fence, proclaiming himself a bit Eurosceptic and promising another Referendum. Who wants that?
This was his one chance in my view, and he's fluffed it. And that is rather sad.
skwdenyer said:
FWIW there's a theory that says Farron's problem isn't Brexit, it is being too timid on Brexit. If ever there was a time to go all-in, this is it. What has he got to lose? The current electoral maths is *very* unkind to the LDs.
Both major parties are essentially pro-Brexit now - it *will* happen under them.
If Farron said "vote for us, we'll stop this nonsense on day 1" then *that* would be a position.
Instead he sits on the fence, proclaiming himself a bit Eurosceptic and promising another Referendum. Who wants that?
This was his one chance in my view, and he's fluffed it. And that is rather sad.
The trouble is that by declaring the "all in" position they are in effect putting a hard limit on there support of around 20-25%. Because while people may go on about "the 48%" a sizeable number wanted to leave but thought the risks were too high (and so are happy it's going to happen) and another sizeable portion didn't want to leave, aren't happy with it but believe that democratically it's been decided. Both major parties are essentially pro-Brexit now - it *will* happen under them.
If Farron said "vote for us, we'll stop this nonsense on day 1" then *that* would be a position.
Instead he sits on the fence, proclaiming himself a bit Eurosceptic and promising another Referendum. Who wants that?
This was his one chance in my view, and he's fluffed it. And that is rather sad.
20-25% is not enough to win.
Besides, they have already declared that to be their position, just trying to fudge round it a bit to try and appeal to more than the 20-25% (which isn't really happening as they've barely gained any support).
Fastdruid said:
The trouble is that by declaring the "all in" position they are in effect putting a hard limit on there support of around 20-25%. Because while people may go on about "the 48%" a sizeable number wanted to leave but thought the risks were too high (and so are happy it's going to happen) and another sizeable portion didn't want to leave, aren't happy with it but believe that democratically it's been decided.
20-25% is not enough to win.
Besides, they have already declared that to be their position, just trying to fudge round it a bit to try and appeal to more than the 20-25% (which isn't really happening as they've barely gained any support).
LibDems could always try appealing for the student vote.20-25% is not enough to win.
Besides, they have already declared that to be their position, just trying to fudge round it a bit to try and appeal to more than the 20-25% (which isn't really happening as they've barely gained any support).
Then again, maybe not.
Or they could target poor downtrodden workers - by pledging a tax increase that includes the basic rate.
Failing that there's always the attraction of a mansion tax to spend several times over, with Vince in charge of spunking it over and over; they'd do well in London.
As a last resort they might get Tom Farrow to change his name to something more memorable.
turbobloke said:
Fastdruid said:
The trouble is that by declaring the "all in" position they are in effect putting a hard limit on there support of around 20-25%. Because while people may go on about "the 48%" a sizeable number wanted to leave but thought the risks were too high (and so are happy it's going to happen) and another sizeable portion didn't want to leave, aren't happy with it but believe that democratically it's been decided.
20-25% is not enough to win.
Besides, they have already declared that to be their position, just trying to fudge round it a bit to try and appeal to more than the 20-25% (which isn't really happening as they've barely gained any support).
LibDems could always try appealing for the student vote.20-25% is not enough to win.
Besides, they have already declared that to be their position, just trying to fudge round it a bit to try and appeal to more than the 20-25% (which isn't really happening as they've barely gained any support).
Then again, maybe not.
Or they could target poor downtrodden workers - by pledging a tax increase that includes the basic rate.
Failing that there's always the attraction of a mansion tax to spend several times over, with Vince in charge of spunking it over and over; they'd do well in London.
As a last resort they might get Tom Farrow to change his name to something more memorable.
As much as I think the public and media did them a huge disservice during their time in coalition, equally they didn't help themselves; they didn't properly communicate to their core vote what coalition was all about. Much of the public are stupid and cannot grasp complicated messages; they could and should have turned that into a huge success for them, showing that they were responsible in power, demonstrating how they could "rein in" the Tories. Oh, if only they were better politicians...
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that 10-20% of the public wanted Brexit yet didn't vote for it (or, if it is so, I'd suggest that at least as many voted for Brexit but have regretted it ever since). No other party is anti-Brexit. 20-25% of the vote is all they're going to get at the moment (if that, to be honest), so anything else has to be a bonus.
Above all, they have to be about something. They must be for something tangible. And it must be a simple message.
Along the way, if they manage to collapse the housing market (which is the real issue right now, not tax rates - a basic rate hike isn't a problem if people can only afford to live) and regularise a few other things, that wouldn't be the end of the world.
But above all it would make this a genuine debate.
Right now it is not.
We have:
- May (the consummate politician - was pro-Europe, now "bowing to the will of the people" by leading us through the muddy waters of Brexit - didn't she do well?, as someone might have said...);
- Corbyn (who, much as I loved the idea of his candidacy as providing a first genuine philosophical choice for the country in decades, has simply demonstrated why he's spent his political life not leading anything of note);
- UKIP (no idea who's leading it) (who seem to be the only protest vote party ever to really deliver on the promise of the protest, and who are therefore now irrelevant); and
- Farron (who has taken the one political point of difference he had and, frankly, destroyed the simplicity of its message)
And, given this showing, what did either Labour or LibDems think they possibly had to gain by backing May's snap election? The whole point of the fixed term parliament act was to stop this sort of politicking, instead allowing elections only when there was broad-based support for the good of the country. What on earth is the good of this?
It is just such an enormous shame (again).
skwdenyer said:
I'm not sure I agree with the idea that 10-20% of the public wanted Brexit yet didn't vote for it (or, if it is so, I'd suggest that at least as many voted for Brexit but have regretted it ever since). No other party is anti-Brexit. 20-25% of the vote is all they're going to get at the moment (if that, to be honest), so anything else has to be a bonus.
You misunderstand what that 10-20% or so is, it's the people that did not like the EU but thought the cost of leaving was too high. The people who believed Project Fear. The people who ideologically wanted out but had jobs that relied on the EU. Totally different from those that voted leave as few would have voted leave but really wanted to stay (regret is something different but there the polls say it's only a few %)
Equally there would have been 10-20% of people that wanted to leave, voted for leave, don't regret it but wouldn't have kicked up any fuss if the vote had been remain.
Fastdruid said:
You misunderstand what that 10-20% or so is, it's the people that did not like the EU but thought the cost of leaving was too high. The people who believed Project Fear. The people who ideologically wanted out but had jobs that relied on the EU.
Totally different from those that voted leave as few would have voted leave but really wanted to stay (regret is something different but there the polls say it's only a few %)
Equally there would have been 10-20% of people that wanted to leave, voted for leave, don't regret it but wouldn't have kicked up any fuss if the vote had been remain.
I did understand the 10-20% but when it gets down to it this is about one hunch vs another. The polls are all over the place.Totally different from those that voted leave as few would have voted leave but really wanted to stay (regret is something different but there the polls say it's only a few %)
Equally there would have been 10-20% of people that wanted to leave, voted for leave, don't regret it but wouldn't have kicked up any fuss if the vote had been remain.
My point is this: unless Farron can be about something clear and differentiated, he has no hope in my view. The only sane reason to back May's self-serving election was if he had such a thing to offer. It seems he didn't, and it is the country that is the poorer for that.
skwdenyer said:
I did understand the 10-20% but when it gets down to it this is about one hunch vs another. The polls are all over the place.
Not really the polls have been pretty clear. Little regret, what there is seems to be more remain than leave regret and 2/3rds of people wouldn't want another referendum. So absolute best case the Lib Dems are appealing to 1/3rd but that third wouldn't be all "remainers".The upper bound for the Lib Dems is about 20% not 48%.
Fastdruid said:
skwdenyer said:
I did understand the 10-20% but when it gets down to it this is about one hunch vs another. The polls are all over the place.
Not really the polls have been pretty clear. Little regret, what there is seems to be more remain than leave regret and 2/3rds of people wouldn't want another referendum. So absolute best case the Lib Dems are appealing to 1/3rd but that third wouldn't be all "remainers".The upper bound for the Lib Dems is about 20% not 48%.
People don't want another referendum, no - the last one was too damaging - that's rather why I think a LibDem position of "vote for us to remain - no new referendum needed" would be a good one.
Anyhow sadly Farron's as stupid as the rest of them. It is a sad fact that almost all of the current politicians fail the old Groucho Marx club membership test...
skwdenyer said:
((Right now, they're the "nothing" party)) the home of people who believe in some sort of lovely cuddly idea of democracy without really espousing a strong position on anything - just as they so often have been.
. . .
Above all, they have to be about something. They must be for something tangible. And it must be a simple message.
. . .
Along the way, if they manage to collapse the housing market (which is the real issue right now, not tax rates - a basic rate hike isn't a problem if people can only afford to live) and regularise a few other things, that wouldn't be the end of the world.
. . .
It is just such an enormous shame (again).
I must with respect disagree on all points selected.. . .
Above all, they have to be about something. They must be for something tangible. And it must be a simple message.
. . .
Along the way, if they manage to collapse the housing market (which is the real issue right now, not tax rates - a basic rate hike isn't a problem if people can only afford to live) and regularise a few other things, that wouldn't be the end of the world.
. . .
It is just such an enormous shame (again).
LibDems aren't cuddly. Anyone looking for cuddly will be disappointed. They're the sort of people who want to tax voters for parking cars outside their own homes. add a penny to the basic rate to tax low-earners more, and truly believe it's justified and reasonable. Madness.
A basic tax rate hike is absolutely a problem for people barely making ends meet.
After decades of failure, left-liberalism is on the way out, if it hasn't already departed. What should Liberal Democrats be for, that won't be rejected yet again?
LibDemmery spawns odious hypocrites such as Huhne, oily shifters like Clegg and nobodies like Tim Who. Getting a figurehead and cabinet-in-waiting with credible individuals that voters can relate to without needing a peg on their nose will be challenging. They're the fence that's not in the middle any more which few people want to sit on. Which is why I put the 'nothing party' in brackets as I agree on that bit
jmorgan said:
News telling me that "Tim nice but who" wants to tax me more to fund the NHS.
Not that I was going to vote for him anyway.
I think they're talking about £6 billion in revenue. But therein lies the problem: it seems that however much ££££ is ploughed into the NHS, it seems to be ALWAYS in some sort of state of crisis. For as long as I can remember, it appears to be teetering on the edge of calamity. As pointed out by others, perhaps its time for a full scale re-hash, rather than tinkering around the edges. The ginger one is not being clever on this one.Not that I was going to vote for him anyway.
Biker 1 said:
jmorgan said:
News telling me that "Tim nice but who" wants to tax me more to fund the NHS.
Not that I was going to vote for him anyway.
I think they're talking about £6 billion in revenue. But therein lies the problem: it seems that however much ££££ is ploughed into the NHS, it seems to be ALWAYS in some sort of state of crisis. For as long as I can remember, it appears to be teetering on the edge of calamity. As pointed out by others, perhaps its time for a full scale re-hash, rather than tinkering around the edges. The ginger one is not being clever on this one.Not that I was going to vote for him anyway.
But propose modernizing it and the f
kwit wkers appear and claim the Tories are "privatising" the NHS by the back door. Some of the st I've heard from Corbynites since the election was announced. 
1 actually claimed that in 5 years the NHS wont exist anymore!Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff