Did You Vote LibDem?

[butchersapron]

fuck me it's weird to see all these people come out with "yeah, but you know, I hate the tories and all that but maybe it's not so bad our team ARE FUCKING TORIES NOW".

It's just a continuation of their pre-election behaviour and shows they're not pre-disposed to learning. That and the lashing out (see gareth's drivel above)

 

[danny la rouge]

Just like Liberal Democrat voters didn't endorse the Tories.

I understand you don't want to believe this, but the Liberals said they'd put the Tories in power, then they put the Tories in power. It's just a fact. If you voted for them, they are taking that vote as an endorsement of this. You knew the promise. You voted for it.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

You're claiming exactly that thing.

thanks for telling me my own mind love I'm so glad we talked where would i be without you to tell me what to think...

 

[butchersapron]

It's not a case of taking out the central strut.

That's ludicrous.

His argument is clear from his whole post and substituting largest part for majority does not make any great difference.

Yes it is, it's precisely that - the tories won because the achieved a majority so everyone else should not blame the lib-dems. That's how whole stupid pig-ignorant argument. And it's wrong because they didn't achieve a majority of a damn thing. The whole thing hinges on what understands (or more accurately, fails) to be a majority.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I'm claiming no such thing [Garf claims the majority of the country backed the Tories]...

So you didn't say 'the party who were elected by the majority of the country to run it...'; which is where we came in.

Louis MacNeice

 

[butchersapron]

thanks for telling me my own mind love I'm so glad we talked where would i be without you to tell me what to think...

It's in your first post gareth. Go check. Unless you've suddenly realised what majority means and so have taken back that first ranting nonsense post? Have you?

 

[danny la rouge]

thanks for telling me my own mind love I'm so glad we talked where would i be without you to tell me what to think...

So, when you said the Tories were elected by the majority, you did not mean 'the majority of the country backed the Tories'? What did you mean, then?

 

[Diamond]

Yes it is, it's precisely that - the tories won because the achieved a majority so everyone else should not blame the lib-dems. That's how whole stupid pig-ignorant argument. And it's wrong because they didn't achieve a majority of a damn thing. The whole thing hinges on what understands (or more accurately, fails) to be a majority.

It's not a pig-ignorant argument. It's perfectly valid and far more worthwhile addressing if you're of a left wing persuasion and in it's simplest form it is this:

Why did Labour lose?

 

[Fedayn]

No I fucking didn't.

 

[kabbes]

It seems to me that a very pertinent question has not been asked. If the Liberal Democrats did not exist, what would have happened? Would, then, the Tories not be now forming a government? Or would they have managed to get a simple majority?

 

[danny la rouge]

Why did Labour lose?

Because they were shit.

Next?

 

[fractionMan]

I understand you don't want to believe this, but the Liberals said they'd put the Tories in power, then they put the Tories in power. It's just a fact. If you voted for them, they are taking that vote as an endorsement of this. You knew the promise. You voted for it.

I know plenty of people that voted libdem who had no idea this would happen. It never even occurred to them it would happen.

 

[DotCommunist]

perhaps they should have looked at the political landscape before voting then. It was on the cards.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

It's not a pig-ignorant argument. It's perfectly valid and far more worthwhile addressing if you're of a left wing persuasion and in it's simplest form it is this:

Why did Labour lose?

This presumes that BA or myself wanted Labour to win; which for my part I didn't (and unless BA has recieved a sharp blow to the head I can't imagine that he did either).

Louis MacNeice

 

[Diamond]

Because they were shit.

Next?

If that's as far as the left's analysis is going to go they better prepare for being out of power for a good few elections to come.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

It's just a continuation of their pre-election behaviour and shows they're not pre-disposed to learning. That and the lashing out (see gareth's drivel above)

I'm not lashing out I really couldn't give a shit what the no mark numpties on here think about their labour at any cost policy or their support for one branch of neo liberal conservatives over another to me it's like people arguing over which is more healthy coke or pepsi... but I understand why it's important for little elitists like you and you kin to try and continue this false impression...

but it's still a nonsense...

 

[danny la rouge]

It seems to me that a very pertinent question has not been asked. If the Liberal Democrats did not exist, what would have happened? Would, then, the Tories not be now forming a government? Or would they have managed to get a simple majority?

Who knows. But they do exist, and they chose to prop up the Tories.

 

[Diamond]

This presumes that BA or myself wanted Labour to win; which for my part I didn't (and unless BA has recieved a sharp blow to the head I can't imagine that he did either).

Louis MacNeice

But even if you're a non-labour left-wing politico, it is still the most pertinent question to ask.

 

[danny la rouge]

If that's as far as the left's analysis is going to go they better prepare for being out of power for a good few elections to come.

Who had better prepare to be out of power?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

But even if you're a non-labour left-wing politico, it is still the most pertinent question to ask.

Why?

Louis MacNeice

 

[danny la rouge]

I know plenty of people that voted libdem who had no idea this would happen. It never even occurred to them it would happen.

Well, OK, but they did say so well in advance. So you can't really accuse the LibDems of keeping it quiet.

 

[Diamond]

Who had better prepare to be out of power?

Anyone who seeks election without finding an answer to that question first.

 

[kabbes]

Who knows. But they do exist, and they chose to prop up the Tories.

But any statement that begins by blaming the Liberal Democrats for the presence of a Tory government must logically start by considering what would have happened without the Liberal Democrats. If the Tories would have got in anyway then people who voted Liberal cannot be blamed.

I ask this pure as an academic exercise. As I said previously, I live in such an overwhelmingly Tory area that it really makes bugger-all difference who I vote for.

 

[danny la rouge]

Anyone who seeks election without finding an answer to that question first.

Oh, OK. Cheers.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

It's not a pig-ignorant argument. It's perfectly valid and far more worthwhile addressing if you're of a left wing persuasion and in it's simplest form it is this:

Why did Labour lose?

Theres no need to address this whatsoever it's far better to have recriminations and self congratulating back slapping that what ever happens the smug and shill aren't to blame ... who cares if they'll suffer the consequences all the same as long as they can go to their graves saying I told you so they're happy...

again no action before or after the election merely like the old gits from the muppets sitting on the side lines sniping about things...

Still Internet rages and keyboard warriorism is far better than real world action...we all know that right....

 

[Diamond]

Why?

Louis MacNeice

Because it goes to the heart of the current political situation.

Let me be clear - I don't necessarily have an answer to it but if that isn't the starting point for analysing this election then you're in trouble from the off.

 

[cesare]

If that's as far as the left's analysis is going to go they better prepare for being out of power for a good few elections to come.

It's been decades since a left wing party were even running for power.

 

[butchersapron]

It's not a pig-ignorant argument. It's perfectly valid and far more worthwhile addressing if you're of a left wing persuasion and in it's simplest form it is this:

Why did Labour lose?

That's was a part of his rant, not the whole by any means - be consistent. The major point was that the lib-dems need not be blamed for joining a tory govt because the tory govt are the rightful govt due to their winning a majority of the countries support, and that's democracy (And your question isn't really an argument).

I notice also you ignore all the stuff about:

oh noez the puppet on this hand is nasty where as the puppet on this hand is good... we'll ignore the intentions of the puppeteer eh....

Is this the sort of simple argument you feel drawn to?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I'm not lashing out I really couldn't give a shit what the no mark numpties on here think about their labour at any cost policy or their support for one branch of neo liberal conservatives over another to me it's like people arguing over which is more healthy coke or pepsi... but I understand why it's important for little elitists like you and you kin to try and continue this false impression...

but it's still a nonsense...

That's not what is going on though; or more accurately no just what is going on. Why are you making stuff up?

Louis MacNeice

 

[Diamond]

That's was a part of his rant, not the whole by any means - be consistent. The major point was that the lib-dems need not be blamed for joining a tory govt because the tory govt are the rightful govt due to their winning a majority of the countries support, and that's democracy (And your question isn't really an argument).

I notice also you ignore all the stuff about:



Is this the sort of simple argument you feel drawn to?

I'd classify it as the majority or the largest part.