Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

National Walkout Against Fees 24.11.10

The Lib Dems are not the far-right flank, you are actually only succeeding through the sheer vitriol of the left in pushing many Lib Dems further to the right.

It's all the left's fault, if they would stop insulting the lib dems and start agreeing with them for a change, all would be well in the world.
 
The Lib Dems are not the far-right flank, you are actually only succeeding through the sheer vitriol of the left in pushing many Lib Dems further to the right.

So it's our fault you're turning into a right wing tory apologist? Yeah, right.

Don't forget to mention you're only referring to a tiny minority of people who voted libdem at the election. Most of them have abandoned you now they see what you really are.
 
The Lib Dems are not the far-right flank, you are actually only succeeding through the sheer vitriol of the left in pushing many Lib Dems further to the right.

Yes you are. That's why laws was placed as the original hatchet man - it's why you pushed hard for the cut in child benefit and have basically acted as the vanguard of the cuts on the poorest (mug enough to take the flak for them too).

If you're saying theres an ongoing extreme-right wingisation of your party who am i to argue? There has been for a decade now - and now it's come to fruition, to the benefit of the tories and the horror of the rest of us.
 
The error was yours. (If it was an error, I am beginning to think you are utterly incapable of telling the truth). You said most people voted Tory, not the most. There is only one possible interpretation of that statement and it is the one people have taken.

I've given example as to how there are other interpretations of 'most' in post 659. Given that I have also clarified the term in which I meant it I fail to see why it continues to be a point worthy of discussion.

The underlying question is about whether the Tories have more of a democratic legitimacy within government than the Lib Dems. Sadly more people voted for them so they have. This being the case we can expect often Tory policy will have a larger influence than coalition policy. This is one of those instances.

The Coaltion agreement was made so a programme of government could be delivered, to facilitate that programme of government support is required from both parties in areas of disagreement. So the Conservatives are supporting an AV referendum bill and the Lib Dems are supporting the fees proposals, albeit with having made improvements.
 
John, Gill and Harry each stood for election,

John got 10 votes,
Harry got 5 votes,
Gill got 7 vote,

Who out of John Harry and Gill got the most votes.

Yes, John got the most votes. BUT, and here's the bit you seem to be unable to grasp, most people DIDN'T vote for John. You know this too; you've been caught lying and you're trying to dig your way out.
 
One thing with the 21 grand repayment limit as well (beside the fact that it is being touted as more generous than the current limit or 15 grand, which let's not forget was 23 grand when it was introduced - wedge strategy anyone?) is that it is likely to be more imposing the lower your salary gradient. So if you get a job that starts at 30k when you graduate and quickly rises to 50k, then you're in a different situation to someone who might only start earning national average wage in their 30s, when they might well have kids and it will be seriously inconvenient to start paying back student loans.
 
I've given example as to how there are other interpretations of 'most' in post 659. Given that I have also clarified the term in which I meant it I fail to see why it continues to be a point worthy of discussion.

The underlying question is about whether the Tories have more of a democratic legitimacy within government than the Lib Dems. Sadly more people voted for them so they have. This being the case we can expect often Tory policy will have a larger influence than coalition policy. This is one of those instances.

The Coaltion agreement was made so a programme of government could be delivered, to facilitate that programme of government support is required from both parties in areas of disagreement. So the Conservatives are supporting an AV referendum bill and the Lib Dems are supporting the fees proposals, albeit with having made improvements.
the only reason that the conservatives have any sort of 'legitimacy' is because the queen summoned david cameron to buckingham palace and didn't ask nick clegg. it's nothing to do with the number of votes who gets summoned to form a government, you know.
 
One thing with the 21 grand repayment limit as well (beside the fact that it is being touted as more generous than the current limit or 15 grand, which let's not forget was 23 grand when it was introduced - wedge strategy anyone?) is that it is likely to be more imposing the lower your salary gradient. So if you get a job that starts at 30k when you graduate and quickly rises to 50k, then you're in a different situation to someone who might only start earning national average wage in their 30s, when they might well have kids and it will be seriously inconvenient to start paying back student loans.

I don;'t know anyone who's got a 30k job on graduating. Who are these mythical people?
 
the only reason that the conservatives have any sort of 'legitimacy' is because the queen summoned david cameron to buckingham palace and didn't ask nick clegg. it's nothing to do with the number of votes who gets summoned to form a government, you know.

You really don't seem to understand how it works, do you?
 
the only reason that the conservatives have any sort of 'legitimacy' is because the queen summoned david cameron to buckingham palace and didn't ask nick clegg. it's nothing to do with the number of votes who gets summoned to form a government, you know.

The number of MPs does, and the number of votes translates accross to MPs in some form.
 
The number of MPs does, and the number of votes translates accross to MPs in some form.
can you explain then why john major got more votes in 1997 than 1992 and yet enjoyed no majority at all? the simple number of votes is in large measure utterly irrelevant - it's where they are which makes all the difference.
 
Back
Top Bottom