Why the lib-dems are shit

[andysays]

you mean, people voted based on their manifesto rather than the sheffield victory rally? I agree.

I would suggest that most people make their decision to vote based on a number of factors, including (though not necessarily only) the manifesto; their perception of how likely the party is to implement its manifesto; their perception of the leader; their perception of the local candidate; their perception of how likely their preferred party/candidate is to win in their constituency; last minute shit that gets publicised immediately before the election.

I also suggest that these various factors will be of different proportional significance to different people (and possibly change for a given person over time) and that it is more-or-less impossible to judge the significance of the different factors (either for an individual or collectively) with any accuracy.

It's a complex business, this decision making.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Surely those incidents are a part of the impression people make of those who would lead us.

You mean like Cameron's Bullingdon photo, and Osborne's "sniffing charlie with a black sex worker" photo?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Voters vote for a party that is certainly true if that is your point? but the party usually has as its figurehead a single politician who will go on to wield power. They are critical to the style and substance of the resulting government.

For example, it was clear a vote for Blair or for that matter Thatcher would result in a government dominated by their personalities and ideologies.

You're missing the point, which is that as many people vote (somewhat) tactically (i.e. for a particular person/personality to be their MP), as vote tribally, and it's the tactical voters - the "swing" voters" - in marginals that are critical, at least in our current clusterfuck of a so-called political system.

 

[weltweit]

You mean like Cameron's Bullingdon photo, and Osborne's "sniffing charlie with a black sex worker" photo?

Exactly.. yes ..

 

[Dogsauce]

If labour maintains their lead, Clegg will join with Cameron to attack Milliband in the leader's debates, simply because it will be in their interests to try an bring down that lead to somewhere that might give them a chance of holding the balance of power again. This might trump any value in attacking the Tories to hold up their own vote.

 

[weltweit]

You're missing the point, which is that as many people vote (somewhat) tactically (i.e. for a particular person/personality to be their MP), as vote tribally, and it's the tactical voters - the "swing" voters" - in marginals that are critical, at least in our current clusterfuck of a so-called political system.

Yes, although I would not claim to be any kind of expert, I agree our elections are won or lost in a small number of swing constituencies which makes individual voters votes in other areas worth less than those in critical seats. That is certainly not a fair situation.

 

[butchersapron]

If labour maintains their lead, Clegg will join with Cameron to attack Milliband in the leader's debates, simply because it will be in their interests to try an bring down that lead to somewhere that might give them a chance of holding the balance of power again. This might trump any value in attacking the Tories to hold up their own vote.

I hope he does as he will drive the few labourish lib-dem voters still hanging around away.

 

[brogdale]

I hope he does as he will drive the few labourish lib-dem voters still hanging around away.

...and, the closer the coalition parties/leaders, the more 'old' tories will be driven into the right split party. Win win.

 

[DotCommunist]

surely camerons more likely to se the writing on the wall and do his best to distance himself from nick the millstone

 

[brogdale]

surely camerons more likely to se the writing on the wall and do his best to distance himself from nick the millstone

....but his main problem is that there is no distance to be gained.

 

[Kaka Tim]

The next election bares no resemblance to 1992. Its an utterly bullshit comparison - yet many poltical commentators are peddling it.
The 1992 election was decided by how many tory voters from 1987 switched to labour - the famous 'swing voters' of middle england. Some switched, but not enough to stop a tory victory. The replacement of thatcher with major pursuaded enough of their lost support to come back to the tory voting fold.
2015 will be decided on how many 2010 lid dem defectors vote labour. Its a totally different dynamic. These voters are not going to vote tory no matter what - they are the sort of voters who stopped voting labour becasue of shit like Iraq. Eds supposed lack of charisma is not going to be a big factor for them.
Since 2010, very few tory voters have switched to labour - a few percentage points at best, whearas the lid dem defection has gifted labour maybe an 8% boost.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Exactly.. yes ..

You seemed to have missed the point, which is that such bad publicity doesn't appear to have had much of an effect with the Tory core vote, except to make people think "twat!" and reflect on their own youthful hi-jinks. It certainly didn't affect the only people whose decision-making could have influenced Cameron's or Osborne's positions - the voters of Witney and Knutsford, and the heirarchy of the Parliamentary Conservative Party and the 1922 Committee.

 

[Pickman's model]

The next election bares no resemblance to 1992. Its an utterly bullshit comparison - yet many poltical commentators are peddling it.
The 1992 election was decided by how many tory voters from 1987 switched to labour - the famous 'swing voters' of middle england. Some switched, but not enough to stop a tory victory. The replacement of thatcher with major pursuaded enough of their lost support to come back to the tory voting fold.
2015 will be decided on how many 2010 lid dem defectors vote labour. Its a totally different dynamic. These voters are not going to vote tory no matter what - they are the sort of voters who stopped voting labour becasue of shit like Iraq. Eds supposed lack of charisma is not going to be a big factor for them.
Since 2010, very few tory voters have switched to labour - a few percentage points at best, whearas the lid dem defection has gifted labour maybe an 8% boost.

tory vote 1987: 13,760,935
tory vote 1992: 14,093,007

 

[Kaka Tim]

tory vote 1987: 13,760,935
tory vote 1992: 14,093,007

higher turnout - good weather, a tighter contest. their share of the overall vote was slightly down.
please dont make me remember any more of that torrid evening. I combined it with my birthday party as i was fully expecting to see the back of the tory cunts ......

 

[Pickman's model]

higher turnout - good weather, a tighter contest. their share of the overall vote was slightly down.
please dont make me remember any more of that torrid evening. I combined it with my birthday party as i was fully expecting to see the back of the tory cunts ......

down 0.3% but up 340,000

 

[weltweit]

You seemed to have missed the point, which is that such bad publicity doesn't appear to have had much of an effect with the Tory core vote, except to make people think "twat!" and reflect on their own youthful hi-jinks. It certainly didn't affect the only people whose decision-making could have influenced Cameron's or Osborne's positions - the voters of Witney and Knutsford, and the heirarchy of the Parliamentary Conservative Party and the 1922 Committee.

Surely it is impossible to know if Cameron Osbourne might have had more votes if those images had not come out. I do understand your point that the key marginal seem not to have been affected. However I bet Labour will refer to the current tories as the toff party at the next election, or they will if they think there are votes in it.

 

[Wilf]

Very hard to predict the next election - Labour has some structural advantages in the distribution of the electorate, but the polls have narrowed to the point where these claims can be made:
http://descrier.co.uk/politics/tories-hold-firm-2015-elections-says-new-forecast/
(that the normal cycle of voting intentions for govt and opposition through to polling day may will deliver a Tory majority)

Be interesting to see what happens after the Euros, with UKIP almost certainly getting a higher vote than the Tories. They'll want to see where those votes are coming from before they decide whether to go into headless chicken mode.

My pessimism is that the Tories are better placed than Labour to construct a political narrative over the next 12 months ('took the painful choices, now seeing recovery, clearing up Labour's mess'). They can certainly make something out of the deficit shrinking and predicted to disappear - even if the overall debt is as big as ever and the deficit is down by welfare slashing (admittedly, a big 'even if'). It certainly blunts Labour's one successful line - 'it isn't working'. Beyond that, what can Miliband say, given the world view he's committed to? There are plenty of reasons for most of the electorate to hate the Tories, but little inspiration for Labour voting.

 

[redsquirrel]

There are plenty of reasons for most of the electorate to hate the Tories, but little inspiration for Labour voting.

Which in 2010, after 10 years of a Labour gov and with a highly unpopular leader, was enough to stop the Tories getting a majority.

The ABT vote has an very strong core vote, if the Tories couldn't get a majority in 2010 then how are they going to in 2015 in less favourable conditions (Labour better placed, UKIP attacking their right flank). I'm not quite as certain as BA and Kaka Tim that Labout will get a majority but they have to be the favourites atm.

 

[Kaka Tim]

the tories have to outperform labour by 5% to get an overall majority - probably 40% of the vote. They have not managed anything close to that sort any poll - or had any lead - since the election - bar a very brief blip in dec 2011. They have not achieved 40% of the vote since 1992. They have to increase their vote share on 2010 by several percentage points - no full term incumbent government has ever increased their vote share. The tories have to attract a significant chunk of voters that have never voted for them before. They have to do this with UKIP taking a chunk of their right flank.
Given all this, the tories need a miracle to avoid defeat.

 

[belboid]

Ukip vote will shrivel back for the GE. 8% tops! more likely 5. It is true that the governing parties will see a fall in their share of the vote! but it come overwhelmingly from just one of them. Would be labour voters will fail to drag themselves to a polling booth cos Ed is so shit. And the libs won't fall as much as they should cos of those places where labour have no chance, and people will go 'well, I know it didn't work last time, but..,'

 

[DotCommunist]

too small a point for its own thread, but: how long do we give clegg as leader of the libs? I think he will fall on his sword post GE.

 

[butchersapron]

Falling on his sword suggests a modicum of honour. I don't think this is the case.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Very hard to predict the next election - Labour has some structural advantages in the distribution of the electorate, but the polls have narrowed to the point where these claims can be made:
http://descrier.co.uk/politics/tories-hold-firm-2015-elections-says-new-forecast/
(that the normal cycle of voting intentions for govt and opposition through to polling day may will deliver a Tory majority)

Be interesting to see what happens after the Euros, with UKIP almost certainly getting a higher vote than the Tories. They'll want to see where those votes are coming from before they decide whether to go into headless chicken mode.

My pessimism is that the Tories are better placed than Labour to construct a political narrative over the next 12 months ('took the painful choices, now seeing recovery, clearing up Labour's mess'). They can certainly make something out of the deficit shrinking and predicted to disappear - even if the overall debt is as big as ever and the deficit is down by welfare slashing (admittedly, a big 'even if'). It certainly blunts Labour's one successful line - 'it isn't working'. Beyond that, what can Miliband say, given the world view he's committed to? There are plenty of reasons for most of the electorate to hate the Tories, but little inspiration for Labour voting.

Although you're right that the Tories are better-placed to construct a "winning" political narrative, I'm not sure it can be played widely enough to matter, except in the heartlands. Although "the green shoots" have supposedly shot, the much-trumpeted recovery hasn't had much of an effect on making people feel more secure, and most of the claims the Tories are making (lower unemployment, economic stability etc) are eminently-refutable even by a 12 year-old with no interest in politics. I'm not sure there's enough leverage for "The Big Lie" to work.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Falling on his sword suggests a modicum of honour. I don't think this is the case.

The "National Liberal" route, post-GE? Leading his fellow ministerial types over to the Tories, and then squatting their constituencies until the next GE?

 

[frogwoman]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/nick-clegg-easter-eggs-labour-3433843#.U1OUagb6lOB.facebook

 

[DotCommunist]

if he won't jump its hard to see who among them is not covered in shit so badly they can lead a pushing. Cable? lol

hopefully though, it'll just implode and we can re name this thread 'why the lib dems were shit'

 

[Wilf]

if he won't jump its hard to see who among them is not covered in shit so badly they can lead a pushing. Cable? lol

hopefully though, it'll just implode and we can re name this thread 'why the lib dems were shit'

Vacancy: Libdem leader
Essential Skills: weeping
Other: Clean driving licence

 

[magneze]

Vacancy: Libdem leader
Essential Skills: weeping
Other: Clean driving licence

 

[DotCommunist]

it'd be great if huhne had to take both the sentence for lying and the points.


If you are cleared of a wrongful conviction then they take the 'bed and board' costs of being in prison out of your compo. Massively out of order. The door should swing both ways

 

[Kaka Tim]

I guess Tim Farron will lead the charge of the hand-wringers to oust Clegg come the 2015 meltdown.