Why the lib-dems are shit

[i_got_poison]

vince cable's plan for the royal mail

http://www.libdems.org.uk/latest_ne...ting&pPK=a576f52b-c3d4-4b20-a430-5cfd70eb1a10

The Post Offices will not be for sale and there will be no further programme of closures. Innovative proposals could see Post Office Ltd turned into a mutual, giving power to staff, sub postmasters and communities

 

[stethoscope]

vince cable's plan for the royal mail

http://www.libdems.org.uk/latest_ne...ting&pPK=a576f52b-c3d4-4b20-a430-5cfd70eb1a10

There's a thread here btw.

You didn't mention that the Royal Mail of course will be mostly privatised, and mutualising Post Office counters might sound all very community and 'big society', but it could mean the death of them if those involved cannot find the money and resources to keep them running (Post Offices are already struggling, along with village stores and pubs).

Socialist my fucking arse.

 

[frogwoman]

There's a thread here btw.

You didn't mention that the Royal Mail of course will be mostly privatised, and mutualising Post Office counters might sound all very community and 'big society', but it could mean the death of them if those involved cannot find the money and resources to keep them running (Post Offices are already struggling, along with village stores and pubs).

Socialist my fucking arse.

That is why the lib dems are shit basically - "socialist", lol. You are basically a party of hipsters, or in other words, tories who find it unfashionable to admit that you are tories, because, like, that is so not cool man, and seeming to be very very slightly left-wing is more "edgy" and "cool" but you don't want to get too radical and start supporting things like strikes, because you're basically, at the end of it all, still tories, and besides, you hate chavs and that.

 

[moon23]

and you haven't grasped that self-interest will bind the LDs closer to their coalition partners for fear of an early election, and the Tories will feel unstoppable. Whereas a YES vote will be a slap down for Cameron, will get the Tory right itching to blame him for the whole thing. Why wouldn;t that produce just as much internal grief and strain on the coalition as your scenario?

A NO vote would say people have faith in their political system, and trust the way things get done in Westminster. It would hardly be a revolutionary message.

A No vote would be selling sort a generations chances of reform for what might or might not end the coalition sooner. I agree that losing the AV vote will wed the Lib Dems to the Tories, their only hope will be that the economy picks up after 4 years or so. A yes vote would embolden the party to stand up to the Tory party as they would have defeated it and won on what is a central issue.

 

[frogwoman]

A No vote would be selling sort a generations chances of reform for what might or might not end the coalition sooner. I agree that losing the AV vote will wed the Lib Dems to the Tories, their only hope will be that the economy picks up after 4 years or so. A yes vote would embolden the party to stand up to the Tory party as they would have defeated it and won on what is a central issue.

Yeah right

 

[butchersapron]

A No vote would be selling sort a generations chances of reform for what might or might not end the coalition sooner. I agree that losing the AV vote will wed the Lib Dems to the Tories, their only hope will be that the economy picks up after 4 years or so. A yes vote would embolden the party to stand up to the Tory party as they would have defeated it and won on what is a central issue.

Anything that's been 'thrown away' will be by and because of you. Don't you dare lecture anyone on selling generations short you cuts supporting goon.

 

[frogwoman]

but the welfare state and free university tuition is so last century man

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

but the welfare state and free university tuition is so last century man

Yeah it's more important to be able to rank candidates in order of preference than fund education and healthcare.

 

[frogwoman]

Yeah it's more important to be able to rank candidates in order of preference than fund education and healthcare.

Insert some guff about choice here

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Cos the fucking cunts are on newsnight saying that they will start means testing child benefit.

i hate to say i told you so....

 

[frogwoman]

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

even that isn't right cos they haven't plucked the poor fucker bare.....

 

[ymu]

 

[butchersapron]

Clegg and Huhne both in big trouble in their seats. This on uk polling report tonight:

Taking Eastleigh first, Chris Huhne’s seat is a Con/LD marginal. In 2005 it was an ultra-marginal with only 568 votes in it, in 2010 Chris Huhne extended his majority to 3864 (7%) – the shares of the vote were LD 47%, CON 39%, LAB 10%. Lord Ashcroft’s poll has currently voting intention in Eastleigh at CON 42%(+3), LAB 21%(+11), LDEM 31%(-16) – suggesting the Lib Dem vote collapsing towards Labour and letting the Conservatives through.

Moving onto Sheffield Hallam, this is currently a pretty safe Lib Dem seat for Nick Clegg, with the Conservatives currently in a distant second place. The topline figures for general voting intention in the Populus poll are LDEM 33%(-20), LAB 31%(+15), CON 28%(+4): an even bigger collapse from the Lib Dems to Labour, but as Labour start off in third place Nick Clegg narrowly holds on.

 

[ymu]

Look at those numbers for Clegg! From safe Lib Dem with Labour third, it's a three way marginal with Labour second.

 

[i_got_poison]

A No vote would be selling sort a generations chances of reform for what might or might not end the coalition sooner. I agree that losing the AV vote will wed the Lib Dems to the Tories, their only hope will be that the economy picks up after 4 years or so. A yes vote would embolden the party to stand up to the Tory party as they would have defeated it and won on what is a central issue.

if this coalition fails a general election will return a conservative majority. what little concessions the lib dems were able to wring from a coalition will
evaporate, in favour of a hardline approach. those complaining of cuts now will have their eyes opened when cameron caves into the demands of his backbenchers.
labour should work with the liberal democrats to get agenda through into government policy.

i've not read anything concerning what numbers\position the liberal democrats would poll if AV were passed?

 

[ViolentPanda]

There's a thread here btw.

You didn't mention that the Royal Mail of course will be mostly privatised, and mutualising Post Office counters might sound all very community and 'big society', but it could mean the death of them if those involved cannot find the money and resources to keep them running (Post Offices are already struggling, along with village stores and pubs).

Socialist my fucking arse.

Poison's link is shite, there's no meat on the actual proposals (as opposed to the well-crafted generalisations that hide the sort of occurrences you mention above). Such fluff may make a few lib-dims feel good, but that's the only purpose it serves.

 

[ViolentPanda]

A No vote would be selling sort a generations chances of reform for what might or might not end the coalition sooner. I agree that losing the AV vote will wed the Lib Dems to the Tories, their only hope will be that the economy picks up after 4 years or so. A yes vote would embolden the party to stand up to the Tory party as they would have defeated it and won on what is a central issue.

So again you ask people to eat the shit sandwich because it's the only sandwich on offer, and again you can't understand why people might prefer to forego the shit sandwich.

 

[moon23]

Anything that's been 'thrown away' will be by and because of you. Don't you dare lecture anyone on selling generations short you cuts supporting goon.

I'll speak how I like thanks and won’t be bullied down by you. Labour had 13 years in power and failed to offer any form of PR. The Lib Dems have argued passionately for a fairer voting system for years. All that was on the table was a shot for AV, it is step towards greater reform of our current old and outdated unfair voting system. We as a party now passionately argue for AV as a step on the road to reform.

If Labour had introduced some form of electoral reform in their 13 years of power then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

 

[frogwoman]

I think that being able to choose multiple candidates on a list is kind of secondary to the kind of hammering that the quality of life all of us are going to face over the next few years. That is the point you are failing to grasp.

 

[moon23]

So again you ask people to eat the shit sandwich because it's the only sandwich on offer, and again you can't understand why people might prefer to forego the shit sandwich.

Excuse me? The Liberal Democrats have for years consistently argued for a fairer voting system. Neither Labour or the Conservatives were prepared to offer a vote on STV. I don't remember Labour offering a PR system to try and form a coalition, and the Tories where never going to agree to it. Politics is about the art of the possible, what the Lib Dem's have done is secure a chance for a system that is an improvement on the current one. It's not the best improvement, but it's an improvement.

If you vote against AV then you will be voting against political reform, you are aligning yourself with the status quo and the Murdoch press for the sake of your intellectual purity.

 

[moon23]

I think that being able to choose multiple candidates on a list is kind of secondary to the kind of hammering that the quality of life all of us are going to face over the next few years. That is the point you are failing to grasp.

If you are willing to conflate issues and throw away our generations chance for poltical reform then so be it.

 

[frogwoman]

This isn't about "intellectual purity" this is about real peoples lives not ticking boxes in a list.

 

[frogwoman]

Excuse me but how dare you lecture others about "throwing away our generations chance" in any context? These cuts are going to destroy peoples lifes and futures and possibly kill people, having FPTP for another 50 years won't.

 

[moon23]

This isn't about "intellectual purity" this is about real peoples lives not ticking boxes in a list.

Yes it's about real people and how they democratically elect representatives, it's not about whether we have a system that elects people that are going to agree with what you think is the best course of action.

This is about whether the Labour party who had AV as part of their manifesto live up to their principles or sell them short for a shot at attacking the Lib Dems.

 

[moon23]

This is about all the so called progressives arguing for the status quo because at this moment they disagree with those who propose the reform.

 

[frogwoman]

Yes it's about real people and how they democratically elect representatives, it's not about whether we have a system that elects people that are going to agree with what you think is the best course of action.

This is about whether the Labour party who had AV as part of their manifesto live up to their principles or sell them short for a shot at attacking the Lib Dems.

Before you have a go at anyone about not standing up for principles why not ask the Lib Dem MPs why they abstained on the vote for PR when even some tories and Labour MPs did when it has been THEIR POLICY for the last four years !

And I'm not in the Labour party, as you know

 

[moon23]

Excuse me but how dare you lecture others about "throwing away our generations chance" in any context? These cuts are going to destroy peoples lifes and futures and possibly kill people, having FPTP for another 50 years won't.

You are prepared to conflate issues for political gain? Listen to yourself talking about killing people for an emotive hit. Whether you think the cuts are right or wrong is a separate issue from political reform. The Labour government had AV as part of it's manifesto, so we assume if they were in power and not making as many cuts they would be brining it in.
You however are prepared to act as a roadblock to progressive political reform because the government introducing them is not to your liking.

I would have hoped you were more principled and less partisan than that.

 

[frogwoman]

this is a thread about the lib dems, i think i am allowed to bring in whatever issues are relevent to the topic - and "throwing away our generations chance" is a misjudged choice of words indeed when it comes to the events of the last few days ..........

 

[i_got_poison]

This is about all the so called progressives arguing for the status quo because at this moment they disagree with those who propose the reform.

this is called spite.