Why the lib-dems are shit

[moon23]

So it is the left's fault that people will get screwed and not the lib dems for providing lobby fodder...glad we've got that clear.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

I thought you were meant to be educated, why can you not read?

 

[little_legs]

from the Sunday Times:

A parliamentary inquiry is to investigate why Vince Cable, the business secretary, quietly signed off £32m of public funding to a helicopter manufacturer based in the constituency of David Laws, his Liberal Democrat colleague.

The taxpayer handout has been granted to Agusta-Westland despite being judged "unaffordable" by the previous Labour administration and despite the coalition government's austerity drive.

 

[free spirit]

from the Sunday Times:

tbf, the enquiry really ought to be focussing on why they've not approved similar funding for other constituencies, eg forgemasters, rather than why they did agree to this one IMO.

this sounds like exactly the sort of thing a government ought to be supporting companies to do to help create jobs, and get us out of this mess.

 

[little_legs]

tbf, the enquiry really ought to be focussing on why they've not approved similar funding for other constituencies, eg forgemasters, rather than why they did agree to this one IMO.

this sounds like exactly the sort of thing a government ought to be supporting companies to do to help create jobs, and get us out of this mess.

Agreed. The piece in the ST does mention that pulling the plug on the Forgemasters ticked a lot of people off. But I think it's the secrecy surrounding the details of funding that's being questioned. It also mentions that the helicopter maker has a bit of history in the Westminster, I've never heard of it before, but a quick wiki gives http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westland_affair.

 

[Nylock]

The long term strategic mistake will be a failure of the Left to tackle the views of Conservative voters as it is so busy kicking of the Lib Dems for committing the ultimate sin of going into government with the Tories.

'The left' is kicking the libdems because they sold themselves as the party of principle during the general election. They said that there was another way, they promised the electorate so much and when it came down to it, they cynically sold their voters out. They even planned TWO MONTHS before the general election to renege on a promise they made not very long before people went to the polls. The backlash from 'the left' is understandable -you lot fucking deserve it.

 

[ymu]

moon, if one of the MPs from the left of the party wanted to challenge Clegg's leadership:

1) what are the constitutional arrangements for doing this, and

2) would you support them?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Seriously, the class war is over. And the sooner we realise that capitalism is here to stay, the better. The most we can do is make it more ethical.

Sarcasm apart though, that is actually the line that a generation (or two) has been sold.

When that conflicts with common sense, as it has increasingly clearly done since the banking crisis, I think that line gets increasingly harder to sell ...

When the consequences of capital's restructuring start to really bite, I think it's quite possible that mass anger at being sold a bunch of self-serving ruling class bullshit may ignite.

In the immortal words of Johnny Rotten 'Ever had the feeling you've been cheated?'

P.S. the Lib Dems really are shits aren't they?

 

[moochedit]

what are the constitutional arrangements for doing this, and

I'm not moon, but i googled the awnser to your first question ...

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-03872.pdf

An election for the Leader shall be called upon:
(a)
the Leader asking for an election;
(b)
the death or incapacity of the Leader;
(c)
the Leader ceasing to be a Member of the House of Commons (other
than a temporary cessation by reasons of a dissolution;
(d)
the receipt by the President of the resignation of the Leader or of a
declaration of intent to resign upon the election of new Leader;
(e)
a vote of no confidence in the Leader being passed by a majority of
all Members of the Parliamentary party in the House of Commons;
(f)
the receipt by the President of a requisition submitted by at least 75
Local Parties (including for this purpose, the Specified Associated
Organisation or Organisations representing youth and/or students)
following the decision of a quorate general meeting; or
(g)
the first anniversary of the preceding general election being reached
without an election being called under any of paragraphs (a) through
(f), provided that:
(i)
the Federal Executive may postpone such an election for no
more than one year by a two-thirds majority of those present
and voting; and
(ii)
this paragraph (g) shall not apply if the Leader is a member
of the Government.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

para h) if your leader turns out to be a smarmy lying wanker who just killed your party's credibility for the foreseeable future stone dead by sucking Tory cock.

 

[ymu]

Thanks!

75 local parties (out of, presumably, 600ish) could force a Lib Dem leadership election? That's very doable. Get the students onto it - they probably have enough constituencies between them.

 

[moochedit]

Get the students onto it

do you think they have any left ?

 

[moon23]

'The left' is kicking the libdems because they sold themselves as the party of principle during the general election. They said that there was another way, they promised the electorate so much and when it came down to it, they cynically sold their voters out. They even planned TWO MONTHS before the general election to renege on a promise they made not very long before people went to the polls. The backlash from 'the left' is understandable -you lot fucking deserve it.

The party didn't deny there had to be cuts, forming a coalition isn't selling out and there is nothing cynical about it. It's fucking common place on the continent where people grasp that a minority party in a partnership isn't going to get all its polices enacted. It's not breaking a promise to have to give up some areas of policy in a coalition.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

The party didn't deny there had to be cuts, forming a coalition isn't selling out and there is nothing cynical about it. It's fucking common place on the continent where people grasp that a minority party in a partnership isn't going to get all its polices enacted. It's not breaking a promise to have to give up some areas of policy in a coalition.

shitters.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

you've lost more votes than you could have dreamed of, i reckon. i speak to a lot of people who think you sold them down the river basically.

 

[moon23]

moon, if one of the MPs from the left of the party wanted to challenge Clegg's leadership:

1) what are the constitutional arrangements for doing this, and

2) would you support them?

The first question has been answered; the second one would depend on the candidate and whether they still had a sensible plan for reducing the deficit and state spending.

 

[moon23]

you've lost more votes than you could have dreamed of, i reckon. i speak to a lot of people who think you sold them down the river basically.

I'm not surprised we are not used to coalition and most left-leaning voters seem unable to accept that we can't enact all the polices they wanted to see enacted and instead are seeing them as broken promises. People are used to parties in power having total say so that narrative seems a reasonable explanation. It’s also the case that all three parties were in denial about the size of the deficit, the electorate did not appreciate quite how bad some things were going to be. As many commentators have said, this was perhaps the worst time to be in government. I think the party should have been more honest before about this, even if it would have hurt them a lot at the polls.

The party is also negatively Labour's strategy of trying to steal Lib Dem votes rather than take on the Tory agenda directly. This will be a long-term failure of Labour but will when them back the left-leaning voters.

Still you go into politics to have an impact so it’s better to have a period of influence in government than it is to remain popular on the side-lines. Parties come back from bad polls all the time, just look at the Republicans winning in the mid-terms or Labour’s current polling increases.

Locally for me the party is actual in a Coalition with Labour running the council so things are a bit different, and people see we are not simply just Tory-lite which is Clegg's image at the moment.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

I'm not surprised we are not used to coalition and most left-leaning voters seem unable to accept that we can't enact all the polices they wanted to see enacted and instead are seeing them as broken promises. People are used to parties in power having total say so that narrative seems a reasonable explanation. It’s also the case that all three parties were in denial about the size of the deficit, the electorate did not appreciate quite how bad some things were going to be. As many commentators have said, this was perhaps the worst time to be in government. I think the party should have been more honest before about this, even if it would have hurt them a lot at the polls.

The party is also negatively Labour's strategy of trying to steal Lib Dem votes rather than take on the Tory agenda directly. This will be a long-term failure of Labour but will when them back the left-leaning voters.

Still you go into politics to have an impact so it’s better to have a period of influence in government than it is to remain popular on the side-lines. Parties come back from bad polls all the time, just look at the Republicans winning in the mid-terms or Labour’s current polling increases.

Locally for me the party is actual in a Coalition with Labour running the council so things are a bit different, and people see we are not simply just Tory-lite which is Clegg's image at the moment.

you're blatant liars.

eta: The party is also negatively Labour's strategy of trying to steal Lib Dem votes rather than take on the Tory agenda directly. This will be a long-term failure of Labour but will when them back the left-leaning voters. - this for example? what is it but dissembling dyslexic rubbish?

 

[moon23]

you're blatant liars.

eta: The party is also negatively Labour's strategy of trying to steal Lib Dem votes rather than take on the Tory agenda directly. This will be a long-term failure of Labour but will when them back the left-leaning voters. - this for example? what is it but dissembling dyslexic rubbish?

Yes I am dyslexic, sorry for the bad grammar allow me to re-phrase it.

Labour's current strategy is to attack the Lib Dems more than the Conservatives. They are trying to 'steal' votes from the party, rather than make the case against strongly against the Conservatives. What you see in election terms is a swing with left-leaning voters returning to Labour. This doesn't affect the overall left/right balance of the nation or address the fact that the Conservatives won the most votes at the GE. The propagate the myth that every Coalition policy that is not a Lib Dem policy is a broken promise.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Yes I am dyslexic, sorry for the bad grammar allow me to re-phrase it.

Labour's current strategy is to attack the Lib Dems more than the Conservatives. They are trying to 'steal' votes from the party, rather than make the case against strongly against the Conservatives. What you see in election terms is a swing with left-leaning voters returning to Labour. This doesn't affect the overall left/right balance of the nation or address the fact that the Conservatives won the most votes at the GE. The propagate the myth that every Coalition policy that is not a Lib Dem policy is a broken promise.

no it's not. it's the simple fact that you lied your way into power and appear to be content to continue on such a course whilst being held up as human shields for those tory bastards.

 

[shagnasty]

moon you are a fool clegg is a tory and as no concern for liberal policies he will not fight sheffield hallam at the next election but a safe surrey type seat because he is a feather in the tory hat.all the orange bookers are in the government the likes of simon hughes were totally ignored

 

[butchersapron]

The long term strategic mistake will be a failure of the Left to tackle the views of Conservative voters as it is so busy kicking of the Lib Dems for committing the ultimate sin of going into government with the Tories.

It's not the left kicking you you muppet - it's your own voters. The ones you lied to to. The ones you tricked. The ones you used.

 

[butchersapron]

The party didn't deny there had to be cuts, forming a coalition isn't selling out and there is nothing cynical about it. It's fucking common place on the continent where people grasp that a minority party in a partnership isn't going to get all its polices enacted. It's not breaking a promise to have to give up some areas of policy in a coalition.

People have grasped what's happening pal. You haven't.

 

[butchersapron]

The first question has been answered; the second one would depend on the candidate and whether they still had a sensible plan for reducing the deficit and state spending.

So not any Lib-dem then. Join the only party for someone like you.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not surprised we are not used to coalition and most left-leaning voters seem unable to accept that we can't enact all the polices they wanted to see enacted and instead are seeing them as broken promises. People are used to parties in power having total say so that narrative seems a reasonable explanation. It’s also the case that all three parties were in denial about the size of the deficit, the electorate did not appreciate quite how bad some things were going to be. As many commentators have said, this was perhaps the worst time to be in government. I think the party should have been more honest before about this, even if it would have hurt them a lot at the polls.

The party is also negatively Labour's strategy of trying to steal Lib Dem votes rather than take on the Tory agenda directly. This will be a long-term failure of Labour but will when them back the left-leaning voters.

Still you go into politics to have an impact so it’s better to have a period of influence in government than it is to remain popular on the side-lines. Parties come back from bad polls all the time, just look at the Republicans winning in the mid-terms or Labour’s current polling increases.

Locally for me the party is actual in a Coalition with Labour running the council so things are a bit different, and people see we are not simply just Tory-lite which is Clegg's image at the moment.

Labour's stealing our votes pathetic and hilarious.

You're so clueless.

 

[butchersapron]

Yes I am dyslexic, sorry for the bad grammar allow me to re-phrase it.

Labour's current strategy is to attack the Lib Dems more than the Conservatives. They are trying to 'steal' votes from the party, rather than make the case against strongly against the Conservatives. What you see in election terms is a swing with left-leaning voters returning to Labour. This doesn't affect the overall left/right balance of the nation or address the fact that the Conservatives won the most votes at the GE. The propagate the myth that every Coalition policy that is not a Lib Dem policy is a broken promise.

Just fucking what!?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I thought you were meant to be educated, why can you not read?

You said the left should be attacking the Tories and not the Lib Dems. Presumably they should be attacking the Tories in order to defend and promote the interests of those about to get hurt by the proposed public sector cuts and standstills; these are the cuts and standstills which are being supported by Lib Dem lobby fodder and an enthusiastic Lib Dem leadership. My reading isn't the problem here. Your inability to think clearly and your willingnness to defend your party at all costs is.

Louis MacNeice

 

[Nylock]

The party didn't deny there had to be cuts, forming a coalition isn't selling out and there is nothing cynical about it. It's fucking common place on the continent where people grasp that a minority party in a partnership isn't going to get all its polices enacted. It's not breaking a promise to have to give up some areas of policy in a coalition.

No. But declaring publicly to support one policy AFTER formulating a plan to ditch said promise at the first opportunity IS cynical and IS selling out. Lets' not forget here that after beardy lentil munchers, the libdem's main body of support was the students -some of which wasted, in some cases, their first ever vote on your disgraceful pack of charlatans. What an introduction to representative democracy eh.


I suppose those first time voters sorta felt like this:





E2A: I never mentioned in that post you quoted them 'selling out', i said that they 'sold themselves as the party of principle'. Big difference... Guilty conscience encouraging Freudian slips here by any chance?

 

[Streathamite]

forming a coalition isn't selling out and there is nothing cynical about it.

there's nothing cynical about going into an election with a flagship, nail-your-colours-to-the-mast policy (i.e. against tuition fees), that your own policy team were already planning to drop as soon as you could?

 

[butchersapron]

They had three major polices - they formed the centre of their election approach. No to immediate aggressive cuts. End tuition fees. PR.

We now know that they had ditched the first two before the election without telling the electorate - and ditched the last at the first chance.

Moon is right, there was no sell-out. There was deliberate planned public lies.

 

[Streathamite]

And the way in which you are so willing to give cover to this onslaught against thde poor, in return for red boxes and ministers' Limoes is certainly cynical!
enjoy it whilst it lasts, btw - next time, you're toast