Nick Clegg thinks he is going back into Coalition again?
After hearing Nick Clegg for last few weeks about going into coalition with the Biggest party - what make him think that either Labour or the Tories want them in Government again, I know we might be going to have another Hung Party but does really believe that the Lib Dems will be in Power again
For all he knows he called lose seat and the party as whole are in meltdown, so surly I would thought the Party would want to regroup in opposition for while and get the support back, But depending on what party wins or has the biggest number of seats the Party could well be back in Coalition with or with out him
But what give Nick Clegg or the Lib Dems right to think they can govern again and is Clegg taken the Voters for Granted when he want to be back in Coalition Government again
I don't think they be back in any sort of Government for while, what does everyone else think
For all he knows he called lose seat and the party as whole are in meltdown, so surly I would thought the Party would want to regroup in opposition for while and get the support back, But depending on what party wins or has the biggest number of seats the Party could well be back in Coalition with or with out him
But what give Nick Clegg or the Lib Dems right to think they can govern again and is Clegg taken the Voters for Granted when he want to be back in Coalition Government again
I don't think they be back in any sort of Government for while, what does everyone else think
0
Comments
As much as I'd like it to be true, there's no chance.
As for Clegg, he knows that either of the main two will be begging for LidDem support very soon. As long as he holds on to his seat, there is a very strong chance he will be involved in the next government.
If the LDs can't get a deal through, I'd suggest a LD-Labour coalition, probably becomes a decent bet. Labour will jump at the chance to get into government without the influence of the SNP, however I suspect if he survives in Sheffield Hallam, Labour (probably as revenge for Clegg doing the same to Brown in 2010) will ask for Clegg's head, and then you're looking at Tim Farron as your deputy PM. Oh dear.
The reason why the LDs will most likely by the king-makers is because of the electoral system as well as the circumstances. FPTP will mean that despite gaining lower vote share than UKIP, the LDs will have seats in the double-digits. Both the Conservatives and Labour will be reluctannt to deal with arguably the two most divisive parties of the campaign - the SNP, and UKIP, and in that sense the LDs by being a less hard to swallow option, win by default. Labour will not want to alienate England, and such an intense hatred has formed between Labour and the SNP, it's questionable how well that coalition could even work. At least with the Tories and the LDs, despite their political differences, Cameron and Clegg had a good working relationship, and Orange-Bookers and Cameron's Tories, aren't that ideologically far a part anyway. Meanwhile even the Labour hierarchy are still seething at the SNP, for taking their heartlands. Cameron will also not want to deal with Farage, even if half his party does.
Perhaps the real question is how long can any of these governments last? A Lab-LD may last courtesy of SNP, Plaid, and Green MPs voting down anything that could benefit the Tories, and they also could vote through a Lab-LD Queen's Speech. A Tory-LD coalition, however, even with DUP and UKIP support, could lose the Queen's Speech, courtesy of the Lab-SNP-Green-Plaid block voting it down. Then's there arguably how Cameron's (IMHO) inevitable departure in 2017, effects the Con-LD relationship, along with the EU ref, if it survives that long. Either a Tory or Labour minority government (the latter of which, seems quite unlikely to happen but still..) won't last beyond six months.
Sky News is predicting the Conservatives and Labour will win pretty much neck and neck the same number of seats.
The fact that the Conservatives are highly likely to need the Lib Dems as part of a coalition if they are to remain in government, I imagine.
I doubt it, although I think they'll do better than some people are predicting - I don't see the wipeout some do.
There is room for another fairly central party in the system so they should always be around.
I agree Jim. I think they will do better than predicted. Personally I would prefer them to have another coalition with the Conservatives but, god forbid, if we have to have a Labour government, I would prefer them to go with the LDs rather than the SNP. Sorry, I know you are voting for them but I don't think it would be good for a Lab/SNP deal.
Still who knows. We will have to live with what we get after polling day.
I highly doubt it with Milliband in control, I think it will be a close thing with either Labour teaming up with the SNP or the Conservatives with the Liberals , I would take a bet on the latter
Touche.
This being the most unpredictable election for some time, it's anyone guess as to how the number of seats will play out.
What seems probable, is..
That there will be a "hung parliament"
That SNP will be a strong minor party.
That its to close to call which of the two major parties will gain the most seats.
The LibDems seem to be sending mixed messages, making conditions with both the Cons and Labour on any coalition agreements, and then stating that they want to be in government. Mixed messages, suggests disunity, and division and won't help the voter support.
They may see themselves as "kingmakers" as they were in 2010 but the power of the "kingmaker" appears to be some what diluted now, and may not play out as they think it will.
If Labour just happen to gain the most seats, it will be interesting to see if Mr Clegg negotiates a coalition agreement will Labour first, as he stated he would and did with the Cons in 2010.
The likely outcome is Labour being the largest party, relying on SNP and Plaid in a kind of loose coalition.
its this attitude that i think is doing most damage to the lib dems as even their traditional voting base now doesn't know what they are even voting for
They sold their voting base down the river last time. Most LibDems I know are earnest sandal-wearing types, nothing like Clegg's 'orange book' ToryDems.
I do feel for people like that because they're grass roots and can't bear that their party has propped up a tory government.
On all the current polling the Liberals will be needed to support any government. Whether they become part of it, insist on more power, or just give support on confidence motions and when they agree , is another issue.
There is no other way of getting anyone near to a majority- given the SNP are anti-Conservative, and poisonous for Labour, and only the Liberals have policies that can be met by compromises from both the major parties.
If the public keep on refusing to vote for the only parties that can provide a government , its inevitable that some parties in the middle will end up in power perpetually.
The Liberals gain nothing from retreating to a nunnery - if they are in government they can at least try and get some praise for doing something, Ironically, their best chance is to argue they moderate a Conservative government, and then to claim a share in its its economic success by 2020. Its difficult to see many votes in making Labour spend less.
Their voting base never knew what it was voting for. There was a hippy element at one extreme, wooly Liberals in the middle , and hard headed sdp types at the other. The party positioned itself to both the right and left of Labour - depending who it was speaking to. The party's vote has dispersed accordingly - some has gone off to the unworldly Greens, some to Labour, a bit less to the Consrvatives and a big chunk of the vote - probably including the protest voters ,and don't know and can't decide Liberals , has gone to UKIP according to the polls.
It was a brainer not5 to go in with a failed and defeated Labour party in 2010. Brown had no mandate, Lbaour offered no say in governemnt, and the Liberals and Labour had no majority. There was only one democratic and practical coalition avalable - even if the left didn't like it.
Clegg and the Lib Dems are a "safe pair of hands" to boost a party over the finish line. They won't upset anyone and are "yes" people (I.E will let the new government lead)
So in essence he's right, most people saw it coming months ago who saw past the fog.
a political party is meant to represent its voters and by going into a coalition with the tories, the ideological opposite of what the word liberal is meant to represent, they failed in that respect
the loss of support they have seen suggests their core vote didn't like it and isn't that what should be more important ie representing the people who actually voted for you ?
but I suppose because it benefitted "the right" you really don't care about principles
That assumes Scotland votes exactly as the polls say, many of these polls are based on as little as 80 people with 29% of them saying they are undecided and if you look at some of the SNP candidates you have to seriously question the wisdom of an electorate that chooses a 20 year old over a long serving experienced and previously very popular MP as is the case in many constituencies.
There are a significant number of constituencies that are Lib Dem / Tory battles like my own where Lib Dem will keep the anti Tory support. Even with only 20 seats they will be a major player in coalition discussions.
Yeah I do agree with this. I claimed last night the big story on May 8th might be Labour keeping more seats in Scotland than expected but I was treated like a fool for even suggesting it.
Doesn't mean they won't be in government - we are getting a hung parliament and they will be first choice of both main parties.
A sense of reality perhaps?
People whinge about how the Lib-Dems broke 2010 manifesto promises but fail to observe one simple fact. Hardly anyone voted for them, so as mandates to live up to said promises go those promises were never rubber stamped by the public in the first place.
They're shit, irrelevant and largely despised, yet they still think they have some sort of divine right to rule. I don't see why the Lib Dems can't be equally arrogant and delusional.