Yep, I'd rather waste a second vote on the foaming mouthed loons of UKIP than the Lib Dems under Clegg (or the Tories, of course). Ideally, the greens would get my second choice.
Yes. The Barnsley by-election in March was a reasonable indicator of how they'll do. They went from a close second in May 2010 to a distant sixth (losing their deposit) this time. Even UKIP and the BNP (spit) beat them.
Course he is expecting to be both labour and conservative 2nd choice. So would have more chance of getting power.
He might be in for a shock then. Nobody I know would EVER vote LibDem again, even people who would have had them as first choice last time around.
Nor me, i doubt very much if they get one seat in Scotland
Course he is expecting to be both labour and conservative 2nd choice. So would have more chance of getting power.
He might be in for a shock then. Nobody I know would EVER vote LibDem again, even people who would have had them as first choice last time around.
Nor me, i doubt very much if they get one seat in Scotland
You might be right but I doubt clegg realises this lid dems have always been a 2nd option for those that didn't want to vote con/lab as other partys are even smaller but the way UKIP are gaining ground should tell them something.
Nobody I know would EVER vote LibDem again....
I will. I suppose I hold liberal principles and philosophy at heart.
Nobody I know would EVER vote LibDem again....
I will. I suppose I hold liberal principles and philosophy at heart.
Me too, as long as I have as sound a constituency Lib Dem MP as I do at the moment. The Lib Dems have had to concede a shed load of their principles to the coalition. But hey ho, that's compromise for you. I'll vote YES to AV aware of the limitations, but knowing that change sometimes comes in drip drops. First past the post sew-saw politics just isn't for me anymore.
The Lib Dems have had to concede a shed load of their principles to the coalition. But hey ho, that's compromise for you.
There should not have been compromise. They were voted for on their manifesto as were the Tories- both of whom have totally gone back on their promises and IMO dont deserve any more votes whatsoever! 
The Lib Dems have had to concede a shed load of their principles to the coalition. But hey ho, that's compromise for you.
There should not have been compromise. They were voted for on their manifesto as were the Tories- both of whom have totally gone back on their promises and IMO dont deserve any more votes whatsoever!
Yeah. In an ideal world, an ideal economic climate blah blah blah.
Yep. In a myriad of clutter waiting for the one to undo the other before any noticeable 'business' is done.
Agree. 
The LibDems have sold their souls to the Devil and will suffer the consequencies for years to come.
The Lib Dems have had to concede a shed load of their principles to the coalition. But hey ho, that's compromise for you.
There should not have been compromise. They were voted for on their manifesto as were the Tories- both of whom have totally gone back on their promises and IMO dont deserve any more votes whatsoever!
Yeah. In an ideal world, an ideal economic climate blah blah blah.
They are liars--- bottom line-no ideal world as you state. People voted for them on the basis of their manifesto so in an "Ideal world" should we not believe what they say in election run-ups?They knew the economy of this country long before they were in power yet lied to get in into power by any means
The Lib Dems have had to concede a shed load of their principles to the coalition. But hey ho, that's compromise for you.
There should not have been compromise. They were voted for on their manifesto as were the Tories- both of whom have totally gone back on their promises and IMO dont deserve any more votes whatsoever!
Yeah. In an ideal world, an ideal economic climate blah blah blah.
They are liars--- bottom line-no ideal world as you state. People voted for them on the basis of their manifesto so in an "Ideal world" should we not believe what they say in election run-ups?They knew the economy of this country long before they were in power yet lied to get in into power by any means
People have voted (those allowed to vote) for centuries on fallacies. I didn't vote for a Labour govt. in 1997 to suck up to neo-cons like the Bush Dynasty and take us in to illegal wars overseas. Crap happens, battle lines are re-drawn and deep down I'm relatively content that a bunch of Liberal Democrats that had no real say in any way shape or form in the direction of political thought have shaken the established status quo, neutered what could have been Thatcherism Part 2 to some extent and taken some of that blurred Blairite Nu Labour ground and made the current Labour Party go back to grass roots. I like seeing the positive in this situation.
If you were down my way I'd even let you in for a cuppa and a chinwag over a Morning Star 
The current system being that if you don't vote Tory or Labour, there's no point in even registering to vote 
Like a dictatorship, but with twice the choice in dictators
The current system being that if you don't vote Tory or Labour, there's no point in even registering to vote
Like a dictatorship, but with twice the choice in dictators
Exactly!
Not really Joe, it's up to the Government to represent and protect the People!
Looking at the gap between rich and poor I'd say they have failed the majority of the population miserably.
In fact if it wasn't for Stockholm syndrome amongst the electorate the third way would be civil war to shift them two from their cosy little stitch up 
OT
I love Earl Grey tea 
Earl Grey isn't really tea.
ION.
Earl Grey isn't really tea.
ION.
That's like saying that tea ceases to be so if you put milk and sugar in it.
ION
some even get their kick from champagne, or a dry mnartini.
That's like saying that tea ceases to be so if you put milk and sugar in it.
ION
No, tea ceases to be tea, when you stick stinky stuff in it, innit!
IF clegg was too lose this referendum would he spit his dummy out and break the coalition? because if he would then i would vote against AV otherwise i might be tempted, to make voting fashionable again make it compulsory
You know he just might as this is his big thing. Compulsory voting hmm not sure as if people don't care enough to vote they not really fit to be voting as they won't look at the issues.
IF clegg was too lose this referendum would he spit his dummy out and break the coalition? because if he would then i would vote against AV otherwise i might be tempted, to make voting fashionable again make it compulsory
Clegg may well do ! As for compulsary voting, its a no from me. Too many that didnt understand the policies etc would just vote anything, and more than likely give the BNP more power, which is unthinkable, IMO
Anything that stops someone ruling the country, who 65 out of every 100 people did not want in power, can't be a bad thing.
IF clegg was too lose this referendum would he spit his dummy out and break the coalition? because if he would then i would vote against AV otherwise i might be tempted, to make voting fashionable again make it compulsory
I don't think Clegg would spit the dummy, he's already suggested that losing on AV would not be a reason to quit the coalition. However, he would say that because he's burnt his bridges now and has nowhere to go only the House of Lords or back on the Euro gravy train.
Clegg has no honour or principles, just an interest in his own self aggrandisement. He'll end up dragging the Lib Dems down with him. He's turned a party often viewed with respect by Tory and Labour voters alike to one that has shown itself to be a venal rabble of hard right, millionaire careerists.
I will vote against AV because I think losing AV and then tons of council seats will split the Lib Dems apart and lead to the collapse of this awful government.
I will vote against AV because I think losing AV and then tons of council seats will split the Lib Dems apart and lead to the collapse of this awful government.
My view exactly, Clogg is a man driven by power and certainly not of principals... I had a lot of respect for the likes of Charles Kennedy in the past, but even that's diminished. A few weeks ago he all but said if he had still been leader the Lib Dems would not be in a coalition with the Cons... simply walk away then and gain some respect back.
I think its a terrible shame, that a lot of decent hard working MP,s, MSP,s and Councillors that are Lib Dems are now getting very little support and respect due to one man,s sheer lack of any moral fibre or backbone. The Lib Dem candidate for my area, has more or less said he is a goner , not in so many words of course, but the fact he isnt even canvassing now, says it all.
I will vote against AV because I think losing AV and then tons of council seats will split the Lib Dems apart and lead to the collapse of this awful government.
My view exactly, Clogg is a man driven by power and certainly not of principals... I had a lot of respect for the likes of Charles Kennedy in the past, but even that's diminished. A few weeks ago he all but said if he had still been leader the Lib Dems would not be in a coalition with the Cons... simply walk away then and gain some respect back.
I am cynical enough to think nearly all politicians are driven by power.... especially once they get some I think the days of the idealist MP are long since gone...
I am cynical enough to think nearly all politicians are driven by power.... especially once they get some I think the days of the idealist MP are long since gone...
Me too in a way Baz, but most don't blatantly throw all their principles out the window to get there and then totally ignore their own members and voters who put them there
Anything that stops someone ruling the country, who 65 out of every 100 people did not want in power, can't be a bad thing.
Anything that stops someone ruling the country, who 65 out of every 100 people did not want in power, can't be a bad thing.
thing is if everyone votes for every candidate how does the AV system stop someone ruling the country, who 65 out of every 100 people did not want in power. People will vote for who they want as first choice and the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th etc are not the candidate they want in power.
So you end up with a situation where the candidate who most people want and gets the most votes (as 1st choice) is not the one who gets the seat. Maybe if 2nd was worth 1/2 a vote and 3rd a 1/4 of a vote it would be fairer.
Look at it this way you get down to 3 candidates 2 have 40% of the vote one has 20% so the one with 20% is iliminated one then gets over 50% (he gets the seat) but if you do one more round he is elected with 100% of the vote but most people didn't want him/her
Look at it this way you get down to 3 candidates 2 have 40% of the vote one has 20% so the one with 20% is iliminated one then gets over 50% (he gets the seat) but if you do one more round he is elected with 100% of the vote but most people didn't want him/her
It's worse than that.
Theoretically, someone who gets 49% in the first round, could get overtaken by someone who got far less, due to second, or third votes being counted.
We could make all voting positions fractions. i.e. 1st place is 1/1, 2nd place is 1/2, 3rd place is 1/3 etc. and just add them all up and not bother with the elimination rounds.
If someone's first choice comes last, in the first round, why should their second choice be so powerful?
