Lib Dems push Labour into 3rd place

[Berberis]

It would appear the YouGov poll in the Sun shows a huge swing to the Lib dems primarily at the expense of the other main parties.

 

CON 33%(-4)

LDEM 30%(+

LAB 28%(-3)

 

Could we be about to see a complete change to our political landscape? Could labour become the little voice of the 3rd party in UK politics or is this just a blip and with the new focus on their policies will they unravel.

 

I’m intrigued by the whole thing, this is the first time a general election has been so open to all three parties.

[HeadingNorth]

I would hazard a guess that it's due to Clegg's (apparently, I didn't watch it) impressive performance in the televised debate.

 

Since, in the next debate, both leaders will be setting out to attack Clegg and not each other, the effect will no doubt disappear again.

[Berberis]

I would hazard a guess that it's due to Clegg's (apparently, I didn't watch it) impressive performance in the televised debate.

 

Since, in the next debate, both leaders will be setting out to attack Clegg and not each other, the effect will no doubt disappear again.

 

Or it could push more support to the Lib Dems if the others appear to be ganging up on him unfairly.

[Longcol]

It would appear the YouGov poll in the Sun shows a huge swing to the Lib dems primarily at the expense of the other main parties.

 

CON 33%(-4)

LDEM 30%(+

LAB 28%(-3)

 

Could we be about to see a complete change to our political landscape? Could labour become the little voice of the 3rd party in UK politics or is this just a blip and with the new focus on their policies will they unravel.

 

I’m intrigued by the whole thing, this is the first time a general election has been so open to all three parties.

 

You only quote half the story.

 

Translated into seats this would give;

 

Labour 276 seats; Conservatives 245 seats; Lib Dems 100 seats; Others 29.

 

It would give the Lib Dems a huge bargaining chip for proportional representation.

[HeadingNorth]

Or it could push more support to the Lib Dems if the others appear to be ganging up on him unfairly.

 

People don't seem to have been smart enough to realise that Clegg looks better because the other two are ignoring him and attacking each other; why would they be smart enough to see that the reason he starts to look worse is because they're ganging up against him?

 

If they were smart, they wouldn't be watching a live televised debate in the first place. Ability to pick up cheap debating points by trapping your opponent in words is not a skill that helps to run a country, so there's no sensible reason for wanting a Prime Minister who is any good at it.

[Greybeard]

The poll results will be a flash in the pan but the exposure the Lib Dems are enjoying from these live debates is likely to do them more good than harm and if charisma counts they should gain significantly....Clegg made Cameron look positively middle-aged

[Stoatwobbler]

It would appear the YouGov poll in the Sun shows a huge swing to the Lib dems primarily at the expense of the other main parties.

 

CON 33%(-4)

LDEM 30%(+

LAB 28%(-3)

 

Could we be about to see a complete change to our political landscape? Could labour become the little voice of the 3rd party in UK politics or is this just a blip and with the new focus on their policies will they unravel.

 

I’m intrigued by the whole thing, this is the first time a general election has been so open to all three parties.

 

 

Are we going to see this in the form of a barchart graph, as you get on Lib Dem leaflets?

[esme]

People don't seem to have been smart enough to realise that Clegg looks better because the other two are ignoring him and attacking each other; why would they be smart enough to see that the reason he starts to look worse is because they're ganging up against him?

no they were too busy agreeing with him, especially at the end of the debate

 

especially on issues like the right to recall corrupt MP's, on which both Cameron and Brown expressed support for Cleggs idea, pity they couldn't have supported that idea when it was proposed in the commons by Clegg some months earlier, Brown's lot voted against it and Camerons mob didn't even turn up

If they were smart, they wouldn't be watching a live televised debate in the first place.

if we were smart we'd have a better system of government that represented the people and not the handful of cabinet members of the party that wins

Ability to pick up cheap debating points by trapping your opponent in words is not a skill that helps to run a country, so there's no sensible reason for wanting a Prime Minister who is any good at it.

except this is exactly what happens at prime ministers questions and any debate that happens in the commons where they speak, you can watch it live when parliament reforms if you don't believe me, the only difference is the lack of insults and jeers from the backbenchers on the TV debate

 

the thing is in the commons Cameron and Brown can ignore Clegg, in the TV debate they couldn't

[HeadingNorth]

except this is exactly what happens at prime ministers questions and any debate that happens in the commons where they speak

 

 

Quite so. We seem to care far more about having politicians who can score cheap debating points, than having politicians who are actually any good at running a country. Live television debates are only going to make that worse.

[esme]

You only quote half the story.

 

Translated into seats this would give;

 

Labour 276 seats; Conservatives 245 seats; Lib Dems 100 seats; Others 29.

 

It would give the Lib Dems a huge bargaining chip for proportional representation.

and is a huge reason for introducing full proportional representation or scrapping the constituency system which seems biased towards labour and conservatives