Nick Clegg won't support Labour in a hung parliament.

[Kingmaker2]

Reading between the lines I think Clegg is saying he will not support Brown and if Labour come third it would be for Labour to support him (Clegg) as PM.

 

Unfortunately for Clegg, it's seats that count, and the Lib Dems will come third, so Labour aren't going to support Clegg as PM if they have twice as many seats as the Lib Dems.

[Berberis]

Unfortunately for Clegg, it's seats that count, and the Lib Dems will come third, so Labour aren't going to support Clegg as PM if they have twice as many seats as the Lib Dems.

 

Then we have a problem don’t we. If no party will align itself with any other party and none will back a new PM, we have stalemate then:

 

The Election II

"You thought the first one was bad"

[PuressenceUK]

LibDems run Sheffield.

 

Last year my Council Tax went up by less than 2.2 percent.

 

This year my Council Tax went up by less than 1.6 percent.

 

LibDems have proved to me that they are good housekeepers.

 

LibDems should be given a chance to run the Country.

.

.

.

 

If you're using this as your benchmark, I'm in a Conservative council area (Hillingdon, Greater London) and we have had zero council tax increase for the last two years.

[oldprune]

If you're using this as your benchmark, I'm in a Conservative council area (Hillingdon, Greater London) and we have had zero council tax increase for the last two years.

 

Conservatives are not an option in Sheffield.

 

Our benchmark is how little the Council Tax has increased in the last couple of years under the Lib/Dems compared to the above inflation rises we had annually when the council was Labour controlled.

[oldprune]

Unfortunately for Clegg, it's seats that count, and the Lib Dems will come third, so Labour aren't going to support Clegg as PM if they have twice as many seats as the Lib Dems.

 

The whole point of this thread is that Clegg doesn't want the support of Labour. So it is nothing about who gets how many seats. It is about which potential PM can get the backing of enough MPs to support a government.

[Kingmaker2]

The whole point of this thread is that Clegg doesn't want the support of Labour. So it is nothing about who gets how many seats. It is about which potential PM can get the backing of enough MPs to support a government.

 

 

Brown may not get Cleggs backing, but Clegg won't get Labour backing either.....that's the point.

 

If we had a system under proportional representation then the number of votes polled for each party would carry more weight and impact,........

but since we have a first past the post system Labour, aren't likely to support Clegg for PM, as the Lib Dems will inevitably end up 3rd with less than half the seats of the second placed party,

 

so you are wrong it is all about seats.

[andyofborg]

 

Brown may not get Cleggs backing, but Clegg won't get Labour backing either.....that's the point.

 

If we had a system under proportional representation then the number of votes polled for each party would carry more weight and impact,........

but since we have a first past the post system Labour, aren't likely to support Clegg for PM, as the Lib Dems will inevitably end up 3rd with less than half the seats of the second placed party,

 

so you are wrong it is all about seats.

 

if neither labour nor the conservatives win an overall majority then the parties will have to reach some accommodation or we'll be having another election in the middle of june

 

whether or not there is a formal coalition, the winning party will have to work with the lib dems

[jeremyjh1]

The whole point of this thread is that Clegg doesn't want the support of Labour. So it is nothing about who gets how many seats. It is about which potential PM can get the backing of enough MPs to support a government.

 

If you read between the lines, Clegg has not ruled out working with Labour - what he has said is that he doesn't think it would be right for Brown to remain as PM if Labour polled the fewest number of votes (yet still managed to get the greater number of seats in a hung parliament - much as our odd election process usually determines).

 

To me what he is saying, with Brown as leader (thus PM designate) count me (and the Lib Dems) out. Get rid of Brown and maybe we can talk.

 

Trouble is, I really do not think this will happen (i.e. hung parliament). Many may think 'I'll try the sea bass' yet when the waiter comes to take the order the answer will be 'I'll have steak and chips, please' (or fish and chips, if you'r Labour - joke!!!)

[andyofborg]

another consideration is that gordon brown is unlikely to survive as leader very long if labour loses its overall majority, (he may not survive very long if they retain their majority but thats a different matter).

 

david cameron is probably more secure than gordon but if he fails to secure an overall majority then his position becomes less secure the fewer seats they get

 

while the country can survive a couple of weeks without a functioning government, it probably cant stand the several weeks it will take for the other party to elect a new leader, so a lib/whoever deal could see nick clegg being pm for a few months while the other party sorts itself out.

[Kingmaker2]

if neither labour nor the conservatives win an overall majority then the parties will have to reach some accommodation or we'll be having another election in the middle of june

 

whether or not there is a formal coalition, the winning party will have to work with the lib dems

 

Yes the winning party will have to work with the LibDems, but some people here somehow think that Clegg or even Cable will be given top post PM & Chancellor ,but that ain't gonna happen.

 

Whichever way you look at it the Lib Dems might get double the tally of seats this election, to perhaps 100-120 seats, but that still puts them at less than half the total of the party coming second, that rules out any consideration that Clegg would be considered for PM by either a Labour or Conservative coalition.