Clegg refuses to rule out long term deal with Tories-End of Libdems?

[Titanic99]

So you admit they KEPT their promise, but you think they should have broken it to save your neck in some way or other.

 

Speaking as someone who never finds everything he seeks, I think it quite reasonable to seek a deal and then admit defeat when the elusive item cannot be found.

[truconstruct]

No I mean the two parties with most in common compromised to introduce policies voted for by most of the population.

 

For example only 24-25% of the people eligible to vote, voted for the cuts coming next week. My suggestion would have prevented this and satisifed the wishes of the majority.

 

That's just spin.

[Titanic99]

and what if the result of the second election was just as confused? or resulted in a conservative majority?

 

not counting the chaos of having another 40 days without a government and the cost to both the parties and the state of a second election?

 

i doubt the wider electorate would have stood for the "one party standing against the tories" plan, both parties would have been massacred

 

it seems to me, you just wanted the lib dems to become slaves to the nulabour politburo, at least in coalition with the conservatives the libdems are equals

 

It wouldn't happen as a high majority of people opposed the cuts coming and this is/was the main issue for the electorate, the vote could have been a straight choice between cuts now and risk another recession, or cuts/tax increases when the recovery is in place and I suspect a clear majority would have existed for the second option.

 

Again I'm not sure what you have got that means you are being treated as equal!

[Titanic99]

That's just spin.

 

If factually accurate means spin then yes it is.

[truconstruct]

it seems to me, you just wanted the lib dems to become slaves to the nulabour politburo, at least in coalition with the conservatives the libdems are equals

 

Yep that about sums it up.

 

These nu-labour 'people' just can't contemplate that anyone could have an idea of their own.

 

Their arrogence is astounding.

[espadrille]

Ok

 

So I have just sat and listened to the Andrew Marr interview with Nick Clegg, courtesy of Plekhanov( thank you)

 

I really cannot see what the problem is. Nick Clegg is as honest as the day is long. You only have to analyse his body language. So many politicians do not realise what they are giving away in their body language.

He answers the questions, very clearly and fully.You can detect too fully by Andrew Marrs impatient 'yeses', as though he is rushing him along.

 

He admits that now that he has a clear picture about the economy (and how bad the situation has got in Europe since the election )that cuts now need to be made sooner than he at first anticipated.

So that is human like behaviour. We admit that when we dont have the full facts , it can be very difficult to make accurate decisions.

Now that he can see how Labour spent so frivously on projects that they didnt even have a budget for that there is an enormous sense of urgency to get on with the job.

He constantly reminds Marr that the decisions they will take will not be easy, that they will be unpopular and that there will be some disagreements over the decisions.

When asked about Vince Cable he tells it like it is. Not how the newspaper article portays it.

I have started by the way to read The Independant. You get a much better read and the stories are just stories.Not tainted by political bias

[truconstruct]

I have started by the way to read The Independant. You get a much better read and the stories are just stories.Not tainted by political bias

 

Good choise, I aslo take in the Daily Star and the Mirror so I can see how the spin compares for the prols.

[Titanic99]

Ok

 

So I have just sat and listened to the Andrew Marr interview with Nick Clegg, courtesy of Plekhanov( thank you)

 

I really cannot see what the problem is. Nick Clegg is as honest as the day is long. You only have to analyse his body language. So many politicians do not realise what they are giving away in their body language.

He answers the questions, very clearly and fully.You can detect too fully by Andrew Marrs impatient 'yeses', as though he is rushing him along.

 

He admits that now that he has a clear picture about the economy (and how bad the situation has got in Europe since the election )that cuts now need to be made sooner than he at first anticipated.

So that is human like behaviour. We admit that when we dont have the full facts , it can be very difficult to make accurate decisions.

Now that he can see how Labour spent so frivously on projects that they didnt even have a budget for that there is an enormous sense of urgency to get on with the job.

He constantly reminds Marr that the decisions they will take will not be easy, that they will be unpopular and that there will be some disagreements over the decisions.

When asked about Vince Cable he tells it like it is. Not how the newspaper article portays it.

I have started by the way to read The Independant. You get a much better read and the stories are just stories.Not tainted by political bias

 

What would your take be on the following key points:

 

Will Clegg enter another deal with the Tories before the next election- I predict he will

 

Will you get your much cherished desire for a change in the voting system within this Parliament- I'd like a wager you don't

 

Will Vince Cable still be there in a years time- I predict No

 

Given the reason for the change in policies is now down to problems within the Eurozone, do you believe your leader should have been aware of these before the election and told you so before you cast your vote- Perhaps I've credited him with more inteligence than was due, but I'm sure these problems have been with us for quite a while now

[espadrille]

What would your take be on the following key points:

 

Will Clegg enter another deal with the Tories before the next election- I predict he will

 

Will you get your much cherished desire for a change in the voting system within this Parliament- I'd like a wager you don't

 

Will Vince Cable still be there in a years time- I predict No

 

Given the reason for the change in policies is now down to problems within the Eurozone, do you believe your leader should have been aware of these before the election and told you so before you cast your vote- Perhaps I've credited him with more inteligence than was due, but I'm sure these problems have been with us for quite a while now

 

I guess that no one with any sense can predict what will actually happen before 5 years is up.Nick Clegg wouldnt have predicted anything at all. I clearly remember him saying many many times that he would talk to the party who had the most number of votes. That is what is did and he kept his word on that. I cant waste my energies on what may or may not happen. decisions are made on a day to day basis, attempting to bring some stability to a fragile economy. We dont have crystal balls so we shall stick to just facts.

I do believe that we shall get our way re a change to the way we do politics in this country. As Clegg stated, even though we are only just over 2 weeks in to the new parliament they already have meetings going on to discuss how the news system will work.

I guess the next thing will be that you will ask me to predict how long this will take. Of course I cant do that, but I do know that If Clegg says he is taking steps to take that forward then he is taking steps to take that forward.

 

Again, I dont have a crystal ball and cant read Vince Cables mind but there is nothing to suggest that Vince Cable is unhappy with his lot.

After all just 3 weeks ago he was a respected adviser to Clegg. Now he is part of a coalition Govt . Cant see what the problem is..

oh and regarding the Eurozone, no one predicted this chaos. Even the Governor of the Bank of England.

[plekhanov]

The boundary review will take place in any event; it's long overdue, as constituencies at present come in widely varying sizes. (Indeed, it's because of these discrepancies, which at present happen to favour Labour areas, that a Labour vote of 36% would have been a sizeable majority but a Tory vote of 36% wasn't a majority at all.)

 

I'm not sure why Marr, or Clegg, was trying to conflate the two issues. They both happen to concern Parliamentary practice, but they don't have to happen together.

Whilst they aren't intrinsically linked they are related and importantly both only have to be settled by May 2015 and will have little to no effect upon the country before then.

 

In contrast thanks to the state Labour have left the country in there are a great many issues that affect people everyday which need dealing with right away and it is only right and proper that they are given priority with things which can wait, like electoral reform, waiting.

 

I think our electoral system is badly in need of reform and when we get the referendum will campaign with everything I've got to try and win it but I'd be outraged if Nick was trying to get that done ahead of rather more pressing matters like sorting out the deficit and issues which affect the day to day lives of people and running of the state.

 

If in two years time nothing has happened then I'll be getting rather concerned but there is no need for electoral reform to be a top priority of the new government right now and a good many reasons why it shouldn't be.