Cable threatens to bring Government down..

[sccsux]

the usual course of action when this happens.

 

Some tories are saying that if these comments had been made by one of their (tory) MPs, then he would have been fired; yet Cable keeps his job. Hardly "the usual course of action when this happens".

[wednesday1]

The BBC have also shot themselves in the foot to some extent, gleefully reporting the "War on Murdoch" comments.

 

Let's wonder for a while what would happen if the Govt broke up and a General Election were called. I couldn't see anything other than a Tory win. Labour are still trying to figure out what they stand for and the Lib Dems would probably be wiped out.

 

 

 

I'm not sure if the Coalition broke-up now that this would lead to an outright Tory win at all. Labour seem to be consolidating their small lead in the polls which if repeated at an GE would give them a majority of 34.

I reckon the best thing that could happen would be for the ConDems to hold it together for another few months, just watch their poll ratings slip when the mass redundancies start and the protests begin.

It is then when the Lib Dems will imo lose their nerve and bring down the Coaltion.

[puisseguin]

I'm not sure if the Coalition broke-up now that this would lead to an outright Tory win at all. Labour seem to be consolidating their small lead in the polls which if repeated at an GE would give them a majority of 34.

I reckon the best thing that could happen would be for the ConDems to hold it together for another few months, just watch their poll ratings slip when the mass redundancies start and the protests begin.

It is then when the Lib Dems will imo lose their nerve and bring down the Coaltion.

 

You seem to have a very strange outlook on politics. I see the Lib/Dems with a share of power that they have craved for decades. They might not like some of the policies that they are involved in but they are at least in a position to influence them. They also have several ministers in government for the first time in generations. Influencing policy and drawing ministerial salary.

As you rightly pointed out the Lib/Dems are way down in the polls right now, so you have to think that forcing an election where they can trade what they have for political oblivion isn't the obvious choice.

I can't see the Tories forcing an election either if as you claim they would lose it. So at the moment the coalition is in the best interests of both parties and the wishful thinking of a few folk on here who clearly didn't vote for either of them isn't going to alter that.

So at the moment the coalition will just have to get on with the job of clearing up the financial chaos. It is obviously painful for a lot of people but would have been necessary whoever was in government. In a few years time the initial pain will be forgotten and if that leads to substantial gains for either the Tories or Lib/Dems in the polls either one might bring about an election. As Gordon Brown showed in the last couple of years, unpopularity in the polls doesn't cause an election. If he had thought he would win, he would have gone to the polls in 2008. As he didn't think that he hung on until full term despite numerous attempts to oust him.

[wednesday1]

You seem to have a very strange outlook on politics. I see the Lib/Dems with a share of power that they have craved for decades. They might not like some of the policies that they are involved in but they are at least in a position to influence them. They also have several ministers in government for the first time in generations. Influencing policy and drawing ministerial salary.

As you rightly pointed out the Lib/Dems are way down in the polls right now, so you have to think that forcing an election where they can trade what they have for political oblivion isn't the obvious choice.

I can't see the Tories forcing an election either if as you claim they would lose it. So at the moment the coalition is in the best interests of both parties and the wishful thinking of a few folk on here who clearly didn't vote for either of them isn't going to alter that.

So at the moment the coalition will just have to get on with the job of clearing up the financial chaos. It is obviously painful for a lot of people but would have been necessary whoever was in government. In a few years time the initial pain will be forgotten and if that leads to substantial gains for either the Tories or Lib/Dems in the polls either one might bring about an election. As Gordon Brown showed in the last couple of years, unpopularity in the polls doesn't cause an election. If he had thought he would win, he would have gone to the polls in 2008. As he didn't think that he hung on until full term despite numerous attempts to oust him.

 

 

Quite right unpopularity in the polls doesn't neccesarily lead to elections but, and it is not on that basis that I think there would be on. It would be the fact that the Coalition is just totally unworkable!

[puisseguin]

Quite right unpopularity in the polls doesn't neccesarily lead to elections but, and it is not on that basis that I think there would be on. It would be the fact that the Coalition is just totally unworkable!

 

I wouldn't fret about it too much. That seems to be the wishful thinking of half a dozen folk on this forum, none of whom voted for either of the coalition partners in the first place.

I voted for one of them thinking that a coalition was very much on the cards. I didn't get the government that I wanted but someone has to clear up the financial mess this country is in. Most people who voted for either party in the coalition understand that and will make allowances.

As I said no one has given me a good reason why either party would break the coalition. That includes you.

Tell me why you think a Lib/dem MP involved in government and drawing £100K ministerial salary who want to bring about an election where you claim he would lose his deposit.

[wednesday1]

I wouldn't fret about it too much. That seems to be the wishful thinking of half a dozen folk on this forum, none of whom voted for either of the coalition partners in the first place.

I voted for one of them thinking that a coalition was very much on the cards. I didn't get the government that I wanted but someone has to clear up the financial mess this country is in. Most people who voted for either party in the coalition understand that and will make allowances.

As I said no one has given me a good reason why either party would break the coalition. That includes you.Tell me why you think a Lib/dem MP involved in government and drawing £100K ministerial salary who want to bring about an election where you claim he would lose his deposit.

 

What do you think the motives of the Telegraph were by breaking this story if it wasn't to humiliate the Lib Dems further.

 

A Lib Dem minister may decide that the ONLY hope of retaining his seat is to dump the Coalition so that his constituents will not blame him for the devastation that the ConDems are planning on the public services or want to be associated with the party that destroyed the NHS.

 

Money is not the only motivator for people I would guess that Cable (Certainly Clegg with his inherited wealth!) are already financially secure without having to sell their soul's in this tie-up with the Cons for a day in the sunshine.

[Greybeard]

I'm not sure if the Coalition broke-up now that this would lead to an outright Tory win at all. Labour seem to be consolidating their small lead in the polls which if repeated at an GE would give them a majority of 34.

 

If all the 'don't knows' voted for the Don't Know party labour would have a landslide victory.

[wednesday1]

If all the 'don't knows' voted for the Don't Know party labour would have a landslide victory.

 

 

 

I think 'Don't know' seems to be the preserve of the Lib Dem portion of the Coalition.

[Stoatwobbler]

Why is most of the anti government criticism aimed at the smaller part of the coalition and not the conservatives? May I suggest that they are an easier target.

The media look for sensationalism to increase their audience.

 

That's a very fair question.

 

The Lib Dems are an easy target (not helped by their reneging on some of their most important policies) and you have to wonder if they are being used as a kind of human sheild for the Conservatives.

 

Certainly there are a fair few Labour supporters who seem to have all but forgotten about the Tories as they go after the Lib Dems.

[Greybeard]

What do you think the motives of the Telegraph were by breaking this story if it wasn't to humiliate the Lib Dems further.

 

 

The Barclay brothers aren't wishy-washy Cameron type tories, they're more old guard colonel blimp types and hope to destabilise the coalition and make life difficult for Cameron et al.