The next election - prediction

Gorgeous_George

I expect another election to be called this year - possibly in November.

The Lib Dems are unlikely to form a lasting coalition with either Labour or the Tories. With Labour funds running low and the Tory party coffers overflowing, the result is likely to be very different.

What do you think? Will there be another election this year? Will they print enough ballot papers? Might they introduce online voting.

GG

lostinrates

who knows.

what I do think, as I have said for ages, is what we needed was a period of stability and to be fairly sure of he political terrain for a period. I'm sure the election being held, not necessarily the outcome..., is what has been a good thing for America..eople confident in the short term decisions they make in rspect to taxation/political direction etc.

I think a stable political situation would help UK whatever the result.

Really2

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

I expect another election to be called this year - possibly in November.

The Lib Dems are unlikely to form a lasting coalition with either Labour or the Tories. With Labour funds running low and the Tory party coffers overflowing, the result is likely to be very different.

What do you think? Will there be another election this year? Will they print enough ballot papers? Might they introduce online voting.

GG

Could it be sooner with all the problems we have had in terms of votes cast?

Would not be to surprised if it was run again in the next couple of months TBH.

purch

I think it would be good decision for the long term credibility of the Liberal Democrats for them to form a solid and workable coalition that creates a Government with a workable majority and mandate.

If they do that, and we get a period of stable Government in the longer run it will make the wavering voter, who would like to vote LD but doesn't, more likely to vote for them, and ultimately give them a better chance of turning % of votes into real seats.

Of course, if they could also get some agreement on electoral reform included in the coalition agreement it would help them even more.

Gorgeous_George

I'd like to see a House of Representatives and a Presidential-style election (limited to 2 runners in the final race).

I think the next couple of months is too ambitious. It takes a while to arrange and July/August is holiday season. Call an election in September and hold it in November is more likely IMHO.

FWIW, I think a coalition would hand too much power to the minorities. I'd prefer a majority Government who can lead with strength.

GG

abaxas

Libdems need to bow down ALL power and form a pact with the tories.

If they dont, they will make a mockery of their own PR ideas. Why would anyone want PR made for unstable governments.

kennyboy66_2

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

I expect another election to be called this year - possibly in November.

The Lib Dems are unlikely to form a lasting coalition with either Labour or the Tories. With Labour funds running low and the Tory party coffers overflowing, the result is likely to be very different.

What do you think? Will there be another election this year? Will they print enough ballot papers? Might they introduce online voting.

GG

I suspect this will be vastly outweighed by the removal of the 'Gordon effect'.
The Tories had a hugely unpopular PM , an overwhelmingly supportive press, a vast war chest to spend on adverts, plus Ashcrofts money & organization in the marginals.

They still couldn't win a majority. No policies, no strength in depth to their team and a foolish willingness to let Michael Gove appear on TV. Bright bloke, excellent debater, interesing ideas - but is a walking odious advert for "same old Tories" in mould of John Redwood.

The best campaigning costs next to nothing - it relies on an army of volunteers canvassing and posting leaflets.

I reckon a Labour party led by someone other than Brown (say Milliband) would have performed about 30-40 seats better than they did.

smk77

kennyboy66 wrote: »

I suspect this will be vastly outweighed by the removal of the 'Gordon effect'.
The Tories had a hugely unpopular PM , an overwhelmingly supportive press, a vast war chest to spend on adverts, plus Ashcrofts money & organization in the marginals.

They still couldn't win a majority. No policies, no strength in depth to their team and a foolish willingness to let Michael Gove appear on TV. Bright bloke, excellent debater, interesing ideas - but is a walking odious advert for "same old Tories" in mould of John Redwood.

The best campaigning costs next to nothing - it relies on an army of volunteers canvassing and posting leaflets.

I reckon a Labour party led by someone other than Brown (say Milliband) would have performed about 30-40 seats better than they did.

I agree 100% with this. I back Brown as I believe that he's very capable. Had other countries listened to Brown's concerns in 1998 over global financial regulation then we wouldn't be in a global mess. He was right but was ignored. Had it not been for Brown's fiscal stimulus package then we'd still be trying to drag ourselves out of recession. Why was Cameron the only leader of any of the major opposition parties in the G20 that did not support Brown?

Even after all the problems with the economy, the 'illegal' wars and immigration issues which have Labour with very little support from the press the tories were still not able to put themselves into power with a majority..something that they did in 79, 83, 87 and 92. If Labour have been that bad then surely Cameron should have walked it? He didn't because the public don't want him as PM - but they don't want Brown either.

I do think that Brown has to go for the sake of the country. We need a stable government and Brown can't provide that - Neither can cameron. Another Labour leader would be able to steady the ship and take back some of those seats. That puts Labour in a better position to form a steady coalition government with the Lib Dems.

Jonbvn

smk77 wrote: »

I agree 100% with this. I back Brown as I believe that he's very capable. Had other countries listened to Brown's concerns in 1998 over global financial regulation then we wouldn't be in a global mess. He was right but was ignored. Had it not been for Brown's fiscal stimulus package then we'd still be trying to drag ourselves out of recession. Why was Cameron the only leader of any of the major opposition parties in the G20 that did not support Brown?

You can stop canvassing. The election is finished (for now).

smk77

Jonbvn wrote: »

You can stop canvassing. The election is finished (for now).

:rotfl:
very true!!