Lib Dems & Tories... Can they work together?

Gorgeous_George

I think Labour and the Tories have more in common than Lib Dems and Tories (or even Lib Dems and Labour).

If Nick Clegg thinks the Tories deserve power, he must think Labour should be the coalition party.

GG

Snooze

lostinrates wrote: »

How can I speak for ''fellow conservatives''? I voted conservative in lieu of a more approprate option BTW, as I have siad before.

Not that I expect you to remember....which is why I found it odd that snooze is meant to remember your sex!

I think she meant to direct the gender comment at chucky rather than me, as he'd been calling her a 'he' throughout this thread until she pointed it out and then he went changing all his posts. For the record I also thought ninky was a 'he' until I saw a post from her yesterday saying to the contrary.

lostinrates

ninky wrote: »

well you could speak for yourself.

what do you think of lib dem policies on scrapping trident, robin hood tax, pr, immigration amnesty etc?

most of us vote for what we vote for in lieu of a more appropriate option afaik.

Trident: undecided.
Robin Hood tax: nice in theory but would have serious flaws in practice I think...IIRC from my reading of it...when we did those cool questionaires on how we should vote.
pr...hmm...perhaps views are changing, as I have been writing about today. A family member has been a political correspondent in Germany...commentating from a very biased opinion, and I was recently in Italy,...so been exposed primarily to the flaws of the system. I would not vote against it though. Total immigration amnesty, no.

Graham_Devon

ninky wrote: »

well what is the alternative?

form a coaltion with the tories. find that most your mps vote with the labour party anyway. another election has to be called and you've lost most of your supporters to labour because they didn't like you offering support to the tories.

works for me.:D

not sure it works for clegg.

You answered my question with a question, nice

I simply don't believe that most lib dem supporters will see it the way you see it.

I'm a lib dem supporter, I've cast my vote. I voted because I wanted change. I got it. A lot of people were doing the same. The polls attract those who are disgruntled, they always have and always will. You are more likely to get involved in a poll if you are annoyed, especially the type of poll you linked up to.

The alternative is to get a foot into government, with just two parties, rather than 3 or 4 and getting tangled into pay off rows. Most importantly, support the economy, and use your time to try and get some of your policies through the door, while you have this one chance.

I have to break it to you, but not everyone detests the tories ninky. Surely the election results have shown you this? It simply wouldn't have the massive impact you suggest.

Gorgeous_George

PR would be quite amusing.

Many people who are disillusioned with the Labour party (but still anti-Tory) will have voted Lib Dem yesterday. Under PR there would be less desire to vote Lib Dem.

As a tactical voter, I'd be happy to vote Labour under PR rather than Lib Dem even though Labour cannot win in my area.

PR could seriously backfire on the Lib Dems.

GG

lostinrates

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

PR would be quite amusing.

Many people who are disillusioned with the Labour party (but still anti-Tory) will have voted Lib Dem yesterday. Under PR there would be less desire to vote Lib Dem.

As a tactical voter, I'd be happy to vote Labour under PR rather than Lib Dem even though Labour cannot win in my area.

PR could seriously backfire on the Lib Dems.

GG

The more I think about i the more I argue with myself. On the one hand it could be amazingly representative....

but then, is it truely reprisentative if not all people in all areas have all the same voting options i.e. the smaller parties/independents.

On the other it could be lumbering and chaotic, as I saw in Italy and as a really good example in germany that I can't recall ATM:o but that made me read further because Germany is always referred to as exemplary here.

edit: a big issue for me would be how much it was cost to implement and sustain.

PhylPho

lostinrates wrote: »

Trident: undecided.

I was the same.

Then I realised, queuing up at a Manchester Airport security control t'other day and being required to remove shoes and trouser belt so as to identify a possible terrorist, that Trident is. . . essential.

It means that if the shoes removal and trouser belt discarding fails, a multi-megaton warhead can be immediately fired at Manchester Airport.

That'll show the terrorists we know how to defeat 'em!

DelBoyPhil

I just pray that he does a deal with LAB and not the CONS

Cat695

PhylPho wrote: »

I was the same.

Then I realised, queuing up at a Manchester Airport security control t'other day and being required to remove shoes and trouser belt so as to identify a possible terrorist, that Trident is. . . essential.

It means that if the shoes removal and trouser belt discarding fails, a multi-megaton warhead can be immediately fired at Manchester Airport.

That'll show the terrorists we know how to defeat 'em!

How I hate to nick pick but trident has nothing to do with terrorists and is not in anyway a defence against them.

mitchaa

DelBoyPhil wrote: »

I just pray that he does a deal with LAB and not the CONS

You'll be praying a long time. Dave and Nick are having quiet words just now.

Clegg would be an imbecile if he sided with a party that had just lost 90 seats. Further to that, a Lib-Labour government are still not large enough to make up the 326 seats required.

Say bye bye to Gordon and salute Dave. He will be picking up the keys to number 10 soon. Thank the lord.:T

The Tories HAVE won this election, they polled 2m more votes than Labour. Quite an achievment with the creation of Gordons benefits for votes culture.