lib are talking to labour please tell me it's not so

abaxas

chucky wrote: »

you are right, you do need to stop squinting and open your eyes.
you're not seeing the full picture with your rabid anti-Labour narrow view.

Labour is not the only political party that has fooked up whilst being in power.

the teflon knights in shining armour the tories have fooked up a few times too.

I'd agree, everyone makes mistakes.

But most Tory 'mistakes' were also caused by the 70/80's unions. Blame must be equal in that.

To blame Thatcher is also equally to blame Scargill.

moggylover

Sapphire wrote: »

I will be absolutely horrified if labour gets in again. It would be undemocratic and totally to the detriment of the country.

B****rds! :mad:

Purleeeease ! Not another whimpy Tory whine about "undemocratic":rotfl::rotfl:

If anyone cares to face the fact that 2/3rds (or at least, 64%) of the voters voted clearly for ANY party but the Tories, then a Tory government could NEVER claim to be democratically elected in this election.

Here's a really novel idea, two parties each got about 1/3 of the vote (not the seats: the vote) and to my mind that suggests that the Country is pretty much evenly split between them and that the result that would best represent the wants of the PEOPLE (not the media, or the Tories or even the money markets) would be a power share between Labour and the Con-merchants:eek::eek::eek::eek:

NEITHER party would be willing to put the needs of the Country that far first though, despite all of their blathering:rotfl:

Really2

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/



So the most popular opinion is a rainbow coalition, but most voters want the Tories to be in some sort of government. And yet another opinion poll is in favour of PR.

So going on most thought on here 39% is not enough so the 2 lower options should get it.;)

Hi hardly think over 50% saying the tory's should form the next government makes a rainbow coalition the most popular.

If tory minority choice was not there it is obvious what the vote would be.
A Lib or Labour minority government is not an option because they did so poor in the election.
So I read that as as the country want a tory backed government in some way.

StevieJ

abaxas wrote: »

Since when has a labour goverment ever 'done right by the people'?

Is saddling the 'people' with a record debt that someone else has to sort out 'right for the people'?

Stop looking at the small picture, open your eyes and view it all.

Suggest you do the same

Sir_Humphrey

Really2 wrote: »

So going on most thought on here 39% is not enough so the 2 lower options should get it.;)

Hi hardly think over 50% saying the tory's should form the next government makes a rainbow coalition the most popular.

If tory minority choice was not there it is obvious what the vote would be.
A Lib or Labour minority government is not an option because they did so poor in the election.
So I read that as as the country want a tory backed government in some way.

Well, I posted it because it could be argued either way.

What seems clear to me is that all the Tories have to do is give a copper-bottomed promise on proper PR (at least AV+) and David Cameron will be PM. That would probably best reflect the will of the people. It is up to the Tories.

marklv

I believe that Clegg will eventually go for the Tory deal. If it was his decision alone he would have done it already, but he needs the Lib Dem 'Federal Executive' to rubber stamp the agreement and they want to keep all options open. However, the more I think about a deal with Labour, the more I think it won't work. There are too many Labour rebels and without SNP/PC support the whole idea cannot work. Infact, you also need ALL the Ulster MPs to be involved as well in order to get a stable coalition.

My bets are that the Lib Dems will do a deal with Cameron in the end. I think the main issues are differences over Europe and the Tory unwillingness to put STV as well as AV to a referendum.

PrivatisetheNHSnow

kennyboy66 wrote: »

The last Boundary changes (review 2003-2005, implemented 2005) actually favoured the Tories (13 new seats, 10 Tory, 1 Labour, 1 Lib Dem, of the 9 abolished 6 were Labour).

Of course the actual facts interfere with the "Boo hoo, its not fair, we won 36% of the vote, Labour gerrymandering, crying" from the Tory seethers.

it can't have been favourable enough to the tories to restore balance and fairness if you take off the blinkers and look at the actual facts...

in 2005 howard won 198 seats with 8,772,598 votes
in 2010 brown won 258 seats with 8,604,358 votes

call me biased if want, but it think the above speaks for itself...

moggylover

ninky wrote: »

i'm a labour voter but strongly support electoral reform. at least labour have previously come out in support of it in principle. it's not great they haven't prioritised it. but maybe this is now the right time to do so.

I believe that this particular election result makes it very clear that it is wholly necessary and that it is time for politics to move into the 21st Century and aim to serve the wishes of the people more clearly and more democratically.

Our "seat" system is so badly flawed that it doesn't represent fairly entire Nations of the UK, let alone the electorate and that needs addressing and addressing quickly. The end result of that might well be that those who feel sadly disenfranchised by the fact that their vote will be wasted if cast for the party they actually believe in in their "seat" might actually be enticed to vote, and feel that they actually count as people:D

Really2

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

What seems clear to me is that all the Tories have to do is give a copper-bottomed promise on proper PR (at least AV+) and David Cameron will be PM.

I thought they already had?

I don't think it is that simple TBH.:(

Sir_Humphrey

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

it can't have been favourable enough to the tories to restore balance and fairness if you take off the blinkers and look at the actual facts...

in 2005 howard won 198 seats with 8,772,598 votes
in 2010 brown won 258 seats with 8,604,358 votes

call me biased if want, but it think the above speaks for itself...

The boundaries are only part of the issue. The main issue is that the Tory vote is over-concentrated in rich areas of the country, with many Tory seats being hyper-safe. Any constituency-based system would be against the Tories. But of course, they believe the constituency link is vital in democracy.