Guess who is not voting Lib Dem next election

GeneHunt_2

Laurel & Hardy

GeneHunt_2

2 Ronnies

GeneHunt_2

GeneHunt wrote: »

Did anyone else get the impression from the Cameron/Clegg speech today that maybe it's going to be an Ant & Dec style relationship? - Will we be seeing them side by side everywhere they go, maybe even sharing a seat at the G20:smileyhea:lovethoug

Spartacus_Mills

de1amo wrote: »

does sound like deceit to me--the labour party refused to compromise its core values --i dont think labour got as hammered as much as people thought--Dc still didnt win the electoral majority despite the almost blanket favouritism of the press(and internet coverage)--it was time for a change in the mind of the population but what horse trading that has gone on is to the detriment of the lib dems--they are finished!

The Labour Party entered into negotiations in bad faith. They would need to realise without a majority they would need to compromise on some of their manifesto pledges.

The fact they rigidly stuck to their loathsome core values which include economic incompetence, assaults on civil liberties, the surveillance state and runway three shows them to be totally deluded.

It is good they are out of power.

Again I must state the point. There is no deceit as Nick did not keep his intentions from people. The only potential deceit was opening negotiations with Labour in secret however that depends on what pledges were given the Tories.

GeneHunt_2

A personal favourite of mine - Jedward

GeneHunt_2

Does this say it all....

or this

Spartacus_Mills

ninky wrote: »

oh did you now? and what sort of 'we' was that. were you personally involved? amazing how you have time to post on here with all these top end negotiations you are conducting.

yes the coalition is 1 day old. so that means it's okay for you to rave about how great it is. but i'm not allowed to be critical?

We, as a party, of course. Sarcasm is not your strong point and I refrain from making a !!!!!y comment.

I am raving about the bits I like. I also have criticised an element of the agreement I did not like.

You can be as critical as you want but you are simply coming at it with an emotional, knee-jerk, thoughtless response without coming out with anything substantive to criticise it for. The only person who has done that in a constructive manner was Sir_Humphrey and he raised a valid point.

renegade

To quote a friend of mine.

WE HAVE BEEN CON/DEM-ED to DOOM!

POPPYOSCAR

tomterm8 wrote: »

So, in other words, we no longer have a Liberal Democratic party. The Liberal Democrats were founded from the Liberal AND Social Democratic Party. If the Liberal Democratic party has no intention of standing up for half its founding policies, and half its voters, I would have thought it would be better off telling people like me before the election.

But I thought he did?Did he not say that he would negotiate with whoever got the largest number of seats? If you didn't want this why did you vote for them then?

tomterm8

Negotiating with another party is not the same as throwing away the core policies of your party. I didn't vote for the Lib Dems simply so they could be in power, I did vote for the Lib Dems because I thought they could do good things with the power.

As I said to Nick Mason before the election, while I agree with Liberal (Not, not Liberal Democrat) policies like electoral reform, I vote for education, social policy, nuclear policy and health care policy. Probably in that order. I am also particularly upset that they abandoned 600,000 people who had been living in britain for a decade, simply because it was politically expedient.

I do not believe this agreement reflects my core values as a former Liberal Democrat voter.