Guess who is not voting Lib Dem next election

POPPYOSCAR

ninky wrote: »

not being arrogant but i don't think the majority of the electorate get the basics of keynsians economics. not saying i'm an economic mastermind but history shows that you need public spending through tough times.

i'd hardly say it was my 'sole' opinion.

yes i have lost. and many others have lost. and we'll be feeling even more like losers a year from now.

How can you say that? You do not have a crystal ball do you? At least give them a chance and then at least you can say 'I told you so' or will you still feel like a loser even if it works out?

Wheezy_2

Jonbvn wrote: »

Put simply you lost. See you in 4 years.;)

Somehow I think it won't be that long

Idiophreak

Pete*G wrote: »

you don't think this will just be a temporary measure, where both parties play the PR game to make Labour look even worse, before Mr Cameron (I don't know him that well sadly) calls an election after 6-12 months, in the hope that the Conservatives can gain a majority and the Lib Dems can garner more seats & support?

As I understand it there's going to be a fixed-term government to guarantee the lib dems a couple of years in "power".

I actually agree with the OP a bit...people who vote for our "left" party may be a little upset to see their votes helping our "right" party get into power. But thems are the breaks, I guess...

Jonbvn

ninky wrote: »

not being arrogant but i don't think the majority of the electorate get the basics of keynsians economics. not saying i'm an economic mastermind but history shows that you need public spending through tough times.

I'm sorry but it is a typical socialist stance to state that most people don't understand and you will tell them what to think. It is nothing to do with keynsian economics. We just don't have the money and are living beyond our means. People understand that.

As any poster of the DFW board will tell you, cutting back is the only option and more debt is counterproductive.

Really2

Ok so the Labour supporters took it worse than their own part.

But lets look at the reality of this, as a percentage of the vote Labour were closer to 3rd than 2nd.

The right call has been made, Labour could not agree with the Lib Dem's (or their selves for that matter) ,torys could so the right decision was made.
If labour could not get a stable decision on a deal within the party how could form a coalition.

Spartacus_Mills

Whatever way we went there would be voters who would not be happy. However if you look at the split it is quite close between Labour leaning and Tory leaning in our vote (32/25 according to John Curtice on R4 this morning) so the party going into government with one side would alienate some support although I doubt the OP was sincere or genuine in their comments and doubt they are a committed Lib Dem. Obviously not one for the new mood of grown up politics.

We need a new style of politics. We cannot sit on the sidelines and sloganise. We are not fighting the battles of the 1980's. We have alot in common with the Tories on civil liberties, ID cards, economy etc etc.

The Labour/Lib Dem alliance was nothing more than a Guardian leader writers wet dream. Believe me in parts of the country the two parties detest each other. If we had aligned with Labour I would still support the Lib Dems but I would have not been very happy about it.

Davesnave

I think the majority of the electorate may not 'get' Keynsian economics, but they work in places where there is always compromise. It's only politicians that normally have a relatively pure decision-making environment.

Certainly, where I worked, we constantly fell foul of goverrnment dictat and the vagaries of various bosses' pet ideas and, somehow, we came through it all with reasonable success. I see the new political situation as being a lot like that.

It'll be good for them.

tomterm8

I voted for the Lib Dems ever since I was 18. The policies I voted for clearly aren't the ones the Lib Dems are going to implement. It's as simple as that.

By the way, like 95% of the electorate, I don't vote for a party because of the policies where we agree with another party, I vote on the issues where we disagree.

lostinrates

I maintain the ''winning'' and ''losing'' terminolgy is atually very egative, especially for those who ''win''.

The question is one not of victory but of representation. If we accept we are represented fairly and democratically....up for debate more than ever...we all win, IMO, even those who voted for different representation. If our vote ''wins'' but leads to an unfair representation and we are not in a democratically elected position I would suggest we all lose.

Spartacus_Mills

tomterm8 wrote: »

I voted for the Lib Dems ever since I was 18. The policies I voted for clearly aren't the ones the Lib Dems are going to implement. It's as simple as that.

That is the nature of a coalition. There has to be a compromise. You get some of your policies but not all of them. It is the same for the Tories too. With just over 50 seats in a government of 360 plus we are not going to get EVERY policy but we have already, from the snippets coming out, seen some of the more gormless Tory policies on the backburner or canned.

Try grasping that this happens at a local level up and down the country. We work succesfully with the Tories (and other parties) on a great many councils. We are able to influence policy and direction and improve the lot of our core voter. Does not harm us in those areas. This is grown up politics and you need to get used to it.

I am sure you are a lifelong Lib Dem voters. Your sour disposition says otherwise. A true Party supporter would be ECSTATIC we are now in government with cabinet positions and a clear opportunity to influence the future direction of this country as well as restrain the rabid excesses of the Tory right.

The thought that this has not only hacked off Polly Toynbee but also Simon Heffer at the same time is doubly satisfying.