Camertoff's powers of judgement

Rochdale_Pioneers

markharding557 wrote: »

LizEstelle wrote:
I think you need a dose of reality because the labour party have a lot of work to do before they will be ready for another election.
1/ they have to sort their leadership and policy issues and the new leader will need time to make his mark on the party and if he has any sense he will tell mandleson he is no longer required.
2/they will have to become an effective opposition and be able to present a clear and viable alternative.
These things will not happen overnight or any time soon so labour will have to bide their time and not do any stupid things like in the 'foot'days in the early 80's

All true, but now we're back to two party politics its a lot easier without the LibDems splitting the progressive vote. At the next election if you want to support the Tory government vote Tory. If you want an alternative vote Labour. Will the LibDems support their record in government? Why not just vote for the majority partner then. Or will they oppose their own record?

markharding557

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

All true, but now we're back to two party politics its a lot easier without the LibDems splitting the progressive vote. At the next election if you want to support the Tory government vote Tory. If you want an alternative vote Labour. Will the LibDems support their record in government? Why not just vote for the majority partner then. Or will they oppose their own record?

Indeed very interesting,this could put the libdems in an awkward spot

Spartacus_Mills

LizEstelle wrote: »

You thought it was perhaps questionable when he opted to retain Osborne instead of Ken Clarke as Shadow Chancellor, thus ruling out a couple of million extra votes?

You thought it craven and unstatesmanlike when he kept the gross weasel and proven liar Ashcroft on board his election team?

Well, you're now going to have to swallow:

Whereas Labour had the bully Charlie Whelan on board and bankrolling their campaign with funds from the Brothers. Convenient given the large Union modernisation fund. Ashcroft, whatever his faults may be, did not play an active hands on role in the campaign and did not try to place his own preferred candidates in safe seats unlike Brother Whelan. I saw the excruciatingly bad Jack Dromey on "The Politics Show". He and Batty Hattie are well suited.

LizEstelle wrote: »

1. A confuzzled and desperately motley gluing together of people who cannot stand the sight of each other, rather than the far more dignified and appropriate formation of a minority government.

Sounds like the factions in the Labour Party to me.

LizEstelle wrote: »

2. The pompous and incompetent Osborne in charge at the treasury with Cable sidelined as a deputy sub-assistant in charge of nothing very much.

I appreciate a Labour supporter would think Business was nothing very much given their incompetent approach to it over the last 13 years.

Osborne may or not be incompetent, that remains to be seen. Although it is hard to see how he can be less incompetent than the cretinous James Gordon Brown. End to Tory boom and bust - LOL. As for pompous he is nothing of the sort. He always comes over as rather self-deprecating. He came over pretty well in the Chancellors debate, as did Alistair Darling as well to be fair. I find Osborne a risk, I would have preferred Vince but understand why he would be reluctant, Clarke would have been better but it is fantastic news that David Laws is in the Treasury as well. Very very smart guy. I hope Jeremy Browne is in his team as well.

LizEstelle wrote: »

3. A 'Deputy Prime Minister' whose every word will be scrutinised for hanging material by the Tory grass roots.

You are clutching at straws now.

Batty Hattie was not averse to scheming against Brown.

LizEstelle wrote: »

4. The opportunity for Labour to regroup as being now the only centre-left voting opportunity on offer and looking to pounce on the inevitable future dissent as evidence of Con-Lib incompetence.

Even more straw clutching.

LizEstelle wrote: »

All in all, this is political misjudgement of the finest water.

That remains to be seen. What you meant to say was you feel threatened and uncomfortable by two parties working together.

LizEstelle wrote: »

I would say he's contrived to put together the ideal circumstances for another long term Labour government - and that probably before not too long....

You would say that, but you are full of sh..

nicko33

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

This thread is stupid. Its not "Camertoff". Its Cleggeron. And Libservatives or ConDem as the name of the political hybrid running the government.

I see it as a healthy release of the long built up tension of being Nu Liebour run by Tony Bliar.
Long live the ConDem nation!

ninky_2

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

This thread is stupid. Its not "Camertoff". Its Cleggeron. And Libservatives or ConDem as the name of the political hybrid running the government.

Or, as it will be presented on the door step, "the Conservatives". Such a shame that the LibDems have voted themselves out of existance

or condom. conservative domination.

Really2

markharding557 wrote: »

LizEstelle wrote:
I think you need a dose of reality because the labour party have a lot of work to do before they will be ready for another election.
1/ they have to sort their leadership and policy issues and the new leader will need time to make his mark on the party and if he has any sense he will tell mandleson he is no longer required.
2/they will have to become an effective opposition and be able to present a clear and viable alternative.
These things will not happen overnight or any time soon so labour will have to bide their time and not do any stupid things like in the 'foot'days in the early 80's

3/ Rather ironic as well this one, they have to sort out their finances as there is every possibility they could go bust.:D

Pete111

Wheezy wrote: »

And 15 posts from you between 10 and 5. What's your excuse? Day off?

Nope - started at 8.30 finished at 6.45. Got plenty done between MSE'ing

(Oh and I'm in charge here so I makes the rules...!)

Pete111

abaxas wrote: »

British Telecom call centre....:P

If so then I'm grossly overpaid...

:cool:

Spartacus_Mills

Really2 wrote: »

3/ Rather ironic as well this one, they have to sort out their finances as there is every possibility they could go bust.:D

Especially when the Union Modernisation Fund gets scrapped. Unite will have less money to give back to fund the Labour Party.

Wheezy_2

markharding557 wrote: »

Indeed very interesting,this could put the libdems in an awkward spot

Agreed. The libdems have made themselves utterly irrelevant by wh0ring up to the cons. Next ballot will be a two horse race again between cons and lab. No point in voting libdem as they sell out to the highest bidder anyway. Change you can believe in, sure....