Lib Dem Support down to 12%....

ukcarper

Lance wrote: »

Clegg will go down in Lib Dem history as the leader who actually got to make a decision in the running of the country! He actually sat in the drivers seat when the driver was busy elsewhere. Also people and even the press are actually talking about him and to him instead of to him only as an afterthought when Labour and Con MP's are too busy to talk. As for Lib Dem activists targeting him..... that's like Ollie threatening to beat you with a wet lettice.

Yes I will change my mind on everything and decide to do what the Tories want.

lemonjelly

Clegg will defect to the tory party imo.

How can he go back to grassroots libdems now?

vaporate

headcone wrote: »

Include me in that group,but never again.:mad:

Hardly the voters fault is it.

Better result would be for all to not vote and go against the system.

All politicians are bent.

Thrugelmir

blueboy43 wrote: »

Labour introduced plenty of policies to attempt to alleviate child poverty - minimum wage, sure start, tax credits etc etc.

Can you name any policies were you think they set out to increase child poverty ?

I'm merely making a non-political point that politicians promise a lot but often fail to deliver. As in 1997 this was a major plank of policy. As you would know if you were involved in this area at all.

But subequently was quietly and effectively removed off the agenda.

Rochdale_Pioneers

Huh? Child poverty remained absolutely on the agenda - the problem was that they set an unachievable target and got embarrassed. Thats classic New Labour - doing good progressive redistributive things, but not talking about them in case Hate Mail readers object.

We keep hearing how relative poverty increased - yes, because the top 1% got so much richer. Go ask the poor if they were better off in 2007 than they were in 1997. The city booming shifting the median level of poverty doesn't change the very real improvements made to the lives of the poor.

lynzpower

Absolutely the case. No one says ( im talking cabinet ministers) child poverty increased under labour- indeed they feel that children are given too much via the state system and so want to reduce the money children's families recieve.

What they say is " the gap between rich and poor GOT WIDER" thats because some were allowed to get far too rich under labour ( arguably)

markharding557

Lance wrote: »

Clegg will go down in Lib Dem history as the leader who actually got to make a decision in the running of the country! He actually sat in the drivers seat when the driver was busy elsewhere. Also people and even the press are actually talking about him and to him instead of to him only as an afterthought when Labour and Con MP's are too busy to talk. As for Lib Dem activists targeting him..... that's like Ollie threatening to beat you with a wet lettice.

Clegg will be remembered as the man who sold out his party,voters and the man who helped knobble a whole generation with debt:mad:

lynzpower

Surely if clegg does defect ( and Im of the opinion that he is painting himself into a corner where its probably the only option for him) then would his sheffield constituents be faced witha by-election or not? Ie they can get shot of him and choose an alternative party ( eg the NUS candidate or indeed labour)

the irony of what the liberal democrats have done, is in trying desperately to break the 2 party structure, have in all liklelhood reinforced it.

I expect them to be decimated next time around, and one of the other 2 main parties will pick up the slack.So many peeps voted LD as they felt they were the "progressives" and to a point, more left than the labour offering, or to punish Lab for not getting rid of brown earlier, Iraq war and so on.

ninky_2

clegg is political toast imo.

it will be interesting to see how others such as cable do. i don't see how you can abstain from a major policy vote that your coalition is trying to push through and that your ministry will be responsible for. at the same time now that he has flagged the potential for abstaining he's made it patently clear he's not happy with the policy. the problem i see with the wooliness of the libdems is it risks leading you into an "only obeying orders" corner - which is quite an ugly place to be historically.

lynzpower

I think the difficulty is that the way that the liberal democrat PARTY is set up, the members have a lot of influence over the MPs. Heres an interesting article

http://www.libdemvoice.org/opinion-keeping-our-voice-restating-our-democratic-structure-on-fees-and-beyond-21994.html