Nick Clegg

[Glyn_Wigley]

Don't forget, I've memorialised your words of wisdom so you can't surreptitiously change them after the result whilst swearing blind you haven't...

[hoolahoop]

Don't forget, I've memorialised your words of wisdom so you can't surreptitiously change them after the result whilst swearing blind you haven't...

pmsl  because he will. Carling was far more fun to debate with.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Don't forget, I've memorialised your words of wisdom so you can't surreptitiously change them after the result whilst swearing blind you haven't...

pmsl  because he will. Carling was far more fun to debate with.

He can change his original post, but he can't change what I've quoted because it's in my post, not his.

[hoolahoop]

Don't forget, I've memorialised your words of wisdom so you can't surreptitiously change them after the result whilst swearing blind you haven't...

pmsl  because he will. Carling was far more fun to debate with.

He can change his original post, but he can't change what I've quoted because it's in my post, not his.

However he will twist your words to suit his argument ...the man is a bore.

[hoolahoop]

As per-boring-usual Mick, your "facts" get blown over under the slightest of breezes.

It WASN'T tuition fees that hammered the LDs' popularity. They were already hammered by the time they broke the pledge on tuition fees. They got 23% of the vote in the May 2010 Election. They were still picking up 18-25% in opinion polls a month after the Election. Then the rot set in, when Osborne published his emergency Budget and it suddenly became clear to the muddle-headed fools who'd voted LD what they'd actually done. The LD vote share in the opinion polls collapsed. By August 2010, they were polling 12-15%.  By November 2010, they were typically polling 11%.

The tuition fee vote wasn't until 9 December 2010. The LD vote share in the polls then dropped to ~8% and it's stayed there rock-solid ever since.

Tuition fees weren't the reason that people despise the LDs. That was just the final betrayal, but most of their support had already evaporated by the time they welched on that commitment.

You could check that REALLY easily if it EVER dawned on you to actually look for facts before you form an opinion.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_for_Students_pledge

I think you would then have to despise every party that ever came into government on that basis BST. Their vote will hold up far better than you think because of their hard work in the constituencies they now hold. It suits you and both the Labour and Tory parties to try and smash this party apart from day1 . There is not a party around who would not have seized some form of limited power given the same circumstances or would have had to concede some if not most of their election pledges.
Their natural partner would have been Labour , being a centre-left party, but as we now know Labour weren't at all interested in any form of power sharing to continue with a minority government. Now you seek to blame these last 5 years purely on Nick Clegg ?
This decrease in their overall share of the vote will go where Billy ? Careful for what you desire because if disaffected LD voters leave in droves as you suggest then they may not go to Labour and that with the situation in Scotland could prove very interesting . Their Scottish seats could well go to the SNP and their English seats will go to anyone but don't assume they will all go to Labour.In fact disaffected LD voters could well ensure that Labour lose key marginals here in England with the economy recovering or at least perceived to be in recovery.

Strangely enough and what would appear to be a strange phenomenon is that 20-23% is roughly the combined LD and UKIP throughout these opinion polls. As we all know , minor parties don't usually collapse completely from election to election (regardless of who voted for what , where and when) so perhaps the soft underbelly of the LDs are defecting to the right i.e. UKIP which may not help the Labour party at all, Where the LDs do control and were they to lose control then perhaps those seats would more naturally fall to the Conservatives in the marginals.



Btw come the election, if Nick Clegg doesn't hold his constituency ; then I will show my arse in the Keepmoat car park. Perhaps that's the penalty for ''muddle- headed'' folk like me and yes I would do it all over again and yes I am very proud of what they have been able to achieve and curb.

[hoolahoop]

Well whaddya know?

I was on kids duty today and neither if them wanted to go to the match. So we went to Millhouses Park in Sheffield.

Who walks into the play park with his little daughter and 3 obvious minders but old Nick himself.

He looked haggard. Haunted. Not a smile for his daughter the whole time they were there. The look of a man staring at the accusing finger of history which will point him out as a spectacular failure.

As a fellow human being, I felt sorry for the man.


What a ridiculous post . You despised him before the General Election in 2010 because Billy you knew he would kick those foolish mates of yours out of office.
History will certainly look at those ''wasted'' 13 years in power from  those 'muddle headed' and 'dangerous' fools in a very dim light . So many things went wrong on that watch it was untrue and poor old Ed continually finds himself saying ''we were wrong'' and you harp on about tuition fees ..............where is the effing money Billy or rather where  did it go ?



Weapons of mass destruction, quangos upto our arseholes, wasted opportunities for real health and welfare reform, poor banking sector regulations, weak immigration policies, waste everywhere etc etc etc...........and nowt left in the bank. You wanted them back in power in 2010 for more of the same ? You have a cheek to moralise about Nick Clegg when the rest of this mess had already happened ffs where is your grasp of reality and the overall picture ? We've had these debates before and I can't be bothered to trawl through every mistake and failed to materialise promise that Labour made during those 13 years.

I have a daughter studying for her 'A' levels don't you think I want everything free too but it can't happen and central planks have fallen out of EVERY party's election pledges whether they win or lose . Do you really think there was a way out for the LDs ?










Aye, like f***. Nemesis time Nicholas. Nemesis.

[IC1967]

Go on Mick. I can't help myself when you spout your bullshit.

Back in November when Ashcroft last polled Hallam, Labour were on 30% and the Greens on  10%

Today, Labour are on 36% and the Greens on 6%.

As you were. Back to "Ignore"

What you 'ignore' is the methodology of the polling. When Nick Clegg is named when the question is asked about which party people will vote for he tops the polls comfortably.

You'd be surprised at how many people have respect for Clegg for putting the country first knowing he was going to lose support from his usual voters. I think he is a top bloke and deserves the chance to form another 'coalition' with the Tories if there is no outright majority. People aren't daft. Most people would prefer a 'coalition' like we've just had rather than Labour and the SNP getting their incompetent hands on power.

[GazLaz]

That will be the first question to Ed tonight "would you be prepared to form a coilition with the SNP". If he answers yes it will be the end for Labour, if he answers no he probably has little chance of getting the big job.

[hoolahoop]

That will be the first question to Ed tonight "would you be prepared to form a coilition with the SNP". If he answers yes it will be the end for Labour, if he answers no he probably has little chance of getting the big job.

Very little ''wriggle room '' there is there then Gaz ? The trouble is will he keep the line of 'we will win with an absolute majority' or will he be already looking at what both parties have in common. Personally I think the SNP would want far too much in return for co-operation and he has to forge ahead knowing he is risking everything with no fall back position if he doesn't get that majority.

Personally think the LD vote will hold up where it counts and the UKIP share will drop by a fair margin. That will probably leave us in much the same position and the same Coalition going ahead.

Barring a major gaff , I don't think the Conservative share will shift sufficiently and perhaps firm up on the back of  gains in the South West from the LDs. Labour would be hoping to poll nearer the high 30's by now wouldn't they ?

[The Red Baron]

The Ashcroft polling, from which the 36% Lab, 34% LD in Sheffield Hallam is taken, is actually very interesting.

It suggests that in LD held marginals their vote is holding up remarkably well, but in their target seats, mostly Tory-held, the LD vote has weakened substantially.

I'd say this is more evidence of the Eastleigh Effect. I'll be interested to see how this pans out in my constituency which is currently a knife-edge Lib Dem marginal.

The conclusion I draw is that however much their share of the national vote may fall, LD losses may not be that heavy. They are therefore very likely to be major players in the (likely) event of a Hung Parliament.

[The Red Baron]

That will be the first question to Ed tonight "would you be prepared to form a coilition with the SNP". If he answers yes it will be the end for Labour, if he answers no he probably has little chance of getting the big job.

As I 've mentioned elsewhere, I can't see that the SNP would be interested in forming a coalition with any UK party. That doesn't mean to say that they wouldn't support a minority Labour government on key votes. But they would want things in return, and Labour might consider some of those non-negotiable.

[hoolahoop]

The Ashcroft polling, from which the 36% Lab, 34% LD in Sheffield Hallam is taken, is actually very interesting.

It suggests that in LD held marginals their vote is holding up remarkably well, but in their target seats, mostly Tory-held, the LD vote has weakened substantially.

I'd say this is more evidence of the Eastleigh Effect. I'll be interested to see how this pans out in my constituency which is currently a knife-edge Lib Dem marginal.

The conclusion I draw is that however much their share of the national vote may fall, LD losses may not be that heavy. They are therefore very likely to be major players in the (likely) event of a Hung Parliament.

That's how I see it. The LD party just like the other 2 main Parties will have seats they WON'T lose and that's because they work them hard and well ; basically they are very organised. National decreases in % share would be extremely unlikely to affect these constituencies. They will lose seats but strangely enough may gain a few if the UKIP vote splits the Tory vote and the LDs are in 2nd place in many of the Tory heartlands. All to play for and of course there is last minute tactical voting that will be especially crucial in 3 way marginals .

The Ashcroft analyses are very interesting indeed...

[hoolahoop]

That will be the first question to Ed tonight "would you be prepared to form a coilition with the SNP". If he answers yes it will be the end for Labour, if he answers no he probably has little chance of getting the big job.

As I 've mentioned elsewhere, I can't see that the SNP would be interested in forming a coalition with any UK party. That doesn't mean to say that they wouldn't support a minority Labour government on key votes. But they would want things in return, and Labour might consider some of those non-negotiable.

The terms of any tacit agreement from the SNP would surely be another tilt at Devolution in the next Parliament...ouch. It doesn't bear thinking about from a Labour point of view.

[The Red Baron]

I think you mean another independence referendum rather than devolution but yes, I think that will be the SNP's price.

[BillyStubbsTears]

No chance in a million that Labour will offer an independence referendum. Independence is not something you vote in every couple of years until a YES vote finally happens. And of course, the SNP don't want one because their entire post-independence economic policy is shot to pieces.

 There will not be another referendum for 20 years at least.

There will also be no coalition between Lab and SNP. Both parties have ruled that out.

That leaves SNP support for a minority Lab Govt. This is where it gets interesting. It seems on the surface that the SNP would hold a strong hand. In practice I suspect the SNP will find that they will get very little from the Labour Party. Because Labour can call their bluff. They can say "Bring down a Labour Govt if you want. Allow the Tories in if you want. And THEN see what response you get from those new, predominantly left wing voters that you have won in Scotland by telling them that you are their natural left wing home. Go on! We dare you!"

Politics. Rough tough game.

[hoolahoop]

I think you mean another independence referendum rather than devolution but yes, I think that will be the SNP's price.

Sorry I did mean Independence

[hoolahoop]

No chance in a million that Labour will offer an independence referendum. Independence is not something you vote in every couple of years until a YES vote finally happens. And of course, the SNP don't want one because their entire post-independence economic policy is shot to pieces.

 There will not be another referendum for 20 years at least.

There will also be no coalition between Lab and SNP. Both parties have ruled that out.

That leaves SNP support for a minority Lab Govt. This is where it gets interesting. It seems on the surface that the SNP would hold a strong hand. In practice I suspect the SNP will find that they will get very little from the Labour Party. Because Labour can call their bluff. They can say "Bring down a Labour Govt if you want. Allow the Tories in if you want. And THEN see what response you get from those new, predominantly left wing voters that you have won in Scotland by telling them that you are their natural left wing home. Go on! We dare you!"

Politics. Rough tough game.

It will get very interesting and fatr more interesting than outright majorities. I think that the LDs or at least Clegg suggested that he wanted to finish the job I.e. another 5 years of a Con/LD Coalition and Cameron's final argument possibly suggested the same.
Strange but very interesting times if you enjoy politics

[Sammy Chung was King]

Clegg's popularity has mainly been harmed by being ''Guilt of Association'', just like when a football manager doesn't do well, the supporters don't want his number two involved when the boss is sacked.

[hoolahoop]

Obviously the opinion polls suggest that Clegg's decision to enter a coalition with the Tories was a poor one. But it is worth considering his other options. He could have formed one with Labour, but they would have to have made cuts and increased taxes as well - they admitted as much. So a Lab-Lib Coalition might not have been popular, and given the numbers of MPs involved might not have been very stable either.

Clegg's other option was to refuse to enter a Coalition and decide whether or not to support a minority Government (probably Tory) on a case by case basis. That would probably have been the best option for his party - with hindsight. They might have got squeezed a bit at the inevitable second election as voters felt they had to choose one of the "big" parties. But their vote wouldn't have fallen by as much as it has now.

I suppose Clegg's mistake was that he wanted a seat in Government and thought that the Lib Dems could really make a difference as a junior partner in a coalition. And maybe they have, but in doing so they have sacrificed some of their principles and a lot of their public appeal. It is a salutary warning to all "smaller" parties who may have to contemplate whether to join a coalition after this May's GE.

I believe he did the right thing , if the LDs , with their share of the vote, could not influence and help stabilise the country after the shite position that 13 sorry and let down years of the Labour Party; then what was the point ? They took a bold decision that obviously was deeply unpopular with numpty Labour supporters who had hoped that the term would not be served at great risk to themselves.
As for letting folk down, not standing by their principles etc . ....jeez what about every broken promise and election pledge broken by the other  2 main parties.
Sorry it won't wash and come the election results , I believe they will be vindicated and hold on to many of their existing seats . Do you know why ? Because they work hard in their constituencies and don't take things for granted as the other 2 main parties have done in the past.
Its obvious that the press and even folk on here seek to undermine and scapegoat the LDs in order to poach their supporters.

Labour supporters crowing about principles after the Blair/Brown calamitous years has got to be some kind of sick joke hasn't it ?