Comments:UK elections: Hung parliament, Cameron to negotiate with Liberal Democrats
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|Tories + Lib Dems||4||09:50, 9 May 2010|
|Clegg should agree to work with Labour on one condition...||0||01:34, 9 May 2010|
|Clegg should try to work with Cameron||0||22:17, 8 May 2010|
I would rather have the Tories and the Liberal Democrats in partnership. I'm not sure which of the two parties I like the most, so if they work together, I'd be getting the best of both worlds.
They're far too nice to mention it, but its time for the Liberals to stick the knife into the Labour party for stitching them up in 1997. Labour have had 13 years to inact their previous promise of inacting PR, the sudden conversion of the party to the rightness of PR is sickening.
The Liberal Democrats are screwed either way. The Tories have no respect whatsoever for the welfare state while Brown's clowns in Labour want to use the threat of terrorism as a bludgeon to destroy British civil liberties in that fascist ID programme of theirs. In the past, I would have said that a government with Labour would be more in line with Liberal values, as Labour is ostensibly a party in the progressive tradition of politics, however "new labour" has espoused policies that do not even marginally resemble the principles upon which the party was founded. However the thought of letting the Tories (and that sodding tit Cameron) decide what to do with the social safety net is not at all a pleasant one. Really it's a rotten load of bollocks any way you slice it.
I spent the 80's and 90's wanting to be rid of the Tories, the fact that Labour once they gained power would be no different was something I was told but hoped would not be true. I guess like many I've gravitated to the Liberals as they have as yet been untarnished by power.
That Gordon Brown resign as party leader. He should stick it to them in the form of an ultimatum, That they either shape up and ask their man to step down and let someone else lead the party, or he'll throw his weight behind the Tories, however useless and counterproductive that may ultimately be, it may be the only thing Clegg can do to get Labour to budge in terms of its policies. It is his one real bargaining chip, and he should not fail to take the opportunity to use it effectively.
Personally, I am not a fan of the Conservatives, but they received the largest vote share (in fact, their share was larger than Labour's 2005 victory), and so deserve to form the next government. That does not mean that the (grossly under-represented, due to the evils of FPTP) Liberal Democrats should compromise their principles, and—if no adequate compromise, preferably involving Lib Dem cabinet positions (but I'm not sure if that's fair if Labour are excluded) and a referendum on proportional representation—can be reached, Clegg should either attempt to make a deal with Labour (in the name of stability), albeit a temporary one, or force an early election by voting against the queen's speech. I don't think it would be wise for Clegg to miss out on this opportunity to reform the voting system, however, and I think Cameron is probably (somewhat complacently) open to a referendum, if not to the idea itself. The UK is practically unique in usually having a working majority, and—while expedient—it is not democratic enough for a First World country such as ours.