Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem
I think Clegg's refusal to give any indication who his party would be likely to support in the event of a hung parliament may come back to haunt him. At the moment he seems to be trying not to put off the large number of red and blue waverers who're seemingly thinking about the Lib dems as a serious option. As decision time comes closer, however, I think he may just lose a proportion of both unless he nails his colours to the mast.
|
Given the total lack of any real and achievable commitment on pretty much anything from the other two I guess he felt he needed to follow.
This is the problem really, the Labour campaign and manifesto is so full of BS that attempts to introduce commitments and facts to the equation just don't get you elected as you're against someone promising the earth and an electorate a large proportion of which are gullible enough to believe it. This is also largely the Tories' fault as they aren't doing enough to call BS on Labour's policies instead trying to be positive and take the moral high ground, which given they're against the Dark Lord isn't really going to work.
---------- Post added at 10:17 ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
Surely it's unwise for him to support a party without knowing the results, I shall imagine he will go for the party with the bigger mandate.
|
I honestly don't see how he could support Cameron looking at the massive gulf between them. I struggle to reconcile his far more positive attitude to Europe along with socialist economic policies with Conservative points of view.
This is quite amusing. No real surprise to most who watch the BBC's output either
