2010 General Election: The Cable Forum Exit Poll

[Blackened]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Then why don't you engage in the debate, instead of behaving so poorly.

Just a minute..
To be fair to the bloke, your semi-inflammatory post to him (#817) was hardly what you'd call behaving nicely to another user was it? You certainly couldn't expect him to back down from that I mean.
For someone such as myself who doesn't post much but reads an awful lot, I'd be taking a leaf out of my own book there, Flyboy.

[Charlie_Bubble]

Originally Posted by injuneer

Most Lib dem supporters were against a Conlib deal anyway.

LibDem supporters are 43% left of centre, which leaves 57% to be centre and right of centre, hardly a resounding no to Conservative policies.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Charlie_Bubble

I heard the following phrase mentioned several times on the way home today:



Really? I never voted for electoral reform. I didn't realise it was a refurendum last Thursday, I thought it was an election. I voted to kick that stupid arse out of number 10 and put Cameron in it. I never voted for electoral reform and I doubt 99% of the people voting last week voted for it. They voted for their party and tbh the mucking around that has been going on with Clegg desperately trying to get into the government and holding others to ransom is the biggest advert to never go PR that anyone could have.

The pound is going south and the rest of the economy will follow it while he tries desperately to get the best deal for HIM, not the country, HIMSELF. I don't look forward to this every couple of years with a stupid PR system, so that the LibDems can always finish 3rd, yet hold the winners to ransom. The only reason the LibDems are pushing it is because it's the only way they will ever have any power and they'll use it to always water down the actual winners.

Well said

Originally Posted by Charlie_Bubble

Really? I never voted for electoral reform. I didn't realise it was a refurendum last Thursday, I thought it was an election. I voted to kick that stupid arse out of number 10 and put Cameron in it. I never voted for electoral reform and I doubt 99% of the people voting last week voted for it. They voted for their party and tbh the mucking around that has been going on with Clegg desperately trying to get into the government and holding others to ransom is the biggest advert to never go PR that anyone could have.

There is the problem, you voted for Cameron but a bunch of people did not. There was no clear winner and the only reason people think there was is because they are confusing democracy with a game where the first person to cross the line wins. The Tories have no right to form a government on there own, they need to compromise, and we're not sure what they offered yet. Besides they are asking for a referendum on reform, polls seem to agree it's popular, not to change it right away.

The pound is going south and the rest of the economy will follow it while he tries desperately to get the best deal for HIM, not the country, HIMSELF. I don't look forward to this every couple of years with a stupid PR system, so that the LibDems can always finish 3rd, yet hold the winners to ransom. The only reason the LibDems are pushing it is because it's the only way they will ever have any power and they'll use it to always water down the actual winners.

The reason they are doing it is because the system is geared towards a two-party system whereas we are not a two party country. So a lot of the electorate gets shafted.

Originally Posted by Damien

Then we might have rerun after rerun. At the moment there is no clear winner and, while I think the majority party should have the choice to form a government first, they will have to respect the result and form a collation. Morally the collection of 'losers' as they will be dubbed will still represent in some way over 50% of those who voted.

I agree with what you are saying and i profess to know little about the matter* but it just 'seems' wrong that one party get a shed load of votes but still lose.


* - Just like football really, I only ever pay any real attention when England are playing for example.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Damien

I am still hoping that this is a bargaining ploy to get the Tories to give something with regards to PR and tomorrow a government will be formed. I don't want this is carry on all week.

It won't happen that quick. As far as I am aware, Nick Clegg has to put to conference, before any agreement can be made.

---------- Post added at 18:57 ---------- Previous post was at 18:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

By the way it seems the disagreement with the Tories was held amongst Liberal Democrat MPs rather than the leadership.

If the leadership recommend that the deal offered by The Tories should be accepted, they still have to get agreement from the rest of the party. Their constitution requires that they hold an extra-ordinary conference in order to vote on it.

I really hope the Tories give ground on PR, I don't think the Conservatives should be out of government completely but I don't see any other way a deal between the two can be done when Labour are offering AV+.

[Charlie_Bubble]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

It won't happen that quick. As far as I am aware, Nick Clegg has to put to conference, before any agreement can be made.

Do you honestly think he has to wait for them to organise a conference and get that going, then vote. I doubt it. Maybe he has to put it to the party executive, but I doubt everyone in the party has to have a vote. They've voted him as their leader. He makes the decisions, otherwise, why bother with a leader, we'll all vote on every tiny thing.

---------- Post added at 19:04 ---------- Previous post was at 19:02 ----------

Personally, I hope for a LabLib pact that royally screws up and dies a huge death after a few months, thereby ensuring a good Conservative victory at the General Election shortly afterwards and the final death of the LibDem party.

[punky]

Originally Posted by Charlie_Bubble

I heard the following phrase mentioned several times on the way home today:



Really? I never voted for electoral reform. I didn't realise it was a refurendum last Thursday, I thought it was an election. I voted to kick that stupid arse out of number 10 and put Cameron in it. I never voted for electoral reform and I doubt 99% of the people voting last week voted for it. They voted for their party and tbh the mucking around that has been going on with Clegg desperately trying to get into the government and holding others to ransom is the biggest advert to never go PR that anyone could have.

The pound is going south and the rest of the economy will follow it while he tries desperately to get the best deal for HIM, not the country, HIMSELF. I don't look forward to this every couple of years with a stupid PR system, so that the LibDems can always finish 3rd, yet hold the winners to ransom. The only reason the LibDems are pushing it is because it's the only way they will ever have any power and they'll use it to always water down the actual winners.

In The Guardian they analysed the results under different 'voting reforms'. Whilst Lib Dems gained seats it didn't affect the actual result.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...neral-election

[Charlie_Bubble]

Originally Posted by punky

In The Guardian they analysed the results under different 'voting reforms'. Whilst Lib Dems gained seats it didn't affect the actual result.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...neral-election

I wouldn't trust a word that left wing rag has to say. The guardian is a job centre for pointless council jobs.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Charlie_Bubble

Do you honestly think he has to wait for them to organise a conference and get that going, then vote. I doubt it. Maybe he has to put it to the party executive, but I doubt everyone in the party has to have a vote. They've voted him as their leader. He makes the decisions, otherwise, why bother with a leader, we'll all vote on every tiny thing.

Chris posted this link earlier.

http://www.channel4.com/news/article...policy/3640887

Established by the party in 1998 - when talk of an arrangement between Paddy Ashdown and Tony Blair was rife - it states that any "substantial proposal which could affect the party's independence of political action" will need the consent of a majority of Lib Dem MPs and of the party’s federal executive.

Unless three-quarters of each of these two groups support the proposals, a special conference is called. And two-thirds of those who vote at the conference - which is open to all party members - need to support any deal. If that fails then a full ballot of party members will taken and a majority will be required.

---------- Post added at 19:13 ---------- Previous post was at 19:12 ----------

Originally Posted by BBC

BREAKING NEWS

The Conservatives are making a "final offer" to the Lib Dems, promising a referendum on bringing in a different voting system - known as AV - shadow chancellor George Osborne says. Labour had a referendum on AV in the their election manifesto.

I'm not sure if AV is going to be good enough.

[Gary L]

Nearly a punch up live on Sky News
Campbell and Boulton.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XHuZqyuIS8

Clegg should accept the offer.

---------- Post added at 19:17 ---------- Previous post was at 19:14 ----------

Originally Posted by punky

In The Guardian they analysed the results under different 'voting reforms'. Whilst Lib Dems gained seats it didn't affect the actual result.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...neral-election

It did make wrong assumptions, the biggest one being that presuming people would vote the same way if they knew their vote was more likely to be taken into account if they vote for someone other than the top 2. That said AV is not PR but I think it will have to do for now.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Damien

Clegg should accept the offer.

But AV would hardly change the results.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...neral-election

Are the Tories offering AV or AV+

---------- Post added at 19:20 ---------- Previous post was at 19:18 ----------

Originally Posted by danielf

But AV would hardly change the results.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...neral-election

Yeah but we may not get STV. Also I think more people would vote for the smaller parties under AV, the problem on election day is people still see it as a choice between the main two.