Exactly
UK Election Results 2010
- Thread starter ParadigmShifter
- Start date
Did anyone see the Sun columnist complaining that the Tories got a similar percentage of the votes as Blair did in '97 but with no majority? I doubt he's so upset about the Lib Dems getting 22% of the vote but only 50-odd seats.
Low. I think Clegg was implying that PR was deal breaker for him, and the Conservatives aren't going to hoist their own petard by allowing such a reform.
Mise
isle of lucy
They disagree on Trident, they disagree on PR, they disagree on Europe, they disagreed on Iraq, on gay marriages, on taxation, on nuclear power, on green taxes, on tuition fees, on marriage taxes, on who should provide public services... It's hard to see what a Lib/Con coalition could possibly achieve together...
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,191
Short of disrupting essential services... a government incapable of abusing its citizenry, because it can't agree on how to abuse it.
Best form of checks and balances ever.
Mise
isle of lucy
Haha, yeah; reminds me of when David Mitchell (a comedian) asked his panel of experts last night, "what would happen if, after weeks without any form of government at all, Britain is still doing fine?"
Got to think positively: we avoided the main threat of a Tory outright victory. A Lib-Lab pact would still be a minority, so that is looking unlikely at the minute, although not impossible.
Nick Clegg is in a good position in that he can SAY that it's up to the Tories to propose the first deal with them, but he can just reject it as insufficient. This would force the Tories to rule as a minority, which has the dual effect of disabling the Tories from implementing their more right-wing ideas, and of ensuring that all the unpopular measures to 'save the country/economy' fall squarely on the reputation of the Tories. So, when the next election rolls round, the Tories should lose seats.
Still, Clegg wants proportional representation however much he talked it down during the campaign, and he can afford to be that 'radical' now since it's up to him to reject or accept proposals. Proportional representation would seriously increase the number of seats that the Lib Dems get in the future, and would marginalise their main foes, the Tories. So this or something similar would be the basis of a Lib-Lab pact, as shown by Mandelson last night supporting electoral reform.
Fascinating stuff.
Nick Clegg is in a good position in that he can SAY that it's up to the Tories to propose the first deal with them, but he can just reject it as insufficient. This would force the Tories to rule as a minority, which has the dual effect of disabling the Tories from implementing their more right-wing ideas, and of ensuring that all the unpopular measures to 'save the country/economy' fall squarely on the reputation of the Tories. So, when the next election rolls round, the Tories should lose seats.
Still, Clegg wants proportional representation however much he talked it down during the campaign, and he can afford to be that 'radical' now since it's up to him to reject or accept proposals. Proportional representation would seriously increase the number of seats that the Lib Dems get in the future, and would marginalise their main foes, the Tories. So this or something similar would be the basis of a Lib-Lab pact, as shown by Mandelson last night supporting electoral reform.
Fascinating stuff.
I don't think lib-dem got enough vote to force PR on the other parties.
Think both lab/con would rather have a re-election in oct or may next year rather than give in over PR.
Lib-dems really needed enough votes to make it look like there would a series of hung parliament no matter how many re-elections there were, really they need about 30% vote and 100 seats or so.
Just glad con didn't win overall majority.
Benefactor
Beneficial
By the looks of it there is still an extremely small chance of a Lib-Lab coalition having a very slim majority.
Benefactor
Beneficial
As I understand it, the SDLP and the Liberal Alliance, are basically Liberal Democrats with a different name, so thats an extra 4 seats.
Lib/Lab could probably get some kind of hard PR through as the small parties will likely be in favour of it. The problem is AV may not be sufficiently beneficial to the Independents and local parties to convince them to back it, while STV is likely too radical for Labour to get behind.
Shekwan
Kim Chi Quaffing Celt
Yeah, SDLP are nationalist liberals and Alliance are non-aligned liberals.
I don't see why they'd want to make a government though. I mean surely its better to leave the buck well and firmly with the Conservatives. They got the most votes, let them make a crappy minority government and take all the popularity hits.
The big shock right now is the LibDems complete failure, but only because we all (well almost) bought the polls. But really the story is how the Conservatives managed to screw up so badly! They really should have don far better.
I don't see why they'd want to make a government though. I mean surely its better to leave the buck well and firmly with the Conservatives. They got the most votes, let them make a crappy minority government and take all the popularity hits.
The big shock right now is the LibDems complete failure, but only because we all (well almost) bought the polls. But really the story is how the Conservatives managed to screw up so badly! They really should have don far better.
Mise
isle of lucy
Back in January, a result like this would have been hailed as a resounding success for Labour, and a career-ending defeat for Cameron. But Cleggmania changed all that -- now it's seen almost as a vague relief for Cameron and Labour, but a disaster for Clegg. Weird old country...
AV would at least be a step forward if an impasse occurs. Hard to imagine that reform could collapse.
GinandTonic
Saphire w/ Schweps + Lime
- Joined
- May 25, 2005
- Messages
- 8,898
Radio 5 is predicting a tory final total just shy of 310.
Even with the unionists 8 and deducting the non-voting sinn fein 4 that still leaves them just short. It also means a lib/lab would need everyone else on board, plaid, snp, NI libs and perhaps the single green and alliance mps.
Looks like it is going to be either a minority gov, a lib/con gov or an everyone-but-the-tories alliance which would be just about unable to pass an austerity budget as the local nationalist will have them by the knackers.
Even with the unionists 8 and deducting the non-voting sinn fein 4 that still leaves them just short. It also means a lib/lab would need everyone else on board, plaid, snp, NI libs and perhaps the single green and alliance mps.
Looks like it is going to be either a minority gov, a lib/con gov or an everyone-but-the-tories alliance which would be just about unable to pass an austerity budget as the local nationalist will have them by the knackers.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
This outcome is maddening. We were all expecting a hung parliament, but I don't think any of us could have expected this uncertain a result. A minority government seems certain, but everything else could hardly be less certain. Cameron seems unable to offer the Lib Dems enough to pass a Queen's speech, the Lib Dems seem unable to offer Labour enough seats to produce a viable government, and the economic situation puts huge pressure on the parties to come to some accomodation quickly and smoothly.
A Lib/Lab pact doesn't seem like it could pull off a majority, but they could probably eek out a Queen's speech and struggle on for a few months before facing a potentially nasty election. I can't really see them bothering.
The Tories seem to be deluded. They look to be totally intransigent on any deal with the Lib Dems, and determined to pursue a minority government, but seem to have forgotten that they are the opposition and have no entitlement to form a minority government whatsoever. It takes a majority to unseat the government, so if they refuse to deal they simply have no constitutional means to form a government. I'm sure the Tory leadership is well aware of this, but their MPs seem to have an attatchment to the opposition benches.
By all means give Cameron the poisoned chalice, but he'll have to remind his party that they need the Lib Dems backing even if they want to go it alone. However bad the election went for the Lib Dems, this is still the best chance they've ever had for electoral reform, and the Tory plurality doesn't change that one bit.
A Lib/Lab pact doesn't seem like it could pull off a majority, but they could probably eek out a Queen's speech and struggle on for a few months before facing a potentially nasty election. I can't really see them bothering.
The Tories seem to be deluded. They look to be totally intransigent on any deal with the Lib Dems, and determined to pursue a minority government, but seem to have forgotten that they are the opposition and have no entitlement to form a minority government whatsoever. It takes a majority to unseat the government, so if they refuse to deal they simply have no constitutional means to form a government. I'm sure the Tory leadership is well aware of this, but their MPs seem to have an attatchment to the opposition benches.
By all means give Cameron the poisoned chalice, but he'll have to remind his party that they need the Lib Dems backing even if they want to go it alone. However bad the election went for the Lib Dems, this is still the best chance they've ever had for electoral reform, and the Tory plurality doesn't change that one bit.
