The Liberal Democrats

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

I cant bring myself to vote for them after their capitulation to the tories in that coalition

 

[Don Karleone]

I voted for them during the Corbyn years. I’ll be voting Labour but I hope the Lib Dems take as many seats off the Tories as possible where Labour can’t.

Not a fan of the silly stunts but I think Ed Davey comes across very well when he’s being serious as with the social care stuff.

Thought Daisy Cooper was great in the debate.

Was that tactical?

Didn't think so. Thank you for the Tory government.

 

[Vic]

Depends on the constituency, if the Lib-dems are the best way to oust a self-servative then give them the vote.
I'm not opposed to a two party state, I'm just opposed to the tories and their even more extreme brothers being one of those parties, and I am TOTALLY opposed to proportional representation as I cannot see any way in which it could work in the United Kingdom.
Single Transferable Vote though I would fully support.

STV is PR

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I cant bring myself to vote for them after their capitulation to the tories in that coalition

They didn’t have any real choice, in terms of the simple maths. They also moderated the worst instincts of the Tories for those five years. The mistake they made was their capitulation on PR. That was a huge mistake.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

They didn’t have any real choice, in terms of the simple maths. They also moderated the worst instincts of the Tories for those five years. The mistake they made was their capitulation on PR. That was a huge mistake.

I thought they were stuck either way - go into coalition and try to take the chance of having something close to power, or refuse and likely have a new election when they would almost certainly end up with fewer seats.

They definitely screwed up - PR being one - but mostly I think they underestimated how badly the Conservatives were going to use them. Cameron/Osborne et al with their belief that they deserve to be in power vs Clegg isn't an even contest.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I thought they were stuck either way - go into coalition and try to take the chance of having something close to power, or refuse and likely have a new election when they would almost certainly end up with fewer seats.

They definitely screwed up - PR being one - but mostly I think they underestimated how badly the Conservatives were going to use them. Cameron/Osborne et al with their belief that they deserve to be in power vs Clegg isn't an even contest.

Yes that’s fair comment too. I do think it’s naive to criticise a politician for taking a chance on being in power, especially when it’s their only realistic shot at it, but the execution by the LibDems was terrible.

I also think, upon reflection, that the performance of Gordon Brown as PM wasn’t as poor as it appeared to many (including me) upon first blush and I think the Libdems got caught up in that, along with the fact that Cameron and Osborne were socially liberal probably played a part too.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

Yes that’s fair comment too. I do think it’s naive to criticise a politician for taking a chance on being in power, especially when it’s their only realistic shot at it, but the execution by the LibDems was terrible.

I also think, upon reflection, that the performance of Gordon Brown as PM wasn’t as poor as it appeared to many (including me) upon first blush and I think the Libdems got caught up in that, along with the fact that Cameron and Osborne were socially liberal probably played a part too.

I think hindsight is 20:20 and it’s easy to proselytise on some of the bad decisions they made. At the time in 2010 the zeitgeist was one of “change needed” (much like now) and LibDems took a gamble on the Tories because siding with Labour would have made them look like they were propping up the status quo. I think they were sort of damned either way.

Their biggest mistake was not making the tuition fees and PR a core condition of their coalition agreement. Eventually the Tories would have folded to that because they craved power. LibDems had the strongest hand they’re ever likely to get and played it as badly as they could have done and I lie that blame solely at the feet of Clegg who I think talked a great game but was better at comms than negotiations.

How the rest unfolded from the point at which they went into coalition was sadly inevitable as they were forced into honouring an agreement with a party they fundamentally disagreed with on a lot of things and their paddling in 2015 was well deserved.

That was 9 years ago though, and I don’t want to be like my parents voting one way for 30-40 years because of the mistakes of the past - that entrenchment is how we’ve got 14 years of Tories. That doesn’t mean I’ll vote LibDem this time, I haven’t decided but ultimately it won’t matter in my constituency anyway.

 

[law74]

STV is PR

I have to disagree.
Under PR if a party gets a certain percentage of the votes, that is the percentage of seats they get.
Under Single Transferable Vote, you could get 30% more of first preference votes than any opponent and lose.
In a recent NI Assembly election the TUV got a high percentage of first preference votes, but very few seats, as the numbers of second and third preference transfers they received were miniscule.
Big advantages are that you maintain the constituency representative, the electorate in the constituency decide who to elect, and you don't have an MP the majority of the constituency find repulsive (this can also negate tactical voting to a large degree).
The Tories would have been apoplectic if this had been suggested even up to 5 or 6 months ago, but as it seems likely their traditional vote share will be divided between them and Tice Ltd, even they might welcome the move

 

[Vic]

I have to disagree.
Under PR if a party gets a certain percentage of the votes, that is the percentage of seats they get.
Under Single Transferable Vote, you could get 30% more of first preference votes than any opponent and lose.
In a recent NI Assembly election the TUV got a high percentage of first preference votes, but very few seats, as the numbers of second and third preference transfers they received were miniscule.
Big advantages are that you maintain the constituency representative, the electorate in the constituency decide who to elect, and you don't have an MP the majority of the constituency find repulsive (this can also negate tactical voting to a large degree).
The Tories would have been apoplectic if this had been suggested even up to 5 or 6 months ago, but as it seems likely their traditional vote share will be divided between them and Tice Ltd, even they might welcome the move

What "high percentage" of first preference votes did any TUV candidate get? Under STV you have to be a very niche programme not to pick up 2nd/3rd preference votes.

 

[law74]

What "high percentage" of first preference votes did any TUV candidate get?

Not sure off the top of my head, but it was certainly the most they have ever had, and were ahead of lot of those who were elected on first preference votes, and would have been in double figures in the assembly if it was based on first preference votes only per constituency (some constituencies return 6 members to the assembly).
And the point still stands, STV is different and preferable to PR