Liberal Democrats

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by asst_dep_to_dep_asst, Oct 16, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

?
  1. Yes

    100.0%
  2. No

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. In good faith, I turned the radio on to the Today programme to listen to the news this morning and all I got was that Minge had resigned.

    If we are serious about reducung our carbon footprint, we should disband the LDs forthwith, as they are irrelevant and a waste of good oxygen. That they should interfere with normal proceedings on Today is very , very disappointing!
     
  2. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    ADTDA you have forgotten the Who Gives a Fcuk option.
     
  3. Why do the Lib Dems act as if they will miraculously win an election and become the government of this country?
    I wouldn't vote for them even as a protest vote.
    Just a bunch of limp wristed, PC correct, all embracing, nincompoops
     
  4. with you Janner and Slim.
     
  5. Hear Hear, maybe they should just be absorbed into the Labour party....
     
  6. I put in a "Who Cares?" option, but the system didn't pick it up!
     
  7. To be honest (I'm one of those guys who follows the detailed political ongoings), from a policy perspective, the Lib Dems are quite sound. Look at some of their past proposals and you'll find a map with the other 2 main parties, in terms of taxation (increased IHT was an LD idea before Osbourne raised it), education and environmental policies. However, they suffer from a problem of anonimity - even in the haydays, it was a knowledgable person who could name more than 3 members of the LD cabinet.

    What is a pity is that they've had some good politicians in the near past. Paddy Ashdown would have been great as Sec Def (compared to every incumbent since 1997) and Ming would have made a good Foreign Sec (definately compared to every incumbent since 1997).

    The LDs need a) to get rid of the sandalled lot who still crop up, b) a serious and charismatic leader and c) an indepth image makeover. From what we've seen in the last 2 years, they haven't got anyone obvious to take up that mantle, and so will, at a national level anyway, be consigned to the protest voters.
     
  8. Seadog

    Seadog War Hero Moderator

    I'm in danger of agreeing with Slim. Lib Dems try too hard to be nice to everyone and misjudge the mood of the electorate especially on taxation, stand fast GW II. In a so-called profession short on charisma, courage, non soundbite vision, drive and CDF the Lib Dems are more challenged than most.

    Listen to them today;

    Journo: 'are you going to be entering the leadership contest?'
    Lib Dem of the moment: 'I haven't given it any thought/oh no not me/ruling nothing in and ruling nothing out/now is not the time/get on with the job blah.....'

    FFS, make a decision. The only one that anyone knows (Simon Hughes) has said 'no'. Well Lembit Opik may be well known (and has had a proper job before entering Parliament) but 'for all the wrong reasons' springs to mind.
     
  9. I think that the Lib Dems are the ideal party for the DON'T Knows
     
  10. I think that before they can be seen as credible the party needs to make a decision about direction, many of the policies are credible and reasonably sustainable, but likely to be unpopular given the ill informed short sightedness inherent in parliamentary democracy. The two groups within the party are never going to be particularly comfortable partners; social liberal and economic liberal in the UKs current socialised welfare state lead to an unaffordable situation. Until such time as they can come to a conclusion they're never going to muster enough unified support to make a significant difference.

    I think one of the issues for the party is that the economic liberal position is co-incident with a moderate tory economic position, so there is little to differentiate the two parties there when the tories aren't pandering to their more lunatic fringe.

    Notwithstanding that, and to consider the initial question, I think it probably was reasonable for Campbell to resign. He's not made significant enough impact since he was elected to actually improve the situation for the party, and given the low likelihood of an election in the next few months it's reasonable to give someone else an opportunity.

    At least Simon Hughes has ruled himself out, that means that most of the potential contenders are on the economic liberal side of the party, whilst Campbell was also I don't think he ever got over the legacy of having stiffed his predecessor and his age. If there can be a decisive move in that direction then the party are unlikely to make significant gains in the next election, but could become somewheat more credible for the next one.
     

Share This Page