How to sum up the Tory party

[llcoolphil]

It was obvious before a single vote was cast that a coalition was going to happen and from Cleggs avoidance on the subject it was going to be a coalition with the Tories, a vote for the lid dems was always a vote for the tories, to not expect it was naivety. The only thing really to consider was how much of a c**t Clegg was going to turn into when he tasted a little power. Almost makes me miss the one eyed c**t.

[sifi]

'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again, but already it was impossible to say which was which'

I know it was originally written about Communists, but it seems to apply.

[RABun]

its very quiet today - do you think oaf might actually have to do some work?

or according to Phil sign on or something lol

[oafc0000]

its very quiet today - do you think oaf might actually have to do some work?

or according to Phil sign on or something lol

[llcoolphil]

'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again, but already it was impossible to say which was which'

I know it was originally written about Communists, but it seems to apply.

[RABun]

I think its about time I stopped posting... Just going to be a lurker... Just going to stick to the Glasto boards again

[philipsteak]

how selfish - i'm sooooo bored by my job and the only entertainment i get is arguing with you and you bugger off to glasto. :angry:

[sifi]

Oaf not posting here any more? It's a sad, sad day.

for the glasto boards anyhow

[ampersand]

Oaf not posting here any more? It's a sad, sad day.

for the glasto boards anyhow

[Pogues Mcgogues]

It was obvious was it? Whilst I accept that I had been calling a hung parliament on these boards for well over a year, it was far from obvious. Equally, why does Clegg's silence on the matter mean it was going to be a coalition with the tories? There was nothing pre election day that suggested that Clegg had decided to go with the tories before a vote was cast and there was nothing in the immediate aftermath of the election that suggested it either. Clegg's criticism of tory economic policy before the election suggests anything but a done deal.

But how is a vote for the lib dems a vote for the tories? One involves a coalition, one involves a tory majority.

[eFestivals]

Errr excuse me but I told you before any deal was made that Clegg would form a coalition with the Tories. I gave specific reasons why as well. You told me I was talking rubbish.

Yeah, he joined the Liberals because all along he planned to become leader and have them cosy up to the tories, just to piss YOU off.

You guessed, and either you knew Labour didn't have a hope in hell of getting enough seats to form a viable coalition, or you got lucky.

He's a politician FFS, and all politicians are just hot air without power. His *ONLY* opportunity of power was with the tories, because Labour didn't have enough seats to be involved in any viable coalition.

Those are the reasons. Anything else you're fantasising are just that, fantasies.

If Labour and the tories had had equal seats, would it have panned out the same? Perhaps - it would have depended on whether the Labour leadership had the brains to take their heads out of their arses and offer a viable deal. Given that they offered no deal at all when in the most weak position imaginable, chances are they'd have been no deal on offer if they'd been in a stronger position - so that would have made Labour no less culpable for the existence of a right wing govt than they are in reality.

But it's all Clegg's fault.

Edited August 26, 2010 by eFestivals

[Pogues Mcgogues]

Yeah, he joined the Liberals because all along he planned to become leader and have them cosy up to the tories, just to piss YOU off.

You guessed, and either you knew Labour didn't have a hope in hell of getting enough seats to form a viable coalition, or you got lucky.

He's a politician FFS, and all politicians are just hot air without power. His *ONLY* opportunity of power was with the tories, because Labour didn't have enough seats to be involved in any viable coalition.

Those are the reasons. Anything else you're fantasising are just that, fantasies.

If Labour and the tories had had equal seats, would it have panned out the same? Perhaps - it would have depended on whether the Labour leadership had the brains to take their heads out of their arses and offer a viable deal. Given that they offered no deal at all when in the most weak position imaginable, chances are they'd have been no deal on offer if they'd been in a stronger position - so that would have made Labour no less culpable for the existence of a right wing govt than they are in reality.

But it's all Clegg's fault.

[eFestivals]

Lol, you avoid my posts for a good while, I make a criticism of Glasto, then here we are.

you really do have an overblown sense of your own importance, don't you?

I can't reply in full to that now, as I have no argument to make back

corrected for you.

[Pogues Mcgogues]

Yeah, he joined the Liberals because all along he planned to become leader and have them cosy up to the tories, just to piss YOU off.

You guessed, and either you knew Labour didn't have a hope in hell of getting enough seats to form a viable coalition, or you got lucky.

He's a politician FFS, and all politicians are just hot air without power. His *ONLY* opportunity of power was with the tories, because Labour didn't have enough seats to be involved in any viable coalition.

Those are the reasons. Anything else you're fantasising are just that, fantasies.

If Labour and the tories had had equal seats, would it have panned out the same? Perhaps - it would have depended on whether the Labour leadership had the brains to take their heads out of their arses and offer a viable deal. Given that they offered no deal at all when in the most weak position imaginable, chances are they'd have been no deal on offer if they'd been in a stronger position - so that would have made Labour no less culpable for the existence of a right wing govt than they are in reality.

But it's all Clegg's fault.

[Snufflebutt]

No. I outlined reasons why the modern day Liberals were more likely to side with the Tories in a coalition than with Labour. I made it clear and showed a lack of optimism (something I usualy have for Labour chances) because of this information. Clegg's led Liberals are not left type Liberals but are realy core valued Liberals. Liberalism in its purest form is very centralistic with economic values that have common interests with the right. For f**k sake Neil, look at the "saviour" Vinny Cable, he's more anti Trade Unionism than half the bloody Tory back bench!

[eFestivals]

Ideology has got sack all to do with it. The Lib Dems made a pragmatic, entirely understandable decision. A coalition with Labour would have been plainly unviable - it would have either meant a minority government or giving the nationalist parties concessions which could, down the line, have led to independence in Scotland. There was only one way for the Lib Dems to go.

yep, they had the choice - for the first time in decades - or some power or no power. It's hardly surprising they went for some power.

If the situation with the Lab & Con parties had been fully reversed (including a willingness from Labour to do a fair deal - something they weren't prepared to even consider from a position of gross weakness, which just gets to show what an arrogant bunch of c**ts they really are!), then would the Libs have been any less willing to make a coalition with Labour? No, no less willing and in fact more willing.

I presume that what pogo is spouting is the official Labour version of history, cos it so often is. And if it is, it just gets to show that even after that heavy election defeat they're still a million miles away from grasping why. The Libs have shot themselves by making that coalition, I'm sure. Meanwhile, the Labour party is determined to shoot itself again and again and again and again and condemn us to many more years of the tories than we deserve.

Edited August 27, 2010 by eFestivals

[llcoolphil]

For f**k sake Neil, look at the "saviour" Vinny Cable, he's more anti Trade Unionism than half the bloody Tory back bench!

[eFestivals]

So how do we place a series of labour governments that failed to repeal tory anti-union legislation?

I think part of the reason labour refused to make a coalition offer was because Brown couldn't carry his cabinet. The Millibands were lining up for a leadership contest and had the cabinet supporting one or the other and wanting to see the back of Brown, whose style of leadership they knew couldn't make a coalition work. Without Mandelson to a deal as he had before, any coalition negotiations were scuppered before they started. What some labour members need to remember is that the labour party itself is as much a coalition of opposing ideals as any con Lib government - but with more infighting.

I agree that was going on, but even so there till seems to be an huge amount of amazement oozing from some senior labour peeps that the Libs didn't accept their "offer".

Some at least believed that the Libs would agree to side with Labour for nothing in return, just to keep the tories out.

Yet it's a no brainer that to any full-brained politician that some influence on policy is always better than none at all. Politicians who refuse to compromise on anything are the politicians who are always marginalised, because only the stupid think just they have the monopoly on good ideas.

Edited August 27, 2010 by eFestivals

[indieheart]

might be worth throwing into the mix that Australia is finding itself in a similar position politically. It has got to a point where no vote, no faith in the above has a validity. But where do we go from here? Anarchy is too scary for the majority.

[philipsteak]

might be worth throwing into the mix that Australia is finding itself in a similar position politically. It has got to a point where no vote, no faith in the above has a validity. But where do we go from here? Anarchy is too scary for the majority.

[Pogues Mcgogues]

So how do we place a series of labour governments that failed to repeal tory anti-union legislation?