How do the Lib Dems survive? As Mike has pointed out many times the Coalition with the Tories has alienated a significant section of their support who will find the comments by Norman Lamb baffling. They will vote Labour next time and this surely increases the chance of them doing so even in seats where Labour has no chance and the Lib Dems need their tactical votes to see off the Tories.
Presumably Lamb is indicating that the Orange Bookers would find Coalition with Ed and Ed every bit as unacceptable and fear or contemplate a similar loss to the right. What is then left?
Slightly to my disappointment it seems that UKIP is here to stay and there is a realignment going on on the right which will inevitably push the Tories towards the centre. This leaves the Lib Dems very few places to go as most of their seats are tory leaning seats where they have offered a nicer alternative. If the Tories lose the nasty party tag to UKIP what is the point of the Liberal Democrats?
This country desperately needs a centre left option which is credible and capable of governing the country without inflicting serious damage but history and the SDP show that such an option is best achieved by internal reform of the Labour party rather than a challenge from the outside. Personally I would like the Lib Dems to be that centre left party but I think it is vanishingly unlikely this will happen.
I don't see why the "country desperately needs a centre left option which is credible and capable of governing the country" - the redistribution of power consequent upon globalization means that we no longer have class-based politics, but identity politics. This means that both social justice (Attlee, Wilson) and the opportunity to "better oneself" (Thatcher) are thrown into the dustbin of history.
India has managed democratic politics inside a communitarian framework ever since independence. Perhaps we should send a working party there to find out how to do it.
The Ottoman Empire is perhaps a better example, the US certainly seems to be moving to a hybrid between the Ottoman Empire and Brazil.
Only here could someone offer up the Ottoman Empire as an example of democratic politics! It's the sort of thing that makes me love this place... anyway, that's me done for to-day: real life beckons...
The Lib Dems must be praying that they don't have to go into another after the next election.
The ideal result for them would be an unwanted Labour government with a small majority. People will be more forgiving about tuition fees and propping up the Tories when the whole country is going down the pan under Labour. In fact people might retrospectively appreciate the job the Lib Dems did a lot more when staring at dopy Ed's face every day on the news.
Mr. Roger, it's ridiculous to describe a four year coalition partner as 'borderline immoral'.
"Look at these bastards, like David Cameron. What a git. Or 'sir' as I call him, Monday-Friday."
Honest disagreement is fine, but casting aspersions on the morality of the people you've been working with makes the Lib Dems look dodgier than the Conservatives.
They are acting like children. Don't they realise it will lose them any credit they would have got on the economy?
What exactly are they trying to gain coming out with rubbish like this?
There's even less chance of a Lab-Lib coalition in 2015 than there was of that fabled "rainbow coalition" in 2010. The numbers just won't be there, never mind whether the Lib Dems like Miliband or not.
1) looking at UKIP's prospects as they stand now 2) looking at the Lib Dems' prospects as they stand now 3) updating my Labour and Conservative battlegrounds.
I'm probably going to do all three in due course, but any preferences which I should do first?
The first has the greatest immediate betting interest.
Most of us could reel of the names of the first five most likely UKIP wins, but it gets a bit hazy after that.
UKIP's prospects look the most volatile and are closely tied to the forthcoming byelections. Any analysis could be badly out of date by Christmas, and mince pies are already in the shops.
For that reason, I'd say time on LibDems and marginals might be more usefully spent.
The Lib Dems must be praying that they don't have to go into another after the next election.
The ideal result for them would be an unwanted Labour government with a small majority. People will be more forgiving about tuition fees and propping up the Tories when the whole country is going down the pan under Labour. In fact people might retrospectively appreciate the job the Lib Dems did a lot more when staring at dopy Ed's face every day on the news.
Yeah but suppose the country does not in fact go down the pan under Labour? And come to think of it, that might be the LibDems' best bet -- that the country continues to tick along with nothing much happening so that the 2020 election is a damn close-run thing with both main parties casting around for coalition partners.
"This idea of a Labour Party that exists outside Westminster and is rooted in our communities is clearly one that appeals to Nandy. She’s clearly someone who’s sceptical about the way Westminster and party politics work, so I asked her why she joined the Labour Party in the first place:
“I joined when I was a teenager, mainly because I grew up in Manchester in the late eighties. You couldn’t avoid being political. You could see the direct impact of the government’s policies…I thought it was really important that people fought back, and with a collective voice.”
Yet despite that, she’s no starry eyed party triballist:
“I’m not in the Labour Party because I just love the Labour Party. I’m in the Labour Party because I think that it’s the best hope for social justice this country has ever had…We’re only as good as what we do for people, what we stand for and what we deliver.”
The difference between Wigan and Westminster – and Nandy’s reaction to the two, could not be more stark. Meeting Nandy in her constituency office she’s a whirling dervish of activity, making calls, chatting to local businesses people, laughing and joking with volunteers. Often MPs can feel beaten down by the nature and drudgery of Westminster politics – and the feeling that it’s hard to make a difference. I ask her what she thinks of it after four years....
She tells me that “the gap between what we talk about in Westminster and what we talk about in Wigan is massive” and that her job “is to go to Westminster and drag what matters from Wigan into that arena.” The conversations I hear her have over the course of a single day reinforce that ten-fold."
Mr. Neil, worth recalling two things: 1) the Lib Dems have been attacking the Conservatives at pretty much every conference 2) pre-election (I believe) Clegg attacked the Conservatives and implied their dislike of the EU (specifically, I think, the European Arrest Warrant) would make it harder to catch paedophiles and the like
So, there's a shade of hypocrisy in the Lib Dems suddenly deciding intra-coalition sniping is a bad thing.
That said, I think a policy disagreement is fine, but politicians hurling morality about generally make themselves look bad rather than their opponents. I dislike painting the other side as evil baby-eaters. Incompetent and with the wrong ideas, fine, but Sauron's more evil brother, no.
People seem to be ignoring the reason that Norman Lamb suggested a coalition with Labour would be hard. He wasn't saying that it was an ideological diffference, or that the two parties couldn't put together some kind of joint programme, or that they couldn't work together for tribal reasons. Instead he gave a very specific and very interesting reason:
“And this is a political point but I think it is one that this party has to take very seriously. I’m afraid I don’t see Ed Miliband as a Prime Minister.
“I think the idea of use being latched into a Labour Government with a low percentage of the vote, led by Ed Miliband and what's gone on in France under Hollande, I think it could be enormously damaging for our party in that sort of relationship.
Hard to argue with that. The LibDems would be mad to associate themselves with the almost inevitable disaster of a weak Miliband-led government, especially when they've just spent five years in a coalition focused on stability, growth, and falling unemployment. They would want to ensure that all the merde falls into Labour's lap.
One other point: I don't think a Confidence & Supply agreement (with either of the two larger parties) is a sensible option for them either. It would mean they still get all the flak for the bad or unpopular things ("why are you propping up this government?") without any of the credit for any good things, without any real positive influence, and without the ministerial portfolios. That looks like the worst of all worlds.
If we assume LibDem meltdown continues and only those he considers dead-certs are re-elected, here is the new team. I've put a star next to those who are in government (that I know of):
INVERNESS, NAIRN, BADENOCH & STRATHSPEY (Danny Alexander) * GORDON (Sir Malcolm Bruce (retiring – Christine Jardine selected) TWICKENHAM (Vince Cable) * NORTH EAST FIFE (Sir Menzies Campbell (retiring)) ORKNEY & SHETLAND (Alistair Carmichael) * SHEFFIELD HALLAM (Nick Clegg) * KINGSTON & SURBITON (Edward Davey) * WESTMORLAND & LONSDALE (Tim Farron) BATH (Don Foster (retiring)) BERMONDSEY & OLD SOUTHWARK (Simon Hughes) * ROSS, SKYE AND LOCHABER (Charles Kennedy) NORTH NORFOLK (Norman Lamb) * YEOVIL (David Laws) * BERWICKSHIRE, ROXBURGH & SELKIRK (Michael Moore) * LEEDS NORTH WEST (Greg Mulholland) SOUTHPORT (John Pugh) COLCHESTER (Sir Bob Russell) CAITHNESS, SUTHERLAND & EASTER ROSS (John Thurso) * THORNBURY & YATE (Steve Webb) * BRECON & RADNORSHIRE (Roger Williams) BRISTOL WEST (Stephen Williams)
If this happens, then this doesn't look like a team who are going to go and form a coalition with Ed M. Nor is it a group who will lightly give up the red boxes.
He still thinks it would be a "major shock" if the tories took Berwickshire and that Argyll & Bute is a possible Lib Dem hold. My guess in the latter is that the Lib Dems will come a poor fourth and in my opinion it would be a major shock if the Tories did not take Berwickshire.
I hope his comments on the English seats are better informed.
All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now. What happens should Labour lose the GE is quite another matter.
People seem to be ignoring the reason that Norman Lamb suggested a coalition with Labour would be hard. He wasn't saying that it was an ideological diffference, or that the two parties couldn't put together some kind of joint programme, or that they couldn't work together for tribal reasons. Instead he gave a very specific and very interesting reason:
“And this is a political point but I think it is one that this party has to take very seriously. I’m afraid I don’t see Ed Miliband as a Prime Minister.
“I think the idea of use being latched into a Labour Government with a low percentage of the vote, led by Ed Miliband and what's gone on in France under Hollande, I think it could be enormously damaging for our party in that sort of relationship.
Hard to argue with that. The LibDems would be mad to associate themselves with the almost inevitable disaster of a weak Miliband-led government, especially when they've just spent five years in a coalition focused on stability, growth, and falling unemployment. They would want to ensure that all the merde falls into Labour's lap.
One other point: I don't think a Confidence & Supply agreement (with either of the two larger parties) is a sensible option for them either. It would mean they still get all the flak for the bad or unpopular things ("why are you propping up this government?") without any of the credit for any good things, without any real positive influence, and without the ministerial portfolios. That looks like the worst of all worlds.
I completely agree with the last point. Other than Short money what is the upside of a Confidence and Supply agreement? I jus don't get it.
It's obvious electioneering - saying that your opponent is so weak you couldnt see him leading a Government before an election is designed to make your party look better in relation to his; I dont think it has real implications for post election coalition options because he doesnt really believe it.
: I don't think a Confidence & Supply agreement (with either of the two larger parties) is a sensible option for them either. It would mean they still get all the flak for the bad or unpopular things ("why are you propping up this government?") without any of the credit for any good things, without any real positive influence, and without the ministerial portfolios. That looks like the worst of all worlds.
As I noted below, Danny Alexander has already specifically ruled this out. Of course, Mr A has his own challenges in returning for the 2015 Parliament, but as the second most senior Lib Dem in government at present, we should take what he says very seriously.
As with Brown, Labour need to either axe him or at least pretend to unite behind Miliband. It's not like he got the gig three weeks ago. He's been there for 3-4 years now.
Bitching about him just weakens Labour and decreases their prospects of winning the election. In Scotland, people will feel more comfortable drifting to the SNP. In England, back to the Lib Dems or away from UKIP to the Conservatives (on the basis you can't risk Miliband as PM).
It's not difficult, but they're making the same mistake as they did in 2010 with Brown. Only this time there'll be no Scottish premium, the SNP are stronger, and UKIP (whilst near certain to take more from the Conservatives) could take bites out of Labour support in the north.
All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now. What happens should Labour lose the GE is quite another matter.
Things that make you say, hmm. Why Alan Johnson and not Andy Burnham?
It's obvious electioneering - saying that your opponent is so weak you couldnt see him leading a Government before an election is designed to make your party look better in relation to his; I dont think it has real implications for post election coalition options because he doesnt really believe it.
I think he does believe it. It was a fringe meeting, and it's a very striking thing to say in public. It's also nothing more than political commonsense.
All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now. What happens should Labour lose the GE is quite another matter.
It helps explain how Labour came to select Ed when you consider than Alan Johnson is the next best option.
Agree, PfP, it is way, way too late to be changing leaders.
It's obvious electioneering - saying that your opponent is so weak you couldnt see him leading a Government before an election is designed to make your party look better in relation to his; I dont think it has real implications for post election coalition options because he doesnt really believe it.
I think he does believe it. It was a fringe meeting, and it's a very striking thing to say in public. It's also nothing more than political commonsense.
Meh, I'm sure he thinks it's worth his while to say it. Of course you buy the Miliband = Hollande = disaster line, you're a Cameroon!
All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now. What happens should Labour lose the GE is quite another matter.
It helps explain how Labour came to select Ed when you consider than Alan Johnson is the next best option.
Agree, PfP, it is way, way too late to be changing leaders.
They'll change leader after the election. Whatever the result.
Mr. L, maybe a Michael Howard option? He could be a short term figure of unity.
Indeed, but is Johnson being touted by friends or rivals of Burnham? Or is the whole thing invented by some over-excited SpAd who's just seen AJ on telly plugging his new book?
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now. What happens should Labour lose the GE is quite another matter.
Things that make you say, hmm. Why Alan Johnson and not Andy Burnham?
Johnson has the self-control not to blub every other day?
"He gave the SNP a “test” as it enters the Smith Commission on the new powers for Holyrood with the Scottish Greens, Labour, Lib Dems and Tories.
He said: “Will they be like Gollum in Lord of the Rings, torn apart by the lust for the ring of independence, or will they work constructively with others to create home rule that is stable as well as powerful, inside the United Kingdom?" "
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
If Conservatives are smart, PR is now massively in their interest. They can get a right wing Conservative + UKIP coalition probably around half the time, which would hallow them to have a proper conservative government. The problem is the leadership have a pathological hatred of UKIP that blinds them to their strategic interest.
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
Yes, and Nick Clegg was very careful not to rule it out on R4 Today this morning. He waffled away, and even managed to claim that he'd been a 'lifelong supporter' of a referendum, doing a fancy dance routine on the pinhead that he always supported a referendum 'when the rules change'. (I probably wasn't the only one to raise an eyebrow at that, giving the LibDems' behaviour on Lisbon.) He also waxed indignant at the arbitrary nature of the proposed 2017 date.
But he didn't actually say that the LibDems would not accept such a referendum.
I've been saying for a long time that this is not a deal breaker, from the LibDems' point of view. Of course, not getting a referendum would be a deal-breaker from the Conservatives' point of view.
"All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now"
I wonder if it is? It would need the agreement of Ed and the persuasion of several beefy union leaders but it might not be too late. labour are more popular than Ed and also the Tories so there is no reason to think their lead would vanish under a temporary leader. Then when a new one is selected early next year they could look forward to a new leader bounce.
"All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now"
I wonder if it is? It would need the agreement of Ed and the persuasion of several beefy union leaders but it might not be too late. labour are more popular than Ed and also the Tories so there is no reason to think their lead would vanish under a temporary leader. Then when a new one is selected early next year they could look forward to a new leader bounce.
" It would need the agreement of Ed"
Aha. I think I can see a flaw in this plan. If the entire Shadow Cabinet asked him to stand aside for the good of the country, then, maybe, just maybe...
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
If Conservatives are smart, PR is now massively in their interest. They can get a right wing Conservative + UKIP coalition probably around half the time, which would hallow them to have a proper conservative government. The problem is the leadership have a pathological hatred of UKIP that blinds them to their strategic interest.
PR would weaken both Labour and the Conservatives.
FPTP means parties form internal coalitions before an election. Without that pressure, 'broad church' parties don't have an attraction.
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
Yes, and Nick Clegg was very careful not to rule it out on R4 Today this morning. He waffled away, and even managed to claim that he'd been a 'lifelong supporter' of a referendum, doing a fancy dance routine on the pinhead that he always supported a referendum 'when the rules change'. (I probably wasn't the only one to raise an eyebrow at that, giving the LibDems' behaviour on Lisbon.) He also waxed indignant at the arbitrary nature of the proposed 2017 date.
But he didn't actually say that the LibDems would not accept such a referendum.
I've been saying for a long time that this is not a deal breaker, from the LibDems' point of view. Of course, not getting a referendum would be a deal-breaker from the Conservatives' point of view.
But they'd want a "grand package of constitutional measures in return.”. So Lords Reform? STV for local elections?
Leaving aside Chairman Miliband's intellectual self-confidence, don't forget how he got the job. Even if people take the view that it was fine and dandy, his winning the leadership did lead to his brother's political career ending.
If he walks away now, without even contesting the election, what was it for? What did he achieve? He'll have effectively ended his own career *and* his brother's, for nothing.
Besides which, there's sod all time left and he's been in post for 3-4 years now. It's not like nobody's pointed out the flaws of Miliband.
"He gave the SNP a “test” as it enters the Smith Commission on the new powers for Holyrood with the Scottish Greens, Labour, Lib Dems and Tories.
He said: “Will they be like Gollum in Lord of the Rings, torn apart by the lust for the ring of independence, or will they work constructively with others to create home rule that is stable as well as powerful, inside the United Kingdom?" "
I've always wanted to do a Lord of the Rings themed thread.
Always envisaged it being along the lines of the Tories portraying Ed Miliband as Sauron, and a last alliance, of Hobbits, Elves and Men (aka the Tories, Lib Dems and UKIP) uniting to destroy Sauron
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
If Conservatives are smart, PR is now massively in their interest. They can get a right wing Conservative + UKIP coalition probably around half the time, which would hallow them to have a proper conservative government. The problem is the leadership have a pathological hatred of UKIP that blinds them to their strategic interest.
PR would weaken both Labour and the Conservatives.
FPTP means parties form internal coalitions before an election. Without that pressure, 'broad church' parties don't have an attraction.
Yes, but that only makes sense if you see the goal as "getting a big as possible conservative party" rather than "getting conservative governance". Conservatives in politics for the right reasons should want the latter.
"All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now"
I wonder if it is? It would need the agreement of Ed and the persuasion of several beefy union leaders but it might not be too late. labour are more popular than Ed and also the Tories so there is no reason to think their lead would vanish under a temporary leader. Then when a new one is selected early next year they could look forward to a new leader bounce.
A small part of Ed's problems is that, like Cameron before him, he has been around as LOTO for a full 5 year Parliament and any novelty or self indulgent fantasy that he might be better than he appears has long since evaporated. This over familiarity probably cost Cameron his majority.
I think this is a problem that the major parties must learn from. If, say, we had a safe Labour majority in the next Parliament, or a safe Tory one, there would be much to say for Cameron or Miliband hanging on for a year or two whilst the losing party had a serious conversation with itself before it chooses its next leader. It is not the modern way but leaders need some element of novelty at elections and the present system is not providing it. And given that party democracy is between dying and dead choosing the leader is too big a decision on direction to rush.
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
Leaving aside Chairman Miliband's intellectual self-confidence, don't forget how he got the job. Even if people take the view that it was fine and dandy, his winning the leadership did lead to his brother's political career ending.
If he walks away now, without even contesting the election, what was it for? What did he achieve? He'll have effectively ended his own career *and* his brother's, for nothing.
Besides which, there's sod all time left and he's been in post for 3-4 years now. It's not like nobody's pointed out the flaws of Miliband.
No, I totally agree. Looks all but impossible to replace him in time now. But, the all but impossible does sometimes happen in politics.
Apart from anything else, it seems clear, from a distance anyway, that Ed really believes there is a way he could stagger across the threshold. And he's right.
I'd be interested to know the deepest thoughts now of the handful of union barons who 'rigged' the leadership vote by placing 'Vote Ed' posters wrapped around their ballot papers.
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
Not as inept as Gandalf - Why did he wait until the last moments to summon those birds to take the ring to the fires of Mount Doom?
All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now. What happens should Labour lose the GE is quite another matter.
It helps explain how Labour came to select Ed when you consider than Alan Johnson is the next best option.
Agree, PfP, it is way, way too late to be changing leaders.
Actually the more I see of Alan Johnson the more impressed I am. He's autobiography is entertaining, and if he wasn't in Labour he would be a good catch for UKIP.
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
Unfortunately the author seems to have given up in 2011 but this blog provides many useful insights into Sauron's earlier thinking:http://www.sauronsblog.com/
It is extremely funny and it would have been good to see the author address this particular conundrum.
Oh dear, it looks like Lamb's comments haven't been fully understood. If you look at the Guardian they've quoted him far more extensively. He talks about a possible scenario where Labour get most seats, but the Tories most votes. You then add Ukip getting far more votes than the Lib Dems and he's quite right to say a Lab/LD coalition would be difficult. What's more surprising is his general point about Ed Miliband. Okay, he's trying to score political points against a rival, but what's the message? He's been happy to spend 4 1/2 years in coalition with the likes of George (neoconservative) Osborne, Iain Duncan Smith, Eric Pickles, Chris Grayling and Michael Gove but Ed Miliband is beyond the pale. I don't see that as a way for them to win back votes, whatever people think of Ed.
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
I thought the point was that he couldn't conceive of the idea that someone else would try to destroy it, given that anyone who got the ring would surely want it to claim absolute power for themselves.
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
Not as inept as Gandalf - Why did he wait until the last moments to summon those birds to take the ring to the fires of Mount Doom?
Because Sauron had massive flying dragon things that could rip them to shreds?
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
Not as inept as Gandalf - Why did he wait until the last moments to summon those birds to take the ring to the fires of Mount Doom?
you can't win anything by air alone, you need boots on the ground......
The Lib Dems must be praying that they don't have to go into another after the next election.
The ideal result for them would be an unwanted Labour government with a small majority. People will be more forgiving about tuition fees and propping up the Tories when the whole country is going down the pan under Labour. In fact people might retrospectively appreciate the job the Lib Dems did a lot more when staring at dopy Ed's face every day on the news.
Yeah but suppose the country does not in fact go down the pan under Labour? And come to think of it, that might be the LibDems' best bet -- that the country continues to tick along with nothing much happening so that the 2020 election is a damn close-run thing with both main parties casting around for coalition partners.
If Labour come in and somehow against all the odds do a good job then the Lib Dems will have a very difficult time of it indeed. The tuition fees will pledge will be brought up again and again.
The Lib Dems need Labour to crash and burn big time and they need to actually attack them rather that the Tories this time. They won't of course and they'll let Labour off the hook again going completely against their interests probably because deep down they would rather keep the Tories out than actually be a grown up party of government.
Mr. Eagles, oh, aye, Gandalf was thick as two short planks too. Not as bad, I'd say, but still stupid. [Also, the eagles rescued Frodo, they didn't take him there].
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
If Conservatives are smart, PR is now massively in their interest. They can get a right wing Conservative + UKIP coalition probably around half the time, which would hallow them to have a proper conservative government. The problem is the leadership have a pathological hatred of UKIP that blinds them to their strategic interest.
If PR came in I can imagine the Tories never getting a majority on their own every again. How could that possibly be in their long term interests?
It is much more advantageous to them to just sort out the dodgy boundaries and stick with FPTP.
Mr. Eagles, oh, aye, Gandalf was thick as two short planks too. Not as bad, I'd say, but still stupid. [Also, the eagles rescued Frodo, they didn't take him there].
they rescued Bilbo et al in the Hobbit though and then promptly disappeared for circa 2.5 books...
Mr. Eagles, oh, aye, Gandalf was thick as two short planks too. Not as bad, I'd say, but still stupid. [Also, the eagles rescued Frodo, they didn't take him there].
I read somewhere that JRR Tolkien based Gandalf on Hannibal
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
Not as inept as Gandalf - Why did he wait until the last moments to summon those birds to take the ring to the fires of Mount Doom?
you can't win anything by air alone, you need boots on the ground......
Mr. Eagles, oh, aye, Gandalf was thick as two short planks too. Not as bad, I'd say, but still stupid. [Also, the eagles rescued Frodo, they didn't take him there].
I read somewhere that JRR Tolkien based Gandalf on Hannibal
Nick Clegg: I'd go to bed with Miriam over Ed Miliband or David Cameron every time
Asked by a Sky News anchor: “When you woke up this morning.. when you roll over and look at her lovingly and then think, come next May who you might have to get into bed with would you rather have Dave or Ed?
Mr Clegg replied: “Miriam every single time, unsurprisingly if you really must put it like that, I don’t think of politics in those terms.
Mr. Eagles, oh, aye, Gandalf was thick as two short planks too. Not as bad, I'd say, but still stupid. [Also, the eagles rescued Frodo, they didn't take him there].
they rescued Bilbo et al in the Hobbit though and then promptly disappeared for circa 2.5 books...
They also rescued Gandalf from Saruman and even then he did not think of getting at least a lift most of the way.
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
If Conservatives are smart, PR is now massively in their interest. They can get a right wing Conservative + UKIP coalition probably around half the time, which would hallow them to have a proper conservative government. The problem is the leadership have a pathological hatred of UKIP that blinds them to their strategic interest.
If PR came in I can imagine the Tories never getting a majority on their own every again. How could that possibly be in their long term interests?
It is much more advantageous to them to just sort out the dodgy boundaries and stick with FPTP.
The boundaries play a small part in the bias to LAB and you are foolish to think otherwise.
The big reasons are differential turnouts in LAB heartlands and, what's likely to be increasingly large, ANTI-CON tactical voting.
One could argue the same for God and the Garden of Eden. Not that God had orcs of course. But a shed load of angels to stop the serpent? He could've asked Michael to do the job...
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
That is a surprise and helpful for EdM. Populus have been showing Lab leads of 4. So 6 is at the top end in the past 3 months. ICM is (I guess a week) the one to look out for. Were the last 2 Yougov outliers as OGH suspects?
Nick Clegg: I'd go to bed with Miriam over Ed Miliband or David Cameron every time
Asked by a Sky News anchor: “When you woke up this morning.. when you roll over and look at her lovingly and then think, come next May who you might have to get into bed with would you rather have Dave or Ed?
Mr Clegg replied: “Miriam every single time, unsurprisingly if you really must put it like that, I don’t think of politics in those terms.
"All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now"
I wonder if it is? It would need the agreement of Ed and the persuasion of several beefy union leaders but it might not be too late. labour are more popular than Ed and also the Tories so there is no reason to think their lead would vanish under a temporary leader. Then when a new one is selected early next year they could look forward to a new leader bounce.
A small part of Ed's problems is that, like Cameron before him, he has been around as LOTO for a full 5 year Parliament and any novelty or self indulgent fantasy that he might be better than he appears has long since evaporated. This over familiarity probably cost Cameron his majority.
I think this is a problem that the major parties must learn from. If, say, we had a safe Labour majority in the next Parliament, or a safe Tory one, there would be much to say for Cameron or Miliband hanging on for a year or two whilst the losing party had a serious conversation with itself before it chooses its next leader. It is not the modern way but leaders need some element of novelty at elections and the present system is not providing it. And given that party democracy is between dying and dead choosing the leader is too big a decision on direction to rush.
I can see the sense in what you are saying, but there are problems with that approach.
Maybe it was because Brown simply went awol after leaving Downing Street, but Labour were a particularly weak opposition during the period of their leadership election, and it allowed the government to set the narrative - a narrative that for example Larry Elliot now points out that Labour have completely failed to shift.
In a media climate so focussed on the leader, and on the leader setting a policy direction, why would they bother to listen to a caretaker leader?
There's a clear contradiction there, and I'm not sure how best to resolve it.
Edit: Except, of course, by implementing the Chartists final demand - annual elections to Parliament.
Mr. Eagles, oh, aye, Gandalf was thick as two short planks too. Not as bad, I'd say, but still stupid. [Also, the eagles rescued Frodo, they didn't take him there].
they rescued Bilbo et al in the Hobbit though and then promptly disappeared for circa 2.5 books...
They also rescued Gandalf from Saruman and even then he did not think of getting at least a lift most of the way.
Oh yes - so they did....
A very unreliable service - the Easy Jet of travel in Lord of the Rings.
I presume the death eaters, oops I mean black riders were advance symbols of HS2?
There are some interesting comparisons and thoughts possible on that story. One is that Prometheus and Lucifer are basically the same (giving fire/technology/knowledge to mankind) and both are punished by Zeus/God. Only Prometheus is seen as a hero, and Lucifer as a villain.
The Lib Dems must be praying that they don't have to go into another after the next election.
The ideal result for them would be an unwanted Labour government with a small majority. People will be more forgiving about tuition fees and propping up the Tories when the whole country is going down the pan under Labour. In fact people might retrospectively appreciate the job the Lib Dems did a lot more when staring at dopy Ed's face every day on the news.
Yeah but suppose the country does not in fact go down the pan under Labour? And come to think of it, that might be the LibDems' best bet -- that the country continues to tick along with nothing much happening so that the 2020 election is a damn close-run thing with both main parties casting around for coalition partners.
If Labour come in and somehow against all the odds do a good job then the Lib Dems will have a very difficult time of it indeed. The tuition fees will pledge will be brought up again and again.
The Lib Dems need Labour to crash and burn big time and they need to actually attack them rather that the Tories this time. They won't of course and they'll let Labour off the hook again going completely against their interests probably because deep down they would rather keep the Tories out than actually be a grown up party of government.
The next parliament is going to be tough for the LDs whoever is in government.
In seats where they lose their MP in 2015, their local government base is likely to be eroded further. And they'll be competing with UKIP/SNP/Greens for media coverage.
Nick Clegg: I'd go to bed with Miriam over Ed Miliband or David Cameron every time
Asked by a Sky News anchor: “When you woke up this morning.. when you roll over and look at her lovingly and then think, come next May who you might have to get into bed with would you rather have Dave or Ed?
Mr Clegg replied: “Miriam every single time, unsurprisingly if you really must put it like that, I don’t think of politics in those terms.
There's a book reviewed in The Times today that calculates the statistical probability of GoT character life expectancies... I can see it appealing to many on here.
"All this stuff in the Daily Telegraph about Alan Johnson challenging Ed Miliband for the Labour leadership - it's all way, way too late for all that now"
I wonder if it is? It would need the agreement of Ed and the persuasion of several beefy union leaders but it might not be too late. labour are more popular than Ed and also the Tories so there is no reason to think their lead would vanish under a temporary leader. Then when a new one is selected early next year they could look forward to a new leader bounce.
A small part of Ed's problems is that, like Cameron before him, he has been around as LOTO for a full 5 year Parliament and any novelty or self indulgent fantasy that he might be better than he appears has long since evaporated. This over familiarity probably cost Cameron his majority.
I think this is a problem that the major parties must learn from. If, say, we had a safe Labour majority in the next Parliament, or a safe Tory one, there would be much to say for Cameron or Miliband hanging on for a year or two whilst the losing party had a serious conversation with itself before it chooses its next leader. It is not the modern way but leaders need some element of novelty at elections and the present system is not providing it. And given that party democracy is between dying and dead choosing the leader is too big a decision on direction to rush.
I can see the sense in what you are saying, but there are problems with that approach.
Maybe it was because Brown simply went awol after leaving Downing Street, but Labour were a particularly weak opposition during the period of their leadership election, and it allowed the government to set the narrative - a narrative that for example Larry Elliot now points out that Labour have completely failed to shift.
In a media climate so focussed on the leader, and on the leader setting a policy direction, why would they bother to listen to a caretaker leader?
There's a clear contradiction there, and I'm not sure how best to resolve it.
Edit: Except, of course, by implementing the Chartists final demand - annual elections to Parliament.
Maybe not having leaders with the sort of psychological baggage that Brown had?
I'm amazed people are talking up Alan Johnson. The comparison with Gordon Brown is ludicrous.In 2009 Labour were polling in the mid-20s and facing possible annihilation. In that scenario a change of leader just before an election might make sense. If Cameron looked to be heading towards a 100 seat majority, I could understand a panic reaction. But not now.
It makes me wonder though. What if the Tories were headed for a 100 seat majority? Would people move against Miliband? I suspect not. Are some in the part willing him to lose? It's starting to look that way.
I see that Lord Ashcroft's constituency poll in Norwich South projects that the Lib Dems will come in fifth. When was the last time (if ever) that a party finished fifth in a seat that it had held at a previous general election?
Turned into LD Conf on BBC Parliament and amongst the acres of purple empty seats (a metaphor?) on stage again is Julian Huppert (aka Little Hands), talking about housing but he has appeared many times and seems to portray himself as an expert on everything with an opinion on everything else.
Noticeable how at least half the LD MPs are not really bothering. ex MP Evan Harris (Dr Death) has also had multiple appearances. Next up is the equally awful Richard Younger-Ross ex MP.
Nick Clegg: I'd go to bed with Miriam over Ed Miliband or David Cameron every time
Asked by a Sky News anchor: “When you woke up this morning.. when you roll over and look at her lovingly and then think, come next May who you might have to get into bed with would you rather have Dave or Ed?
Mr Clegg replied: “Miriam every single time, unsurprisingly if you really must put it like that, I don’t think of politics in those terms.
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
I thought the point was that he couldn't conceive of the idea that someone else would try to destroy it, given that anyone who got the ring would surely want it to claim absolute power for themselves.
And indeed Isildur had already passed up the opportunity to destroy the Ring.
Nick Clegg: I'd go to bed with Miriam over Ed Miliband or David Cameron every time
Asked by a Sky News anchor: “When you woke up this morning.. when you roll over and look at her lovingly and then think, come next May who you might have to get into bed with would you rather have Dave or Ed?
Mr Clegg replied: “Miriam every single time, unsurprisingly if you really must put it like that, I don’t think of politics in those terms.
Mr. Eagles, Sauron is arguably the most stupid creature in fantasy.
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
Not as inept as Gandalf - Why did he wait until the last moments to summon those birds to take the ring to the fires of Mount Doom?
Gandalf was simply too busy guiding the forces with Aragorn at the Black Gate. Sauron thought himself invincible and immortal - like the Tories - (with the ring he would have been) it was simple hubris that brought him down. So too the Tories will be brought down.
There's a book reviewed in The Times today that calculates the statistical probability of GoT character life expectancies... I can see it appealing to many on here.
I too am amazed. AJ is Cheeky Chappy Fodder - when he was SCoE he joked about not knowing the difference between Debt/Deficit and didn't know the VAT rates. He clearly wasn't interested at all. Now that may have been after he discovered his little domestic problems - but either way, he was a firewall against Balls and was burned to a crisp. Balls still got the job.
He's got bugger all credibility as a potential PM. It just shows the paucity of available talent on Labour's benches.
I'm amazed people are talking up Alan Johnson. The comparison with Gordon Brown is ludicrous.In 2009 Labour were polling in the mid-20s and facing possible annihilation. In that scenario a change of leader just before an election might make sense. If Cameron looked to be heading towards a 100 seat majority, I could understand a panic reaction. But not now.
It makes me wonder though. What if the Tories were headed for a 100 seat majority? Would people move against Miliband? I suspect not. Are some in the part willing him to lose? It's starting to look that way.
I see that Lord Ashcroft's constituency poll in Norwich South projects that the Lib Dems will come in fifth. When was the last time (if ever) that a party finished fifth in a seat that it had held at a previous general election?
This is the best GE for years for the Greens to make a major leap forward. But their Leader is almost as bad as EdM. Keeping her off the box is a must. If the party does "stand in three quarters of UK seats next year – double 2010's efforts" that is part of the answer but they also have to go after the LDs at the relevant local elections and grab hundreds of LD cllr seats. That also will need several thousand candidates, which in the past they have struggled to find.
Mr. Eagles, oh, aye, Gandalf was thick as two short planks too. Not as bad, I'd say, but still stupid. [Also, the eagles rescued Frodo, they didn't take him there].
they rescued Bilbo et al in the Hobbit though and then promptly disappeared for circa 2.5 books...
They also rescued Gandalf from Saruman and even then he did not think of getting at least a lift most of the way.
Oh yes - so they did....
A very unreliable service - the Easy Jet of travel in Lord of the Rings.
I presume the death eaters, oops I mean black riders were advance symbols of HS2?
Perhaps more Ryanair? Only to be used in absolute extremis.
Typically, nice likeable characters have short shelf-lives because killing them off creates emotional tension. It does get rather tedious when it happens a lot. IIRC GoT is particularly prone to this phenomenon.
I've just been given the LotR films to watch by a friend. Oh dear. I've been avoiding all things Ringish since I was a teenager and had a boyfriend who had posters of wizards in his bedroom. Even now I cringe at the thought. I know I'm going to have to watch these now. Urgh. This really isn't my genre...
There's a book reviewed in The Times today that calculates the statistical probability of GoT character life expectancies... I can see it appealing to many on here.
I see that Lord Ashcroft's constituency poll in Norwich South projects that the Lib Dems will come in fifth. When was the last time (if ever) that a party finished fifth in a seat that it had held at a previous general election?
This is the best GE for years for the Greens to make a major leap forward. But their Leader is almost as bad as EdM. Keeping her off the box is a must. If the party does "stand in three quarters of UK seats next year – double 2010's efforts" that is part of the answer but they also have to go after the LDs at the relevant local elections and grab hundreds of LD cllr seats. That also will need several thousand candidates, which in the past they have struggled to find.
The Greens should be doing on the left what UKIP are doing on the right. I'm astonished at quite how hopeless they've been. The opportunity in this Parliament has been obvious.
Miss Plato, whilst I rather like them, LOTR is definitely at the high end of high fantasy. Worth mentioning there's a lot of variety within the whole fantasy genre, so even if you dislike that (which is fair enough) there might be other things which tickle your fancy.
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
If Conservatives are smart, PR is now massively in their interest. They can get a right wing Conservative + UKIP coalition probably around half the time, which would hallow them to have a proper conservative government. The problem is the leadership have a pathological hatred of UKIP that blinds them to their strategic interest.
If PR came in I can imagine the Tories never getting a majority on their own every again. How could that possibly be in their long term interests?
It is much more advantageous to them to just sort out the dodgy boundaries and stick with FPTP.
The boundaries play a small part in the bias to LAB and you are foolish to think otherwise. The big reasons are differential turnouts in LAB heartlands and, what's likely to be increasingly large, ANTI-CON tactical voting.
OGH There was a survey graph on this website recently on how disliked each party was. The Cons had a similar level of dislike as the Lib Dems, so if you are right then there will also be a large anti-LD vote. The most disliked party was UKIP.
I see that Lord Ashcroft's constituency poll in Norwich South projects that the Lib Dems will come in fifth. When was the last time (if ever) that a party finished fifth in a seat that it had held at a previous general election?
There could be quite a few seats where the Lib Dems come 5th. In the end the British system comes down to total seats, but it would be very hard for them to have much credibility to act as kingmaker. Clegg would be under a lot of pressure too. It's very hard to see how the Party would react though. They're a mystery. Danny Alexander might be desperate for another coalition, but that doesn't mean too much. They'd need to get it past their party.
At a local level Lib Dems historically benefited from being the opposition to national majority Con or Lab governments. Any such majority government would in theory allow the LD's seriously depleted councillor base to be replenished - a Lab gov broadly benefiting potential northern LD councillors and a Con one southern councillors. Or at least that used to be the case but the rise of Ukip has made that calculation less straightforward.
In truth the contradictory nature of Lib Demmery has come back to haunt them. PR at Westminster would not have suited them in 2015 but is the best guarantee of their long term survival as a parliamentary force.
One thing that YouGov and Populus both show is that Cameron's speech and accompanying UKIP friendly policy announcements haven't made any inroads into the UKIP vote yet.
I wonder if the CON conference will do one thing - increase turnout perhaps ?
It was reasonably divisive stuff and people will be on one side of the line or the other on alot of issues. Also add UKIP previous non voters to the mix - So perhaps turnout could be higher than last time ?
Comments
The ideal result for them would be an unwanted Labour government with a small majority. People will be more forgiving about tuition fees and propping up the Tories when the whole country is going down the pan under Labour. In fact people might retrospectively appreciate the job the Lib Dems did a lot more when staring at dopy Ed's face every day on the news.
"Mr. Roger, it's ridiculous to describe a four year coalition partner as 'borderline immoral'."
Exactly my point. Talk about biting the hand that fed you. They give opportunists a bad name
What exactly are they trying to gain coming out with rubbish like this?
For that reason, I'd say time on LibDems and marginals might be more usefully spent.
“I joined when I was a teenager, mainly because I grew up in Manchester in the late eighties. You couldn’t avoid being political. You could see the direct impact of the government’s policies…I thought it was really important that people fought back, and with a collective voice.”
Yet despite that, she’s no starry eyed party triballist:
“I’m not in the Labour Party because I just love the Labour Party. I’m in the Labour Party because I think that it’s the best hope for social justice this country has ever had…We’re only as good as what we do for people, what we stand for and what we deliver.”
The difference between Wigan and Westminster – and Nandy’s reaction to the two, could not be more stark. Meeting Nandy in her constituency office she’s a whirling dervish of activity, making calls, chatting to local businesses people, laughing and joking with volunteers. Often MPs can feel beaten down by the nature and drudgery of Westminster politics – and the feeling that it’s hard to make a difference. I ask her what she thinks of it after four years....
She tells me that “the gap between what we talk about in Westminster and what we talk about in Wigan is massive” and that her job “is to go to Westminster and drag what matters from Wigan into that arena.” The conversations I hear her have over the course of a single day reinforce that ten-fold."
http://labourlist.org/2014/10/lisa-nandy-brilliant-interesting-and-important/
1) the Lib Dems have been attacking the Conservatives at pretty much every conference
2) pre-election (I believe) Clegg attacked the Conservatives and implied their dislike of the EU (specifically, I think, the European Arrest Warrant) would make it harder to catch paedophiles and the like
So, there's a shade of hypocrisy in the Lib Dems suddenly deciding intra-coalition sniping is a bad thing.
That said, I think a policy disagreement is fine, but politicians hurling morality about generally make themselves look bad rather than their opponents. I dislike painting the other side as evil baby-eaters. Incompetent and with the wrong ideas, fine, but Sauron's more evil brother, no.
People seem to be ignoring the reason that Norman Lamb suggested a coalition with Labour would be hard. He wasn't saying that it was an ideological diffference, or that the two parties couldn't put together some kind of joint programme, or that they couldn't work together for tribal reasons. Instead he gave a very specific and very interesting reason:
“And this is a political point but I think it is one that this party has to take very seriously. I’m afraid I don’t see Ed Miliband as a Prime Minister.
“I think the idea of use being latched into a Labour Government with a low percentage of the vote, led by Ed Miliband and what's gone on in France under Hollande, I think it could be enormously damaging for our party in that sort of relationship.
Hard to argue with that. The LibDems would be mad to associate themselves with the almost inevitable disaster of a weak Miliband-led government, especially when they've just spent five years in a coalition focused on stability, growth, and falling unemployment. They would want to ensure that all the merde falls into Labour's lap.
One other point: I don't think a Confidence & Supply agreement (with either of the two larger parties) is a sensible option for them either. It would mean they still get all the flak for the bad or unpopular things ("why are you propping up this government?") without any of the credit for any good things, without any real positive influence, and without the ministerial portfolios. That looks like the worst of all worlds.
I hope his comments on the English seats are better informed.
It's obvious electioneering - saying that your opponent is so weak you couldnt see him leading a Government before an election is designed to make your party look better in relation to his; I dont think it has real implications for post election coalition options because he doesnt really believe it.
As with Brown, Labour need to either axe him or at least pretend to unite behind Miliband. It's not like he got the gig three weeks ago. He's been there for 3-4 years now.
Bitching about him just weakens Labour and decreases their prospects of winning the election. In Scotland, people will feel more comfortable drifting to the SNP. In England, back to the Lib Dems or away from UKIP to the Conservatives (on the basis you can't risk Miliband as PM).
It's not difficult, but they're making the same mistake as they did in 2010 with Brown. Only this time there'll be no Scottish premium, the SNP are stronger, and UKIP (whilst near certain to take more from the Conservatives) could take bites out of Labour support in the north.
Agree, PfP, it is way, way too late to be changing leaders.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/be863d24-4ca4-11e4-a0d7-00144feab7de.html#axzz3FLRaVqlc
"A 2017 popular vote on Britain’s membership of the EU is more likely than ever, with senior Liberal Democrats having told the Financial Times they are willing to give up their opposition to a referendum if the party were to enter into coalition talks with the Conservative party next year."
"One minister told the FT: “We can’t stop the Tories having their EU referendum, but it puts us in a strong negotiating position. We want them to give us a grand package of constitutional measures in return.” "
The implicit assumption is that there is a coalition deal to be done.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/snp-plan-is-timebomb-to-deliver-independence-1-3563246
"He gave the SNP a “test” as it enters the Smith Commission on the new powers for Holyrood with the Scottish Greens, Labour, Lib Dems and Tories.
He said: “Will they be like Gollum in Lord of the Rings, torn apart by the lust for the ring of independence, or will they work constructively with others to create home rule that is stable as well as powerful, inside the United Kingdom?" "
But he didn't actually say that the LibDems would not accept such a referendum.
I've been saying for a long time that this is not a deal breaker, from the LibDems' point of view. Of course, not getting a referendum would be a deal-breaker from the Conservatives' point of view.
I wonder if it is? It would need the agreement of Ed and the persuasion of several beefy union leaders but it might not be too late. labour are more popular than Ed and also the Tories so there is no reason to think their lead would vanish under a temporary leader. Then when a new one is selected early next year they could look forward to a new leader bounce.
Aha. I think I can see a flaw in this plan. If the entire Shadow Cabinet asked him to stand aside for the good of the country, then, maybe, just maybe...
FPTP means parties form internal coalitions before an election. Without that pressure, 'broad church' parties don't have an attraction.
Leaving aside Chairman Miliband's intellectual self-confidence, don't forget how he got the job. Even if people take the view that it was fine and dandy, his winning the leadership did lead to his brother's political career ending.
If he walks away now, without even contesting the election, what was it for? What did he achieve? He'll have effectively ended his own career *and* his brother's, for nothing.
Besides which, there's sod all time left and he's been in post for 3-4 years now. It's not like nobody's pointed out the flaws of Miliband.
The Lib/Dems are going nowhere, except to oblivion. Other than that, they are having the time of their lives.
Always envisaged it being along the lines of the Tories portraying Ed Miliband as Sauron, and a last alliance, of Hobbits, Elves and Men (aka the Tories, Lib Dems and UKIP) uniting to destroy Sauron
I think this is a problem that the major parties must learn from. If, say, we had a safe Labour majority in the next Parliament, or a safe Tory one, there would be much to say for Cameron or Miliband hanging on for a year or two whilst the losing party had a serious conversation with itself before it chooses its next leader. It is not the modern way but leaders need some element of novelty at elections and the present system is not providing it. And given that party democracy is between dying and dead choosing the leader is too big a decision on direction to rush.
Con 31 (-2) Lab 37 (-1) LD 8 (nc) UKIP 15 (+2)
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/OmOnline_Vote_06-10-2014_BPC.pdf
He had thousands, probably millions, of orcs, and how many did he have on guard duty at the only place his ring (and therefore himself) could be destroyed? 100? 1,000? 10,000?
None. Daft sod.
Apart from anything else, it seems clear, from a distance anyway, that Ed really believes there is a way he could stagger across the threshold. And he's right.
I'd be interested to know the deepest thoughts now of the handful of union barons who 'rigged' the leadership vote by placing 'Vote Ed' posters wrapped around their ballot papers.
It is extremely funny and it would have been good to see the author address this particular conundrum.
I know how Wenger feels today.....
The Lib Dems need Labour to crash and burn big time and they need to actually attack them rather that the Tories this time. They won't of course and they'll let Labour off the hook again going completely against their interests probably because deep down they would rather keep the Tories out than actually be a grown up party of government.
It is much more advantageous to them to just sort out the dodgy boundaries and stick with FPTP.
Mr. L, indeed, seen that blog before and it's really rather good.
Edited extra bit: Mr. Eagles, must be why he's so popular.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11138579/Liberal-Democrat-conference-Seven-reasons-why-the-2015-general-election-will-be-a-five-horse-race.html
Asked by a Sky News anchor: “When you woke up this morning.. when you roll over and look at her lovingly and then think, come next May who you might have to get into bed with would you rather have Dave or Ed?
Mr Clegg replied: “Miriam every single time, unsurprisingly if you really must put it like that, I don’t think of politics in those terms.
The image, he added, was “disturbing”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11142880/Nick-Clegg-Id-go-to-bed-with-Miriam-over-Ed-Miliband-or-David-Cameron-every-time.html
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BfQ7j7_CAAAbikE.jpg
The big reasons are differential turnouts in LAB heartlands and, what's likely to be increasingly large, ANTI-CON tactical voting.
Maybe it was because Brown simply went awol after leaving Downing Street, but Labour were a particularly weak opposition during the period of their leadership election, and it allowed the government to set the narrative - a narrative that for example Larry Elliot now points out that Labour have completely failed to shift.
In a media climate so focussed on the leader, and on the leader setting a policy direction, why would they bother to listen to a caretaker leader?
There's a clear contradiction there, and I'm not sure how best to resolve it.
Edit: Except, of course, by implementing the Chartists final demand - annual elections to Parliament.
A very unreliable service - the Easy Jet of travel in Lord of the Rings.
I presume the death eaters, oops I mean black riders were advance symbols of HS2?
There are some interesting comparisons and thoughts possible on that story. One is that Prometheus and Lucifer are basically the same (giving fire/technology/knowledge to mankind) and both are punished by Zeus/God. Only Prometheus is seen as a hero, and Lucifer as a villain.
In seats where they lose their MP in 2015, their local government base is likely to be eroded further. And they'll be competing with UKIP/SNP/Greens for media coverage.
Find it in the Book Review section.
It makes me wonder though. What if the Tories were headed for a 100 seat majority? Would people move against Miliband? I suspect not. Are some in the part willing him to lose? It's starting to look that way.
Noticeable how at least half the LD MPs are not really bothering. ex MP Evan Harris (Dr Death) has also had multiple appearances. Next up is the equally awful Richard Younger-Ross ex MP.
Surely it must be Mr Clegg who's the chewing gum on the bed post here?
Sauron thought himself invincible and immortal - like the Tories - (with the ring he would have been) it was simple hubris that brought him down. So too the Tories will be brought down.
He's got bugger all credibility as a potential PM. It just shows the paucity of available talent on Labour's benches.
Labour somewhere between 33-37 in the main, Tories somewhere between 31-35 in the main.
The key thing there is that if the Tories hit their top end and Labour hit their bottom end, we now get ties or small Tory leads.
The numbers of pollsters who haven't found that on at least the odd occasion in the last six months is ever diminishing.
We're down to Comres , Survation and Opinium now, I think.
I've just been given the LotR films to watch by a friend. Oh dear. I've been avoiding all things Ringish since I was a teenager and had a boyfriend who had posters of wizards in his bedroom. Even now I cringe at the thought. I know I'm going to have to watch these now. Urgh. This really isn't my genre...
In truth the contradictory nature of Lib Demmery has come back to haunt them. PR at Westminster would not have suited them in 2015 but is the best guarantee of their long term survival as a parliamentary force.
It was reasonably divisive stuff and people will be on one side of the line or the other on alot of issues. Also add UKIP previous non voters to the mix - So perhaps turnout could be higher than last time ?