I'm just watching the interview with Ed Miliband. The biggest mystery is who is Wot? Ed keeps on saying "Do you know Wot?" Many other politicians also have asked the same thing. Who is this Wot?
We are in a period of weak governments that FPTP produces from time to time every 30-40 years, however those don't last more than 15 years, by 2025 the latest we will get another government with a strong majority.
The weak government periods were a lot more fun.
I wouldn't call the Liberals in 1914 strong, nor the Coalition weak.
One of the assumptions made here all the time needs to be challenged. This is that the rump LD will join with the Tories in forming a coalition.
Are you guys being serious ?
The reason why the LDs are in this mess - forty years work undone - is because of this nasty coalition.
The Liberals will not go into coalition with no one - not Tory, not Labour. They will go into opposition and rely of people's short term memory.
In 2020, they will again be the Protest Party.
Or.... "for the good of the country", "to avoid chaos", "to deal with meltdown in the markets", "because this is how it is done on continent" etc etc, they will attempt to do a deal.
The level of urgency to make a deal is not as great this time as the national situation is not as bad (or doesn't appear as bad), so there is not as much need to do so for the good of the country or avoid
Ultimately, they don't want to be seen as the natural allies of only the Tories, which will happen if they work with them again. But jumping straight in with Labour might look bad (though is marginally more likely I suspect), and if Labour get in regardless there is more to be gained electorally in staying in opposition. The party also needs time to regroup from what will be a probable 50% drop in MP numbers and gutted membership, possibly more, and will need to figure out what sort of approach to take once they kick out Clegg and his cohorts from leadership positions.
If ordinary members get any say in it, I would oppose both coalition or C and S.
A period of opposition would help rebuild the party, while the other parties tear themselves to bits. The future is bright, the future is orange. The May 7th election is going to be horrible though.
A 'period in opposition'?? Who are you trying to kid. 'a period'? The liberal democrats are neither fish nor fowl. They do not want to be in government. They want to exist permanently in opposition, but to who or what I have not got a clue.
The horse trading over C and S in the next Parliament, the whipping to produce even a small majority and the carping from the usual suspects is going to make the LD Con coalition look like the golden period of sane government that it was.
It will take a little while for the British public to adjust to the end of two party politics, but that is what it is going to have to do.
Your scenario is a good advert for majority government.
US polls always show this sort of thing at this sort of stage in the cycle - indeed the Presidential polls are little more than name recognition polls at the moment. [The same is true within the GOP nomination polls]. A clear front runner in one party with strong name recognition leads by large margins in the polls until the challenger's name recognition goes up (a gradual process) and is nominated (usually quite a step). Given that Hillary has sky high name recognition, it is obvious why she holds a lead in the Presidential polling. It will not hold, certainly not by those margins. I envisage a close election, unless the GOP pick an absolute dud.
Hillary's initial campaign week was somewhat bizarre - the Scooby Bus, with its odd 2 day trek to Iowa with no publicity except for buying a salad bowl at a Chiptole Grill, staged meetings with 'grass roots' Iowans, who were in fact Democratic activists, total exclusion of the press and avoidance of any questions.
Yes, I did see it. She is trying so hard not to answer any questions or take a position on anything. The GOP candidates who have announced have all given 3-4 serious interviews. She has not even answered one question. At some point she will have to.
Another problem she has is she's just not a good campaigner. Her handlers have kept her in front of groups of 6-8 and away from bug crowds.
The longer this goes on, the more it will hurt her.
Also she is being judged - according to polls - as less and less honest and trustworthy, thanks to the email server etc.
Labour's 1990s assessment that devolution would kill independence "stone dead" is probably going to go down in history as one of the biggest misjudgements of all time.
The Tories do play the SNP tune better than the Edinburgh Philharmonic orchestra. The SNP stand for independence. Scotland has just voted against independence in a referendum. It wasn't even close.
In an election that is going to see 20+ point swings to the SNP I think it is risky to call a result that would be changed by a 5 point swing as "wasn't even close"
I caught that the BBC were happily reporting Labour claims of yet another "Tory secret plan" today.
Once upon a time, a political party talking about another secret plans, meant they had been leaked papers showing that somebody wasn't been straight, now it just seems enough to go on the radio and say "party x have a secret plan...insert scare story...." and it will get reported with basically no criticism / fact checking.
Today's was that the Tories have a secret plan to cut 2000 nurses. Made up out of thin air.
One of the assumptions made here all the time needs to be challenged. This is that the rump LD will join with the Tories in forming a coalition.
Are you guys being serious ?
The reason why the LDs are in this mess - forty years work undone - is because of this nasty coalition.
The Liberals will not go into coalition with no one - not Tory, not Labour. They will go into opposition and rely of people's short term memory.
In 2020, they will again be the Protest Party.
That would be the sensible thing to do. They are making a big deal of adding heart to the Tories and brains to Labour and all that hokum, but also of avoiding extremes. Even if their numbers would make the difference - hardly assured - they can claim neither of the big two is willing to moderate their extreme positions enough to justify backing them up, and then sit back and hope things return to 'normal'. As the Tories have no chance without the LDs, that would mean some sort of Lab government (hard to see Lab/SNP permitting a Con minority), and the potential return of some lefty voters.
If they are not going to ever be in government nor opposition, then what is their point? Why bother tl recover? They are a nothing party. Or rather an everything party - everything to all men.
Personally I'd prefer a LD-Con coalition mark 2 than any other outcome, but I cannot see how it would be in the LDs interest, and lacking any national interest argument to the same degree as last time, I should not expect them to want to do so.
They have run away from government. They have rubbished their own govt all along - even though they got their referendum on PR. After all the pomposity over expenses their own leading lights made themselves laughing stocks. They will never form an opposition in their own right; they plainly cannot hack coalition. As for coalition mark 2 - that would depend on numbers. But the point of a political party is to be in government. If it is not in the LDs interest to be in government then why bother?
"As for coalition mark 2 - that would depend on numbers. But the point of a political party is to be in government. If it is not in the LDs interest to be in government then why bother?"
In other words. you want them to be your bitch permanently !
Labour's 1990s assessment that devolution would kill independence "stone dead" is probably going to go down in history as one of the biggest misjudgements of all time.
The Tories do play the SNP tune better than the Edinburgh Philharmonic orchestra. The SNP stand for independence. Scotland has just voted against independence in a referendum. It wasn't even close.
At what point do the SNP convincing people to abandon Labour and the LD's in what are true heartlands for these parties become basic pests.
This sudden attack of isn't Nicola great from smurking middle England Tories is doing more to break up the country than any far fetched threat of LAB SNP co-operation.
No Nicola is not great, I suspect she is being humored by NO voting unionists who are simply fed up with the loudest person at the pub talking up what is essentially an isolationist republican agenda, the flames of which are fanned by continual reporting of absurd scenarios.
Could you re-post that, in readable English? I detect that you might have something interesting to say, but it is obscured by your inane prolixity.
Ta.
Sometimes Seant- you can be a complete dick. It must be difficult sometimes living in your head.
SLAB in negative numbers! Con lead in E+W according to Ashcroft! Yet Polls seemingly neck and neck. Does all this really add up? I'm really starting to doubt the 1000 old ladies from Huntington these phone pollsters seem to continually ring....
One of the assumptions made here all the time needs to be challenged. This is that the rump LD will join with the Tories in forming a coalition.
Are you guys being serious ?
The reason why the LDs are in this mess - forty years work undone - is because of this nasty coalition.
The Liberals will not go into coalition with no one - not Tory, not Labour. They will go into opposition and rely of people's short term memory.
In 2020, they will again be the Protest Party.
That would be the voters.
If they are not going to ever be in government nor opposition, then what is their point? Why bother tl recover? They are a nothing party. Or rather an everything party - everything to all men.
m to want to do so.
They have run away from government. They have rubbished their own govt all along - even though they got their referendum on PR. After all the pomposity over expenses their own leading lights made themselves laughing stocks. They will never form an opposition in their own right; they plainly cannot hack coalition. As for coalition mark 2 - that would depend on numbers. But the point of a political party is to be in government. If it is not in the LDs interest to be in government then why bother?
Well for one they didn't get a referendum on PR (semi-pr perhaps? Not sure the distinction on that one from proper pr), but never mind. But you seem to be suggesting that if the LDs have the numbers to make a government possible then of course they have to do so. But why? Depending on the party they would have to ally with and what it is proposing, and how much the LDs could moderate it (depending on their own numbers), perhaps the ends would not justify the means in that instance. People are seriously suggesting it would not be worth Labour being in government while in hock to the SNP, and Lab would at least be the bigger partner in that relationship. Junior coalition partners need to pick and choose.
After an evening when I am feeling much more kindly disposed to the Tories after than Ed M interview (and I leaned more to the Tories anyway), you're pushing me back from them with that kind of bizarre expectant attitude toward other parties - fortunately my vote doesn't make a difference in my area, so no worries.
I'm just watching the interview with Ed Miliband. The biggest mystery is who is Wot? Ed keeps on saying "Do you know Wot?" Many other politicians also have asked the same thing. Who is this Wot?
Along with the equally awful "Tell you Wot", they drive me positively insane. I'd find it very, very difficult to vote for anyone who uttered either!
SLAB in negative numbers! Con lead in E+W according to Ashcroft! Yet Polls seemingly neck and neck. Does all this really add up? I'm really starting to doubt the 1000 old ladies from Huntington these phone pollsters seem to continually ring....
Cons are ahead in England by 3%, it is remarkably consistent across alot of pollsters.
US polls always show this sort of thing at this sort of stage in the cycle - indeed the Presidential polls are little more than name recognition polls at the moment. [The same is true within the GOP nomination polls]. A clear front runner in one party with strong name recognition leads by large margins in the polls until the challenger's name recognition goes up (a gradual process) and is nominated (usually quite a step). Given that Hillary has sky high name recognition, it is obvious why she holds a lead in the Presidential polling. It will not hold, certainly not by those margins. I envisage a close election, unless the GOP pick an absolute dud.
Hillary's initial campaign week was somewhat bizarre - the Scooby Bus, with its odd 2 day trek to Iowa with no publicity except for buying a salad bowl at a Chiptole Grill, staged meetings with 'grass roots' Iowans, who were in fact Democratic activists, total exclusion of the press and avoidance of any questions.
Yes, I did see it. She is trying so hard not to answer any questions or take a position on anything. The GOP candidates who have announced have all given 3-4 serious interviews. She has not even answered one question. At some point she will have to.
Another problem she has is she's just not a good campaigner. Her handlers have kept her in front of groups of 6-8 and away from bug crowds.
The longer this goes on, the more it will hurt her.
Also she is being judged - according to polls - as less and less honest and trustworthy, thanks to the email server etc.
I read that her handlers have decided to rein her in so that she does not go psycho at each and every faint criticism, which means keeping her away from the media and, apparently, anyone who is not a hand-picked, card-carrying Clintonite.
Lab at 5-1 10-14 seats could be headless betting but I think I've backed worse 5-1 shots.
Con at 6-4 2 or more seats looks very fair. As well as DCT and a decent shot at Berwicks, there are a couple of seats that could just drop into their lap on an LD or Lab to SNP swing, not least Dumf & Gall. I've historically pooh poohed any reference to Tory revival, but I don't think they need a revival to get lucky and pick up 2 seats.
The Tory vote would need to increase to take D&G, currently the( Lab+SNP )/2 vote equals them, it would take a perfect split for con to come through the middle.
I'm just watching the interview with Ed Miliband. The biggest mystery is who is Wot? Ed keeps on saying "Do you know Wot?" Many other politicians also have asked the same thing. Who is this Wot?
Along with the equally awful "Tell you Wot", they drive me positively insane. I'd find it very, very difficult to vote for anyone who uttered either!
"We will learn lessons" is on equal footing for me. Nobody ever asks the obvious question...what f##king lessons? And well you are learning from them, now what about action based upon those lessons.
Sam Coates Times @SamCoatesTimes · 1 min1 minute ago Exc: Times / YouGov / Scotland 16-20 April SNP 49 Lab 25 Con 17 LD 5 Other 4 Unchanged on April 8/9
We are in a period of weak governments that FPTP produces from time to time every 30-40 years, however those don't last more than 15 years, by 2025 the latest we will get another government with a strong majority.
The weak government periods were a lot more fun.
I wouldn't call the Liberals in 1914 strong, nor the Coalition weak.
Yet there is no improvement in SLAB's polling. So we get a more Ed Miliband friendly sample but the polling doesn't improve. I'd say that's worse for SLAB than the last poll tbh.
Is the SNP winning the ground war - YES you bet it is.
Phil Cowley, of the Nuffield Election Studies, asks the questions without understanding the answers. Obviously the SNP will be concentrating their ground vast resources on canvassing rather than papering the place with leaflets. Labour, Tory and particularly the Liberals will have have paid for Royal Mail delivery because they have no activists.
hamiltonace - Cycling through Lanarkshire - brave man - but unless you were cycling through the housing schemes you won't have picked up the force of the SNP campaign which I saw on Saturday in Inverurie.
The figure which answers all your questions is in today's ICM certainty to stick with the current vote with the NATS running at no less than 95%!
Finally the SNP have moved beyond the YES 45% on the last two polls and whenever the next one is will show it once again. They are running at somewwhere near 50%!
I'm just watching the interview with Ed Miliband. The biggest mystery is who is Wot? Ed keeps on saying "Do you know Wot?" Many other politicians also have asked the same thing. Who is this Wot?
Along with the equally awful "Tell you Wot", they drive me positively insane. I'd find it very, very difficult to vote for anyone who uttered either!
Tell you Wot was a massive Blairism, if I'm not mistaken
One of the assumptions made here all the time needs to be challenged. This is that the rump LD will join with the Tories in forming a coalition.
Are you guys being serious ?
The reason why the LDs are in this mess - forty years work undone - is because of this nasty coalition.
The Liberals will not go into coalition with no one - not Tory, not Labour. They will go into opposition and rely of people's short term memory.
In 2020, they will again be the Protest Party.
That would be the voters.
If they are not going to ever be in government nor opposition, then what is their point? Why bother tl recover? They are a nothing party. Or rather an everything party - everything to all men.
m to want to do so.
They have run away from government. They have rubbished their own govt all along - even though they got their referendum on PR. After all the pomposity over expenses their own leading lights made themselves laughing stocks. They will never form an opposition in their own right; they plainly cannot hack coalition. As for coalition mark 2 - that would depend on numbers. But the point of a political party is to be in government. If it is not in the LDs interest to be in government then why bother?
Well for one they didn't geries.
Why do you pretend you are not Tory ?
I have never voted Tory before is the main reason. And I've always lived in safe Tory seats, so I think I've had the opportunity to do so without tactical considerations to convince me otherwise.
Having grown up in Tory heartlands though, I cannot deny I am more instinctively wary of Labour and favourable to the Tories, though I'd like to think all the times I have defended Ed and Labour mean I am making an attempt at objectivity.
I just hope the Republicans pick someone who is better than the last few neoconservatives. George HW seems like the last decent one they put up, and that was more than twenty years ago!
Is the SNP winning the ground war - YES you bet it is.
Phil Cowley, of the Nuffield Election Studies, asks the questions without understanding the answers. Obviously the SNP will be concentrating their ground vast resources on canvassing rather than papering the place with leaflets. Labour, Tory and particularly the Liberals will have have paid for Royal Mail delivery because they have no activists.
hamiltonace - Cycling through Lanarkshire - brave man - but unless you were cycling through the housing schemes you won't have picked up the force of the SNP campaign which I saw on Saturday in Inverurie.
The figure which answers all your questions is in today's ICM certainty to stick with the current vote with the NATS running at no less than 95%!
Finally the SNP have moved beyond the YES 45% on the last two polls and whenever the next one is will show it once again. They are running at somewwhere near 50%!
When a 'High Tory' such as Charles Moore writes this in the Telegraph you know that something is seriously wrong:
' There is something awry with a society in which wages are only now rising in real terms after seven years of stagnation. There is something rotten about the chief executive of a high street bank (HSBC) being a “non-dom” in the country where he was born and in which he works. And who could blame young people, unable to get their feet on the housing ladder, if they grabbed any actual ladders lying to hand, climbed into all those empty London properties owned by absentee Russians, and squatted there? '
While correctly mentioning the loss of opportunity he doesn't mention the other great failing, namely the way the 1% have become protected from the consequences of their actions.
Mini Milibounce recorded from his debate performances?
What difference does it make?
Just trying to explain it; I cannot think what else could have made them warm to him when they had not already, and he has been very good up to now, even up north I should think some of that filtered through.
I'm just watching the interview with Ed Miliband. The biggest mystery is who is Wot? Ed keeps on saying "Do you know Wot?" Many other politicians also have asked the same thing. Who is this Wot?
Along with the equally awful "Tell you Wot", they drive me positively insane. I'd find it very, very difficult to vote for anyone who uttered either!
I blame it on Simon Cowell. They must use him as a role model for style gurus.
BTW- I think I just got moderated. First time for everything I guess.
Sam Coates Times @SamCoatesTimes · 1 min1 minute ago Exc: Times / YouGov / Scotland 16-20 April SNP 49 Lab 25 Con 17 LD 5 Other 4 Unchanged on April 8/9
It should be noted that the fieldwork was completed before Ruth Davidson's devastating tweet. So the true position is probably more like Lab 22 Con 20.
One of the assumptions made here all the time needs to be challenged. This is that the rump LD will join with the Tories in forming a coalition.
Are you guys being serious ?
The reason why the LDs are in this mess - forty years work undone - is because of this nasty coalition.
The Liberals will not go into coalition with no one - not Tory, not Labour. They will go into opposition and rely of people's short term memory.
In 2020, they will again be the Protest Party.
That would be the sensible thing to do. They are making a big deal of adding heart to the Tories and brains to Labour and all that hokum, but also of avoiding extremes. ... snip
If they are not going to ever be in government nor opposition, then what is their point? Why bother tl recover? They are a nothing party. Or rather an everything party - everything to all men.
Personally I'd prefer a LD-Con coalition mark 2 than any other outcome, but I cannot see how it would be in the LDs interest, and lacking any national interest argument to the same degree as last time, I should not expect them to want to do so.
They have run away from government. They have rubbished their own govt all along - even though they got their referendum on PR. After all the pomposity over expenses their own leading lights made themselves laughing stocks. They will never form an opposition in their own right; they plainly cannot hack coalition. As for coalition mark 2 - that would depend on numbers. But the point of a political party is to be in government. If it is not in the LDs interest to be in government then why bother?
"As for coalition mark 2 - that would depend on numbers. But the point of a political party is to be in government. If it is not in the LDs interest to be in government then why bother?"
In other words. you want them to be your bitch permanently !
A bit of a pathetic comment. The LDs are a small party. What hope do they have to get any policy enacted? Answer: In come sort of coalition. They have lost their PR referendum and spent 5 years rubbishing the government they were a part of. Deputy PM, 4 Cabinet ministers Nr 2 at Treasury. Deputy PM meant real influence and chairmanship of key committees. But they still knocked their own govt. They could have determined to maintain that influence, but have chosen to smear their partners. They are not interested. They are happier to agree together and be pointless. You just go and do your bitching to someone else.
So farewell then, Scottish Labour Laid to rest under a custard overcoat.
E. J. Thribb (17½)
To think when Salmond quit last September, one PBer thought his 6.5 SNP seats overs bet was at risk.
I am so angry with myself for not understanding the words of wisdom antiviral was speaking back in August and my timidity of waiting till November to start Scotland betting.
Sam Coates Times @SamCoatesTimes · 1 min1 minute ago Exc: Times / YouGov / Scotland 16-20 April SNP 49 Lab 25 Con 17 LD 5 Other 4 Unchanged on April 8/9
It should be noted that the fieldwork was completed before Ruth Davidson's devastating tweet. So the true position is probably more like Lab 22 Con 20.
So farewell then, Scottish Labour Laid to rest under a custard overcoat.
E. J. Thribb (17½)
To think when Salmond quit last September, one PBer thought his 6.5 SNP seats overs bet was at risk.
I am so angry with myself for not understanding the words of wisdom antiviral was speaking back in August and my timidity of waiting till November to start Scotland betting.
One of the assumptions made here all the time needs to be challenged. This is that the rump LD will join with the Tories in forming a coalition.
Are you guys being serious ?
The reason why the LDs are in this mess - forty years work undone - is because of this nasty coalition.
The Liberals will not go into coalition with no one - not Tory, not Labour. They will go into opposition and rely of people's short term memory.
In 2020, they will again be the Protest Party.
Or.... "for the good of the country", "to avoid chaos", "to deal with meltdown in the markets", "because this is how it is done on continent" etc etc, they will attempt to do a deal.
The level of urgency to make a deal is not as great this time as the national situation is not as bad (or doesn't appear as bad), so there is not as much need to do so for the good of the country or avoid chaos etc. They also don't face the pressure of making a deal work or be mocked for turning down a coalition after desperately hoping for such an opportunity for so many years - they've made it work for 5 years, so now they can say they would be willing in the right circumstances, but that doesn't mean they have to accept a bad deal for them and the country.
Ultimately, they don't want to be seen as the natural allies of only the Tories, which will happen if they work with them again. But jumping straight in with Labour might look bad (though is marginally more likely I suspect), and if Labour get in regardless there is more to be gained electorally in staying in opposition. The party also needs time to regroup from what will be a probable 50% drop in MP numbers and gutted membership, possibly more, and will need to figure out what sort of approach to take once they kick out Clegg and his cohorts from leadership positions.
If ordinary members get any say in it, I would oppose both coalition or C and S.
A period of opposition would help rebuild the party, while the other parties tear themselves to bits. The future is bright, the future is orange. The May 7th election is going to be horrible though.
A 'period in opposition'?? Who are you trying to kid. 'a period'? The liberal democrats are neither fish nor fowl. They do not want to be in government. They want to exist permanently in opposition, but to who or what I have not got a clue.
I think the is a split in the activist base of the LD's who would want to retain the none of the above vote and remain in permanent opposition. And the Party in Parliament the majority of the rump would have enjoyed the taste of power with a large proportion ( proportionately higher than the Tories or Labour) enjoying ministerial office. Clearly at this stage the parliamentary party tacks to its activists but post May 7th they might not find the prospect of 5 years on the opposition benches quite attractive.
Comments
I wouldn't call the Liberals in 1914 strong, nor the Coalition weak.
Another problem she has is she's just not a good campaigner. Her handlers have kept her in front of groups of 6-8 and away from bug crowds.
The longer this goes on, the more it will hurt her.
Also she is being judged - according to polls - as less and less honest and trustworthy, thanks to the email server etc.
In other words. you want them to be your bitch permanently !
SNP 49
Lab 25
Con 17
LD 5
Other 4
Unchanged on April 8/9
Exc: Times / YouGov / Scotland 16-20 April
SNP 49
Lab 25
Con 17
LD 5
Other 4
Unchanged on April 8/9
Laid to rest under a custard overcoat.
E. J. Thribb (17½)
But, it's still great fun to see them go.
Tykejohnno
Is the SNP winning the ground war - YES you bet it is.
Phil Cowley, of the Nuffield Election Studies, asks the questions without understanding the answers. Obviously the SNP will be concentrating their ground vast resources on canvassing rather than papering the place with leaflets. Labour, Tory and particularly the Liberals will have have paid for Royal Mail delivery because they have no activists.
hamiltonace - Cycling through Lanarkshire - brave man - but unless you were cycling through the housing schemes you won't have picked up the force of the SNP campaign which I saw on Saturday in Inverurie.
The figure which answers all your questions is in today's ICM certainty to stick with the current vote with the NATS running at no less than 95%!
Finally the SNP have moved beyond the YES 45% on the last two polls and whenever the next one is will show it once again. They are running at somewwhere near 50%!
Having grown up in Tory heartlands though, I cannot deny I am more instinctively wary of Labour and favourable to the Tories, though I'd like to think all the times I have defended Ed and Labour mean I am making an attempt at objectivity.
I just hope the Republicans pick someone who is better than the last few neoconservatives. George HW seems like the last decent one they put up, and that was more than twenty years ago!
' There is something awry with a society in which wages are only now rising in real terms after seven years of stagnation. There is something rotten about the chief executive of a high street bank (HSBC) being a “non-dom” in the country where he was born and in which he works. And who could blame young people, unable to get their feet on the housing ladder, if they grabbed any actual ladders lying to hand, climbed into all those empty London properties owned by absentee Russians, and squatted there? '
While correctly mentioning the loss of opportunity he doesn't mention the other great failing, namely the way the 1% have become protected from the consequences of their actions.
Tuesday's Guardian front page:
PM’s Sturgeon tactics put UK at risk, says Tory peer
BTW- I think I just got moderated. First time for everything I guess.
The LDs are a small party. What hope do they have to get any policy enacted? Answer: In come sort of coalition.
They have lost their PR referendum and spent 5 years rubbishing the government they were a part of. Deputy PM, 4 Cabinet ministers Nr 2 at Treasury. Deputy PM meant real influence and chairmanship of key committees. But they still knocked their own govt. They could have determined to maintain that influence, but have chosen to smear their partners. They are not interested. They are happier to agree together and be pointless.
You just go and do your bitching to someone else.