I meant to leave it a couple of years before bringing it back, but the way the Lib-Dems are dropping it might only be a few months before they are in minus territory
Anyway, I won't update constantly for the next couple of years. Obviously the polls begin to get more important from about 2013 onwards. But for now I'll just post occasionally and when I remember (if anyone else wants to post polls they are more than welcome to)
As before most of the polls posted in this thread will either come from here;
Is highly recomended if you want to see how a poll would convert into a general election result (though with possible changes to the voting system and seat numbers/boundries, the seat calculators might not be giving an accurate reflection of what would happen at a general election, at this stage)
Edited by user 16 June 2011 10:59:23(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
Heres the first one anyway:
Con 40% Lab 40% Lib-Dem 9% Con Lead 0%
Government approval -9
That should get the Lib Dems worried. Not Clegg, though. It'll just confirm for him that his real big decision is at what point to join the Tory Party.
It simply guarantees the Coaltion will endure. Which LD MP would want to trigger an election at the moment?
Those who see that things are only going to get worse and that being seen as the Lib dem MPs who took a stand will probably give them a better chance of getting re-elected.
Those with any shred of principle or integrity left?
That rules Clegg out then.
Pretty much rules out all the power-lusting soul-sellers if you ask me.
On the contrary. Cutting and running now would make them look simply unprincipled.
The LDs have haemorrhaged what support they had on the left by aligning themselves with a Conservative led Coalition Government in the national interest. If they were to cut and run now, they would not win back that support, but they would alienate those who support their current principled stance. It is a lose lose for the LDs in the short term - they have to stick with the agenda for the longer term benefits which will flow from it.
As for Labour - seems that the policy of having a go at the LDs at every opportunity has backfired - at the current moment, there is little sign of LD MPs defecting to Labour, although I accept that could change over time as the more social democratic wing of the LDs may lose its nerve.
If they were to cut and run now, they would not win back that support, but they would alienate those who support their current principled stance.
The first statement was sarcastic, right?
The second refers to 3 people and a dog in Cornwall.
The third - MPs' defecting was always a long term game. We have been targetting councillors and a large number have crossed the floor (of the town hall).
I expected a more considered, better response from you Nick. No, I was not being sarcastic, I was saying it as I see it.
The LDs have been principled in putting the national interest before their own interests as a party. They could have remained in opposition, but instead decided that we need a stable government to see us through the current mess, bequeathed to the country by Labour!
By better you mean taking your comments more seriously and as being correct? I fancied responding with humour MM... it is permitted some times.
The fact is, though, that the idea put out by the coalition and repeated by yourself that "The LDs have been principled in putting the national interest before their own interests as a party" is, IMO; a load of old tosh: it's about the personal ambition and desire for political power of the party's senior members. As you say, they could have remained in opposition as the "balance of power", which would have given them far more clout in terms of forcing the Tories to adjust and amend policy, since they would not have been bound TO the Tory party in any formal way. Even if they (or some of them) DID think they were being principled, the reality of the situation is now clear: they are making do with scraps thrown at them by the Tories which amount to next to nothing in the grand scheme of things (eg the pupil premium, which, even so, is NOT extra money at all). The Tories must be laughing behind their backs - it's a Tory government supported by docile Lib Dem support, where the LDs are happy to go along with everything in return for positions of prestige but not much power and the odd bone thrown their way.
That is a very partial way of looking at things, though hardly surprising. The LDs remaining in opposition would have consigned the country to a few months of unstable government living from day to to day and incapable of taking the hard decisions necessary for the long term welfare of this country. At some point within the first year of this Parliament, there would have been a second General Election to try and achieve a stable result - in the meantime, we would have gone to Hell in a handcart as a nation, completely at the mercy of the bond markets, the credit rating agencies and international investors.
The level of hypocrisy (or self-blindness) from you has reached epic proportions MM. Is the easy way out now just to accuse Jonny and me of being partial every time we give a vision or view that is opposed to your own view as a doyen-of-objectivity?
I take your point - if the rainbow coalition of the losers had actually been formed, I would have been outraged of course and waiting for it to collapse. I almost hoped at the time that it would be formed, since it would have been hopeless and would have discredited all parties involved, leading to a Tory majority government after it collapsed.
But that is idle speculation. Back to the substantive issue - surely even you would accept that if the LDs had remained in opposition, we would have had unstable minority rule for a few months, followed by another general election.
As for the Coalition - people cannot have their cake and eat it - if we were to get electoral reform as some wish, it would lead to coalition government of one complexion or another, after every election - that is what electoral reform would give us. If you don't like it, why would you want it? It isn't guaranteed to give a coalition of the left!
Jeez .........and there's another 4+ years till the next General Fiasco
Like I keep pointing out - it depends upon the majority of LD MPs holding their nerve in the national interest.
Given the state of the parties, the LDs have to be committed for the long term, unless they want to be wiped out.
My guess is that the government will hold until 2015, but the Lib-Dems at some point in the next few years will split with a lot of the SDP liberals heading back to Labour and the genuine liberals and orange bookers (right wing Lib-Dems like Clegg and Laws) remaining with the Conservatives to the bitter end.
They're going to be wiped out anyway at the next election - just a case of when and with how much of their pride and integrity they manage to keep intact, to load into the cardboard box alongside their House of Commons stationary, as they begin a life after politics