This claim from 'Leader' Tim Farron has been on the Radio all morning - But so what?
It does not suggest that voting Lib Dem can remove the Tories from power, is the best we can hope for a Tory government with a tiny majority in Westminster?
i.e Exactly what we have right now?
Is the best we can hope for avoiding a landslide?
Where's the vision?
Therefore a vote for the Lib Dems changes nothing.
It's such a negative message of no hope.
Unlike your own?
I'm not standing for office smarty pants.
Have I made explicit my own message, vision or manifesto? No.
Have I been critical of what exists and what is on offer? Yes.
In my view a vote for the Lib Dems changes nothing and Ill conceived press releases don't help their case.
At least the Lib Dem on here didn't deny it.
TRUMP was a no hoper if my memory serves me right.
okay, so who are you looking to bring into power @Indy Scot?
There's no SNP down here which I assume by your name you would want to vote for.
The LibDems are no hopers in your view.
The Tories are in league with the anti-Christ.
So that just leaves Labour and the traitor Corbyn?
The current political system does not express the wishes of the electorate, but I'm sure that labour/conservative parties are quite happy with that. For generations one was in power whilst the other sat in opposition - still claiming fat, unjustified salaries/benefits and doing little for the majority of people who pay their wages.
What if the parties all signed a legally binding contract with the electorate detailing what they would do during their time in office and deadlines for said actions to be done. If the party running government failed to meet these deadlines they were thrown out and a general election were held. Not purfect, but you might at least get realistic goals being given out by the parties wishing to govern, or not. And I'm not talking about there manifesto of lies each party regurgitates every general elction knowing they have no realistic intention of fulfilling any of them during their term in office.
I'll refer to that same article:
I'd vote for a progressive alliance which pledged to introduce PR and abolish the House of Lords. If the Lib Dems were part of that alliance that would probably be the only time I'd vote for them, tactically, in a one-off and when there was someting transformative to vote for.
i'd vote for a transparent system, much like that advocated by @DEEDOODLE. it seems fair.
You assume I'm Scottish, I don't live in Scotland, but I would vote for the SNP if I were resident there, but in a one-off, tactical vote which would deliver something transformative; independence from Westminster. Once independence is delivered I would not vote SNP.
We in the South West get a poor deal from Westminster, I'd advocate a federal system for the English regions. I'd have thought this would be an English region that could comprehend why another area of the UK was sick of being governed from the far wealthier London and Home Counties.
The link above to the Open Democracy article explains why all the UKs main parties have ceded any real powers to global financial institutions and corporations. Democracy was ceded to the IMF in the 1970s, not Brussels.
So nobody with any chance of winning really compels me to vote for them. This article by George Monbiot is persuasive in convincing me to vote Labour;
Then I find it hard to disagree with Labour's 20 Point Plan. I'll wait for their manifesto...
I disagree that the Lib Dem message is negative, Indy Scot. It is unambigous and honest. The Conservatives will undoubtedly win - but they will get the biggest kicking from the Lib Dems.
Labour on the other hand may have a 20 point plan, but under Jeremy Corbyn they are being delusional about the outcome of the election. They are already dead in the water.
But if it's negative messages you are looking for, it's the Conservatives that take the biscuit. Theresa May may not be known for her sense of humour, but really, her spectre of an alternative government 'coalition of chaos' - is she having a laugh?
Clearly the LIb Dems are 'dead in the water' if like they all make statements like 'The Conservatives will undoubtedly win'.
That is so negative.
That is so defeatist.
If you give in before the contest has even begun how can you claim 'but they will get the biggest kicking from the Lib Dems'?
Do you mean the Lib Dems will become an effective opposition party? Very doubtful.
I never claimed that Labour were in a great state to challenge Did I? Did you even read that link to the Monbiot article? Obviously not. You might have learnt something about my thinking on voting, nevermind. But al least Corbyn has some backbone. Your lot has already thrown in the towel if they all share your view.
Lib Dem HQ needs to rein you in, you're a loose cannon on this site.
Nobody has even cast a vote. You've just been brain-washed by the right wing media and the pollsters. Been reading the Mail and Torygraph? Maybe most people think as you do and the Tories will win power. That is sad.
But why not keep those sentiments to yourself until after the election.
You're just thinking exactly what Murdoch, Dacre and Cambridge Analytica want you to think. If we all live in fear nothing will change. Why bother contesting this election as Lib Dems? Why even turn up?
Makes you Lib Dems look like cowards and losers. I don't get that impression from Corbyn or Lucas, At least they're up for a fight rather than a scuffle when the election is over.
Still subservient, nothing has changed since the coalition.
I think it was the coalition that done the biggest damage to the lib dems - period. And I think the lib dem potential voters could do no worse than vote for someone other that the tories.
Now wouldn't that be a shock to the system.
I really couldn't care less about the political compass of the Labour Party.
I call Corbyn a traitor because I was in N.Ireland in the early to mid-eighties when he threw his support behind a continuation of violence by Republican terrorists (as did McDonnell) thereby causing more dead and injured members of the UK security forces.
We believed that our job was to prevent people killing each other. Many of us will never forgive him and his cronies for that.
The Open Democracy article I referenced above explains where Labour went wrong on Brexit. Bit of a long read but worth it.
Corbyn was unable as a leader to challenge the Blairites and criticize 40 years of cross party politics in this country and expalin the root causes of austerity. Brexit occupied that space and peddled their own misinformation, blaming the EU, immigrants, etc just as the right wing had blamed trade unionists in the 1980s to further their agenda of reducing civil liberties and preventing a fair distribution of wealth.
But Corbyn, even with a cohort of Blairites is the only real opposition to the Tories in England and Wales, given that a progressive alliance between Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, Greens, Plaid Cymru, etc is not on the cards.
If it were I would want to see certain pledges made - abolish the House of Lords, PR voting system, a Scottish referendum, a written constitution, a referendum on a federal system.
But that is just me dreaming.
I wouldn't vote tactically unless these pledges were made though. As the 1st past the post system guarantees the Tories a way to get back into power.
If I vote Labour I know I could be voting for a Blairite and Corbyn could be ousted after the election, so I would have effectively voted for Tory-lite. I feel the same way regarding the Lib Dems; another Tory-lite in my opinion.
In terms of what I stand for I should probably vote Green.
Traditionally the result has either gone to the Tories or Lib Dems here, so voting with my conscience doesn't exactly give me any satisfaction.
I suspect that the Lib Dems and perhaps 50% of Labour do not want to win this election in any case; it is a poisoned chalice.
The Lib Dems and the Blairites in Labour would want to occupy the political vacuum created by the Tories when Brexit, the union, the economy and society are in chaos and we reject the Tories. Whenever that will be 5 years? 10. More?
I also suspect that the Blairites are waiting to occupy the vacuum vacated by Corbyn before looking to usurp the Tories.
Both Lib Dems and Labour might be playing the long-game, waiting it out. This election is a power game, the electorate are being exploited as we were in Brexit.
maybe this explains why it is more advantageous for leaders like farron to gain more mps as an opposition party. nobody wants to have to deliver brexit, they'll let the tories win. @Gary Taylor maybe your lot aren't in it to win it in 2017, but do you really think you can in 2022?
I'm seriously considering abstaining this time. Without PR what's the point?
The word politics does means power, and those who I believe stand for democracy are either constrained by rebel MPs or are under-represented under the 1st past the post system.
Once again, Indy Scot, you are missing the point.
You may think Corbyn is the best thing since sliced bread, but most traditional Labour party supporters think he's toast. With JC in charge, the party is destined to remain as divided as the Conservatives.
In the now deep-blue south-west, the only real opposition (outside of city walls) is the Lib Dems. Given people have come to realise the beneficial influence the party had in coalition (albeit as a junior partner) now - with the party's unambiguous positions on Brexit - the very strong belief is that there are seats here for the winning.
But it would be a great shame if all those opposed to a large Conservative majority did not think or act tactically for Lib Dem candidates, especially as the Lib Dems are already reciprocating the withdrawal of some Green party south-west candidates by allowing Green MP Caroline Lucas to run unopposed in Brighton Pavilion (although Labour's position is unclear).
Meanwhile, Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston has condemned similar tactics, should they be employed against her in Totnes, as 'undemocratic'. But will she still be saying that if UKIP did likewise rather than standing against hard-Brexit Conservatives? I suppose that would at least help identify those candidates that I am sure Theresa May had in mind when she once described the Conservatives as the 'nasty party' ...
An interesting proposition Viaduct - but one likely only to increase the Tory majority in the Newton Abbot seat and just about everywhere else in the south-west. It would be great to be able to come to an accomodation that would allow just two candidates to battle it out toe-to-toe, but Theresa May appears to have eyed the green shoots of a 'progressive alliance' forming against her - and decided to quickly nip it in the bud.
So while Labour might be expected to hold Exeter and gain another in Plymouth, the best chance of meaningful opposition in the rest of the south-west is with the Lib Dems. Battered and bruised from our time in coalition we may be, but we are back and we are fighting - and with a party membership that (at the current rate of growth) will be close to that of the Conservatives come the time of the election, it's game on!
You asked me who I was 'looking to bring into power'; I take it you mean 'vote for' as I have no real influence with one vote over who gains power and who does not.
You see one side of the conflict in Northern Ireland, I have family who died at the hands of the British. Are you from Northern Ireland? My relatives would suggest it was not your war to fight.
Corbyn advocates non-violence. The press made him out to be anti-British then and now. I respect him for understanding the plight of families caught up in the troubles. He was no Republican supporter, if anything he was neutral, but the right wing press and an ignorant readership will never see it that way.
British troops did their fare share of indiscriminate killing look at Bloody Sunday in '72 were you trained to shoot fleeing civilians in the 80's too?It was a war. I'm no fan of the IRA either. But I support a United Ireland.
You chose your career. You knew the risks I assume.
After 400+ years of oppression in Ireland it's harder for my family to forgive than it is for you believe me, the scars run deep, but we have to. Some people want to live in peace. It's a far cry from Devon and it could go back to those bad days quite easily.
If you couldn't care less about the moral compass of the Labour party then fine, it was a waste of my time replying to you. You were sent to war to maintain British colonialism not to protect civilians, that's just naive, but you must've been young back then and misinformed. The presence of armed forces was seen as occupation by many. Those who identify as Ulster Scots or protestants are beginning to accept that a United Ireland is a probability, especially Post-Brexit.
Irish people settled in Scotland over a thousand years ago. Lowland Scots and English people settled in NI from the 1500s onwards. The movement of people is the way of the world, I'm not religious and I deplore sectarianism and violence, but nobody can prevent a United Ireland becoming a reality.
Nobody will prevent the break-up of the British union either, it'll happen at some point.
Your time in NI was a waste as were those of the comrades you lost, and unfortunately history won't remember individuals other than the odd general, politician or Monarch.
You're like my family; victimized, exploited, cannon-fodder. Forgotten men and women.
When you see how many service people die in conflict, lose limbs or suffer from PTSD it isn't worth it. You should direct your anger at the British establishment, if you're head is still stuck in 1980s NI, then I really hope you can move on.
@Gary Taylor if you read the links to articles by monbiot and gilbert in open democracy you'd see the reservations about corbyn that i also share.
I think Corbyn is a principled and his values are sound as are his points, I think he needed to be far more ruthless with the Blairites and failed to transform the Labour party and explain why neoliberalism has failed.
You don't know what 'traditional Labour supporters' even means. And how would you even know what they think?
Have you ever voted Tory by the way?
But Corbyn's still a better option than the Lib Dems and Farron. Farron and the Lib Dems are just another neoliberal party - Blairite MK2.They're not an alternative to the Tories. More another Tory-lite.
And they will not prevent Brexit. But they might get the support of some remainers. That is all this election is about for them. regaining some ground with boring middle class policies that do nothing to deliver real change.
There is no co-ordinated tactical voting or progressive alliance nationwide. The Greens stepped aside to prevent Zac Goldsmith winning and the Lib Dems got in Richmond and the favour has been half-returned in Brighton for Caroline Lucas.
So the Greens allow the Lib Dems to win a Tory seat, the Lib Dems decide not to contest a Green seat. that's not an equal deal.
The Lib Dems are taking the mick.
@Gary Taylor do you seriously think the Lib Dems can recover after being in coalition? can the sidekick really become 'the opposition'?
I don't think so- which is why I think you're deluded if you now say the Lib Dems can take on the Tories, but at least you don't sound such a loser like in your earlier posts. At least you're saying what you should be saying even if it is fantasy land with 9 MPs. And it'd be hard to get any less than 9 in 2017.
Who are the Lib Dems putting up against Morris? Morris had 22000 votes to the Lib Dems 11000 in 2015. Do you have anyone better than Richard Younger-Ross and if you tell me it's Cllr Wrigley I'll die from a laughing fit.
When it comes to tactical voting things can get very murky indeed. In the Richmond Park bye election last December a very serious allegation was made about the Greens accepting a huge bung to stand aside in order to make it easier for the LibDems to win the seat. This, of course, was vehemently denied. I don't believe the denials for one second.
@Burnside you're a staunch Tory right? You've got some audacity to bang on about corruption by other parties. e.g. Cameron and the Panama papers.
No, I'm not "staunch Tory".
This article regarding a centre-left 'progressive alliance' and Labour...
And on the other side of the coin, news of Labour and the 'regressive alliance' between UKIP and the Conservatives ...
And this from Vince Cable, from the above Independent article:
“There’s nothing to stop localised agreements and nothing to stop encouragement of people to vote on a tactical basis. I think in the current context an awful lot of people will find their way to the voting booths in that kind of spirit.
“I think it could pave the way for future changes to the electoral system. There’s a certain amount of overlap, and as we approach polling day it may become more polarised like that, with people in many parts of the country wanting an alternative to the Conservatives.”
I personally feel that neither labour nor the conservative party are worthy of governing this country and the smaller parties merely squabble between themselves. The U.K. government system is based on an out of date and crumbling foundation. It is time to bite the bullet and bring in the demolition crew and clear the site for a government that is competent to govern this country.
I don't have the answers to this question, but I'm sure that penty of studies have been done on this. The only problem you have is the old guard do not want change as it suits them just the way it is. No matter how poorly this country is run it is always a financial win/win for those in the public purse.
So there's some healthy tit-for-tat competition in the tactical voting game, this is only going to happen in a very small number of constituencies and won't affect the overall result one way or the other. And really, at his advanced age, Cable should stand down and make way for a younger candidate, but I suppose it's a matter of pride for him after being so ignominiously dumped by the voters in 2015.
Many a fine wine in an old bottle, Burneside.
@Gary Taylor I wrote that there is no co-ordinated tactical voting or progressive alliance.
And there isn't as your posts prove.
Hoping local deals between parties occur is insufficient.
Co-ordinated tactical voting would need co-operation between the so called progressive parties. It hasn't happened as they're all to tribal.
If you think randomized tactical voting will have a major impact it's wishful thinking. Wake up!
The 'progressives' missed a huge opportunity.
Unfortunately @Burnside is right with a small number of constituencies not making a big enough dent on the overall result.
@DEEDOODLE is correct, the system is crumbling. it is past it.
As I have said on other threads - I would vote for every election that comes my way if the voting list had a box for NONE OF THE ABOVE.