(not trying to answer madanthonywayne's interesting question here- I'm USi and know less than he) Now that Liberal Democrats are apparently to decide who wins, or whether there's a new election altogether- I'm interested in learning more about them, too. Please be patient with us, because the way you people use political terminology as disorienting as the way you drive on the wrong side of the road. I'm surprised to learn (it seems) there is no provision for a run-off election. I had assumed that the UK had a more evolved system than the USA. I've long been envious that Parliament chooses the Front Man (PM or Prez in our case) because we get awfully obsessive and distracted in the USA about one single office/person, as if we subconsciously miss having a monarch. It seems like your elections work a lot like our party primaries- "first to the post" as you say. I'm envious that there are ways to call new elections that we lack in the USA, but (this was another surprise to me) with voter turnout nearly as low as here in the democratically-apathetic USA, how much good can more-frequent elections do? Good luck, and good show- you're making things interesting over there even for self-absorbed USAmericans (like me). _______________________________________________________ An interesting primer for Yanks here: A Short Guide to the British Political System
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! These are the three leaders. The first is a Tory. He went to Eton. Looks like he's made out of plastic. The second is Labour. Looks like a boxer who's had a decade too long in the ring. The third is a liberal. He looks pleasant and intelligent. Because of that, we all pretended that we were going to vote for him, but then we voted for the other two instead.
Seems the Liberal Democrats are about to get into bed with the Conservatives in an unholy alliance. Most Lib Dems probably grew up hating the Tories... Well unless you were registed in his consituency you couldnt vote for him... I wonder how many first time voters, after the TV debates, were wondering why Cameron, Brown and Cleggs name wasnt on the ballot paper!
Probably the left, seeing as Labour shifted a bit to the right in the last decade. The Liberals have historically been in opposition to the Conservatives, Labour have only been around 100 years. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I find your top diagram completely crazy, Pinwheel! The two parties who want Britain to escape from the plague of interfering legislation emanating from Brussels (BNP and UKIP) are branded Authoritarian. The Greens -- who want to monitor every calory of energy we use, to force us out of our cars, to abandon overseas holidays, to give up eating meat, and to drink our own urine to save water (OK I exaggerate Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) -- are labelled the most Libertarian. Is the diagram upside down?
Clegg would be a mad fool to accept any deals, the Conservatives want to shove any change in voting or political methods on the back burner until "the next election". This is the usual cop out that politicians feed the Great British Sheeple, people let it slide and the next thing you know, back to square one three years down the line. Cameron's arguement is that a coalition period equals chaos and that the economy would be hit, again more scare mongering. If he's going to be the bloody leader he should act like one and not attempt to panick people just because it doesn't fit his political plan. Clegg should force the coalition on for a 12 month period, during this economic low, it won't cause a great disparity since it's already messed up. Thats 12 months for the government to clean house, 12 months to reform the system to make it fairer and get what the public wants (which isn't Cameron) We want to see the policies followed through with or without any politicians, not placed on a back burner. I still say though, politicians should use a "volunteer" system whereby they don't get paid to be a politician. They could do a limited number of hours a week and shiftwork with other "volunteers" from all walks of life. It would save the tax payer money by not paying their "expenses". As for the voting system, it should all be changed to the public being able to vote for policies as individuals. Policies could be pressed much like the debates were and policy polling could be done through either a medium similar to how the lottery is currently run, or through people voting by completing an online questionaire. People that vote in such a policy system should then have a reduction in taxation as compensation for taking part in getting the country on track, those that don't vote pay taxes at normal rate, If they are in training they could get a reduction on books/equipment etc, if they are on the dole they could perhaps get some sort of coupon or offer to pay towards training etc and if they are on the sick they could get other types of reductions. This generates a "positive" insentive and lessens any negative factors for not taking part, yes the positive would cost a small amount, however if bureaucracy is streamlined using this method it will obviously cause savings allround.
It would be better for Clegg to simply let the Conservatives form a minority government and promise not to do a deal with Labour. That way all the unpopular desicions that will NEED to be made to reduce the £160Bn deficit (tax rises, cutting public services etc) will taint the Conservatives in future elections alone and not the Lib Dems along with them. The Lib dems could simply say they all have a free vote whenever a bill is presented (ie no voting along party lines but each Lib Dem MP deciding themselves how to vote - which is actually how it should be but never is). Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! "Savage Cuts" lol
Like I stated if he does the deal, then there will be no change to how voting is done or how politics as a whole functions, this means we have to go through the whole rigmarol of seeing a slump in the GDP in three years time at the next election, they might as well Kill two birds with one stone right now and sort out the political system while already in a slump, then we can look forwards to decent future growth, rather than just the usual repetative pattern of GDP wanning.
So would it be correct to say that "labor" is the most centrist party? If so, it seems a little strange that neither the conservatives or the liberal dems would seek an alliance with them. Instead they're considering an alliance of the most conservative and the most liberal parties. Sounds like the American "tea party" activists forming an alliance with the Green Party. Sarah Palin and Ralph Nadar forming a government.
Thing is, mad, the Labour Party undoubtedly LOST the election although the Tories didn't quite win it. Under those circumstances, the Lib Dems really have to explore the possibility of some alliance with the Tories -- especially as the widely-despised Gordon Brown refuses to step down from the Labour leadership. It is essential that the new government LOOK very different from the one that has been thrown out, or the electoral process will appear to have been thwarted. A Lab-Lib coalition would make much more sense politically but maybe Brown does not want this. OOPS!!! RIVER APE HAS JUST BEEN OVERTAKEN BY EVENTS! BROWN TO QUIT!!!
Alex Pareene / Salon If only we had the same possibilities for shakeup in the USA. You go UK! Do that whatever-is-it that's happening. Whatever that is, I'm still jealous of the commotion.
Good Luck, Union Jack! The problem, as I understand it, from a leftist's point of view: During this election, where I live in Crystal Palace, for the first time I can remember there have been no Labour supporters visible during an election. In the area where they have always run a stall, there has instead been a Liberal Democrat stall. One woman there told me "I was in Lewisham Labour Party for years, but Labour abandoned social housing, reneged on their promise to reform the House of Lords, supported the Iraq war and handed the country to the bankers, so now I'm with these." The following week another of their activists told me an almost identical story of how, she feels, she's had to change parties to stick by her ideals. I suspect the Liberal Democrats will betray fairly quickly the hopes of those who flock to them for egalitarian reasons, not because of the personality of Nick Clegg but because their base is spread amongst people who desire opposite values. In some areas they attract those like my Crystal Palace friends, but in Conservative areas they promise an agenda to appeal to disaffected Tories. This may explain why Clegg became so defensive when he suddenly found, for the first time, the whole country listening attentively to him at once. The radicalism was downplayed, and became unsure even of his most long-standing policies, such as backing a referendum on the Euro, if they could be considered vote-losers in the Tory suburbs. So then what? The easy way out for a socialist is to declare the election is not an important issue, as all parties are promising to make the mass of the population pay for the crisis caused by the greedy few. (Mark Steel) Oh, well. Barring an unpronouncable volcano in Iceland, it seems I get to see England at what we might call a very interesting time. Eighteen days and counting. Maybe they'll actually have a PM by then. ____________________ Notes: Steel, Mark. "Some Random Incoherent Thoughts On Election Morning". The Official Mark Steel. May 6, 2010. MarkSteelInfo.com. May 10, 2010. http://www.marksteelinfo.com/pt/blog/default.aspx?id=27
Half a dozen?!?! The backbone of England, no doubt! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I've heard a few members of that party speak. By far, my favorite is MEP Nigel Farage. He is witty, a bit of a smart aleck, and overall humorous. There are a number of videos on youtube of him, for anyone interested. So how did they do, overall? And how is the former leader, Nigel Farage, doing after his untimely plane crash? Oh, here is the latest: http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/1617-nigel-back-home-after-plane-crash Really? I'm probably half your age, but I'm sure that will be my story when (or if) I make it that far. So who were the culprits you were applauding this time around? What were the most pressing issues to you and your cadre of UKIP supporters? Aren't the BNP the more racially divisive of those two parties? Either or, I saw a chart that listed Ron Paul, one of our most Libertarian (and sensible!) politicians, in the Authoritarian category in a similar quadrant chart, and I was scratching me head.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Does a nationalistic-leaning ideology automatically earn one a stamp of Authoritarian, Dictator, Fascist, etc??? We had a decent green party candidate with Cynthia McKinney last time. She would've been better than Obama. And blacker. And a woman. And at least half-way honest. But overall, I think the Green platform is a little too.. idealistic? Utopian? Leftist? Not sure...
Wow, Clegg MAY become Deputy PM with the Lib Dems getting 6 cabinet seats. Thats a hell of a lot of ground given by the Conservatives if true.
I didn't vote for either party, but best of luck to them. If they can manage to work well together, they could be a good combination. This is a time for hope, not cynicism, though the cynical side of me feels those hopes will eventually be dashed. Maybe that cynical imp is wrong this time.
FPTP is highly unrepresentative - Labour have governed for 13 years with the approval of between 20 and 24% of the population. In the recent election, Labour had merely 2 million more votes than the Lib Dems, which was converted into an extra 200 seats. It is not straight and honest. It'd democratic in that everyone gets a vote and anyone can stand, but it's not representative of the electorate.
Hi, Giambattista, It's always encouraging when the guy you align with politically is a great character. Farage, now on the mend after the crash, is very bright and very funny. UKIP got around 3% of the total vote and BNP about 2%. Whatever people's real views, most are always going to end up voting for the three main parties -- even more so when it is the three leaders of those parties who get practically all the TV coverage and take part in the TV debates. BNP are considered "racist". I am also racist; that is to say, my folk have lived around these parts (Gloucestershire) for five hundred years (according to extant parish records) and probably longer, and I would prefer that the local population were not displaced or polluted by Kurds, Somalis, Nepalese, etc. I am also a Ron Paul fan. I think he'd get Thomas Jefferson's vote. None of the UK parties are likely to do much to stem the power of central government, the tide of regulation, or the burden of taxation.
I don't think that UKIP's brief flirtation with Robert Kilroy Silk helped them. He's now given up on his Veritas Party and is lurking in your wings again, so watch out! If your home is in rural Gloucestershire, you are more likely to be overrun by Essex man seeking a second home than the Nepalese. I must be a bit racist myself, because I'd have the gentle Nepalese anytime.
