The current system is not perfect but unless we go to a 2 party system then no one will have the majority of the public on side

The downside of a two party system is perfectly illustrated by the way the Tea Party have hijacked the Republicans in the US. Similarly, look at how the Labour party went a long way to the left in the 1980s before the existing third party got a boost. The very idea that two parties can satisfactorily represent all shades of opinion in a country the size of the UK is ridiculous. The idea that it can in a country the size of the US is even more ludicrous.

Another one then, Bob Crow

 

Earns a 6 figure sum a year but lives on a council estate

 

Not to mention many single people on very good incomes who live in small terraced houses because they dont need anything bigger because it is just them

Do you really not understand the difference between a general rule and a few isolated examples? If you were a burglar would you target largely affluent neighbourhoods or spend hours trawling through people's tax records?

The downside of a two party system is perfectly illustrated by the way the Tea Party have hijacked the Republicans in the US. Similarly, look at how the Labour party went a long way to the left in the 1980s before the existing third party got a boost. The very idea that two parties can satisfactorily represent all shades of opinion in a country the size of the UK is ridiculous. The idea that it can in a country the size of the US is even more ludicrous.

 

That is why the Republican party haven't had the most votes in an election since Bush Snr won, or did his idiot son get the most in 2004? cant remember, but the GOP is unelectable because of the Tea Party and religious nutcases

 

The GOP need to modernise or they will be out of power for a generation

That is why the Republican party haven't had the most votes in an election since Bush Snr won, or did his idiot son get the most in 2004? cant remember, but the GOP is unelectable because of the Tea Party and religious nutcases

 

The GOP need to modernise or they will be out of power for a generation

Bush Jr won more votes in 2004. They have more representation in Congress than they deserve because of blatant gerrymandering.

The downside of a two party system is perfectly illustrated by the way the Tea Party have hijacked the Republicans in the US. Similarly, look at how the Labour party went a long way to the left in the 1980s before the existing third party got a boost. The very idea that two parties can satisfactorily represent all shades of opinion in a country the size of the UK is ridiculous. The idea that it can in a country the size of the US is even more ludicrous.

 

I'd disagree about the Tea Party - their influence within the Republican party is very much waning, and has been for years. But I do agree that a 2 party system makes no sense in the USA.

Sorry Craig but you really are an unimaginably stupid tosser if you genuinely think rich people are the most persecuted minority in this country. Do you even know what persecution is? Great, there are a few immature leftists who think rich people are wankers just on the basis that they're rich - boo hoo, such persecution! Try telling that to a gay couple walking in a city centre on a Friday night. Try telling that to the person with a stereotypically black name whose CV gets binned the second they read it. Try telling that to the homeless person who gets spat at to get a job if they beg and who sleeps in the freezing cold every night while running the risk of being beaten to death by drunkards at any time.

Edited November 19, 201311 yr by Cassandra

just like smarmy public schoolboy Cameron and backstabbing Milliband then...

Backstabbing? Explain.

 

I'd love Clegg to lose his Sheffield seat, full of students, but think he'll retain it with a much reduced majority. Apparently a good constituency MP.

Given this is the seat I live in most of the time I feel like I should say something. It's really difficult to call - our campaign has started in earnest early with a candidate who spent last autumn working on the Obama campaign, it's just a question of whether we'll be able to maximise the student vote and whether there's enough people who could be swayed between now and 2015. The Lib Dems are too terrified to canvas anywhere but they have a core support of people who would be Tory if they didn't live in the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire.

 

And Clegg is a useless local MP. He's never here.

Backstabbing? Explain.

Given this is the seat I live in most of the time I feel like I should say something. It's really difficult to call - our campaign has started in earnest early with a candidate who spent last autumn working on the Obama campaign, it's just a question of whether we'll be able to maximise the student vote and whether there's enough people who could be swayed between now and 2015. The Lib Dems are too terrified to canvas anywhere but they have a core support of people who would be Tory if they didn't live in the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire.

 

And Clegg is a useless local MP. He's never here.

That's one of the problems with single member constituencies. It is almost impossible for anyone to be a party leader, a minister and an effective constituency MP. My first MP after I reached voting age was Geoffrey Howe (chancellor under the mad old bat). Even though he represented a constituency within 30 miles or so of Westminster, he was still pretty much invisible.

Sheffield Hallam would go Tory if it went anything else surely? I'd assume the Lib Dems in SH are proportionally more likely to go Tory than Lib Dems in other constituencies. Let's be as generous as possible and say Lib Dem defectors all go 60:40 Labour:Tory (nationally I'd put it at something like 66:33 or 70:30 for LD defectors), and there aren't any Lib Dem 2010 voters in SH who decide sod 'em all and stay home, or go Green or UKIP or whatever. On that basis, that would need Clegg to lose 20,000 votes from his 27,000 in 2010 (already a hell of an ask) just for Labour to pull in the requisite 4,000 gap between us and the Tories (although also UKIP would be an unknown known), and Clegg's got a decent local councillor base hasn't he?

 

I think that's going to be one where there'll definitely be a dogfight between the Lib Dems and the Tories and where Clegg'll keep it.

Edited November 20, 201311 yr by Cassandra

Sheffield Hallam would go Tory if it went anything else surely? I'd assume the Lib Dems in SH are proportionally more likely to go Tory than Lib Dems in other constituencies. Let's be as generous as possible and say Lib Dem defectors all go 60:40 Labour:Tory (nationally I'd put it at something like 66:33 or 70:30 for LD defectors), and there aren't any Lib Dem 2010 voters in SH who decide sod 'em all and stay home, or go Green or UKIP or whatever. On that basis, that would need Clegg to lose 20,000 votes from his 27,000 in 2010 (already a hell of an ask) just for Labour to pull in the requisite 4,000 gap between us and the Tories (although also UKIP would be an unknown known), and Clegg's got a decent local councillor base hasn't he?

 

I think that's going to be one where there'll definitely be a dogfight between the Lib Dems and the Tories and where Clegg'll keep it.

 

But Sheffield Hallam is another example of a northern suburb which has been trending away from the Conservatives (per Wiki, their vote has fallen there for the last SEVEN elections in a row!), even though it should be demographically Tory, simply because it's in the north. Also, I believe it has a lot of "liberal intellectuals" (the Islington of the north?) who went to the Lib Dems en masse after Iraq but now look set to go back to Labour (with a few maybe floating to the Greens).

 

I definitely think Labour have a higher chance of taking it than the Tories, though (admittedly not knowing anything about the specific "on-the-ground" battle) I'm not really sure I see them dislodging Clegg. Looking at Labour's results in that consituency over the past 20 years, I would guess 30% is their ceiling for 2015, so they'd probably need some protest candidates to eat into Clegg's vote further to have a chance.

Edited November 20, 201311 yr by Danny

Sheffield Hallam would go Tory if it went anything else surely? I'd assume the Lib Dems in SH are proportionally more likely to go Tory than Lib Dems in other constituencies. Let's be as generous as possible and say Lib Dem defectors all go 60:40 Labour:Tory (nationally I'd put it at something like 66:33 or 70:30 for LD defectors), and there aren't any Lib Dem 2010 voters in SH who decide sod 'em all and stay home, or go Green or UKIP or whatever. On that basis, that would need Clegg to lose 20,000 votes from his 27,000 in 2010 (already a hell of an ask) just for Labour to pull in the requisite 4,000 gap between us and the Tories (although also UKIP would be an unknown known), and Clegg's got a decent local councillor base hasn't he?

 

I think that's going to be one where there'll definitely be a dogfight between the Lib Dems and the Tories.

The student population will go overwhelmingly Lib Dem to Labour, it's just a case of how many vote. There's 4,200 just in first year halls in the constituency and thousands more in private rented. Obviously it's a massive ask, and there is a solid council base left for him (pretty much the only bit of Sheffield that wasn't decimated in 2011/2) but early signs say that we'll probably take two of the five wards in the locals and then it's anyone's guess.

But Sheffield Hallam is another example of a northern suburb which has been trending away from the Conservatives (per Wiki, their vote has fallen there for the last SEVEN elections in a row!), even though it should be demographically Tory, simply because it's in the north. Also, I believe it has a lot of "liberal intellectuals" (the Islington of the north?) who went to the Lib Dems en masse after Iraq but now look set to go back to Labour (with a few maybe floating to the Greens).

 

I definitely think Labour have a higher chance of taking it than the Tories, though (admittedly not knowing anything about the specific "on-the-ground" battle) I'm not really sure I see them dislodging Clegg. Looking at Labour's results in that consituency over the past 20 years, I would guess 30% is their ceiling for 2015, so they'd probably need some protest candidates to eat into Clegg's vote further to have a chance.

I don't know for certain on this (I'd have to check) but I wouldn't be surprised if the Tory vote falling for the last six/seven elections in a row were the norm for 79-97 Tory seats which went Lib Dem in 1997 - the government's falling popularity from 79 until 97 would account for the first four, and the Lib Dems' rising popularity added to incumbency would account for Tory falls since 1997, with the ground zero of Cleggmania accounting for the Tories not making gains in 2010 like everywhere else. It's the only seat in Yorkshire Labour have never won, and that we'd have to depend on student votes to stand a chance in 2015 doesn't give me any hope that we'll do it in 2015 given how notoriously unreliable student turnout is, even if it is Clegg we're talking about here.

I don't know for certain on this (I'd have to check) but I wouldn't be surprised if the Tory vote falling for the last six/seven elections in a row were the norm for 79-97 Tory seats which went Lib Dem in 1997 - the government's falling popularity from 79 until 97 would account for the first four, and the Lib Dems' rising popularity added to incumbency would account for Tory falls since 1997, with the ground zero of Cleggmania accounting for the Tories not making gains in 2010 like everywhere else. It's the only seat in Yorkshire Labour have never won, and that we'd have to depend on student votes to stand a chance in 2015 doesn't give me any hope that we'll do it in 2015 given how notoriously unreliable student turnout is, even if it is Clegg we're talking about here.

Isn't Richmond in Yorkshire any more? When did it move?

Isn't Richmond in Yorkshire any more? When did it move?

Soz, SOUTH Yorkshire. Rookie error :(

Backstabbing? Explain.

 

Given this is the seat I live in most of the time I feel like I should say something. It's really difficult to call - our campaign has started in earnest early with a candidate who spent last autumn working on the Obama campaign, it's just a question of whether we'll be able to maximise the student vote and whether there's enough people who could be swayed between now and 2015. The Lib Dems are too terrified to canvas anywhere but they have a core support of people who would be Tory if they didn't live in the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire.

 

And Clegg is a useless local MP. He's never here.

 

Backstabbing? I was looking at it from the point of view of his dear (more electable and politically experienced) older brother who's career he ended. Effectively. Democracy? Yes. Ruthless? Absolutely.... If Labour lose the next election, my own opinion is that will be the wrong Milliband was voted in as leader.

 

Clegg never there? Probably something to do with being busy running the country.....that's a price constituents of a serving cabinet member pay, I'm afraid. I'm sure there are statistics to back up how often each MP is meeting their constituents, so should be interesting to compare. I know I got short (rude) shrift from my MP when I wrote a letter (Tory), while my previous MP (Lib-dem) was absolutely lovely and positive. Annette Brooks. There, I've named her.

 

 

I think the current plan is to have me standing in the bigger student village with a giant sign saying THIS MAN IS THE REASON YOU'RE PAYING NINE GRAND from next month until polling day.

I think the current plan is to have me standing in the bigger student village with a giant sign saying THIS MAN IS THE REASON YOU'RE PAYING NINE GRAND from next month until polling day.

 

as long as you also stand there with a giant sign pointing to gordon saying THIS MAN IS THE REASON I HAVE NO JOBS AFTER I'VE DONE MY STUDYING AND EACH OF US IS SADDLED WITH NATIONAL DEBT AMOUNTING TO £40k PER FAMILY AND ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT PERSONAL DEBT (OK Blair, mostly, but Gordon was Chancellor and set up the utterly incompetent and useless FSA that allowed the banks to screw us over, did nothing about it, and Blair and he together allowed the debts to mount to historically momentous levels). I think you'll find the 9 grand, and benefit cuts, and job losses, and stagnant economy are more of a result of that than any "let's bash the students and the poor" mantra from the Lib Dems.

 

As I said before, the electorate voted for what it got, and they have to try and fix the mess they inherited. As will the next one, as this one was always going to fail given the scale of the problem. So, fine, if you think one policy that is (to say the least) inadvisable for the wellbeing of future young people (though in the long run it still works out financially advisable - average A level pay at 34 is about what I'm on (and that's not the national average), graduates is 30-oddplus ) is worth risking a Tory getting in, well, OK, your choice..... ;)

as long as you also stand there with a giant sign pointing to gordon saying THIS MAN IS THE REASON I HAVE NO JOBS AFTER I'VE DONE MY STUDYING AND EACH OF US IS SADDLED WITH NATIONAL DEBT AMOUNTING TO £40k PER FAMILY AND ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT PERSONAL DEBT (OK Blair, mostly, but Gordon was Chancellor and set up the utterly incompetent and useless FSA that allowed the banks to screw us over, did nothing about it, and Blair and he together allowed the debts to mount to historically momentous levels). I think you'll find the 9 grand, and benefit cuts, and job losses, and stagnant economy are more of a result of that than any "let's bash the students and the poor" mantra from the Lib Dems.

 

As I said before, the electorate voted for what it got, and they have to try and fix the mess they inherited. As will the next one, as this one was always going to fail given the scale of the problem. So, fine, if you think one policy that is (to say the least) inadvisable for the wellbeing of future young people (though in the long run it still works out financially advisable - average A level pay at 34 is about what I'm on (and that's not the national average), graduates is 30-oddplus ) is worth risking a Tory getting in, well, OK, your choice..... ;)

The Tories have literally no chance in his seat, they'll have a paper candidate and most of the electorate have never thought about voting for them.

 

And I read a stat the other day saying that the Cameron administration has already seen the national debt rise more than it did in 13 years of New Labour. Oops.

Backstabbing? I was looking at it from the point of view of his dear (more electable and politically experienced) older brother who's career he ended. Effectively. Democracy? Yes. Ruthless? Absolutely.... If Labour lose the next election, my own opinion is that will be the wrong Milliband was voted in as leader.

 

How exactly did he "stab his brother in the back"? How did David have any more of a right to the leadership than Ed? Just because he was a few years older? :lol: I mean really.

 

And he didn't effectively end David's career at all, David chose to throw his toys out of the pram and quit politics just because he didn't get what he wanted, rather than swallow his pride and play for the team like virtually EVERY defeated leadership contender for a political party has done in history.

Clegg never there? Probably something to do with being busy running the country.....that's a price constituents of a serving cabinet member pay, I'm afraid. I'm sure there are statistics to back up how often each MP is meeting their constituents, so should be interesting to compare. I know I got short (rude) shrift from my MP when I wrote a letter (Tory), while my previous MP (Lib-dem) was absolutely lovely and positive. Annette Brooks. There, I've named her.

The previous question was whether he was a good local MP. Regardless of his national role, he isn't.