I did warn you, here it comes...............

[joe-90]

There are a growing number of Labour voters. Anyone on benefits, public sector employees and pensioners who like Gordon investing in the NHS (even though he hasn't paid for it). Labour will soon be the dominant party for decades.

Umm wasnt you paying attention on thursday, joe, labour LOST two million voters and 97 seats ....'growing' is the one thing they arent...........

Yes but what I mean is that the massive swing to the Tories never happened. I was expecting the 97 swing to Labour to be reversed. It didn't happen. The reason for that is that the Tories were honest and said massive cuts were on the way - but Labour said there would be no cuts this year - they would grow the economy instead - and many foolish people took the soft option and voted Labour. Cameron has ended up with less than a 3 per cent increase on the share of the vote achieved at the 2005 general election by Michael Howard.

 

[JohnD]

that. heres the opposite view

how amusing

the FT says "European stocks plunged on Friday, erasing all gains made so far this year, as fears about Greece’s debt crisis went global"

and you think that means it is blaming the UK election?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f25807be-59ff-11df-acdc-00144feab49a.html and it says a lot more

The Times says "As the polls closed, stock markets around the world were reeling from a tumultuous day as shares were buffeted by the Greek debt crisis, with the FTSE 100 Index falling more than 1.5 per cent and New York’s Dow Jones down about 3.20 per cent over concerns about high levels of European government borrowing. "

and you think that means it is blaming the UK election?

As for your silly remark "

some random webby with a hit rate of 4 views per week).

if you are going to talk about investments and share prices, you may as well pay attention to the specialist magazine that's been going for 150 years and is part of the FT group. I concede that if you know nothing about investments, share prices and stock markets you might never have heard of it.

 

[joe-90]

JohnD kicks ass.

 

[Lincsbodger]

So come Monday morning G Brown is still going to be in No 10,who is going to make the final call,us the voter NO, the market men?so a Lib/Con pact will be foisted on us no matter what.

Well hardly 'foisted on us no matter what'.

First blame all the cretins who voted Lib Dem, instead of votong Tories and for strong government. There was 20 seats where 10,000 votes in total would have swung it to the Tories in all 20 seats and given them 326 seats..

second, theres only three options here: a) a deal between Lib Dems and Tories to put the Tories in power, b) a deal between the Lib Dems and Labour to keep Brown in power, or c) another election.

On the balance i think the Lib/Con pact is by far the lesser of three evils.

 

[oompah]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ele...tes-constituencies-Conservatives-set-win.html
Well according to the right wing Mail those bounders from the UKIP and those that voted for them, denied the Tories and Dave his glorious moment ,shame on all their houses,not.

Well hardly 'foisted on us no matter what'.

Nowhere on the ballot paper was it mentioned about a possible coalition,If Dave hasn;t got the backing or the balls to stand up without the support of the Libs he should bugger of now.

 

[RedHerring2]

First blame all the cretins who voted Lib Dem,

What all 23% of the voters?? And I suppose the 29% of Labour voters as well?? I make that as over 50% of the voters being cretins. Is that a reasonable assumption of your position???

There was 20 seats where 10,000 votes in total would have swung it to the Tories in all 20 seats and given them 326 seats..

Shows the stupidity of our FPTP system!

three options here: a) a deal between Lib Dems and Tories to put the Tories in power, b) a deal between the Lib Dems and Labour to keep Brown in power, or c) another election.

On the balance i think the Lib/Con pact is by far the lesser of three evils.

Or a fourth option: Minority Government. All the Lib Dems have to do is agree the Queens Speech, agree not to vote a No-Confidence vote and we're up & running

 

[Lincsbodger]

On the balance i think the Lib/Con pact is by far the lesser of three evils.

Or a fourth option: Minority Government. All the Lib Dems have to do is agree the Queens Speech, agree not to vote a No-Confidence vote and we're up & running

Yea, but thats not going to happen, is it. The Lib dems for the first time in 80 years are in a position to extract changes in the voting system from the government to there advantage, there not going to let it pass by, they might not get another chance for another 80 years. They will get there pound of flesh for there 30 pieces of silver (or in this case, 59 votes), if you'll pardon the stunningly mixed metaphors

 

[RedHerring2]

I hope that Clegg can deliver his 'responsible' attitude to UK politics.
A Minority Government would be a good start.

 

[Lincsbodger]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1274954/UK-ELECTION-RESULTS-2010-Did-UKIP-cost-Tories-seats-fielding-candidates-constituencies-Conservatives-set-win.html
Well according to the right wing Mail those bounders from the UKIP and those that voted for them, denied the Tories and Dave his glorious moment ,shame on all their houses,not.

Well hardly 'foisted on us no matter what'.

Nowhere on the ballot paper was it mentioned about a possible coalition,If Dave hasn;t got the backing or the balls to stand up without the support of the Libs he should b*****r of now.

You show a stunning ignorance of how it works in practice. Its nothing to do with 'balls'. First of all, Brown has to resign, and he isnt go to do that unless forced to by being presented with some sort of deal between the libs and tories thats gives them more credibility, or unless hes voted down in a confidence vote. Thats the only two ways he can be removed.

Even if he did resign, If cameron tried to go it alone with no deal, he can be voted down on his first Queens Speech (May 25th) by the Lib Dems and Labour. In that event, its game over, the rules say there than has to be another general election immediately.

Neither Brown nor Cameron is going to try and govern unless there sure they can get past the first Queens Speech. For that , one of them needs a deal with the Lib Dems, because to forge on up to the Queens Speech and then get voted down is absolutley pointless and a waste of everyones time and taxpayers money.

 

[Lincsbodger]

I hope that Clegg can deliver his 'responsible' attitude to UK politics.
A Minority Government would be a good start.

Whats the point? The first time they lose a vote its game over. Hostorically, all english minority governments/coalitions collapse within 7 months. What we need is a majority government for the next 5 years, then the markets wont panic. Unless you WANT to have an election every 6 months and our credit rating to go down the toilet ?

 

[RedHerring2]

Neither Brown nor Cameron is going to try and govern unless there sure they can get past the first Queens Speech. For that , one of them needs a deal with the Lib Dems, because to forge on up to the Queens Speech and then get voted down is absolutley pointless and a waste of everyones time and taxpayers money.

Labour & Lib Dems can still be voted down by Tories and Others.

 

[JohnD]

can you see the scots nats and the wesh nats voting with the tories?

my guess is that there will be an uneasy coalition followed by an election after 6 months to a year

the Lib Dems would find it difficult to support a party that didn't offer more than a vague promise to talk about electoral reform.

 

[oompah]

You show a stunning ignorance of how it works in practice.

That is one of the reasons I come on here to be able to converse with like minded ****s as your good self, what is your excuse.Cameron has not got the mandate nor balls to form a government.

 

[Lincsbodger]

Neither Brown nor Cameron is going to try and govern unless there sure they can get past the first Queens Speech. For that , one of them needs a deal with the Lib Dems, because to forge on up to the Queens Speech and then get voted down is absolutley pointless and a waste of everyones time and taxpayers money.

Labour & Lib Dems can still be voted down by Tories and Others.

Trying to rely on all of those to vote with you all the time would be not only a nightmare, it would be utterly unworkable and its never going to happen. Indeed its unlikely your get agreement between half of them, let alone the 21 you need. Theoretically yes, in practice never ever going to happen. There is absolutely no incentive or carrot for those 26 to support Cameron - in fact most of them wouldn't entertain the idea, thats why there Independents, Welsh Nationals , SNP and others. The SNP and Welsh woudl never vote Tory even if hell froze over.

 

[RedHerring2]

I hope that Clegg can deliver his 'responsible' attitude to UK politics.
A Minority Government would be a good start.

Whats the point? The first time they lose a vote its game over. Hostorically, all english minority governments/coalitions collapse within 7 months. What we need (You want ) is a majority government for the next 5 years, (sort out the Greece problem) then the markets wont panic. Unless you WANT to have an election every 6 months and our credit rating to go down the toilet ?

This is your application of cause and effect, IMO not supported by history or practice.

Not forgetting the many poliocies that parties agree, e.g. the Iraq War, Afghan War, Nuclear Deterrent, etc etc.