Are the Lib Dems broken.

['bout now]

With their popularity dropping, U-turns on three pre-election pledges (VAT, University Fees and Trident), is this the end for the Lib Dems? Discuss.

[sedgewick]

I think it is,

People cried when they joined forces with the Tories, surly that said it all.

They have been Con-Demned and will never recover as a party.

Jacko.

[Ridgley]

I have to agree with you Sedgewick; The limp Dems as that is what they are with the Tories limp will not be credible with the voters even more so if they have Lembit opik as a candidate for mayor(td)

[DJKillaQueen]

YES...they are in the gutter for a while thanks to their leader who has only five years experience in constituency politics and was chief of staff to the Tory Leon Britten when he was european commissioner (go figure). They were doomed from the moment they picked this Tory masquerading as a LibDem as leader.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Not a very grown up outlook so far, recycling many ?hilarious? media puns

Maybe they are ?broken? , time will tell but much as I dislike Clegg, the fact remains this country did not elect a single party ? some sort of coalition was required. I do not believe the country would have had the stomach for a Lib-Lab coalition and so Clegg decided the country (yes) and the party (too) would best be served by tempering SOME of the Tories excesses

They are damned if they do and damned if they don?t. People SAY they want an end to tribal politics and wish they would act like grown-ups and just get the job done. Yet when that happens not only are they pilloried but in the most lowest-common-denominator way

Personally, despite protests, the period they serve in power will do them good and they will become a stronger force in British politics

[Jeremy]

Better to have a coalition than a pure tory govt, surely?

[Ridgley]

It seems that they are, dammed at the moment considering the ruckus that is going on with the students in central London today

[SeanMacGabhann]

And that ruckus would be going on regardless of the LibDems - yes they made promises but it wasn't them that got elected - no one party did. So the placards and chants may have differed but the message would be the same

[Brendan]

That ruckus, the sentiment of which I wholeheartedly support, would also be going on if the Labour party were still in power.

[Ridgley]

But it is the promises they have broken, regarding tuition fee and the fact the Nick Clegg visited a lot of university give them the old chat! Kissing the blarney like I said limp

[SeanMacGabhann]

Well if the LibDems were elected and the single party in power, then you might have a point Ridgely.

But whatever promises they made when campaigning they aren?t likely to be able to fulfill many of them being the minor party in a coalition. That doesn?t make them devil-spawn

[Brendan]

Not spawn no, concubines.

Or perhaps bitches.

[DJKillaQueen]

There is no reason why there could not have been a cross party leadership. Coalitions only serve to give unpopular inbalances of power, where a good part of the electorate feel unrepresented. It is nonsense to suggest hung parliaments are unworkable. They just have to compromise more that's all.

[Huguenot]

Eh? Surely there is cross-party leadership, the hung parliament is working, and the coalition just makes all the compromises at once rather than dredging them up on every decision?

[Huguenot]

Besides the Lib Dems were always 'broken' by the clash between social liberals (who believe in big government and regulation) and market liberals (who believe in small governemnt and de-regulation).

Whilst they were just barracking from the wings, their members could conveniently overlook this fracture. However when they actually had to set policy they were exposed.

In other words, it wasn't any sort of coalition which derailed them, it was getting power.

[mockney piers]

I completely agree with that analysis Huguenot.

And thinking about it, I've a feeling I've also been exposed, I've a sneaking suspicion that the reason I always voted for them was so that I could always say that those in power weren't my fault.

Now they are seems they're as bad as the rest.

I wouldn't have minded so much iftheywere at least honest and said 'yeah we've u-turned and yeah it all sucks, but life ain't fair' id have applauded their bringing honest discourse into politics.

Instead they keep banging on about how everything is fair and progressive when it's usually the polar opposite in a classic bit of Orwellian thinking.

I'll be voting natural law in the next general election, no chance they can make a coalition with anyone!!

[DJKillaQueen]

I agree with you both as well....especially the point that giving them power has exposed them to be just like the rest.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Oh please. What did anyone expect?

First of all, they don't have power

Secondly, by now you would think power entails a whole number of compromises. Whether it's labour in 97, obama in the us or the limited power thelibdems have.... It would appear its not as easy as it seems

Huguenot makes some good points but as for mockney, im shocked. People have been saying that about the libdems for ever and he's surprised? Why?

I didn't vote for them but i cant quite understand the kicking they are getting now

['bout now]

Sean, they have reneged on 3 HUGE principles(cornerstones) of their election manifesto, and you don't understand the kicking? Coalition aside there has to be some dogma, surely. I mean what did the punters vote for.

I only posted this thread after watching a visibly bemused Huhne and Cable in China.

Human rights was pretty high on the agenda as well. Clegg has duped the party and the electorate, I'll say it again, The ELECTORATE. A Chancer that has put himself above principle and his party.

Discuss

[DJKillaQueen]

I would agree that he has put his own career before that of the party. If you look at his CV, most of his political experience is in Europe, where there is no accountability to constituents. Nick is a career politician in the purest form. He becomes leader within TWO years of his first parliamentary seat and finds himself deputy Prime Minister with FIVE years. This is not a man who is born and bred through constituent politics (like most of his party). And because of that he fails to understand the importance of the electorate. His failure to fight for the grant to Sheffield Forgemasters when his seat is IN Sheffield was a gross error of judgement that I'm afraid may cost him personally dearly at the next general election.

['bout now]

Better to have a coalition than a pure tory govt, surely?

Do you see a difference?

[mockney piers]

Quite I'm failing to see compromise on anything.

If anything the coalition is more extreme than a single party government because they can both point fingers at the other and shrug 'wasn't me gov'.

I understand politics and compromise and the art of slow progress. I don't get reneging on all your principles. Surely parties are supposed to stand for something, not merely be vehicles for power. Ok the Tory party is a vehicle for power with the principle of looking after your own.

Mind you that's what old labour was too thinking about it.

New labour was purely a vehicle for power.

I genuinely liked to think the liberals were about enlightened principle, I guess partly BECAUSE they had such little chance of power. And yes they do have power, they're simply choosing not to exercise that power in order to maintain the trappings and appearance of power.

Like I say, sold out.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I know I?m stretching myself to defend a party I didn?t vote for ? but

If the alternative is for the LibDems to dig their heels in at the beginning of this coalition, surely the outcome is a collapse of government, probable calling of another election and then what, a fully elected Tories? That sounds like an awful lot of drama, cost, and drifting at a time when we could do without it, only to find ourselves back at square one

[DJKillaQueen]

But would it mean fully elected Tories? Many of the LibDem votes came from previous Labour voters. I think the estimated floating vote is only 300,000 across the country, and they by and large are who decide the outcome of elections. If those voters were to swing back to Labour (very likely at the next council and general elections) then the outcome would be different.

Having said that the Labour party took too long to elect a new leader and they need to get their act together. Miliband has yet to emerge as a full on shadow leader. Meanwhile the Coalition declare controversial policy after controversial policy without any kind of strong opposition making a dent.

[SeanMacGabhann]

If labour were reelected I would eat my hat

The country sees this coalition as the best shot. If it were to vote again they would probably re-elect the tories as libdem voters would be too busy holding their noses. Not enough people will vote labour until (possibly at best) the next planned election

If this coalition did fall apart because of LibDems non-coperation with the Tories (which is what it would be if they stood by their manifesto alone) then they would be in the wilderness

Maybe not amongst lib-dem voters, but in the country at large their is some respect for them for understanding their position in this coalition and not using a tiny vote to scupper everything that the largest party attempts (even if I disagree with them)