 |
|
Snotty
|
|
Howard has come strongly out of the gates, but we havent heard from ken clarke yet. There is still some hope.
I think the organization that has appeared gives us some idea of who was behind the downfall of IDS.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Viceroy
|
 |
tu mumbai se, mai Bombay se
Nov 2000
time: 05:31
|
|
It was only when Militant broke from Labout that they started to get their act together back in the 80's. I actually think Portillo or Clarke are the only leaders in that party worth considering.
The whole Howard thing is a bit odd, the guy is a good speaker, and quite witty in debate, but he just is not going to turn the tide.
What the tories really need is to break up, and re-form, and who knows, maybe one faction may be considered almost electalble.
Although I personally would like to see another 5 years of Tony, I do think its important to have an opposition, and we simply do not have one. The Lib Dems are not taking up the challenge (they often talk about becoming the 2nd party, yet ... when will they realise they have to do something to get there ???) and the tories .. well, we've seen what they are capable of.
I wonder how seriously the labour party will be considering a snap election ???? It would really put the cat amongst the pigeons.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CerberusIV
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Just curious: Now that Labour is "New Labour," and the "Third Way" has replaced good old-fashioned socialism, what are the political/ideological differences between Labour and the Liberal Dems? Doesn't seem like there would be many... |
British politics is a bit strange ever since "New Labour". In the good old days we had a left wing party, Labour, a right wing party, Conservatives, and a centre party, the Liberals. All three were a relatively broad church with a range of views.
Then the Labour party went splat in the late '70's/early '80's and spawned the Social Democrats who then got taken over by the Liberals. Once Labour lost the '92 election they finally broke with anything remotely socialist and moved to being a slightly right of centre party - the bit of the political spectrum most likely to get elected. This pushed the Lib Dems rather to the left as the party with a social conscience. the Conservatives are left with nowhere to go and are spending their time (when not tearing themselves apart) recycling policies that are not very different from New Labour, just different words for more or less the same thing, except on the EU where they pretend it isn't far too late to change anything.
So now we don't have socialism, just three parties whose policies aren't fundamentally that different so it comes down to personalities. The Lib Dems don't expect to be the next government so they propose slightly more radical policies secure in the knowledge that they won't actually have to carry them out.
Since it is largely on personality Tony is streets ahead of Kennedy, IDS, Howard and anyone else likely to lead either of the other parties.
Perhaps not a detailed answer to the question but that's the way I see it (I wasn't quite old enough to vote in 1979).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snotty
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Viceroy
The Lib Dems are not taking up the challenge (they often talk about becoming the 2nd party, yet ... when will they realise they have to do something to get there ???) and the tories .. well, we've seen what they are capable of.
|
What more do they have to do except keep making gains at general elections? +6 seats in 2001 and +28 in 1997. This isnt something thats going to happen overnight.
If I was a tory party member I would be furious at what howard has masterminded. The first leader the ordinary party member gets to elect and he gets stabbed in the back. I certainly wouldnt vote for howard after what he did.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Viceroy
|
|
tu mumbai se, mai Bombay se
Nov 2000
time: 05:31
|
|
The lib dems need to do a lot more. Firstly, the need to start walking and talking like a government, and need to continually be talking about its policies on Health, Economy, Defence, Transport, Education .. all the key things. Sure, they have policies ... but the truth is, they are not well known.
Secondly they need to attacking the government, much in the way they did with the war. People should assume they are the credible alternative ..
Simply just expecting to make small gains each time, without making serious moves of this kind, will mean you will only gain when somebody is unpopular, and will lose when they are not.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snotty
|
|
They are still considered the opposition because they are the 2nd biggest party.
The lib dems are drawing away voters from both labour and the torys. As the lib dems gain more voices in the house of commons, then they will have a greater ability to oppose the government.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snotty
|
|
We canvassed Brent east thoroughly and repeatedly. Anyone who wanted to know our policies then could just read one of the leaflets we pushed through the doors. I imagine people too disinterested to read a leaflet would also be too disinterested to vote.
I agree that brent east was helped along greatly by the anti-labour vote, but the win does follow the pattern of gains the lib dems have been having in cities.
Hopefully some of the new lib dem voters will find a better ideological home with us, even when fickle people flock back to their party on its upsurge.
I dont really see the lib dems reaching the top for 20-30 years either, but its something that will happen. We just have to be patient.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-10-2003 07:12
)
..
|