As to the 1/3 of voters who didn't bother…
efck 'em they couldn't be bothered so why should anyone else be bothered about them?

Except that you've ignored the part where I said that almost all Lib Dem and Labour supporters would put the Tories last.

but it's not true… Many people voted lib dem to get labour out. I don't buy this Lib and lab are natural allies stuff, they're not. Look at issues like civil liberties for example.

71% against labour. There you go, there's your argument.

Except that you've ignored the part where I said that almost all Lib Dem and Labour supporters would put the Tories last.

SO? **** hell, tory and lib voters put labour last. Tory and lab voters put lib dem last. Of course they do!
I didn't ignore it, it's just nonsense.

It seems to me from following politics all over the world that even the best governments seem to run out of ideas and enthusiasm and to loose sight of their roots after a decade in power.

Of course they are Porterclough – the differences are far less than tory Lib dem and look at history.

clubber – Member
Junkyard – it's semantics. Technically, the Tories do have a majority (also called a simple majority), they just don't have an absolute majority (eg more than everyone else combined).

No I clearly said votes – I put it in bold second time round-not seats so it is not semantics. I know the difference between majorities and have said what you said in previous posts …one of the very few facts from my 20 year old E grade A level politics that I still retain.
Lib lab also has a simple majority – not really workable though but important to allow them to crawl over the finishing line.
EDIT: Backhande ryou seem to want todisagree with the fact that lib and labour are both left of centre and are more similiar to eah other than they are to the Tories. You seem to think this doe snot matter. the assumption is that if you ask Lib voters who to side with they would pick Labour as a large number of people still find the tories to be an pretty oddious bunch

18 years of Tory rule which was pretty awful by the end
13 years of Labour rule which was also pretty awful by the end (and which seemed well on course to be as bad if they'd manage 18 years…)

I really don't want a government with a comfortable majority for a while thanks. Keep them scared for their seats for a while and I reckon that there's a better chance that we might get some half decent (which would be a big step up from indecent) governance.

tory and lib voters put labour last.

I bet if you asked most people who voted Liberal which would be their next best choice, it would be Labour. Seeing as the current electoral system has failed to provide a clear winner, why is it nonsense to consider what the result might have been if we had a fairer election system?

JY – not going to go back and check but it sounds like I misread your post then.

I'm tlking about the voters TJ. People voted to get Labour out, whilst not being keen on the Tories. Many libdem votes were anti labour votes, not anti Tory votes.

If this is a true democracy, I reckon there should be national vote on this mess, because too many voters' wishes will be disregarded if any of these deals go ahead.

Simple vote: either Con/Lib coalition, or Lab/Lib coalition

This assumes the liberals can actually strike a deal with Labour and the various other factions required for a 325 seat majority.

The Conservative/Liberal coalition would be by far the strongest majority and therefore the most democratic solution. However, I wonder if Clegg has the voters wishes and the future of the country in mind, or if he is putting his political interests first. If he hadn't gone to see Gordon after yesterday's announcement outside No.10, I'd tend to think the former!

I bet if you asked most people who voted Liberal which would be their next best choice, it would be Labour.

I'll take that bet. Labour lost 90 odd seats for a very good reason. And what of the 36% who voted tory, do they get a say? Or are they irrelevant because they voted for a party which you don't like?

I bet if you asked most people who voted Liberal which would be their next best choice, it would be Labour.

I'll start – I voted for Clegg, I want Labour out. Cameron with Clegg in the cabinet is what I wanted, expected, and think is the only option.

Does this help?

backhander have the lib dems secretly become righht wing because dave is so compelling that they are just in awe of him and his big society vision?

And what of the 36% who voted tory, do they get a say? Or are they irrelevant because they voted for a party which you don't like?

well all three parties cannot be in power so someone will be disappointed and more of the lectorate are left of centre than right of centre etc

No one party has a direct mandate to rule can you take your blue shades of and stop jumping around like a small child saying it is our turn we got the most votes please. You did not win and whatever happens will be unfair to some parts of the electorate.
A fudge whoever ends up in power and i doubt either willast long. Lib lab too weak and the lib con to disparate in views especially Europe,defence, taxation and the economy.

I guess it's typical liberal behaviour: they can't make their bloody minds up and just sit on the fence!

I bet if you asked most people who voted Liberal which would be their next best choice, it would be Labour.

I'll take that bet too. I voted LD but in any of the guises I've known labour I'd never vote for them. Labour they would have been my second last choice (BNP had someone up in my consituency) if that'd been in place too. From my experience talking with people that doesn't seem uncommon either.

And I also think plenty of people (ex-labour voters) voted 'against' labour by voting Lib Dem where in the past they may have voted Tory but were put off by 18 years worth…

I voted Lib Dem,I wanted a coalition with Labour Lib Dem, with Gordon replaced by someone who could lead. Unfortunately, because of the way our first past the post system works the Cons got a disproportional number of seats a Lab Lib deal would be unlikely to stick for long, so the only option is really a Lib Con deal.

Does this help?

thanks for posting up MR clegg but are you not busy with the talks 😉

Unfortunately, because of the way our first past the post system works the Cons got a disproportional number of seats

It's Labour that got the most disproportionate number of seats.

I'll start – I voted for Clegg, I want Labour out. Cameron with Clegg in the cabinet is what I wanted, expected, and think is the only option.

OK, well that's pretty conclusive then isn't it? How exactly do you reconcile Tory and Lib Dem policy on electoral reform/immigration/education/tax etc etc?

And what of the 36% who voted tory, do they get a say? Or are they irrelevant because they voted for a party which you don't like?

I'm just saying, that more people voted for a broadly left wing, progressive option (arguably in New Labour's case) than voted Tory – given that there was no clear winner this is significant. Whatever happens, someone will probably have legitimate grounds for feeling aggrieved – but to suggest that the Tories 'won' is just wrong.

Again, in a system where they are virtually guaranteed at least a 50% chance of winning, against a very unpopular PM, in a financial crisis/recession, with all the resources they had available, the fact they didn't win convincingly is a pretty damning indictment of Cameron – as lots of people in the Tory party are apparently now starting to realise.

People saying they voted Lib Dem but would prefer Conservatives to Labour – have you actually read any of the parties' policies or do you base your vote purely on ill-founded grudges?

No one party has a direct mandate to rule can you take your blue shades of and stop jumping around like a small child satying it is our turn we got the most votes please. You did not win and whatever happens will be unfair to some part of the electorate.

I don't have blue glasses just a sense of fairness. It's normal, "ignore what's right and do what is right for us" leftys again. Bawling like babies for fair systems and democracy but only when it suits them. You say unfair to SOME PART of the electorate? The single strongest part?
Just changing the goalposts to suit your own ends. As a side note, I have noticed that the left leaning types on here are often the least tolerant, and most childish and vindictive. The amount of bullying that goes on by these is pretty disgusting. But then, I suppose fans of Brown, Balls, Mandelson would be bullies I suppose.
What would the result have been under the precious PR system?

How exactly do you reconcile Tory and Lib Dem policy on electoral reform/immigration/education/tax etc etc?

replace the word Tory with labour in that sentence, then add civil liberties

Lol at backhander – awwww are you being bullied? Poor diddums. 😆

Just changing the goalposts to suit your own ends.

You mean like strongly supporting first past the post then whinging when it doesn't deliver you the win you wanted?

replace the word Tory with labour in that sentence, then add civil liberties

Well, on tax for instance – both Labour and Lib Dems broadly support more redistributive tax systems than the Tories, who favour tax cuts for the rich.

You mean like strongly supporting first past the post then whinging when it doesn't deliver you the win you wanted?

No like criticising the FPTP system then screaming at all who will listen that according to the system ,that no-one won. I wasn't referring to myself being bullied. You are certainly not capable mate.
So. What would the results have been under PR?

I voted Lib Dem and I think that we have got the best possible outcome.

If Lib/Lab had been on the cards (a few seats more for either) we'd still have GB. Actually I like GB, but he is now too divisive a figure so for the sake of the country, better he goes.

I prefer the idea of a relatively weak Lb/Con Govt as it will expose the problems with the Tories prior to the next election whilst giving some Lib Dems experience in Govt.

The Labour party needs a rest.

We will get some sort of movement on PR.

I don't mind another election in a year or two.

The "Strong Govt" scare story is a myth. London is one of the financial capitals of the world and it will stay that way. Investors have to put their money somewhere and many of them will still want to put it into UK Govt debt – there aren't loads of other places for them to put it.

The situation is a charade now!

Make a bloody decision Clegg!

No like criticising the FPTP system then screaming at all who will listen that according to the system ,that no-one won.

So who did win then? Remind me who has an absolute majority again?

So. What would the results have been under PR?

Depends on the system but the Lib Dems would have got a hell of a lot more seats, making a Lib-Lab coalition probably more workable/likely.

rightplacerighttime, I can find very little to disagree with there.

People saying they voted Lib Dem but would prefer Conservatives to Labour – have you actually read any of the parties' policies or do you base your vote purely on ill-founded grudges?

Yes thanks and it's quite easy to justify. As I've said, I want the LDs in there to control the worst of the conservative tendencies. I think that the Conservatives in power with the LDs will do less damage to the country as a whole over the next few years than Labour will as they become increasing fractious and inward looking, concerning themselves increasingly with their own petty party squables rather than what's good for the country.

Given the voting that took place and the number of seats each party has, the only sensible option is a ConDem govt, but please please please can we have Vince Cable not George Osbourne as the Chancellor (not going to happen but I can hope).

grum – Member

replace the word Tory with labour in that sentence, then add civil liberties

Well, on tax for instance – both Labour and Lib Dems broadly support more redistributive tax systems than the Tories, who favour tax cuts for the rich.

plus possibly scrapping/reducing the minimum wage?

"Vince Cable not George Osbourne as the Chancellor "

yes please, or at least head of the treasury.

No like criticising the FPTP system then screaming at all who will listen that according to the system ,that no-one won

well if you won why you talking to the lib dems rather than forming a government and trying to get your budget /queens speech through parliament …it is because you cant do it alone as you did not win.
the goalposts have not been changed they are still the same get a majority form a government the BIGGEST party still needs someoen else to do that. It seems reasonable that if the other views of the two weaker parties [and they have 50% + of votes] are more similiar then they can form a government if they can make it stick. Are you just saying libs have to side with the Tories as they got the most votes? Again it is all supposition to say what Lib dems would prefer as a coalition but as they are left of centre it seems mor ereasonable to suggest they have more in oommon with a left of centre party than a right of centre party. Neither scenario is perfect but that is the system we have at present

Nick – Member

Given the voting that took place and the number of seats each party has, the only sensible option is a ConDem govt, but please please please can we have Vince Cable not George Osbourne as the Chancellor (not going to happen but I can hope)

Gideon will be heartbroken if Davey drops him for the chance of power 🙂

From what i have heard of him, I like Cable

man people are getting ridiculously wound up

whats wrong with clegg playing the 2 off against each other, to get what he thinks is the best deal for his party and the country

i wouldnt be surprised if labour new they were just being used as a bargaining chip against the torries

clegg has a lot of differences between himself and cameron and needs to get some leverage to ensure that his party pledges can get a look in in a con/lib pact
clegg wants tax relief for the poor, cameron wants tax relief for the rich
libs wants a form of PR cons want anything but that
the libs want an amnesty on immigrants, the cons want to erm well just ignore them i think
and so on

and despite what the tory press keep banging on about the uk debt sale went very well this morning (and manufacturing is up 2% by todays figures as well)

yet some still say the situation is a 'charade' get a grip -stop being fooled by the hysterical media whining-adam boulton anyone! its only been a few days and it looks like it will be sorted pretty soon

plus possibly scrapping/reducing the minimum wage?

True but again, I think that's exactly the kind of thing that would stand a good chance of breaking up a ConLib coalition.

whoever asked about what the results would look like with PR:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8644480.stm

plus possibly scrapping/reducing the minimum wage?

True but again, I think that's exactly the kind of thing that would stand a good chance of breaking up a ConLib coalition.

i also think its a got a good chance of repeating the poll-tax riots