Gordon Brown, final roll of the dice?

[colin]

Whatever you may think of GB's running of the country you've got to admit he's a good poker player!

If Labour had gone to LD's first he knew he was for chop, so what does he do? throw Con's and LD's in bed together and see what happens, if they come to aggreement no real differance to him, but if they don't agree then Clegg has to come to him cap in hand and GB keeps his job, what a political animal, bet half the Labour would like to knife him in back right now.

[malc d]

colin - 2010-05-07 7:16 PM

 

Whatever you may think of GB's running of the country you've got to admit he's a good poker player!

If Labour had gone to LD's first he knew he was for chop, so what does he do? throw Con's and LD's in bed together and see what happens, if they come to aggreement no real differance to him, but if they don't agree then Clegg has to come to him cap in hand and GB keeps his job, what a political animal, bet half the Labour would like to knife him in back right now.

 

 

It was Nick Cleggs idea to go to the Tories first as they have most seats.

 

I think you overestimate Browns' power if you think HE could " throw Cons and LDs in bed together" - it wasn't his decision.

 

May have worked out well for Brown though if the others can't come up with a 'deal' of some sort.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CliveH]

He has little choice. He has lost but is still in Number 10 because of what is basically a "system error"

 

Yes he could stay in Number 10 with the help of the Lib Dems but if they did that and propped up a losing party with a PM that was not elected before or since I for one would never forgive them and on that I do not think I am alone.

 

The only sensible way forward is a LibDem/Con pact but one which I hope is where people of the calibre of Vince Cable get a cabinet position. Asking the Lib Dems for support but no actual part in government all for a promise of electoral reform would only mean it all falls apart sooner rather than later.

 

But Clegg has been badly weakened by his stance on immigration and his support for the Euro (do we really want to be part of the Greece bailout when our debt is just as big?) - so hopefully if Cameron can come up with a good deal Clegg will be able to take it (his party needs to approve any such move).

 

But please do not think I am a Conservative supporter or a Lib Dem supporter (and I have to say Labour has screwed up so much - two wars nobody wants, jobs tax, tax on pensions etc etc etc for me to want THEM back!) - but we DO NEED a stable Government of whatever shape or colour combination because we face a financial s**tstorm of huge proportions.

 

One to big for GB to be rudderless at this point in time.

 

[CliveH]

Arrrrh!!! Another Ooops after posting by yours truly

 

By "GB" I mean Great Britain!! Not Gordon Brown!!! 8-) *-) *-)

 

As far as I am concerned Gordon Brown needs a Rudder where only a Proctologist could find it.

 

(lol)

 

Whereas Great Britain needs direction.

 

[robkilby]

Nah

He has made the best of a tough job.

Clegg looks foolish....lets see what crumb he gets from Cameron and Cameron couldn't scrape together a majority for all of Ashcrofts ££ and Murdochs power.

 

[malc d]

CliveH

 

Cameron has not 'promised' Clegg electoral reform, he simply offered to set up a talking shop to consider it.

Everyone knows that the Tories are strongly opposed to changing the voting system, and I've no doubt that after 'considering 'it, his quango would decide that it was not a good idea.

I doubt if Clegg will fall for that one.

 

 

[robkilby]

malc d - 2010-05-07 9:13 PM

 

CliveH

 

Cameron has not 'promised' Clegg electoral reform, he simply offered to set up a talking shop to consider it.

Everyone knows that the Tories are strongly opposed to changing the voting system, and I've no doubt that after 'considering 'it, his quango would decide that it was not a good idea.

I doubt if Clegg will fall for that one.

 

 

He fell for his own PR (lol)

[Guest peter]

The best scenario would be if Clegg told Cameron to get lost and for him to form a minority government so people can see what a load of piss and wind Cameron is in reality. In the meantime Labour should ditch Brown and elect a new leader. Ready for the next election , which would be in a couple of months. Where Labour would win.

[Klyne]

Here's a thought. Gordon Brown being very Statesman like to allow a Conservative/Lib Dem alliance to self destruct. He steps in offering the Lib Dems a quick referendum on election reform and the promise that, assumimg it is accepted by the country, a quick bill is published and it becomes law. Now any alliance with the Lib Dems and other parties might well rub along quite well but if it did not he could call an election under the new rules with the knowledge that the Tories would never get enough votes to form a majority Government, possibly ever again. A cunning plan!

 

David

[malc d]

As an aside, I do wonder how much the BBC election coverage has cost us licence fee payers !

 

Graphics were way over the top, and as for following Nick Greggs car with a helicopter !!!

( Is no-one in charge of their budgets ?)

 

One thing the Tories have talked about in the past is freezing, or reducing ,the cost of the TV licence fee - let's hope it happens.

 

We could spend the extra pennies we get on diesel for our vans.

 

;-)

[Guest JudgeMental]

My thoughts exactly, the BBC must be spending a similar budget to "avatar" the movie! Them and the media generally have hijacked this election and caused this confusion. but the voters where decidedly uninspired by any one! hence this worse possible outcome.

 

the markets are quivering and we edge neared to the abyss... groups forming now on face book "anyone fancy a riot?" to do battle in Westminster if Torys get in, Athens here we come!

[maggyd]

After the demonstrations outside Liberal Headquarters this afternoon where over a 1,000 people from mixed parties were calling for Clegg to stick to his guns on proportional representation I think we just might be getting somewhere.

 

The Conservatives will never agree to it as they know they wouldn't stand a Cat in Hells chance of being elected.

 

I hope we have another election and then we'll see!! lots of Labour Voters voted Liberal as a protest vote :-S but as Ive always said vote liberal and you put the Conservatives in.

 

As for personalities this isn't America where Film Stars with very few brain cells can be elected as President!! Ive said it before and Ill say it again with G.B. what you see is what you get!! he isnt standing for Mr Universe or Mr Popularity and in a face to face with David Cameron he ran rings around him. He probably now will be replaced as a man can only stand so many insults and for the sake of himself and his family he should bow out gracefully, he has done a good job no matter what his enemies say.

[Brian Kirby]

Don't see how labour could be kept in power, however much that may disappoint some.  Labour + Liberal Democrat together polled 14.3M votes out of 29.5M cast, but can only pull together 315 seats out of 650.  Allow for their widespread unpopularity - most change was from labour to conservative, and most of that was in the midlands, the north east, and the north west, which is where they have always had their strongest support.  This election was not "won" by the conservatives, it was "lost" by labour, and the losing started long, long, ago.  Brown's chalice was comprehensively poisoned, and some of that was self-administered!

The logical combination is Con/LD, because they can, at least, muster 363 seats, so an absolute majority together, and together they polled 17.5M votes, so also a majority of votes cast.  The biggest problem is, no one (including the Cons and LDs!) can tell which bits of whose policies anyone was voting for!  Avoidance of extremes seems the most pragmatic route forward.

Whether we shall get the electoral reform I'd like who knows: somehow I doubt it!  What we might get is agreement to reduce constituencies, which should certainly apply to Wales, Scotland, and N Ireland, as they have their own assemblies and are now grossly over-represented.  We might even get agreement to even up the sizes of the constituencies, which I think would at least help to make first-past-the-post a bit more representative.

Problem is, all that is cake icing compared to the deficit, and while the deficit is being sorted out, the electoral reform ball is likely to roll out of sight under the sofa somewhere, and just get forgotten.  The conservatives really, really, don't want it - any more than they wanted the Euro.  However, even the Cons must now see that the present system has to change in some way so, on the basis the best way to test an argument is with a good sceptic, lets hope they will at least be constructive!  After all, we have spoken.  :-)

The aftermath of the Greek crisis, which really should have been seen coming - enough commentators said they were cheating outrageously when they joined - just may result in a more stable and better managed Euro, at which point we just might get to join.  Whether that will be during our next parliament, is anyone's guess.  Still, looking on the bright side, result two? :-D

[malc d]

I don't see Cons and Lib Dems as a 'logical combination' as they are too far apart ideologically.

 

Might be better to just let the Cons run a minority government and just shoot down their policies one at a time ( e.g. inheritance tax breaks for the better off ).

 

 

 

[Guest JudgeMental]

malc d - 2010-05-08 9:16 PM

 

 

Might be better to just let the Cons run a minority government and just shoot down their policies one at a time ( e.g. inheritance tax breaks for the better off ).

 

 

 

Errrr.......steady on! :-S

 

be prepared to se Libs sell themselves down the river *-)

[Brian Kirby]

malc d - 2010-05-08 9:16 PM I don't see Cons and Lib Dems as a 'logical combination' as they are too far apart ideologically. Might be better to just let the Cons run a minority government and just shoot down their policies one at a time ( e.g. inheritance tax breaks for the better off ).

Don't actually disagree with that, Malc.  My "logic" was numeric - what gets a majority government.  Ideologically, you are right, and there is too little common ground for trust, and without trust a coalition won't work.

Result: no coalition, and agreement on policies item by item with parliament working as it is supposed to work, with the executive having to temper its policies to gain majority support wherever it can.  Messy, and it will never, in my opinion, get us electoral reform, but I don't think either of the coalition options will either.

If the L/Ds don't support Labour in a weak coalition, I think Labour will walk straight away from any support for reform, and if they do support them, the process of agreeing how to reform will take so long, a snap election will be called before any reforms have been enacted.

Whatever the Cons say, they will work to undermine reform because they just don't want it and, even from within a coalition, will muddy up the water, and seek to wrong foot the L/Ds in whatever cabinet roles they get - so that they take the blame for the unpopular decisions on the deficit - and will then declare a snap election on the back of that.

Best strategy for the L/Ds for now is forget reform, focus on the deficit, let the Cons take all the decisions, but temper them in the interests of greater equality and gain the credit for that, and then see when the dare call an election!  Call me a cynic, but I think that may prove the best outcome of all. 

The markets won't like it, so will drop in the short term but, if it seems to be working in practise and there is money to be made, the markets will come back.  When will depend quite a lot on what happens in Euroland, but that will just have to take its course - we just have to get on with our own solutions.  Interesting!

[Guest JudgeMental]

Then...Labour get a new leader in readiness to win the Autumn elections :-D

[malc d]

Fascinating watching our wonderful TV news media this morning.

 

'Hours' of political coverage - all letting us know that absolutely nothing has happened yet.

 

Clearly a lot of vacancies for editors.

 

 

;-)

[Guest pelmetman]

It does not matter who ends up running the country, because who ever wins will still have to sort out the economy which means they will be sticking their fingers even further into our pockets >:-(

I'm glad I downsized my business and semi retired as anyone above £20k will be worse off >:-)

[CliveH]

Billy Bragg was interviewed this morning - made a heck of a lot of sense.

 

As for Cameron not offering electoral reform - that is wrong - he is offering reform - just not what the lib Dems want. They want PR because it would suit them - and I don't blame them for that.

 

Cameron wants equalisation of constituencies because in the Conservatives eyes it is wrong that to get a city Labour MP you need about half the votes required to return a rural Conservative MP. And once again - I don't blame the Conservatives for wanting a fairer system within the first past the post system we currently have.

 

After all it is Labour that has altered the boundaries successively over the last 13 years so that they have the best advantage.

 

So all three parties have their own particular axe to grind and now that we have a hung parliament Gordon hangs on to any possibility of power whilst Cameron would be a fool to give PR the OK because he need the votes of a really small third party.

 

If Clegg props up Labour, then the rest of the country will never forgive him because the Conservatives polled the most votes and have the most seats.

 

All Cameron would need to do then is to sit back and wait for the inevitable fall out and disaster and another election within months rather than years.

 

No guarantee Cameron would win but he only lost because Labour did not release the financial statement outlining the true hole we are all in. Had the election been a year later so that we could all see the depths to which Gordon has lead us and the cost of getting us out, Cameron would have been returned with a workable majority in my view.

 

But what we have now is typical Labour party spin. Don't let on to others about how big the problem is and let’s hope we can get away with it.

 

I hope by end of next week we have a sensible coalition government between the Conservatives and the Lib Dems. If not we will have another election most likely before Christmas.

 

[malc d]

From what I have heard today it is NOT true that Cameron is offering 'electoral' reform - he is only offering 'political' reform - which of course can mean almost anything.

So, as I said, Cameron is not offering electoral reform, he's just willing to set up a committee to talk about it.

( A standard political waffle shop - with no outcome).

 

 

And if Labour have been changing boundaries to their advantage, they obviously didn't make a very good job of it.

 

As I understand it, boundary changes are made due to shifts in population.

 

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

Don't think it matters much what Cameron says, the leader of the Conservatives has never dictated policy - as he may be about to discover. 

I'm sure they'd like a coalition, so as to have someone else to blame for all the nasty decisions they will have to make. 

However, I think the L/Ds should stand back and allow Cameron to form a minority government, offering support on selected issues only, mainly the economy. 

I don't think there will be a quick election, because the government will quickly become very unpopular as it does what is necessary, and a Con government will make itself even more unpopular than is strictly necessary, because it will try to shield its supporters from the worst effects of these measures.  When ordinary folk see the rich being protected from cuts and/or tax rises, I think any prospect of a quick election victory on a tide of popular acclaim will simply evaporate. 

Expect a couple of years for our notoriously short memories to fade, before they'll dare try for an clear majority.  Even then I think they'll be pushing it!  Could even go full term, and still be unpopular - and once they reveal what the true state of the finances really is, they'll probably bury labour's prospects as well.  After that, we'll see who emerges as the popular party.  It's going to be a long game!

[pkc]

 

So lots of scenarios to choose from here.

Lots of people saying that for the sake of the country they should put their differences aside, and deal with the deficit problem in a mature manner.

My guess?

Way too late the declaration of a short lived Con Lib pact

When the markets open tomorrow, the dealers will run amok like headless chickens; the pound will be up and down like a bride’s nightie.

This will then trigger the normal round of blood letting on the Labour back benches with calls for Brown’s resignation.

The euro sceptics will come clanking out of the Tory cupboard, and all hell will break loose.

But this is probably me being my usual optimistic self.

We are about to live in interesting times.

Time to load up the van I think.

 

Regards, PKC.

 

[CliveH]

 

The Conservatives have always talked about Electoral Reform :-

 

http://www.conservativeelectoralreform.org/Media/index.html

 

..but their idea of electoral reform does not include PR. What it does include and has done for some time is equalised constituencies and a reduction in the number of MP's.

 

PR is not the only aspect of electoral reform and electoral reform does not mean we have to have PR.

 

An important aspect of Electoral Reform is to try to equalise the value of each vote. Hence the idea of getting constituencies to be the same size. If you do this, then "First Past the Post" actually becomes a pretty good system if fairness is the main goal.

 

But PR works better for the party(s) that tend to get a good second place. Labour has had a "death bed" conversion to the idea of PR as it is the only way they can hang onto power. Bit of a sham really.

 

As for the markets - looks as if they may be prepared to hold off for a day or so. We will know by lunch time. This is more to do with getting Greece sorted more than who sits in Number 10.

 

Sometimes I despair at the newspapers we have in the UK - some are calling Brown a "squatter" in No 10. - when to be fair to him - he has to do this - he has no choice.

 

Interesting times? - Oh yes!

 

[W3526602]

Hi,

Presumably, Democracy is a "good thing", at least that is what I have always been told. The problem is, we do not have a democracy. Even in Ancient Athens, the birthplace of Democracy (?), the slaves did not have a vote.

 

I am not represented. They take my vote and regard it as my authority to do what they like for the next four years. This means they represent their Party, which in effect means just one person.

 

I do not see how you can have a democracy if one party has an absolute majority. As in most things, weigh up the advantages/disadvantages, make your choice ....... then make it work.

 

602