www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24099255 [iSpeaking from the Lib Dem annual conference in Glasgow, he said political parties needed to be "up-front with the British people about those issues which we really will die in the trench for and those which clearly will depend on political and economic circumstance".[/i But then ... [iHe declined to say, more than 18 months ahead of the election, which policies would be his "red lines" in any coalition talks.[/i So, he's going to be "up front" about what they are going to do ... but not actually tell us. Is that actually any better than what he did last time i.e. "pledging" and then doing a 180-degree-turn after the election?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24099255 [iSpeaking from the Lib Dem annual conference in Glasgow, he said political parties needed to be "up-front with the British people about those issues which we really will die in the trench for and those which clearly will depend on political and economic circumstance".[/i But then ... [iHe declined to say, more than 18 months ahead of the election, which policies would be his "red lines" in any coalition talks.[/i So, he's going to be "up front" about what they are going to do ... but not actually tell us. Is that actually any better than what he did last time i.e. "pledging" and then doing a 180-degree-turn after the election?

Uncle Vince will rally the party faithful.
Followed no doubt by the charismatic Danny Alexander.

They're an utter irrelevance right now. Not a chance of having any say in 2015. They may as well start making up Monster Raving Loony policies for all the likelihood of any of them happening.

He was upfront about tuition fees last time. Pledge an' all. Says all you ever need to know about the hideous runt.

Mind you, seems like Ed is the new Nick Clegg: www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ur-hopeful

Mind you, seems like Ed is the new Nick Clegg: www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ur-hopeful

Quote ="Dally"Mind you, seems like Ed is the new Nick Clegg: www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ur-hopeful'" Seeing as you oft declare your blatant displeasure of all 3 main party leaders (not disagreeing with you) who would be your current choice of No10 inhabitant?

Quote ="Dally"Mind you, seems like Ed is the new Nick Clegg: www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ur-hopeful'" Seeing as you oft declare your blatant displeasure of all 3 main party leaders (not disagreeing with you) who would be your current choice of No10 inhabitant?

Here's Boris' take on it: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... itics.html Boris has summed things up well.

Here's Boris' take on it: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... itics.html Boris has summed things up well.

None of them. Ideally Labour if they can find a leader rather than a muppet. As things stand I would not vote for any of the 2 main parties, or the LibDems. All three have inept leaders who stand for nothing worthwhile. Unless there is a change in leadership of Labour then I'll vote for a party with no coherent policy but which has a primary point of principle - ie Green or UKIP.

Quote ="Dally"Here's Boris' take on it: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... itics.html Boris has summed things up well.'" Would that be the same BoJo whose election promises to London's black cab drivers have proved to be meaningless?

Quote ="Dally"Here's Boris' take on it: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... itics.html Boris has summed things up well.'" Would that be the same BoJo whose election promises to London's black cab drivers have proved to be meaningless?

He did mention one, his idiotic intention to take even more people out of paying income tax.

It'll be a tough choice for you between the Green's and UKIP with them sharing such similarly aligned policies.
I'm sure you could probably talk yourself into becoming a tree-hugging racist.
I admire your diversification.

Quote ="Dally"Here's Boris' take on it: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... itics.html Boris has summed things up well.'" Summed things up well? You mean like this? ... two points, both wrong ... [i"The closer the election gets, the sharper the contrast will be – between a Tory party that has =#0000FFvery largely addressed and rectified an economic disaster, and a Labour Party that had a large share in causing that disaster."[/i What a windbag.

Quote ="Dally"Here's Boris' take on it: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... itics.html Boris has summed things up well.'" Summed things up well? You mean like this? ... two points, both wrong ... [i"The closer the election gets, the sharper the contrast will be – between a Tory party that has =#0000FFvery largely addressed and rectified an economic disaster, and a Labour Party that had a large share in causing that disaster."[/i What a windbag.

I was referring to his take on Clegg (the subject of this thread).

Much as I dislike Clegg ... Boris is a dissembling, verbose, arrogant, low-achiever-in-office and an @rse.
For him to criticise Clegg is to ignore the reflection in the mirror.

It looks unlikely that the tories will gain a working majority in 2015.

Labour might, but probably only if UKIP maintain their current poll ratings. Plenty of fringe parties do well in mid term polls only to disappear at the general election. Take out most of the current UKIP support and Labour's mid term lead in the polls is incredibly fragile.

So unless Nigel Farage and Godfrey Bloom can maintain their current popularity, the Lib Dems will be in the mix in 2015.

These foreign trees coming over here taking good British trees jobs

As I said they both have a primary point of principle behind them. Green - something we should all agree with (although their green policies are flawed) and UKIP - anti-EU and thereby anti-destruction of democracy.

Or, rather, anti-foreigner and thereby .... er ... that's it.

Anyway, back to Clegg ... yesterday they were saying that they can't let the Tories take all the credit for the "economic recovery".


Let's just look at this ... right up to the last election, Clegg was criticising the Tories for an economic plan that would cut too deep and too fast.
This was probably THE most important issue of the day.
THE issue that decided many voters on which way they would vote.

After the election, he promptly did a 180-degree turn on that opinion after a 15 min phone chat with Mervyn King and agreed to support Cameron.
If he can so easily abandon an apparently firmly-held position on such an important issue - just like that - why should anyone (especially those who agreed with his stance before the election and gave him their vote) give him credit for it?

If he had agreed to [uabstain[/u on it, in return for other LibDem aspirations such as constitutional and voting reform, we would have understood ... he had the whip hand (the Tories wouldn't have wanted another election there and then) but hadn't the cojones to use it, he just gave in, ensured the Tory plan would voted through and now he wants credit for capitulation.

Miliband comes in for some stick for not showing leadership and/or judgement but, compared to Clegg, he's a shining beacon.

Being of the slightly leftward persuasion myself, I had always regarded the Lib Dems as not-bad sorts ... but I cannot include Clegg in that view.
Hence, as long as a Tory such as he is leading the Lib Dems, they won't get my vote.

Quote ="Chris28"They're an utter irrelevance right now. Not a chance of having any say in 2015. They may as well start making up Monster Raving Loony policies for all the likelihood of any of them happening.'" OY! I've voted MRLP for a few elections now. Only they have proper policies, and you could really on them to carry thse out of elected. www.loonyparty.com/about/policy-proposals/ For example, Quote We will instruct the RSPCA to ensure that all meerkats come in twos to enable the public to effectively compare the meerkat.'" Can't understand why we failed to win Barking.

Quote ="Chris28"They're an utter irrelevance right now. Not a chance of having any say in 2015. They may as well start making up Monster Raving Loony policies for all the likelihood of any of them happening.'" OY! I've voted MRLP for a few elections now. Only they have proper policies, and you could really on them to carry thse out of elected. www.loonyparty.com/about/policy-proposals/ For example, Quote We will instruct the RSPCA to ensure that all meerkats come in twos to enable the public to effectively compare the meerkat.'" Can't understand why we failed to win Barking.

I'm thinking of starting a Vacillation, Ignorance and Total Capitulation Party.
The Manifesto will be comprised of iron-clad, red-line, unshakeable promises (for broader appeal and to save time these won't be written down and will be invented on the doorstep for whatever the voter fancies at the time).
These will, of course, be gaily jettisoned after the election in favour of meaningless ministerial titles all round.

Vince Cable will be the first to join.
Although he is capable of changing his mind three times in the same sentence, it's been a while since he actually changed parties, so it's due.
That's the Vacillation bit sorted.
Cleggster will handle the Total Capitulation brief and the other two or three members can be responsible for Ignorance, appearances on Question Time and claiming expenses.


[uSTOP PRESS[/u
Vince has changed his mind, he won't be joining.
Oh, hang on, ...

If we dig Cyril up he can be the Minister for child welfare.
Experience is key in such matters.

Quote ="Ferocious Aardvark"OY! I've voted MRLP for a few elections now. Only they have proper policies, and you could really on them to carry thse out of elected. www.loonyparty.com/about/policy-proposals/ For example, Can't understand why we failed to win Barking.'" Now that's something I could vote for

Quote ="Ferocious Aardvark"OY! I've voted MRLP for a few elections now. Only they have proper policies, and you could really on them to carry thse out of elected. www.loonyparty.com/about/policy-proposals/ For example, Can't understand why we failed to win Barking.'" Now that's something I could vote for

From Nick Clegg's lips yesterday (have you heard this anywhere before ?) ...

[i"We will go into the next election in favour of more fair taxes and will not follow George Osborne's plan, since it makes further savings only out of spending cuts ... of course we are not going to do that, that's not Liberal Democrat. It won't happen on my watch.".[/i

and, in a party email ...

[i"In these difficult times, it is important that everyone makes their contribution. It is right that we ask the broadest shoulders to bear their fair share: it is unrealistic to cut more money from welfare spending without increasing taxes on Britain's richest".[/i

However, that email was mistakenly sent to the press as well and Cable dissed it as having "[ino official status whatsoever, <etc etc>. Our platform is essentially about cutting income tax for those on low incomes and the mansion tax". [/i

Cleggster then defeated a motion seeking to reinstate the 50p tax rate.

So, that's it ... a mansion tax and no more cuts.

Keeping the reneging list a bit shorter this time it seems.

But are the rich those earning more than £50,000 or not and will the mansion tax apply to them and, if so, how?

If the rich can't afford the mansion tax then they should give up fags & booze, flog the widesceen TV and simply learn to live within their means. After all it's that simple for the millions worse off