The United Kingdom Elections 2010

[InsaneApache]

Better to use riflemen for nasty work like that, the Guards don't like to get blood on their pretty uniforms.

No. You're right. McRuin isn't able stand up to the Brownies, therefore step up a notch and send the cubs in. Woggle firmly in hand!

[a completely inoffensive name]

Ok, after thinking about it for a quite I've determined that at this point I am happy with either outcome (lib/lab or lib/con) because if:

A. lib/lab happens, the voting reforms have a good chance to move through which makes the US one of the very, very few developed countries to use FPTP and it provides a more solid basis on making some changes here which I desperately want.

B. lib/con happens, voting reforms might not happen since cons dont want to kill their strength under current system but after looking at this with a clear head it seems that the tories are what the UK needs right now in terms of fiscal spending and I will be happy that the UK will not fall into the same pit that greece has fallen under. Also, if the tories mange to get the deficit and massive debt under control then it serves as a good example in America to promote a more active government, and proves it can be run responsibly and economically sound and that systems such as a national health care system can be implemented with government not imploding under debt pressure or mismanagement. Overall, the UK can serve as the US liberals example of an involved government that runs properly and in the best interest of the people. That is of course if the Tories do their job right and doesnt resort to going all Margaret Thatcher everywhere to kill the debt.

Overall, A is a sure thing while B is more uncertain but B is a lot better then A since I put the well being and financial security of UK and its citizens over my ideological goals and ambitions and hopes.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ok, after thinking about it for a quite I've determined that at this point I am happy with either outcome (lib/lab or lib/con) because if:

A. lib/lab happens, the voting reforms have a good chance to move through which makes the US one of the very, very few developed countries to use FPTP and it provides a more solid basis on making some changes here which I desperately want.

B. lib/con happens, voting reforms might not happen since cons dont want to kill their strength under current system but after looking at this with a clear head it seems that the tories are what the UK needs right now in terms of fiscal spending and I will be happy that the UK will not fall into the same pit that greece has fallen under. Also, if the tories mange to get the deficit and massive debt under control then it serves as a good example in America to promote a more active government, and proves it can be run responsibly and economically sound and that systems such as a national health care system can be implemented with government not imploding under debt pressure or mismanagement. Overall, the UK can serve as the US liberals example of an involved government that runs properly and in the best interest of the people. That is of course if the Tories do their job right and doesnt resort to going all Margaret Thatcher everywhere to kill the debt.

Overall, A is a sure thing while B is more uncertain but B is a lot better then A since I put the well being and financial security of UK and its citizens over my ideological goals and ambitions and hopes.

Electoral reform is not relevant right now, it won't help the country.

Defecit first, please.

[tibilicus]

If I was Cameron I would offer Clegg the "National Government solution" I mentioned earlier. Agree to a referendum on the electoral system but advocate STV rather than PR, on the agreement that the Tory party is allowed to campaign against electoral change. As mentioned above by PVC though, this really shouldn't be a priority. If we suffer a run on the pound we're effectively done for. How about we sort out our effective bankruptcy and then talk about electoral reform?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

If I was Cameron I would offer Clegg the "National Government solution" I mentioned earlier. Agree to a referendum on the electoral system but advocate STV rather than PR, on the agreement that the Tory party is allowed to campaign against electoral change. As mentioned above by PVC though, this really shouldn't be a priority. If we suffer a run on the pound we're effectively done for. How about we sort out our effective bankruptcy and then talk about electoral reform?

Quite, that's why I think Cameron is actually right about a cross-part committe. That's a big step forward, for a Conservative leader to say that. The Lib-Dems would benefit from equal-sized constituancies as well as the Conservatives, they would get maybe another 5 seats out of that just on Thursday's results.

[Beskar]

Being honest, David Cameron should accept a referendum as the end of the day, it might not even pass with the voters. Make it for like 2 years-ish in the next ward elections/european elections or whatever. In return, Cameron gets to pretty much do everything as if gets a majority.

If Cons do these key issues, I'll tolerant and accept them in power.

Alternatively, if they don't, I can accept a Lab-Libdem coalition not under Brown.

STV is a very big issue, everyone I know of has commented on it being a needed change. The thing is, STV pretty much removes tactical first voting. This will give people more opportunity to vote for the parties they actually want, instead of constantly voting either Conservative or Labour to counter the other.


edit: On another note, I know from experience that the majority of people don't vote local. One of the Labour MP's in the North West is utter and he keeps getting re-elected. Gordon Marsden, for Blackpool South. He doesn't even live or bother with Blackpool. He lives in Brighton, known for frequenting the gaybars there, with numerous scandels and stories. Only time he comes up to Blackpool is when he tries to hijack some one elses PR stunt for personal gain.

[Subotan]

Furunculus dislikes the Liberal Democrats; I must agree with them

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Being honest, David Cameron should accept a referendum as the end of the day, it might not even pass with the voters. Make it for like 2 years-ish in the next ward elections/european elections or whatever. In return, Cameron gets to pretty much do everything as if gets a majority.

If Cons do these key issues, I'll tolerant and accept them in power.

Alternatively, if they don't, I can accept a Lab-Libdem coalition not under Brown.

STV is a very big issue, everyone I know of has commented on it being a needed change. The thing is, STV pretty much removes tactical first voting. This will give people more opportunity to vote for the parties they actually want, instead of constantly voting either Conservative or Labour to counter the other.

I actually agree that we need electoral reform, I'm not entirely sold on STV, I think it depends how it is implemented. You must agree, surely, that we also need (as Mr Cameron said yesterday) that we need to make sure constituancies are all the same size.

However, if Clegg wants to act "in the National Interest" then PR/STV should not be deal breakers for him. Britain might benefit from electoral reform but it [i]needs/i] stable government now. The markets re-open on Monday, so Clegg needs to do the deal tomorrow if he wants any respect from me.

If in ayear Clegg decides Cameron is stringing him along on electoral reform he can have one of his members bring a Private Bill on changing the voting system, and push it through with Labour. Then he can topple Cameron and trigger an election.

HOWEVER, these are things for the future.