Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Centrists: Why not the Lib Dems? Watch

Announcements
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Because not all centerists are liberals
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I

    It was for country, rather than for party. It was patriotic in that sense. If the economy wasn't at risk, the Lib Dems would have either got a better deal or not gone into Government.

    Labour borrowed huge swathes of money that left us vulnerable. Admittedly, it's not Labour's fault the economy crashed in itself. But there are a lot of things Labour could and should have done differently at the time (for example, Gordon Brown selling off loads of Gold at ridiculously low prices).

    It was because he wanted power and would have gone into any coalition. Again, I don't blame him for wanting power but it wasn't out of any patriotism. The link is incredibly tenuous. It assumes that anyone who wouldn't have done it was not patriotic, like Charles Kennedy. It was nothing to do with patriotism.

    Labour's borrowing did not leave us vulnerable. Interest rates were very low, they were absolutely right to borrow and build hundreds of new hospitals, schools and public infrastructure projects.

    The Lib Dems who were the party of Keynes, helped turn borrowing and governments spending into dirty words so that anyone now who wants a government spending programme is seen as reckless and economically illiterate

    Yes Labour made mistakes, the selling of gold being one but again that had nothing to do with the economic crash.
    Clegg's rhetoric could have been more reasonably 'Under Labour we had ten years of growth, but they made some bad mistakes also'
    Instead it was 'Labour are reckless and economically illiterate and we can never trust them with the economy ever again' etc.

    The Tories managed to convince the nation that Labour's spending caused the financial crash (even though they voted for it) and the mist disappointing thing about the Lib Dems was that they went along with it.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    Rubbish. The Tories would have formed a minority government and negotiated each piece of legislation with Labour/the Lib Dems to get it through. That would have been better for the country than the awful coalition.
    A minority government at that time would have had bigger consequences than another GE. And it would just look like the Tories were grabbing power on behalf of themselves and not the country.

    Giving support on essentially a case-by-case basis is the most unstable government you could possibly have and you might as well have a GE because it will almost certainly end with one quickly. (*cough 1974*)
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Lib dems are the new Labour - I don't think they are centrist after 2015 GE. And their membership is only rising because of their 2nd referendum policy after the EU referendum, which is seeing an influx in (presumably) young people who voted to remain, join the party because they find the referendum result unfair - which is erroneous.

    Lib dems have also gained seats from Labour... Interesting to see how 2020 goes for Labour and if there will be a new opposition. It's split between UKIP and the Lib dems I say.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    They lost rust and were daves fall guys from last elections. Clegg did them a lot of damage as well as it looked like he was a whimp and they toadied up when in coalition. They arent a neutral choice now and are stained with having been in power.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestg)
    A minority government at that time would have had bigger consequences than another GE. And it would just look like the Tories were grabbing power on behalf of themselves and not the country.

    Giving support on essentially a case-by-case basis is the most unstable government you could possibly have and you might as well have a GE because it will almost certainly end with one quickly. (*cough 1974*)
    Saying that the country would fall apart without a majority government is somewhat of a self-fulfiling prophecy. People say it doesn't work because people say it doesn't work.

    There is no reason why we can't have a minority government negotiating with other parties, which would mean far more people got some policies that they actually wanted.

    It's worked in other countries. No reason why it cannot here.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hazzer1998)
    Because not all centerists are liberals
    Name an illiberal centrist MP (or Journo) so I have some baseline from where you're coming.

    (Original post by 999tigger)
    They lost rust and were daves fall guys from last elections. Clegg did them a lot of damage as well as it looked like he was a whimp and they toadied up when in coalition. They arent a neutral choice now and are stained with having been in power.
    So who would you vote for then? Unless you live in Scotland and have the SNP there is no other party close to what the lib dems are offering. Of course you could not vote at all!
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Saying that the country would fall apart without a majority government is somewhat of a self-fulfiling prophecy. People say it doesn't work because people say it doesn't work.

    There is no reason why we can't have a minority government negotiating with other parties, which would mean far more people got some policies that they actually wanted.

    It's worked in other countries. No reason why it cannot here.
    It's worked in other countries because there's greater consensus and they want to avoid ineffective government from previous 'mishaps' - Weimar Germany, Liberal Italy, Second Spanish Republic etc.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by skeptical_john)
    Name an illiberal centrist MP (or Journo) so I have some baseline from where you're coming.



    So who would you vote for then? Unless you live in Scotland and have the SNP there is no other party close to what the lib dems are offering. Of course you could not vote at all!
    People voted single issue or the worst out of a bad bunch or as you say chose not to vote at all.
    Tactical voting is nothing new.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestg)
    It's worked in other countries because there's greater consensus and they want to avoid ineffective government from previous 'mishaps' - Weimar Germany, Liberal Italy, Second Spanish Republic etc.
    we put too much emphasis on 'strong governments' rather than collaborative ones*
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    Lib dems are the new Labour - I don't think they are centrist after 2015 GE. And their membership is only rising because of their 2nd referendum policy after the EU referendum, which is seeing an influx in (presumably) young people who voted to remain, join the party because they find the referendum result unfair - which is erroneous.

    Lib dems have also gained seats from Labour... Interesting to see how 2020 goes for Labour and if there will be a new opposition. It's split between UKIP and the Lib dems I say.
    One thing to note, our policy isn't a second in-out referendum. It's a referendum on the exit terms, so the public vote on the deal we get.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    One thing to note, our policy isn't a second in-out referendum. It's a referendum on the exit terms, so the public vote on the deal we get.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    May not have read news articles properly... but the titles are inferring a second referendum on staying in the EU, it's quite misleading but that's the media!

    I still don't agree with that. Imagine the process of a 2nd referendum for every deal? It would take far too long and we probably won't get anywhere.

    If any deal needs to be decided on, it should be put forward to parliament and available to the public to see. There is no need for another referendum again - which could also maybe create other problems too.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Who?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by skeptical_john)
    The Tories have turned right and the hard left have talked themselves into obscurity

    For those who consider themselves centre and liberal there is not much to cheer about in politics at the moment. One party trying to reach out to them - the lib dems - has not gained much in the polls (though they are doing well in by-elections).

    So my question is to those on the centre left/right why not support the lib dems?
    Because when they got a single iota of tenuous power, they backstabbed pretty much their entire voter base and backtracked on the enormous majority of their election promises in exchange for being the tories ***** for five years.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gwilym101)
    Because when they got a single iota of tenuous power, they backstabbed pretty much their entire voter base and backtracked on the enormous majority of their election promises in exchange for being the tories ***** for five years.
    Sorry, backtracked on the enormous majority of their election promises? Like what? Tuition fees, obviously, but what else?

    However, with that single iota of power they supplied an extra £2.5bn to schools in deprived areas through the pupil premium, passed same-sex marriage, lifted over a million people out of income tax and gave many many more millions of people on low incomes a tax cut, they passed the 5p tax on carrier bags which has proven to have reduced wastage by a massive amount and so much more.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Sorry, backtracked on the enormous majority of their election promises? Like what? Tuition fees, obviously, but what else?

    However, with that single iota of power they supplied an extra £2.5bn to schools in deprived areas through the pupil premium, passed same-sex marriage, lifted over a million people out of income tax and gave many many more millions of people on low incomes a tax cut, they passed the 5p tax on carrier bags which has proven to have reduced wastage by a massive amount and so much more.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Voting reform.

    Reforming the house of lords.

    VAT

    Recruiting more police.

    Getting rid of academies.

    Millionaires tax.

    To name but a few policies the lib-dems backtracked on.

    The Pupil Premiums were negated by cuts to schools budgets, wages are down by over a grand negating tax cuts on the poorest. I will grant the 5p bag tax and the same sex marriage, but that's four policies they claimed to have enacted (two of which were negated completely) vs seven policies (just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are more), that they backtracked on. No one was surprised when the lib-dems got eviscerated in the general election.

    The tories have always dicked people over, but they atleast do it to your face, the lib-dems did it from behind without even the courtesy of a reach around.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gwilym101)
    Voting reform.

    Reforming the house of lords.

    VAT

    Recruiting more police.

    Getting rid of academies.

    Millionaires tax.

    To name but a few policies the lib-dems backtracked on.

    The Pupil Premiums were negated by cuts to schools budgets, wages are down by over a grand negating tax cuts on the poorest. I will grant the 5p bag tax and the same sex marriage, but that's four policies they claimed to have enacted (two of which were negated completely) vs seven policies (just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are more), that they backtracked on. No one was surprised when the lib-dems got eviscerated in the general election.

    The tories have always dicked people over, but they atleast do it to your face, the lib-dems did it from behind without even the courtesy of a reach around.
    Voting reform we got onto the table. Admittedly, it wasn't the reform we wanted but Politics is about compromise. We lost the referendum and the fight continues.

    Reforming the House of Lords actually went through early debates and that sort of thing and was actually shot down by the Tories because we blocked them unfairly cutting funding from trade unions to hamper Labour and we blocked boundary changes. Sorry for standing up for fairness and democracy. Blair pledged major House of Lords reform and all he did was cut the number of hereditary peers.

    VAT we broke, and I'll admit that. But we also gave people a tax cut through the personal allowance increase.

    Can you give me some evidence to suggest we didn't recruit more police?

    Getting rid of academies wasn't and probably still isn't particularly high up on our agenda. All of the stuff we've talked about it as a lot more important and it was a policy the Tories would have been very against.

    Clegg and David Laws tried very very had to push for some form of mansion tax, but George Osbourne wouldn't have it under any circumstances.

    To claim the Lib Dems dicked people over is stupid, when both the Tories and Labour constantly get away with exactly that. The Lib Dems didn't have a majority to do all the things they wanted. They passed all of those policies with only 9% of the seats in the House of Commons. Tony Blair backtracked on loads of things like tuition fees and Lords reform, and he had a majority of over 100 seats!
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Voting reform we got onto the table. Admittedly, it wasn't the reform we wanted but Politics is about compromise. We lost the referendum and the fight continues.

    Reforming the House of Lords actually went through early debates and that sort of thing and was actually shot down by the Tories because we blocked them unfairly cutting funding from trade unions to hamper Labour and we blocked boundary changes. Sorry for standing up for fairness and democracy. Blair pledged major House of Lords reform and all he did was cut the number of hereditary peers.

    VAT we broke, and I'll admit that. But we also gave people a tax cut through the personal allowance increase.

    Can you give me some evidence to suggest we didn't recruit more police?

    Getting rid of academies wasn't and probably still isn't particularly high up on our agenda. All of the stuff we've talked about it as a lot more important and it was a policy the Tories would have been very against.

    Clegg and David Laws tried very very had to push for some form of mansion tax, but George Osbourne wouldn't have it under any circumstances.

    To claim the Lib Dems dicked people over is stupid, when both the Tories and Labour constantly get away with exactly that. The Lib Dems didn't have a majority to do all the things they wanted. They passed all of those policies with only 9% of the seats in the House of Commons. Tony Blair backtracked on loads of things like tuition fees and Lords reform, and he had a majority of over 100 seats!
    *
    What do you see as the main differences between the orange bookers and the likes of Cameron and Osborne?
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    *
    What do you see as the main differences between the orange bookers and the likes of Cameron and Osborne?
    Orange Bookers have a fairly equal balance between Social and Economic liberalism, whilst Osbourne and more so Cameron prioritise Economic Liberalism above Social Liberalism
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    <snip>

    The Tories, towards the centre or not contemplated repealing the human rights act and are in the process of passing the Snooper's charter with the help of the official "opposition".

    amazing how many people in the protest movements have seen the replacement legislation when it isn't even written ...

    but never let facts get i nthe way of a baseless anti Conservative Party slur
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.