The news today...

All is not lost Bruce,  Ed "Wallace" has been getting advice from Russell Brand so what was boring & apathetic, now has Labour turning Monster Raving Loony.

But seriously I agree 100% - this most disappointing, apathetic, lacking any form of political enthusiasm joke of an election that will all end with tears for many/most of us who did not vote for what we will end up with in the days after 7th & I suspect that the whole thing will fall apart pretty quickly.

What bets on an early election & maybe some leader changes

- Dave gets the boot, new leader is either Adam Afriyie or maybe more "excitement" with Boris.

- Ed gets the boot,  Chuka Umunna seems front runner

I did read this morning that Russel was interviewing Wallace  and nearly choked on my croissant.

I do agree that this election has been one of the most pathetic contest I have ever staged and even when we had the likes of the "count" and Alister C spinning their magic wands, it  was a lot more exciting. I am expecting Clarkson to be interviewing Cameron any minute now!

Actually I predict a Lab/SNP coalition or pact or whatever you call it.

I suspect that although Labour may not win a much bigger share of the overall vote they will pick up a lot of the marginals where people vote ABC (Anything But Cameron) as well as UKIP nicking Tory votes.

The one leadership change I would bet my house on is Clegg. He does not look as if he would be too bothered.

Bruce

I would never discard Boris. He may act like a clown sometimes but he seemed quite up for a fight last Sunday on the Andrew Marr program.

Yes, NC does not seem to be bothered  who he shares a bed with and my money is on  another 5 years Cons/Li coalition but, true,  Nicola  could spoil the party(no pun intended) for everyone.

I can see UKIP votes going both ways & they will nick almost as many Labour votes in the north as they will Con votes in the south.

Not sure how a Lab/SNP pact will work,  the SNP leadership is not standing for a seat in Westminster,  so this could be politically very "interesting",  maybe Ed in Salmond's pocket rings true.

With a gaping deficit, both main parties have limited scope for change, and are paranoid about making what the other side will pick up as un-costed promises. I'm fearful for the public services if the Tories return without another party to balance their extremes - as a life long labour supporter the best outcome (other than a labour majority, which won't happen) for me would be labour supported by the Lib-Dems, who will hop into bed with anyone if the price is right. The relatively moderate Cameron is terrified of his own right wing, and if he were to return without a moderating influence, goodness knows what will happen.

Do what I did, leave the country. Clickbait news drivel actually trolling the readers, just to foment lowest-common-denominator 'debate'. Articles written by those with the squeakiest, shrillest opinions. No balance, no objectivity, no 'difficult truths' for the electorate, no nuthin'.

I, however, had the opportunity to vote in our 'departmentale' elections and plumped for the delightfully named Phil Pottey (he lost his deposit)  I have no idea what any of the politicians are on about and I'm happier that way.

Good luck UK! 

Scotland has around 4.3m registered voters, rest of UK c 42m.

If SNP get say 60% of Scottish votes that would give them c2.6m supporters. If UKIP get 14% of the rest of UK they would have c5.9m supporters. SNP would get say 50 MP's and UKIP 2 or 3, reportedly.

How, on that basis, can it be equitable for SNP to call the shots. What a system!!

Originally Posted by wanderer:

Vote for a party that supports electoral reform maybe?

If we have another coalition or similar result I think that the two party system we have had may be seen as permanently broken and electoral or commons reform becomes a live issue.

Coalition did deliver stable government (against many predictions), and probably lead to a slightly more collaborative approach than single party rule. A close result might just do the same again. Maybe that is not so bad.

Bruce

Bruce

57 Lib Dem MPs called the shots in 2010 but where did the 2011 Electoral Referendum get us? Back to square one!

Dave

Both main parties are fighting to gain the centre ground and are terrified of upsetting anyone, which is why there is so little between them.  They take the electorate for fools (some are!) and would I'm sure generate more interest if they spelt it out as it is, rather than trying to outdo each other in snappy headline giveaways and soundbites.  It would be a tragedy for democracy if the SNP with a small portion of the vote was able to prop up a minority government on its own terms. 

I agree 100% with your comments!

First past the post. That's the system the electorate voted for (remember 2011?). We now live with the (potential) consequences. Isn't that how democracy works?

Dave

The news today..... is rightly about Nepal.

Chris

and I, for one, wouldn't disagree. Thank-you for reminding us.

Dave

It would be infinitely worse if UKIP racists had any sway. Better the SNP having an influence than swivel eyed loons. Scotland is part of the UK after all.

Yes, but is the UK part of Scotland?

In 2010 I remember pundits suggesting it was an election to lose. I disagreed. The 2015 is the one to lose.

The next parliament will have to contend with: increased public sector and trade deficits; the culmination of the Eurozone debt crisis; the likely end of the 73 month bull market; and the sudden realisation that it will all have to be paid back!

It's no wonder politicians are being evasive.

Ageing population, obesity epidemic, underfunded schools, housing crisis, NHS on its knees......

and the rich will get richer.

ref: Sunday Times Rich List 2015.

Dave

Exactly my point. It's highly unlikely there will be sufficient funds to meet the commitments made by politicians in these important areas. Households and businesses have leveraged down while governments have increased borrowing to the point where international economic headwinds will be harder and more costly to overcome.

The key point in the UK political cycle was when the Labour Party started going easy on the Conservatives over growth forecasts in the next parliament. They were too optimistic but you don't shout too loudly if it means you end up having to present plans to increase taxes and spending cuts at a greater rate than the governing party. Based on the IFS's own numbers you'd only need a growth rate reduction of 0.25% on the OBR's forecast for Labour's spending cuts and tax rises to eclipse those of the Conservatives. The margin of error on a 2019/20 forecast could easily exceed 1%.

Scotland is part of the UK after all. - Not if the SNP get their way.

It would be infinitely worse if UKIP racists had any sway. - But Ed 'Wallace' Milaband is promising to get a grip of immigration within 100 days of taking power. Does that make him a racist too?

What is weird that Labour wants Uk to stay in the European Common Market and the perception is that the Conservatives want us to come out.  If the Tories lose this election then I think a major part of their downfall is that they want to come out of Europe (and they are no friends of the vulnerable, weak and dispossessed). I am no leanings towards Labour but I do think that the Tory decision over Europe is rather unwise and smells a bit of Etonian arrogance.

I think you are over-simplifying the situation. The Tories (as a whole) don't want to come out of Europe. They have proposed a referendum following re-negotiation of the Treaty.

Anyway, it is the electorate that will decide our future if such a referendum comes about. Cameron knows this. He doesn't want to leave Europe. He is banking on all the main parties persuading their followers to vote to stay within Europe along with (say) about 75% of Tory voters.

Other than UKIP, I can't see any other party trying to drum up support for leaving.

If you don't want the UK to leave Europe, I wouldn't worry. Just make sure you vote in any referendum.