Well, that's the Lib Dems fucked
Nice going, guys. Hound out of office the only one of you anyone knows and likes (bar Lembit Opik, who no one takes seriously), and show yourselves up to be a bunch of infighting, childish morons in the process.
Lib Dems take note for future reference: the reason no one takes you seriously as a political party is not because your leader's a pissartist, it's because you've got a bunch of utterly stupid and often contradictory policies knocking about and not enough MPs to make an impact on anything.
Neither of these are Kennedy's fault - the former is thanks to your overly "democratic" party structure (what's the point of a leader in a direct democracy anyway? He was little more than a spokesman...), the latter due to the current electoral system.
Your next leader's not going to manage any better - in fact, he's almost certain to do a hell of a lot worse in the current climate where both main parties are fighting over a tiny patch of the centre ground with personalities and prettiness. All he/she is likely to manage is to secure Kennedy a place in party history as the fondly-remembered might have been man.
Bye bye, Lib Dems - it was nice knowing you...
17 Comments:
Prediction: the Liberals will tear themselves to peices and will disintegrate before the next general election.
If this is how they deal with disagreements over their leader, then I'm sure issues of policy will be just as nasty.
Cammeron is trying to go for liberal policies all right.
Think the Liberal party circa 1913 - welfare for the poor, sound finances, lots of "compassion" & large, shiny battleships.... Well, 2 out of 3..... :-)
So where do we put our cross on the ballot paper at the next election?
An alternative reading is that with this demonstration of internecine squabbling they've now proved themselves to be a *real* political party who can stand proudly alongside Labour and the Conservatives.
Hm...so we are going to need another box on the ballot papers then.....'None Of The Above'.
I'm not voting Labour because, I can't vote Tory because Cameron is trying to turn it socialist. Lib Dems....forget it. Is there anyone else left?
The reason no one likes the Lib-dims is because they are so pro EU.
Astounding insight as ever there, Robin...
Not exactly a win-win situation for the Lib Dems though - what was supposed to happen when the leader has only recently admitted to alcholism (somewhat different to being a piss-artist), to himself let alone everyone else? It's all very well pointing to him having been stabbed in the back, but how else could this have been handled when he had recently been incapable of doing his job and has got on and fallen off the wagon a couple of times in the last 18 months. Two months dry is not, unfortunately, recovery, yet.
Well Nosemonkey,do you feel the pro EU stance helped the Lib-Dims?
Robin - yes, actually. They did, after all, manage to win the whole of Cornwall, the Highlands of Scotland, plus Aberdeenshire and Gordon - all areas which get a large amount of EU funding but which received wisdom states should be anti-EU due to the impact of the Common Fisheries Policy on local industry. The Lib Dems have helped get the positive EU message across in those areas, and have benefitted electorally from it.
Katherine - a behind closed doors approach would surely have been possible? Kennedy's just had a kid - a stepping down "more time with family" excuse would actually have been plausible with him. As it is, the first time most people get to hear of other leading Lib Dems it's as Brutus figures, forcing out a genial-seeming bloke. Kennedy was never Prime Ministerial material - but then neither are the Lib Dems governmental material, so it didn't matter.
Nosemonkey - that's the whole point, they did try behind closed doors for months on end, and he wouldn't go of his own accord. This goes way back - I only wish they'd acted this resolutely sooner.
Nosemonkey,
Those areas you mentioned have always been their territory,but the Libs were worried at that time of the fishing crises and the EU versus Canada confrontation.They were putting Canadian flags up in Cornwall(I bet not many people put up EU flags volountarily anywhere).
"All areas which got a large amount of EU funding".Well if I was a EUrophile I would be depressed that people have to always be bribed to support the cause.
Valerie - they could surely have kept at him in private for longer? Where was the pressing need for a change? That's what I really don't get about it.
Robin - Your dismissal of Cornwall as an example due to it having "always been their territory" strikes me as rather confused - not least thanks to the thing with the Canadian flags that you mention (largely apocryphal, but based on a certain truth - the Cornwall vs. Spain row is probably a better example for your purposes). If their being pro-EU was such a problem, surely you'd expect parts of the country with a history of anti-EU activism (Cornwall was once UKIP's best hope for a breakthrough) to have the least Lib Dem support?
As for your frankly silly attempt to conflate funding with bribery, you could apply the same flawed logic to any aspect of public spending. (Oooh! The Council's collecting our rubbish! They're bribing us! etc.)
The point I was making - which surely even you cannot have missed - was the simple and fairly obvious one that in areas where the EU can be seen to be having a direct, positive impact (measured in financial terms here purely as it's the easiest to identify), the Lib Dems have done well electorally. And so your initial question is answered - yes, yes I do feel that the Lib Dems' pro-EU stance has helped them. Do pay attention, there's a good chap...
Nosemonkey,
The council isnt bribing if its collecting our waste,its giving a service that our rates pay for.If they collected money to spend in areas where they shouldnt to make people have a more favourable opinion of them,its bribery.If they gave certian classes of people money or services to induce their favour,thats bribery.
I believe the Lib dems lost out overall with their pro EU stance in areas where they could do better but the EU has a negative impact,however slight.
Its funny that the three main political parties dont want the EU to be an issue and try to make the rabid EUrophiles like Ken Clarke take a back seat.
So where is the direct positive impact except in financial terms,of the EU?
So if you understand the difference between public spending and bribery, why the silly attempt to conflate EU spending with bribery?
That little episode - and you pretty much every day through your contributions to the comments section over at Margot Wallstrom's blog, come to that - perfectly illustrate the reason why the main parties want the EU out of mainstream political debate in the UK.
Every time the EU is raised we have people like you crop up determined to find flaws with everything about the bloody thing, making wild generalisations and accusations, and demanding concrete proof of quantifiable benefits as a fall-back the second anyone demonstrates any kind of positive aspect to the thing.
Then, when examples are given the final resort is usually "why couldn't this have been sorted out through x, y or z instead?" - normally involving a hypothetical based around the EU never existing or Britain never having joined, but rarely if ever formulated around an understanding of realpolitik and the practicalities of implementation of such alternatives. Debate when faced with such opponents is impossible, and thusly best avoided.
I sadly also feel the need to point out that, despite your apparent belief, I am no apologist or propagandist for the EU regime.
I also find this kind of "debate" mind-numbingly tedious. It was boring earlier last year when you kept cropping up here, and it's even more boring now. Either challenge specifics of things I've said in my post, explaining yourself to the best of your abilities in the process, or bugger off to hassle some other poor sod. Cheers.
Nosemonkey,
You are a foulmouth,selfimportant,loser.
Thats why you dont go on Margot Wallsrtomms blog
Robin, old thing - I'm a blogger. Of COURSE I'm a foul-mouthed, self-important loser.
That, however, is not the reason I don't bother commenting on Wallstrom's blog.
Post a Comment