?

Log in

No account? Create an account
The PM program - Sex and Sums and a Controlled Dose of Rock and Roll [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Richard Clegg

[ website | Castle Gormenghast ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

The PM program [May. 10th, 2010|02:43 pm]
Richard Clegg
I'm trying to work but I'm mainly just pressing refresh on the BBC website to see if we have a government yet. Well the result could have been worse but not much. A Lib-Conservative pact would look like a total disaster to me with eroded Lib Dem support (how many people are already "never lib dem again" even before this), not much chance of any actual electoral reform and a very small number of LD MPs trying to claim they are "influencing" policy. Also is it really likely that any kind of electoral reform bill would get through given I reckon many tories would defy the party whip on such a matter. In a way the nicest possible result would be a minority Tory government which would quickly turn in on itself as the Tory party typical habit of eating its young in times of stress. What are the rest of you hoping/fearing from this?
link

Comments:
[User Picture]From: steer
2010-05-10 02:56 pm (UTC)
The economy is not a fight the Lib Dems are going to pick with him, as he could just tear into them for threatening recovery,

And they would tear back. The economic debate in the leadership debate was Lab+Lib saying "your cuts are threatening economy" versus tory saying "no your lack of cuts are threatening economy". No clear agreement there.

Things that could generate lots of nasty strikes could be defered a year

Given that Cameron's economic policy was specifically NOT to defer the cuts for a year and he spent a lot of time saying how dangerous and loony Clegg and Brown were for wanting to do that he might find it a hard sell with voters and party I think.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thepaintedone
2010-05-10 03:03 pm (UTC)
Yes, but all those certainties were before the election, the situation is different now and both sides will adapt as they have to. In fact doing so is the very essence of cooperative politics isn't it? If cooperation proves impossible then Cameron can just call another election and take his chances.

Cameron may be many things, most of them I expect probably prompting rude words from most of the readership here, but he is both disciplined and not stupid. I wouldn't bet against him being able to engineer the situation back to a Tory majority.

The other possibillity is a Lab/Lib coalition, but that needs at least two other minority parties to work. That whole setup is inherantly unstable, especially as you'd have the likes of Plaid Cymru or the SNP calling the shots in much the way the Euro rebels did to Major's government. I wouldn't bet on that surviving for any length of time.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: steer
2010-05-10 03:08 pm (UTC)
Curiously I'd have said that the essence of conservative politics is a complete refusal to adapt to changing circumstances. :-)

It will be very hard for Cameron to do what you said and shift his economic policies to those of Labour/Lib Dem without looking very weak. Given the vultures are already circling after his electile dysfunction I think backtracking and taking the economic policies of his opponents having publicly repeatedly declared them disasterous would be a hard volte face to perform.

I wouldn't bet against him being able to engineer the situation back to a Tory majority.

I wouldn't bet on him being Tory leader in six months. The knives are already being sharpened.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thepaintedone
2010-05-10 03:12 pm (UTC)
It's certainly possible, but it depends on how well he comes out of the current stalemate. If he looks to have an angle that could work I would expect them to hold discipline and let it play out. Going into an internal fight right now would be just as disasterous for the Tories as for Labour, but they have less cause to do it to themselves.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: steer
2010-05-10 03:21 pm (UTC)
they have less cause to do it to themselves

Slightly less. Labour went into the election expecting to lose and expecting to oust their leader whatever. Tories went in expecting to win and were guided to what looks to be at best a pyrrhic victory. There's already a big backlash against him leading with that "Big Society" idea (I didn't think it was so dreadful) and apparently tory MPs plotting coups already. There's a widespread belief that his leadership lost it (rather than a more realistic idea that his leadership made them nearly credible but not quite enough and not quite in time).
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thepaintedone
2010-05-10 06:58 pm (UTC)
Funnily enough, while I wouldn't usually want to aly myself with the more reactionary wing of the Tories, I think they might have a point. With the Lib Dems having achieved nothing and Gordon so unpopular, it really was an open goal for the Tories. I think Cameron was a fairly solid, professional looking leader, but he didn't have much of an inspirational air about him. i.e. the kind of thing Blair had. Just a bit more obvious charm and/or charisma and he could have carried it. I wouldn't suggest that they get rid of him now, that would be insane, but once it's all said and done I think the responsibillity will end up at his feet.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: steer
2010-05-11 09:55 am (UTC)
I wouldn't suggest that they get rid of him now, that would be insane

Yes, but lots of prominent tories are suggesting that and yes it is insane.
(Replies frozen) (Parent) (Thread)