UK General Election 2017 Thread

[Muscular-mouse]

First topic message reminder :

Ok guys what are your predictions, how will you be voting and who do you want to win.

[GSC]

Was Tory last time. Less than enthused since May took the reins...

[TRUSSMAN66]

Yes Cameron was far more impressive.

Sun/survey poll...

Con 44
Labour 36..

[Ent]

Yougov breakdown................Pretty much Old vs Young.

Over 65s..Con 65% v 19% Lab.....

18-24s.....Lab 59% v 22% Con.....

Goodnight...

'Twas ever thus. Almost everyone moves to the Right as they get older. Ideals clash with the Real World maybe?

Just good old fashioned greed.

Maybe an element of that, in some people. Too sweeping by far though. Also, many 18-24s don't have the same financial Dogs of War bearing down on them. You know, mortgages, kids, cars, pension etc. That sort of thing. Tends to focus one's mind on money somewhat.

Tax increases generally help those who are struggling for money though, as the cost of the increase in tax is less than the system can help them, particularly with child costs which is one of the most expensive.

Think it's a little unfair to say that 18-24 year olds aren't financially pressured though. I have to pay for rent, a car, Council Tax, food etc. Being able to get a mortgage or even save for a pension are a distant dream for me right now, and whilst they come at a cost, they have long-term benefits unlike renting which is just a great big money pit. Okay, kids are obviously a big saving right now, but there is still a huge amount of financial pressure especially considering the difficulty of getting a job, particularly one that is well paid at the moment. I'm on £17,500 and I'm a graduate, working full-time in a decent job. There is a huge amount of financial pressure on my shoulders, but in my mind, but the Conservatives certainly aren't looking out for me. 

Not to mention that I still see myself as lucky and there a lot of people with less than me and the Conservatives are definitely not looking after them. Their aggressive stance towards disability benefits is disgusting and has blood on it's hands.

Your salary is quite low for a graduate unless you are a first year on a graduate scheme - I'd be looking for another job otherwise.

The contrast in voting patterns depending on age is interesting. The conservatives have 3 policies negatively effecting old people in their manifesto and are generally considered safer hands for the economy and jobs - you would think this would encourage younger voters in their direction and older ones towards labour - I guess old habits die hard.

For anyone who didn't read the IFS piece about the manifestos

However, the IFS said Labour's plans for paying for its proposed expansion in state activity would not work.

Basically Labour's manifesto is complete and utter nonsense - to increase the size of the state we all need to pay and not just the faceless rich and corporations.

With regards the conservatives they restate the impact of austerity and cannot say much more given the lack of costings given, however they speculate it is likely going to follow on from March's budget.

[TRUSSMAN66]

In the spirit of fairness....The IFS trashed the Tory manifesto too..

[Muscular-mouse]

yeh both manifestos got a pounding.

[Ent]

Both parties were criticised for not being honest with the public RE taxation.

The Labour manifesto was felt to be unworkable.

The conservatives was felt to have harsh outcomes of austerity.

Personally I don't feel there is a good choice on offer for the public in this election, sad times indeed.

[GSC]

Labour really need to put a gag order on Diane Abbott. Corbyn builds up momentum then she starts talking again

[Hammersmith harrier]

Corbyn banging on about grass roots football as if it doesn't receive enough money already, concentrate on all the other sports that receive nothing, not quite as populist so he doesn't care.

[Dave.]

Need to see if it becomes a trend but wonderr if we are getting to the stage where either;

Tories make gains in Scotland to keep their majority

or they get propped up by the DUP and UUP.

Some things to note - the 4 SF abstentionists reduce the winning line from 326 to 324, and the Unionists won't be putting Corbyn in Number 10. So for a change in government at the very least, there needs to be a hung parliament where Tories + DUP + UUP < 324.

[GSC]

Think they'll increase it regardless. Corbyns reliant on a hidden vote (probably younger voters as Truss keeps pointing out)

[Ent]

Expect an increased majority, hard to see where Labour will make big inroads. Even if he gets the young vote there are not constituencies where only 18-24 year olds will vote and the EU referendum the young vote was on the losing side.

Not a fan of his but the personal attacks he has suffered from the Conservatives (Patel, IDS, May) in the last few days has been disgraceful.

Big own goal on grass roots funding though.

[Hammersmith harrier]

The latest poll has the Tories back out to a 12 point lead which would equate to a roughly 110 seat majority.

[GSC]

Bookies were calling about 120 maj iirc

[GSC]

Diane Abbott at it again

[Hammersmith harrier]

Finally making sense of the polls now; ComRes and ICM have big leads for the Tories because they're based on a sample demographic of those likely to vote so more weighting towards the older voters.

[navyblueshorts]

Yougov breakdown................Pretty much Old vs Young.

Over 65s..Con 65% v 19% Lab.....

18-24s.....Lab 59% v 22% Con.....

Goodnight...

'Twas ever thus. Almost everyone moves to the Right as they get older. Ideals clash with the Real World maybe?

Just good old fashioned greed.

Maybe an element of that, in some people. Too sweeping by far though. Also, many 18-24s don't have the same financial Dogs of War bearing down on them. You know, mortgages, kids, cars, pension etc. That sort of thing. Tends to focus one's mind on money somewhat.

Tax increases generally help those who are struggling for money though, as the cost of the increase in tax is less than the system can help them, particularly with child costs which is one of the most expensive.

Think it's a little unfair to say that 18-24 year olds aren't financially pressured though. I have to pay for rent, a car, Council Tax, food etc. Being able to get a mortgage or even save for a pension are a distant dream for me right now, and whilst they come at a cost, they have long-term benefits unlike renting which is just a great big money pit. Okay, kids are obviously a big saving right now, but there is still a huge amount of financial pressure especially considering the difficulty of getting a job, particularly one that is well paid at the moment. I'm on £17,500 and I'm a graduate, working full-time in a decent job. There is a huge amount of financial pressure on my shoulders, but in my mind, but the Conservatives certainly aren't looking out for me. 

Not to mention that I still see myself as lucky and there a lot of people with less than me and the Conservatives are definitely not looking after them. Their aggressive stance towards disability benefits is disgusting and has blood on it's hands.

I didn't mean to imply all 18-24s haven't a financial care in the world. I knew it was a sweeping generalisation, but you get the gist of what I was trying, badly maybe, to say. However, it's certainly not just "old fashioned greed", as Pr4wn implied, that means people tend to move to the right of the political spectrum as they get older.

[navyblueshorts]

By election last night in Southend............

Con +4.7 on last time seat was fought..
Lab +4.3 ............
LIb  +2.5............
UKIP -10.00........
Green -2.00........

One look at that tends to suggest Labour and LIbs are squeezing the Greens and a bit of UKIP and the Tories are cleaning most of UKIP..

one thing is for sure....The LIberals remain manifesto isn't hitting the spot..

They can't be trusted that's why. You can't get every one of your mps to make a pledge that they will vote to scrap tuition fees and then 1 month later they all vote to treble the cost of tuition fees.

Yeah, because all the other parties are so trustworthy. The student fees débacle has been massively overplayed, but the LibDems don't seem to be able to address it.

[CaledonianCraig]

By election last night in Southend............

Con +4.7 on last time seat was fought..
Lab +4.3 ............
LIb  +2.5............
UKIP -10.00........
Green -2.00........

One look at that tends to suggest Labour and LIbs are squeezing the Greens and a bit of UKIP and the Tories are cleaning most of UKIP..

one thing is for sure....The LIberals remain manifesto isn't hitting the spot..

They can't be trusted that's why. You can't get every one of your mps to make a pledge that they will vote to scrap tuition fees and then 1 month later they all vote to treble the cost of tuition fees.

Yeah, because all the other parties are so trustworthy. The student fees débacle has been massively overplayed, but the LibDems don't seem to be able to address it.

And all those other parties have NOT and will NOT be in a position to form a government whereas largely Tory and Labour governments have made up the UK government for 300+ years so surely to high heavens more should be expected of them? But knowing how people's minds work - perhaps not.

[navyblueshorts]

By election last night in Southend............

Con +4.7 on last time seat was fought..
Lab +4.3 ............
LIb  +2.5............
UKIP -10.00........
Green -2.00........

One look at that tends to suggest Labour and LIbs are squeezing the Greens and a bit of UKIP and the Tories are cleaning most of UKIP..

one thing is for sure....The LIberals remain manifesto isn't hitting the spot..

They can't be trusted that's why. You can't get every one of your mps to make a pledge that they will vote to scrap tuition fees and then 1 month later they all vote to treble the cost of tuition fees.

Yeah, because all the other parties are so trustworthy. The student fees débacle has been massively overplayed, but the LibDems don't seem to be able to address it.

And all those other parties have NOT and will NOT be in a position to form a government whereas largely Tory and Labour governments have made up the UK government for 300+ years so surely to high heavens more should be expected of them? But knowing how people's minds work - perhaps not.

Rubbish. I expect them all to be honest. You should also go and read a bit about the history of the U.K. as I think you'll find Labour were pretty much non-existent as a serious force prior to the early 1900s .

[CaledonianCraig]

Pray tell how many governments in 300 years have been formed by a government other than Labour or Tory? Sure the Liberals were a prominent party but have not been for best part of a century.  And if they are being dishonest then they shouldn't be voted for but it just shows how pathetic the voting options are that a dishonest party will form the next government.

[Pr4wn]

Using that logic, no Scots should vote for the SNP in the Westminster elections, then.

[Hammersmith harrier]

The SNP are exempt from criticism because they want independence.

[CaledonianCraig]

Using that logic, no Scots should vote for the SNP in the Westminster elections, then.

Don't see the IFS pulling apart the SNP on its manifesto budget - only the Tories and Labour. 

[CaledonianCraig]

So still waiting for the answer.

Posters here are claiming Scots don't want another referendum and that the SNP are doing rubbish governing Scotland but yet they look sure to win three quarters of the seats in Scotland. 

Take your pick either it shows Scots do want another referendum or if that is not the reason then Scots are happy with the job the SNP are doing in government. Or perhaps Scots feel they're interests are better protected by voting SNP.

[Pr4wn]

Using that logic, no Scots should vote for the SNP in the Westminster elections, then.

Don't see the IFS pulling apart the SNP on its manifesto budget - only the Tories and Labour. 

So?

Re-read your post, have a little think, then say something that actually responds to what I wrote. By the logic you used, people should only vote Tory or Labour.

[Hammersmith harrier]

I don't see the SNP having to come up with a budget for 60 million people whilst having one eye on Brexit.

[Muscular-mouse]

By election last night in Southend............

Con +4.7 on last time seat was fought..
Lab +4.3 ............
LIb  +2.5............
UKIP -10.00........
Green -2.00........

One look at that tends to suggest Labour and LIbs are squeezing the Greens and a bit of UKIP and the Tories are cleaning most of UKIP..

one thing is for sure....The LIberals remain manifesto isn't hitting the spot..

They can't be trusted that's why. You can't get every one of your mps to make a pledge that they will vote to scrap tuition fees and then 1 month later they all vote to treble the cost of tuition fees.

Yeah, because all the other parties are so trustworthy. The student fees débacle has been massively overplayed, but the LibDems don't seem to be able to address it.

No it hasn't been overplayed, you can't make a massive promise that you will scrap tuition fees and keep making that promise for 6 years and then the moment you get any power you scrap that promise and treble the fees. and the lib dems rightly lost about 45 mps because of their lies.

I would also add the lib dems did other things in the time they were in power that went against their promises such as increasing VAT, reducing the top rate of income tax for the super rich, creating the bedroom tax, scrapping EMA and reducing council tax benefits.

[Hammersmith harrier]

The Liberal Democrats might have been in a coalition with the Conservatives but they had next to no power to do anything and their role in the things you mentioned is massively overplayed.

[Muscular-mouse]

The Liberal Democrats might have been in a coalition with the Conservatives but they had next to no power to do anything and their role in the things you mentioned is massively overplayed.

They voted in favour of the legislation, without their votes the laws would not have been passed.

[Hammersmith harrier]

The Liberal Democrats might have been in a coalition with the Conservatives but they had next to no power to do anything and their role in the things you mentioned is massively overplayed.

They voted in favour of the legislation, without their votes the laws would not have been passed.

I very much doubt they were given much choice in that, vote for it or lose your cabinet position.

[GSC]

In return they got a vote changing how governments are elected among other things I assume.

This is how often how negotiations go, you have to compromise sometimes.

[navyblueshorts]

By election last night in Southend............

Con +4.7 on last time seat was fought..
Lab +4.3 ............
LIb  +2.5............
UKIP -10.00........
Green -2.00........

One look at that tends to suggest Labour and LIbs are squeezing the Greens and a bit of UKIP and the Tories are cleaning most of UKIP..

one thing is for sure....The LIberals remain manifesto isn't hitting the spot..

They can't be trusted that's why. You can't get every one of your mps to make a pledge that they will vote to scrap tuition fees and then 1 month later they all vote to treble the cost of tuition fees.

Yeah, because all the other parties are so trustworthy. The student fees débacle has been massively overplayed, but the LibDems don't seem to be able to address it.

No it hasn't been overplayed, you can't make a massive promise that you will scrap tuition fees and keep making that promise for 6 years and then the moment you get any power you scrap that promise and treble the fees. and the lib dems rightly lost about 45 mps because of their lies.

I would also add the lib dems did other things in the time they were in power that went against their promises such as increasing VAT, reducing the top rate of income tax for the super rich, creating the bedroom tax, scrapping EMA and reducing council tax benefits.

Sorry. It's been overplayed. It's no more, no less, than the baloney other parties come out with. Somehow, the Tories get off scot free even though they were the majority party in that coalition. Pathetic.

[Muscular-mouse]

The Liberal Democrats might have been in a coalition with the Conservatives but they had next to no power to do anything and their role in the things you mentioned is massively overplayed.

They voted in favour of the legislation, without their votes the laws would not have been passed.

I very much doubt they were given much choice in that, vote for it or lose your cabinet position.

the lib dems had as much power as they wanted, without the lib dems their would not be a majority government.

Not sure the point you are making about lose your cabinet position

[Muscular-mouse]

By election last night in Southend............

Con +4.7 on last time seat was fought..
Lab +4.3 ............
LIb  +2.5............
UKIP -10.00........
Green -2.00........

One look at that tends to suggest Labour and LIbs are squeezing the Greens and a bit of UKIP and the Tories are cleaning most of UKIP..

one thing is for sure....The LIberals remain manifesto isn't hitting the spot..

They can't be trusted that's why. You can't get every one of your mps to make a pledge that they will vote to scrap tuition fees and then 1 month later they all vote to treble the cost of tuition fees.

Yeah, because all the other parties are so trustworthy. The student fees débacle has been massively overplayed, but the LibDems don't seem to be able to address it.

No it hasn't been overplayed, you can't make a massive promise that you will scrap tuition fees and keep making that promise for 6 years and then the moment you get any power you scrap that promise and treble the fees. and the lib dems rightly lost about 45 mps because of their lies.

I would also add the lib dems did other things in the time they were in power that went against their promises such as increasing VAT, reducing the top rate of income tax for the super rich, creating the bedroom tax, scrapping EMA and reducing council tax benefits.

Sorry. It's been overplayed. It's no more, no less, than the baloney other parties come out with. Somehow, the Tories get off scot free even though they were the majority party in that coalition. Pathetic.

The conservatives never broke their main promise unlike the lib dems

[Muscular-mouse]

In return they got a vote changing how governments are elected among other things I assume.

This is how often how negotiations go, you have to compromise sometimes.

Exactly, they sold off their soul in exchange for a referendum on getting rid of first past the post. If they had any backbone and any credibility they would have refused the offer of getting the referendum on proportunality and stick to their main election promise for the past 2 elections of voting aganst tuition fee increases

[Hammersmith harrier]

The Liberal Democrats might have been in a coalition with the Conservatives but they had next to no power to do anything and their role in the things you mentioned is massively overplayed.

They voted in favour of the legislation, without their votes the laws would not have been passed.

I very much doubt they were given much choice in that, vote for it or lose your cabinet position.

the lib dems had as much power as they wanted, without the lib dems their would not be a majority government.

Not sure the point you are making about lose your cabinet position

They had very little power and it's a bit foolish to think they did to be honest.

It will have been made clear to Nick Clegg not to vote down certain legislation or cabinet positions will change and there will be no compromise on other issues.

[Muscular-mouse]

The Liberal Democrats might have been in a coalition with the Conservatives but they had next to no power to do anything and their role in the things you mentioned is massively overplayed.

They voted in favour of the legislation, without their votes the laws would not have been passed.

I very much doubt they were given much choice in that, vote for it or lose your cabinet position.

the lib dems had as much power as they wanted, without the lib dems their would not be a majority government.

Not sure the point you are making about lose your cabinet position

They had very little power and it's a bit foolish to think they did to be honest.

It will have been made clear to Nick Clegg not to vote down certain legislation or cabinet positions will change and there will be no compromise on other issues.

They had all the power because without their votes the tories couldn't get any legislation through parliament as they did NOT have a majority.

And who would have made that clear to nick clegg? the conservatives? that makes no sense because if nick clegg puled the plug it would mean the end of the conservative government too as they never had a majority.

And the lib dems had x amount of cabinet positions based on the number of mps they had, its the lib dems who chose who filled those positions and not the tories. the tories could not dictate anything to the lib dems because as said previously the lib dems held the balance of power. I would also add the majority of lib dem mps wer enot in cabinet, about 50 of them were just back benchers yet they still went against their main promise. untrustworthy.

[GSC]

In return they got a vote changing how governments are elected among other things I assume.

This is how often how negotiations go, you have to compromise sometimes.

Exactly, they sold off their soul in exchange for a referendum on getting rid of first past the post. If they had any backbone and any credibility they would have refused the offer of getting the referendum on proportunality and stick to their main election promise for the past 2 elections of voting aganst tuition fee increases

In the real world would you rather get something you want or nothing

[CaledonianCraig]

Using that logic, no Scots should vote for the SNP in the Westminster elections, then.

Don't see the IFS pulling apart the SNP on its manifesto budget - only the Tories and Labour. 

So?

Re-read your post, have a little think, then say something that actually responds to what I wrote. By the logic you used, people should only vote Tory or Labour.

No as I don't see any SNP government having ruled in Westminster which is the discussion point here. 

Still awaiting an answer to why the SNP will garner three quarters of the seats in Scotland.

[GSC]

Probably because Labour are a train wreck and pro union voters have a choice between voting for the Tories or a party that supports independence.

Can I have an answer as to why the SNP are going to lose seats and votes to said Tories since they lost the last Indy ref and why that doesn't mean an Independence referendum isn't a goer.

[CaledonianCraig]

GSC it is common knowledge that Tories are organising the unionist vote impelling them to vote tactically against the SNP. All the pamphlets are full of that talk. So in constituencies where unionist voters are most prevalent and when they vote tactically it eels out a few seats to the unionist party.

[GSC]

So the SNP are losing seats to a unionist party compared to the last election where they lost a vote to unionist voters, yet another vote is a goer?

[Pr4wn]

Using that logic, no Scots should vote for the SNP in the Westminster elections, then.

Don't see the IFS pulling apart the SNP on its manifesto budget - only the Tories and Labour. 

So?

Re-read your post, have a little think, then say something that actually responds to what I wrote. By the logic you used, people should only vote Tory or Labour.

No as I don't see any SNP government having ruled in Westminster which is the discussion point here. 

Still awaiting an answer to why the SNP will garner three quarters of the seats in Scotland.

[Muscular-mouse]

In return they got a vote changing how governments are elected among other things I assume.

This is how often how negotiations go, you have to compromise sometimes.

Exactly, they sold off their soul in exchange for a referendum on getting rid of first past the post. If they had any backbone and any credibility they would have refused the offer of getting the referendum on proportunality and stick to their main election promise for the past 2 elections of voting aganst tuition fee increases

In the real world would you rather get something you want or nothing

Well they could have not voted for trebling tuition fees and then they would have got something that they wanted which was to not have tuition fees increased.

You cant spend 6 years campaigning against tuition fees and then 3 months after getting into power vote in favour of trebling them. Of course the public will never back lib dems again after that massive lie.

it would be the equivalent of labour who have spent the past year campaigning for an increase in minimum wage to then get in power and reduce minimum wage. It was political suicide and the lib dems have lost 50 mps and scores of European mps and local councillors because of that lie.

[navyblueshorts]

Using that logic, no Scots should vote for the SNP in the Westminster elections, then.

Don't see the IFS pulling apart the SNP on its manifesto budget - only the Tories and Labour. 

So?

Re-read your post, have a little think, then say something that actually responds to what I wrote. By the logic you used, people should only vote Tory or Labour.

No as I don't see any SNP government having ruled in Westminster which is the discussion point here. 

Still awaiting an answer to why the SNP will garner three quarters of the seats in Scotland.

One may well ask. Damned if I know:

On Thursday the people of Scotland will vote in elections for a new parliament at Holyrood. Few doubt that the outcome will see anything other than the triumphant return of the Scottish National party to power. Last May, the SNP’s landslide in the UK general election — securing 56 out of the 59 seats contested — illustrated its near total dominance of the political landscape north of the border. The latest opinion polls suggest Nicola Sturgeon’s party will romp home again.

Scotland’s first minister is one of the most accomplished performers in British politics, rarely putting a foot wrong in her media appearances. But given the SNP’s poor performance in government, it is puzzling that so many Scots still place their faith in her party.

The SNP’s record over the past nine years, first as a minority government and then in majority control, has been very weak. Scotland’s economy now underperforms the UK. In recent years, Scotland’s economic growth has generally lagged behind the rest of the UK, with GDP rising by only 0.2 per cent in the final quarter of 2015. Unemployment north of the border has risen to 6.2 per cent compared to 5.1 per cent across the UK as a whole.

The SNP’s stewardship of public services is also open to criticism. The party has cast itself as the defender of the National Health Service, but has not increased health spending by anything like as much as in England. On education, the most recent OECD figures show that the performance of Scottish children in reading and maths has worsened since 2003. The SNP’s centralisation of the eight regional constabularies to form Police Scotland has led to allegations of heavy handed policing across the country.

The SNP enjoys strong support in large part because identity politics have become the defining currency of discourse in Scotland. The governing party has eclipsed the once mighty Scottish Labour movement, stealing many of its left-leaning policies while also rejecting Labour’s commitment to unionism. The Scottish Conservatives, under their impressive young leader Ruth Davidson, are rising in the polls and may even come second this week. But on 20 per cent of the vote, the Scottish Tories are still a long way from challenging for government.

Despite the Scottish public voting firmly to remain part of the UK in 2014, the nationalist genie has not yet been put back in the bottle. Should Britain vote to leave the EU next month, Ms Sturgeon might press for a second independence referendum. But if the UK remains in the bloc, she will find it harder to keep the flame alive. The Scots should then start asking themselves what purpose a vote for the SNP actually serves.

The Edinburgh government now has a significant degree of fiscal autonomy, granted by a Conservative government in London that seems happy to give tacit support to the SNP bandwagon for its own cynical reasons. Ms Sturgeon has the right to raise taxation in order to fund the pledges she has made on free university tuition, free prescriptions and free care for the elderly. Yet the first minister seems reluctant to make any such move and has even indicated that she may lower some business taxes.

The SNP has thrived by defining itself as the only opposition to distant government from London. But as Scotland’s fiscal autonomy grows that will become a harder claim to make. The only card Ms Sturgeon has left to play is the weakness of the Conservative and Labour opposition. If a true leader can emerge from their ranks, then this week’s election might go down as the moment the SNP peaked.

[CaledonianCraig]

So the SNP are losing seats to a unionist party compared to the last election where they lost a vote to unionist voters, yet another vote is a goer?

What part of the answer did you not understand?

The Tories are begging for unionist voters to unite behind them to vote against the SNP - in short. They are giving no indication whatsoever of what their policies or selling points are but banging out the message for unionists to vote for them. Understand? Now in some constituencies if enough Tory and Labour voters heed the call then it could win a few seats in areas where unionist voters are of a high enough number. That is your reason right there. Surely to high heavens IF the SNP have governed so badly as this forum likes to portray there would be a far bigger collapse than a few seats? Especially, considering how long the SNP have governed.

[navyblueshorts]

In return they got a vote changing how governments are elected among other things I assume.

This is how often how negotiations go, you have to compromise sometimes.

Exactly, they sold off their soul in exchange for a referendum on getting rid of first past the post. If they had any backbone and any credibility they would have refused the offer of getting the referendum on proportunality and stick to their main election promise for the past 2 elections of voting aganst tuition fee increases

In the real world would you rather get something you want or nothing

Well they could have not voted for trebling tuition fees and then they would have got something that they wanted which was to not have tuition fees increased.

You cant spend 6 years campaigning against tuition fees and then 3 months after getting into power vote in favour of trebling them. Of course the public will never back lib dems again after that massive lie.

it would be the equivalent  of labour who have spent the past year campaigning for an increase in minimum wage to then get in power and reduce minimum wage. It was political suicide and the lib dems have lost 50 mps and scores of European mps and local councillors because of that lie.

More fool them then. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. People voted Labour back in after Bliar/Iraq. People voted the Tories in after the Poll Tax. Etc etc.

[navyblueshorts]

Here you go Craig; more examples of SNP excellence:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/azeem-ibrahim/snps-record-in-government_b_7628716.html

Still, why let reality get in the way of a good yarn eh?

[GSC]

So the SNP are losing seats to a unionist party compared to the last election where they lost a vote to unionist voters, yet another vote is a goer?

What part of the answer did you not understand?

The Tories are begging for unionist voters to unite behind them to vote against the SNP - in short. They are giving no indication whatsoever of what their policies or selling points are but banging out the message for unionists to vote for them. Understand? Now in some constituencies if enough Tory and Labour voters heed the call then it could win a few seats in areas where unionist voters are of a high enough number. That is your reason right there. Surely to high heavens IF the SNP have governed so badly as this forum likes to portray there would be a far bigger collapse than a few seats? Especially, considering how long the SNP have governed.

I'm making a simple comparison Craig.

Support for the SNP is lower than at a point when they lost a Indy ref, supposedly down to a stronger unionist vote. Yet an Indy ref is a goer?

[Muscular-mouse]

In return they got a vote changing how governments are elected among other things I assume.

This is how often how negotiations go, you have to compromise sometimes.

Exactly, they sold off their soul in exchange for a referendum on getting rid of first past the post. If they had any backbone and any credibility they would have refused the offer of getting the referendum on proportunality and stick to their main election promise for the past 2 elections of voting aganst tuition fee increases

In the real world would you rather get something you want or nothing

Well they could have not voted for trebling tuition fees and then they would have got something that they wanted which was to not have tuition fees increased.

You cant spend 6 years campaigning against tuition fees and then 3 months after getting into power vote in favour of trebling them. Of course the public will never back lib dems again after that massive lie.

it would be the equivalent  of labour who have spent the past year campaigning for an increase in minimum wage to then get in power and reduce minimum wage. It was political suicide and the lib dems have lost 50 mps and scores of European mps and local councillors because of that lie.

More fool them then. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. People voted Labour back in after Bliar/Iraq. People voted the Tories in after the Poll Tax. Etc etc.

Youre calling the british public fools for not voting lib dem because they lost credibility and trust? You can vote for a party that lied to you just to stay in power but me and the majority will never trust them again.

[Sponsored content]