Should you vote Liberal?

In that case we may as well just accept what the Tories say because we do not want to frighten their backers away, do we?

I didn't say they were dj, I was pointing out just how quickly and easily they are moving out of the UK at the moment thus demonstrating just how quick and easy it will be for other industries to do the same if the taxation system becomes punitive.

The same applies to the very rich.

Might be better off going out for a walk, Jalima. Except the bit of blue sky that appeared five minutes ago has disappeared again.

dj, yawning on two threads, you need to get some sleep.

Yawn.

Varian, they were honest , I wish the leader of my party was

I mustn't say anything...

Labour have also said where there's is going to come from, too, but with press spin it doesn't get out.

Did you watch Andrew Marr today, and the Buzzfeed director?

The Lib Dems are being straight with the voters, explaining that taxes will have to go up to safeguard the NHS.

The trouble is that may not be a vote-winner in this "post truth era" when facts are derided in favour of mindless sloganising.

A lot of people want wonderful public services and low taxes but the money has to come from somewhere.

Careful, Annie, you'll be voting Libdem next.
Another one to join you, daphne?

£65 billion from stopping the corporation tax cuts?

The financial sector and the pharmaceutical sector are moving because of May's hard Brexit, Monica. Nothing to do with Labour.

Both Cable and Farron have said they will not work with Labour.

I admire the honesty of the Libs with their raising of tax, compare this to labour not raising taxes for 95%

While Jeremy Corbyn is offering heaven on earth without raising taxes, for any except the rich and corporate. Are there really enough rich and corporate to sustain the cost? And if the tax rate for them becomes punitive, how long will they stay here? Moving to another jurisdiction is very simple and the financial sector is already doing that.

And Labour are going to save £5 billion of tax payers money by ending tax payers cash going to private healthcare firms.

So between the two parties the NHS should be saved.

The LibDems have announced policy of putting up income tax to save the NHS.

This general election is about much more than that.
It's about who rules this countrey for the next five years, about what happens to the NHS, benefits, taxes, poverty, homelessness.

Best comment I have read so far today has been

"You can have the Tories or the NHS. You can't have both."
It's up to us to choose that sort of question on 8th June, too.

Can I ask this question that has not been answered on another thread. I am I tiguedby the Lib Dem position over the years.

It is often said that the EU Referendum should never have happened, Brexit is all the fault of the Tories and David Cameron, we wouldn't be in this mess if the referendum had not taken place. Then you have the voices that demand a Referendum on a Referendum.

When did the Liberal Democrats have a change of heart as to holding an EU Referendum???

I find the ease with which some posters so easily forget that at one time or another in the past Labour / Lib Dems / Conservatives have ALL wanted an EU Referendum.

Who remembers Ed Davey arguing in Parliament for a referendum over the Lisbon Treaty, boy he and the Lib Dems were very angry.

www.libdemvoice.org/newsflash-lib-dems-walk-out-of-house-of-commons-2233.html

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7265516.stm

"Lib Dem ordered out of EU debate

Lib Dem front bencher Edward Davey has been ordered out of the Commons, after angry protests to the deputy speaker.
Mr Davey was annoyed at the decision not to allow MPs to debate and vote on a Lib Dem call for a referendum to be held on the UK's membership of the EU.

Deputy Speaker Sir Michael Lord acted after Mr Davey defied warnings. Fellow Lib Dems then walked out in support.

The Lib Dems support the EU treaty and UK membership of the EU. They oppose a referendum on the treaty itself.

The protest came as MPs began the latest day of debate on the Lisbon Treaty - something the Conservatives, some Labour and some Lib Dem MPs have said should be subject to a referendum.

Points of order

The Lib Dem leadership, who say they would not vote for such a referendum, say the whole issue of Britain's membership of the European Union should be subject of a referendum instead."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15390884

BBC Link above is a Time Line of when Labour/Conservative/Lib Dems have called for EU Referendums.

So when, why , what changed the Liberal Democrats stance over wanting an EU Referendum which let's face it this General Election is mostly about?

Why would I have been trying to catch you out?

To me, it does seem to follow on that there are only two parties that can afford to have candidates in each constituency.
There is nothing wrong in my eyes with parties telling their followers who they think they should vote for.
Everybody does it.
You don't suggest to your supporters that they should not vote. That would be ridiculous.

Anyway, I really would like to know what anyone thinks of the idea of a candidate being able to spend more money on a campaign than most people could earn in a lifetime of working for him?

No party has to put a candidate up in every constituency and, as you say some cannot because of the cost.

However to deliberately withdraw from a constituency and tell your members who to vote for in your place is one step further, and I, for one, am not prepared to do that.

If SW Surrey chooses to do so that is their business. I do not live in that constituency. But if I did, I would not vote for the candidate just because I was told my party's candidate had decided not to stand and I should vote for a named individual of another party in their place.

I think the whole subject of election expenses is due for revue. Now we are having so many of these presidential style elections for various posts, from Police Commissioners to Mayors, where decisions on candidates are made a year or more in advance and that person is campaigning from that point, much tighter regulations must come in

But to be honest I really cannot see any connection between my original email, your reply and the non-sequitor on mayoral election costs added on to your email. Were you out to catch me out on some point or another, although I cannot see how you could have been.

No party has to put a candidate up in every constituency and, as you say some cannot because of the cost.

However to deliberately withdraw from a constituency and tell your members who to vote for in your place is one step further, and I, for one, am not prepared to do that.

If SW Surrey chooses to do so that is their business. I do not live in that constituency. But if I did, I would not vote for the candidate just because I was told my party's candidate had decided not to stand and I should vote for a named individual of another party in their place.

I think the whole subject of election expenses is due for revue. Now we are having so many of these presidential style elections for various posts, from Police Commissioners to Mayors, where decisions on candidates are made a year or more in advance and that person is campaigning from that point, much tighter regulations must come in

But to be honest I really cannot see any connection between my original email, your reply and the non-sequitor on mayoral election costs added on to your emaail. Were you out to catch me out on some point or another, although I cannot see how you could have been.

www.compassonline.org.uk/publications/the-progressive-alliance-why-the-liberal-democrats-need-it/

But the membership in SW Surrey decided on that strategy in their constituency. Are they not allowed to?
It happens all the time with the Green Party. They do not have the finances to put a candidate in every constituency, so they choose those where they stand a chance.

What do you think about the Tory candidate for metro mayor in the West Midlands, Andy Street, being able to spend nearly a million pounds on the election before the cut off date? Ex head of John Lewis buys his position.
That's going back well over a century in politics.

I am sorry but I am appalled by the idea of a progressive alliance. The Labour, Lib Dems and Green parties are three distinct parties with distinct policies and underlying philosophies.

If they are not separate parties with separate agendas, why do they exist? They might as well amalgamate into one party with one policy and give us an honest choice of what their united policy is. If the Lib Dem in my constituency was to stand down in favour of a Labour or Green party candidate, I would not vote for candidates for either of those parties. If necessary I would just spoil my ballot paper and probably resign my Lib Dem party membership.

I think a Progressive Alliance would be a disaster because I think the media would lambast it, and many of the electorate would treat with contempt parties that were so wishy washy in their allegiance they would stand down for another party with whom they share a few policies.

Co-operation between parties on an issue by issue basis once in Parliament is one thing, but having MPs voted on the basis that they deliberately restricted the elctorate's choice by choosing not to stand in some constituencies is a manipulation of the electorate and is anti-democratic.

"At a packed meeting in Farncombe today, 6th May 2017, organised by SW Surrey Compass group it was overwhelmingly agreed that there should be one progressive alliance candidate for SW Surrey in the coming general election, in order to have the best chance of unseating Jeremy Hunt. The meeting was attended by people from the 4 progressive parties: Liberal Democrats, Labour Party, Greens and National Health Action Party, as well as many non party aligned people.

The meeting overwhelming supported Dr Louise Irvine of the National Health Action Party to be the candidate.

The Green Party has declared they would stand down in favour of Louise as a progressive alliance candidate. Local Labour Party members and several Liberal Democrat members have said they will campaign for Louise as part of that alliance. It is now hoped that the Liberal Democat and Labour Parties nationally will agree to withdraw their candidates so there is just one candidate."

inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/attlees-granddaughter-jo-roundell-greene-runs-lib-dem-candidate-can-offer-strong-opposition/