Lib Dems Leadership

Iam64 it is good to hear that you are another Jo Swinson supporter. Our numbers are growing fast. Politics is in such a mess and we have some truly dreadful party leaders. Many people realise that Jo and the Liberal Democrats are our best hope.

Our family are all joining the LibDems; DD has done so already and I'm about to....

I'm obviously not asking for detail Labaik, but I wonder if you or other members of your family were in a party before this?

My mother and her own father were both Liberal voters. I suspect some of their liberal belief systems are deep in my DNA as well as in the personality they helped mould

It would be interesting to know if the LDs are attracting people who have never been involved with a party before Iam. It's a personal thing but I would really like to see a change in the two party system and a growth of interest in belonging to the (currently) smaller parties could lead to that.

I was in the Labour Party at one time. As a family we were all Labour supporters/voters. However, when I was first interested in politics when the children were small our local Labour Group and the Liberals used to work very closely together. I don't think my daughter has ever wanted to actually join a party before even though she's always been interested in politics. However, since the referendum we've found that the LibDems are the only party to have consistently spoken for us.

can one of you Jo fans explain why you will vote for a woman who voted for every vile tory policy they proposed and although she SAYS she's anti Brexit has said she wont work with either Labour or the other parties ( only tories) to stop it? Seems very strange to me IF she wants to stop it why wouldn't she join forces with every MP who is like minded?

I'm with you paddyann. And she was caught out in a blatant lie just recently. She is an ambitious opportunist. What policies of any substance do the LibDems have, other than Remain. Meanwhile the country is going to the dogs because all many people seem to care about is Brexit.

Jo Swinson has said that the LibDems will not go into coalition with either a Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn or a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson but she has not ruled out co-operation with other parties and is indeed having talks with Remain supporting politicians across the house.

As for policies, although brexit is the biggest threat, and therefore the most prominent issue facing the country, the Lib Dems have a whole range of policies focussing on creating an open, tolerant and fair society and protecting our environment. We believe in co-operation, that we can achieve more together than apart, in our own local and national politics and with our friends abroad.

www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto

Thanks Labaik. You are a small sample but if, out of the mire of Brexit, more people become involved in the reality of politics it will have done a small good I feel.

I feel that Jo Swinson will need to rapidly gain some judgment if she is to succeed in leading her party.

She has stated that the Liberal Democrats will not join in any coalition with either of the other main parties. However, on the day that Boris Johnson was elected and forming his cabinet, Swinson "demanded" that Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party join her and the Liberal Democrats in laying down a motion of no confidence in the government.

Obviously, such a motion would have no chance of commanding a majority in the House of Commons (especially on that day), so Corbyn chose to ignore her demand.

So, perhaps talking to others in the future would get her further rather than making demands, and better judgment of when opportunities may arise may also benefit her party and her leadership.

I notice we can all (me included) look back so much more harshly at parties and politicians we would never vote for anyway. I try, but don't always succeeded, to look at what the party is currently putting forward.

I keep my eye very much on the Liberals and often vote for them. However, when the SDP and Liberals merged I felt the new party absorbed the "democrats" bit (no difficulty as Liberals would always have seen themselves as democratic) but there was no embracing of the " Social" point of view.

This was not a surprise as Social Democracy will always see a level of government intervention that, by its intrinsic nature Liberalism doesn't. I still watch with interest though.

Why is Jo Swinson held to higher standards than our current PM, who just makes up stuff as he goes along and, therefore, contradicts himself.

Jo Swinson showed good judgment in denying that she would join either of the main parties, considering that going into coalition with the Tories is still thrown at the LDs. I think the LDs would come to an agreement with Labour, but not while Corbyn is leader and while it still supports Leave.

I couldn't vote for a party that doesn't even know what a woman is. Jo Swinson, as someone said upthread, is an opportunist and voted for some awful policies. She's Tory-lite

growstuff, why is Jo Swinson held up to higher standards than the Labour leader?

I loathed the way the LibDems propped up Cameron's government. The way they voted in favour of the bedroom tax until they were no longer in coalition, when Clegg said he'd now learned it to be a Bad Thing.

We're in dire straights aren't we. The value of the pound is dropping, we have Flashman flying around the UK with his Be Positive mantra and Jeremy hiding in a bunker somewhere.

DameJudyClench - are you referring to Jo Swinson's support for trans women when you say they're a party that doesn't know what a woman is? I agree, the trans issue is an issue we all need to be more aware of and prepared to criticise some transactivitists.

I agree with you, Iam64. It's desperate. For me, I think it's going to be a question of voting for the least awful next time we go to the ballot box.

That's exactly it growstuff, least awful at the ballot box. I'm struggling because our current Labour MP is old style, not momentum. If he stands again, I can't imagine not voting for him. If he's deselected I will not vote for the person imposed by momentum.

The coalition was a huge mistake but blaming someone for the voting record they were whipped to deliver five years ago is pretty pointless when they’re the leader of the only party which is unequivocally offering the right thing for the country. I challenge anyone to point to a politician they’ve always agreed with on every issue.

Good post, Shoequeen53

Exactly, Shoequeen.

Good post Shoequeen. Holding on to anger about anything is exhausting. Politics is a messy business and we have to find consensus and a way forward. The two main parties seem incapable of doing that

Question

Lib Dems want to scrap the First Past the Post system for Proportional Representation.

Both systems can obviously return a party with no overall majority and hence the Coalition Government or Supply and Demand government is required.

If Gordon Brown had managed to get a coalition government with the Lib Dems the voices that perpetually cry foul over the Coalition Government / Supply and Demand would no doubt, hypocritically, have felt that government would be fit for purpose because it suited their politics.

Because we have a Conservative / DUP Supply and Demand government that is not acceptable because it ' does not suit' their politics. That is surely hypocrisy. It is only accepting '' The Principle ' of Coalition Government/Supply and Demand if and when it suits and Proportional Representation will inevitably lead to permant coalition governments.

Those wanting Proportional Representation will have to accept a Coalition Government and if that Coalition were for agrguement sake the Conservatives/Brexit Party they will still not accept Proportional Representation unless it returns their Political Party into Government. They might not like what Proportional Representation returns!

So my question is how would Proportional Representation give those who dislike Coalition / Supply and Demand governments when it does not ' suit them ' give them the answer to First Past the Post?

POGS, You can't really compare historical coalitions and supply agreements with what would happen with PR. In the last GE percentages were as follows:
Con 42.4%
Lab 40%
LD 7.4%
SNP 3%
UKIP 1.8%
Green 1.6%

If the number of seats matched the percentage of votes cast, the LDs and UKIP would have more seats. Either the Cons or Labour could have formed a coalition with the LDs and Greens or UKIP. It would have been up to the behind-the-scenes negotiators to come up with some kind of agreement.

PR would result in less tactical voting, so the number of votes for each party could end up very different. People wouldn't vote to keep parties out because they felt their preferred option was a wasted vote. It could also result in people feeling more engaged with Westminster. Currently, only a few hundred thousand peoples' votes actually matter because there are so many safe seats.

There are pros and cons of FPTP and PR.

growstuff

"You can't really compare historical coalitions and supply agreements with what would happen with PR"
--

I didn't think I had.

I used past /present/future coalitions to make points.

Not sure you answered my question:-

"So my question is how would Proportional Representation give those who dislike Coalition / Supply and Demand governments when it does not ' suit them ' give them the answer to First Past the Post?"

Thank you however for responding.

So true. Living in the second safest Tory seat in the country, my vote is wasted. Every. Single. Time. Pointless though it feels every time I go to the polling station, I can’t not do it after those brave women fought so hard for me to have it.