Showing posts with label Liberal Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liberal Democrats. Show all posts

Wednesday, 7 June 2017

The End is Nigh

I have a substantial post sitting in my drafts that I was planning to put up today, but it's a tad rambly, and sporadically on topic, so here's something (hopefully) a little more concise.

GET THE TORIES OUT!

Don't be fooled; Brexit is an element of this election, without question, but it is neither the most pressing concern, nor the reason this all happened in the first place.  Theresa May wants unfettered control, saw an opportunity to get rid of Labour once and for all, and took it.

And in her arrogance, she's barely been coy about what will come as a result of a Tory win tomorrow: the NHS will continue to stagnate and crumble, until it can be sold off at a pittance; police cuts will continue to put all of our lives at risk - something she now plans to offset, not by putting more bobbies on the beat, but stripping away our human rights!

The burden of austerity will continue to be heaped upon those who can't bare it, while the best off in this country will continue to reap the rewards.

No, Theresa, there are not 'any number of reasons' why nurses use food-banks.  Nurses use food-banks because they can't afford food!

Nurses!

Where once, paid-for care in your old age would leave you with at least your final £23,000 of savings - not including your house - the cap will be raised to £100,000, including your house.  In other words, if your house is worth more than £100,000, you'll be left with nothing but a roof over your head by the time your care's paid for, and that roof then goes to the government once you croak.

Free, healthy lunches will be taken from infants, and replaced (in part) with 7p breakfasts.

If the Brexit negotiations don't go her way (and given the rag-tag team of Brexiteers she's put together to handle the negotiations, they won't), then she's promised to just 'walk away'.

"No deal is better than a bad deal."

Bullshit.  The only thing worse than a bad deal, is no deal.

'Strong and stable'?  She's a coward!  While Corbyn was facing down six of his opponents (well, five and a sub), she was in a factory with (pre-vetted) Joe Public, while a woman who'd lost her father that week got laughed at in her stead.

"I've debated him every week at PMQs."

No you haven't.  You've avoided every question he's ever asked, instead spouting soundbites and taking swipes at New Labour, who haven't been in power for almost a decade, and haven't existed (outside of a few misguided and failed rebellions) since Corbyn took over.

And regardless of what happens, she'll be bending us all over in front of Trump (assuming he's still there by the end of the week) in a desperate bid to secure at least one trade deal that isn't too much worse than the one we have already.

"But never mind all that: the Sun, Mail and Express are all running (long ago disproved) headlines about Corbyn being a terrorist sympathiser, and coming from them it must be true...!"

I'm not saying everyone should vote Labour tomorrow, but if they've got the best chance of beating the Tory in your constituancy, then do!  If it's the Lib Dems, vote Lib Dem.  SNP.  Greens.  Whoever it is who will take a seat from May!

Because that's what's important this election: putting an end to this regime, that started with Cameron, and has descended into deepening despair with May.  She claims this election was about a stronger footing at the negotiating table, and if the Tories are down just one seat when the count is done, she will, by her own measure, have weakened the country for the sake of her ego.

Just one seat, and the weak, wobbly, detrimental, arrogant, egotistical, homophobic, greedy, self-righteous...person (fought so hard against typing something else), will be out come the end of the Brexit negotiations, if not sooner.

...

That was considerably longer and ramblier than I intended... Sorry.

Tuesday, 9 May 2017

Coalition of Common Sense

One of the Tories' myriad stock phrases on the General Election campaign trail has been a warning against a 'coalition of chaos' arising should they not win a significant majority.

With the Greens' Caroline Lucas urging candidates not to stand against the best anti-Tory hopes, Vince Cable suggesting similar, and Labour activists backing a non-Labour rival to Jeremy C- um, Hunt, there certainly seems to be a lot of cross-party cooperation on the cards.

But is this a bad thing?

Tim Farron and Jeremy Corbyn certainly want us to think they're against it; with one seaming to believe they can take the mantel as the new opposition, and the other suggesting they can actually win this election.

The thing is, unless your name's Donald Trump, delusion does not win elections.  When it comes to a three party race (which is currently the best the Lib Dems can hope for (sorry Tim)), the Conservatives have this in the bag.  Their blinkered, bludgeoning, bungling approach to Brexit, demolition of the NHS, disenfranchisement of the poor and needy, and bending over forwards to please the world's rich and unbalanced is apparently nothing next to how un-Prime Ministerial Corbyn and Farron appear in the eyes of the electorate.

Partisanship is not going to unseat the Tories, or grant any one opposition party a significant voice.  In the current climate, it is vital to have all parties working together.

And not only in opposition to a Tory party fumbling in the dark since Cameron's unceremonious departure, but with the Tories when it comes to negotiating our way out of the EU.

Unfortunately, the Lib Dems can promise a second referendum all they want; it isn't going to happen.  But by the same merit, nor will a Tory majority grant Theresa May a 'strong and stable' hand in the negotiating process.  Brexit was and is a divisive issue, and the backing of one third of whatever percentage of the electorate bothers to vote does not mean you have the support of the nation.  The EU knows this, and will demolish a May-led negotiation if it relies on 'a Tory majority' as a sign of national unity and strength.

The EU cannot, and will not, allow abandoning the union to be a positive move.  And one party - regardless of its perceived mandate from whatever narrow portion of the nation supports them (as is the best any party can achieve under our current electoral system) - cannot stand up to 27 unified nations with a unified goal.

Only a coalition of all parties, representing all areas of the UK, will give us any kind of strength during negotiations.  The only way to force May to accept this is to reduce her majority, and our best hope for doing that is for all opposition parties to work together.

Tuesday, 18 April 2017

Feverishly Elective: The Feckoning

Well, here we go again.

After spending the best part of a year assuring the Great British public that now was not the right time for an election - that the nation had to come together behind Brexit, rather than be pulled apart by another vote - Theresa may has called for another vote.

*sigh*

I'm still running the ins and outs of this through my head, and struggling to find where I stand on it, but I'm currently leaning slightly towards the positive.

Let's start with what will happen on the 8th of June: the Tories will win, May will (erroneously) claim a mandate from the people, and Jeremy Corbyn will be out of a job.  All of which, of course, is why she's done it.

While I started out with a (relatively) high opinion of Corbyn, that has flagged of late.  It's a rare thing to find a principled politician these days, and rarer still to find one who'll stick to those principles, but that's not enough.  Shallow as it may sound, a leader must have some presence; some charisma.  They must be able to convince others of their way of thinking, and that's not Jeremy Corbyn.

That said, it would have helped to have had his MPs show him even a modicum of backing, rather than plotting against him from the moment their own supporters gave him the position.  While Corbyn may not be a great leader, responsibility for the current state of the party rests firmly with those MPs who'd rather cling to D:reams of the glory days of the late 90s, than deal with the present, and acknowledge a need to move on.

I don't believe Corbyn could have ever won an election, but had his MPs not been so focused on castrating their own party, they may have at least closed the gap on May and the Tories.

That said, the Conservative Party's footing isn't nearly as stable as May thinks it is.  Yes, they've comfortably won a couple of local elections recently, but those were in constituencies that voted heavily for Brexit, and are no doubt enamoured by her all-or-nothing approach (as self-destructive as that is).  National opinion, however, has shifted somewhat since the referendum, with people becoming aware of what Brexit actually means, and the impact it is having and will have.

Not only is the pound clinging desperately to the u-bend, having been dropped in the crapper by the result, but our desperate need for trade-deals will keep it there until it can either clamber up the huge pile of excrement we're finally able to negotiate, or it's flushed into the sewer with nothing but America's meagre droppings to sustain it.

Speaking of the good ol' US of Aw crap, what's he's done now?!, that particular 'special relationship' is also likely to cause May an issue or two on the campaign trail.  Fearing our being cast adrift from the EU and its myriad trading partners, dear Theresa has taken every opportunity since November to plant her tongue firmly in the wigged tangerine's rectum in a display of such hurl-inducing fawning, even George W's prize poodle Blair looks restrained by comparison.

Add to that a crumbling NHS, a widely criticised obsession with Grammar Schools, repeated attacks on the poor and disabled, and telling the Scots that she knows better than them what they want, and any illusions of a free ride look increasingly delusional.

Unfortunately, the party and its leader's demonstrable ineptitude doesn't change the fact there's currently no one to challenge them.  Aside from Labour's obsession with marrying bullets to feet, the Lib Dems are still rebuilding after giving David Cameron carte blanche with a sledgehammer to their foundations, UKIP have achieved what they set out to achieve, and are now struggling to convince anyone they're still relevant, the Greens are enjoying 1980s levels of popularity, and despite being, for all intents and purposes, the Tories' only functioning opposition, geographical restrictions mean there's only so much the SNP can do.

So what's the point of even voting?

The point is that is exactly the question May wants us all asking.  If we're too busy lamenting the lack of a viable opposition to bother voting for any of them, then that will become the reality.  That's not to say everyone should vote Labour just for the sake of it, because that's the flip side of the same problem: if they don't like one, they vote for the other, and regardless of which wins, we're left with a self-indulgent ruling party, and a self-destructive opposition.

The problem with our political system isn't the number of supporters for one or the other, but the number of people who support neither, but see only the two options.

If everyone voted, and everyone voted based on policies, rather than old ideologies or attempting to back a winner, then we'd see a significant shake-up of the political landscape.  And while that might not solve any of our problems, it will at least put us on a path to solving them by showing all parties that if they're not good enough, we'll vote for someone else.

That might seem obvious, but the Tories have gutted our industry, crippled our NHS, demolished our education system, disenfranchised the poor and needy, are jumping into bed with a schizophrenic nuclear-weaponised five year-old engaged in a pissing context with a schizophrenic nuclear-weaponised ten year-old, all-but destroyed our economy and only ever help those who can already comfortably help themselves, and they're set to win a third general election!

May might get everything she thinks she wants out of this election, but that doesn't mean we can't lessen her standing, and make this a challenging few years.  Then we can finally look forward to a decent fight in 2022.

We just have to take the opportunity.

Friday, 6 May 2016

Feverishly Elective: an update!

Well, who'd have thunk?!  A mere two months after announcing that all schools were being forced to become academies - after a mere two months of a feckless halfwit failing to convince people who know far better than her that, 'no, really, it's a great idea!' - the government has yanked up the handbrake and swung a 180 that would make Ken Block fill his helmet with yesterday's Frosties.

"This is about being a listening government..." says the twit in question.  "Better to have reforms than have none at all."


And what are those reforms?  "We absolutely support those strong local authorities where schools are good and outstanding - they can make the choice to convert," while those that are failing or can't be supported by the local authority will be 'compelled' to convert.


Soooo they're scrapping the whole idea and going back to Labour's plan.  Way to stamp your authority, Nick.


In other election news, bugger-all has changed.  Oh, everyone's claiming some kind of victory: the Tories are now top of the lowly pile being sniggered at from on high by the SNP; Labour have held on, despite everyone assuming they'd lose big; UKIP and the LibDems have actually made some gains; and Sadiq Khan looks set to become the new Boris, despite once spending a brief evening in the same building as someone with extremist views, clearly marking him out as a terrorist sympathiser (though, when Zac Goldsmith did exactly the same thing, it was meaningless).


However, to look at these 'victories' another way: it doesn't matter who has the most of the measly number of seats left open by the SNP--being the second party in Scotland right now is like being the biggest of five field mice arguing with the farm's angry tabby; given the shit the Tories have been pulling, and their deepening well of failures, Labour should be stomping on their bacon-smelling bollocks, not merely holding on; the LibDems have risen from the doldrums of insignificance to become a protest vote for people who can't bring themselves to be racist; and the best London can hope for from a new mayor is him talking slightly less gibberish than the last one.


 


Democracy.

Yay.

Thursday, 5 May 2016

Feverishly Elective! (a political rant (sorry))

It's [Local] Election day!

*w00p*


And here in Cheltenham we have the democratic privilege of voting for our Police & Crime Commissioner (from a list of people I've never heard of and have no idea about) and our Ward Councillors (from a list of people I've never heard of and have no idea about).


Can you feel the excitement?  Taste the eagerness?  Smell the anticipatory sweat?


No?  How about sense the soul-numbing apathy?



Yup, that's more like it.


Twenty years ago, there was a genuine sense of excitement in the run-up to the General Election.  After a close run fight in '92, the Tories were flagging and Labour were in a position, for the first time since the '70s, to give them a good kicking.  They had a charismatic leader, a positive message of hope heading into the new millennium, a raft of aspirational policies, and even a catchy theme song:



(I didn't say it was a good theme song)


Sadly, as is the way with political parties, it was soon apparent that New Labour was little more than old Tory light, and '97's +70% voter turnout dropped below 60% by 2001.


Politicians on all sides blamed an apathetic generation, disinterested in politics, but from my point of view, the problem wasn't a lack of interest so much as a struggle to see the point: New Labour were two-faced, the Lib Dems were weak and the Conservatives were...well, Tories.


By the '05 election, it wasn't apathy keeping people away from the polls, it was wilful non-participation: Why vote if there's no-one worth voting for?


Jump to 2010 and we had a dull, unrelatable, unelected Prime Minister going up against a resurgent Tory party under their first leader since Thatcher with genuine balls; and the Tories still failed to secure a majority.  Of course, this was in part due to a Liberal Democrat leader who, unlike his opposition, could engage with people from behind a lectern.  It wasn't enough to make the Lib Dems a genuine 3rd contender, but it did make the country indecisive enough to result in the ConDem coalition.


However, engaging leader or not, the Dems proved as weak as ever, and a more apt. name amalgamation there has never been.


So here we are with a Tory majority* back in the saddle and back to trying to put everything in the hands of their business chums, albeit with slightly more subtlety than their straight-forward privatisation of the '80s.  This time around, they've put a pair of expendable imbeciles in charge of Education and the NHS, each with an aggressive simpleton's approach to 'improving' their respective areas.


*Quick side-note: Cameron, please stop using the phrase 'mandate from the people'.  You secured just over a third of votes from the electorate that bothered to turn up.  Of the 30.7 million people who voted, 19.4 million voted against you.  More people cast their vote in the bin than cast it for you.  Until we have a truly representative voting system, no party - whatever their majority - can claim a 'mandate from the people'.

Nicky Morgan has looked at the way a few schools have improved since becoming academies, and decided that ALL schools should do the same (because, obviously, every non-academy school is exactly the same).


Jeremy Hunt was handed a bunch of numbers he was told indicated some hospitals were a bit iffy at the weekend, and decided it was down to all junior doctors not working hard enough.


As far as the party's concerned, their moronic ideas are ideal, given that they are so staggeringly unpopular among the professionals who know better that they will lead to crippling strike action by the unions, denigrating each service to such a degree that they can be snapped up for a pittance by grateful Tory donors.


Just like the coal mines.


Then, come 2019, both proven failures can be put out to pasture (to deflect all the public backlash from the party as a whole), the Tories can put some seemingly competent people in charge of the sales, and claim, in the run-up to the election, that by replacing the 'old guard' with experienced business folks, they're in the best position to ensure the fallout is as beneficial as possible to the whole of the UK.


So what of our local elections?  Well, Cheltenham is currently in the hands of Alex Chalk; a typical Tory drone who supported cuts to child tax credits and disability benefits, and rejected the condemnation of VAT on women's sanitary products, because that was the party line, and he's so lacking in will, spine and individual thought, he couldn't possibly do something sensible without a line of blue-tied bureaucrats telling him which box to tick.


Unfortunately, his position isn't up for grabs, and so our only recourse is to surround him with enemies.


You see, my outlook has changed somewhat since those 'apathetic' days of the mid-noughties.  Everyone should vote, regardless of how samey, useless or vapid every candidate might be.  If there's no-one decent to put in place, the second best option is to remove the cretin already there.  Part of the problem with UK politics stems from the majority settling for the familiar, not because they're the best people for the job, but because the other lot don't appear to be any better.


If, however, incumbents were constantly under threat of losing their seat, they'd be forced to put the effort in, listen to the people and not be arseholes.  And the only way to light that fire under them is to show that, if they don't do a good job, they'll be replaced faster than a shit-stained toothbrush.