What would a Clegg victory mean to the US?

[Undesired Walrus]

I think it will cause an increase in heart attacks and strokes amongst Republican politicians in the USA. Can you imagine any of them having to deal with someone who is a proud and self proclaimed "Liberal" and "Democrat" and considers himself a "European" - apoplexy all round!

If they would have a heart attack due to something so tame, how would they have reacted to Michael Foot if he had ever become PM?

They're just lucky that they haven't had to deal with a Socialist since 1969.

 

[Agatha]

I think it will cause an increase in heart attacks and strokes amongst Republican politicians in the USA. Can you imagine any of them having to deal with someone who is a proud and self proclaimed "Liberal" and "Democrat" and considers himself a "European" - apoplexy all round!

And an atheist!

 

[Darat]

And an atheist!

Good god - How could I have forgotten that one.

 

[headscratcher4]

Another question: Are the LibDems not running in enough riddings? Or does some sort of reapportionment of riddings need to take place in order to better represent the population distribution? In short, I understand that the LibDems would need a huge, nearly impossible swing for them to win a working majority (as opposed to a coalition partner)...but why is that so?

Second, would Labor's losses be such that they would be the minority party in a coalition making Clegg the PM?

Third, I notice, once again, that for all of America's denigration of the UK's national health service, even the conservatives are not running for its repeal. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the repeal of the national health system has not been an issue in the UK ever or recently? As I understand it, the debates around the NHS are always about service and making it more efficient, cost effective, etc. but not about doing away with it? Is that right?

 

[Damien Evans]

Does he have a wooden leg?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_Clegg

 

[Darat]

Another question: Are the LibDems not running in enough riddings? Or does some sort of reapportionment of riddings need to take place in order to better represent the population distribution? In short, I understand that the LibDems would need a huge, nearly impossible swing for them to win a working majority (as opposed to a coalition partner)...but why is that so?

Someone else can explain that - the last time I tried to do so I made a mistake and got my bottom handed to me!

Second, would Labor's losses be such that they would be the minority party in a coalition making Clegg the PM?

I think those predicting a hung parliament at the moment are predicting that Labour would still be the party with the most seats so I think it would be reasonable to think that someone from Labour would be the PM.

Third, I notice, once again, that for all of America's denigration of the UK's national health service, even the conservatives are not running for its repeal. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the repeal of the national health system has not been an issue in the UK ever or recently? As I understand it, the debates around the NHS are always about service and making it more efficient, cost effective, etc. but not about doing away with it? Is that right?

Absolutely - it would be political suicide.

The population as a whole have never really trusted the Tories with the NHS - it's always been their major domestic policy weakness - and Cameron has worked hard since he became leader of the Conservatives to try and change that perception. That is why all the parties, even when talking about making cuts, are so careful to say nothing they cut will effect the service patients get via the NHS.

 

[Agatha]

Another question: Are the LibDems not running in enough riddings? Or does some sort of reapportionment of riddings need to take place in order to better represent the population distribution? In short, I understand that the LibDems would need a huge, nearly impossible swing for them to win a working majority (as opposed to a coalition partner)...but why is that so?

It's to do with our first past the post system, and also that there are some constituencies where the Labour or Tory majority is such that a donkey in the appropriate colour rosette would be elected, and any votes for other parties are in effect wasted. There's a handy gizmo on the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8609989.stm where you can change the percentage of votes for each party and see how that translates to seats; it's a crude measure as it assumes a uniform swing throughout the country (which won't be repeated exactly on the day) but it shows the 'tipping point' for a Lib Dem absolute majority needs to be about 41% of the vote, whereas Labour only need about 32% for an absolute majority.

For instance: In Bolsover, 65% of the vote went to Labour in 2005 so for the Lib Dems to overturn that kind of majority would be nothing short of a miracle. In Sittingbourne and Sheppey the two main parties are almost exactly on the same vote share, the swing to LD needed to take that seat would be huge. On the other hand, there are constituencies where Lib Dems are either the largest party or are within a few votes of taking the seat; Romsey and Southampton North or where I live in Chesterfield.

Second, would Labor's losses be such that they would be the minority party in a coalition making Clegg the PM?

Unlikely, but possible.

Third, I notice, once again, that for all of America's denigration of the UK's national health service, even the conservatives are not running for its repeal. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the repeal of the national health system has not been an issue in the UK ever or recently? As I understand it, the debates around the NHS are always about service and making it more efficient, cost effective, etc. but not about doing away with it? Is that right?

As Darat said, to campaign for repeal of the NHS would be political suicide. There is almost universal support for the principle of the NHS, so all parties can do is campaign for ways that they think will make it more efficient and effective than it is.

 

[headscratcher4]

Unlikely, but possible. As Darat said, to campaign for repeal of the NHS would be political suicide. There is almost universal support for the principle of the NHS, so all parties can do is campaign for ways that they think will make it more efficient and effective than it is.

Don't UKer's understand that they are victems of socialist repression?

 

[Small Town Jesus]

Does he have a wooden leg?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_Clegg

Q. How do you annoy Heather Mills?

A. Nick Clegg.

 

[Big Les]

Another question: Are the LibDems not running in enough riddings? Or does some sort of reapportionment of riddings need to take place in order to better represent the population distribution?

What the Clegg is a 'ridding'? Google has failed me. I think you must mean 'constituency' though.

 

[Darat]

What the Clegg is a 'ridding'? Google has failed me. I think you must mean 'constituency' though.

"riding" is an older term for an administrative region - so it's use as a synonym for constituency has some history behind it.

 

[Cleon]

"riding" is an older term for an administrative region - so it's use as a synonym for constituency has some history behind it.

I believe they still use the term "ridings" in Canada.

 

[Debaser]

I believe they still use the term "ridings" in Canada.

As do we in some of the more important bits of England.

http://www.yorkshireridings.org/

Never mind Scotch independence, freedom for The Grand Republic of Yorkshire...now!

 

[Cleon]

Meh. Yorkshire's just South Scotland anyway.

*duck*

 

[Debaser]

Meh. Yorkshire's just South Scotland anyway.

*duck*

That's alright, I'm above such things, *flower*.

http://traditions-uk.freeservers.com/words.html#pet

 

[dudalb]

Meh. Yorkshire's just South Scotland anyway.

*duck*

Actually it's "Bronteland" considering the number of hotels, restaurants, museums, and plain old Tourist Traps that have names involving Charlotte or Emily in Yorkshire.

 

[jimbob]

Is it my imagination, or are the Lib-Dems almost to the left of Labour these days?

I'd say so on most policies.

...OK practically everything

The founders of the SDP left Labour as a pretty left wing party http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_longest_suicide_note_in_history
The rest of labour moved to the right after 1983 1987 1992

 

[headscratcher4]

What the Clegg is a 'ridding'? Google has failed me. I think you must mean 'constituency' though.

Sorry, my bad. In Canada -- which I am more familiar with -- they are called "ridings" -- and even then I misspelled it. It is the same as constituency, I think, and given that Canada's system is modeled on the UKs, I guess I just assumed that "riding" was a UK term transported to Canada.