Comments on: What’s in it for them? http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/ Not a real vee Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:47:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Richard Havers http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/comment-page-1/#comment-83238 Richard Havers Tue, 15 May 2007 08:10:06 +0000 http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/#comment-83238 Jeff, take your point exactly. That to some extent has always been the LibDem's problem. Having said that how much does any of this chatter in the blogosphere matter or for that matter in the thinking press either. I found out yesterday that the Scotsman has a circulation of a little over 50,000 and the Herald not much more. The thought that goes into politics from many is just none too much. For me the line that the LibDems are taking makes sense. They've kind of lost their way as a separate party and if they are not careful could end up being squeezed out as the UK heads towards a US style two party system, obviously in Scotland alone this is a bit skewed! Jeff, take your point exactly. That to some extent has always been the LibDem’s problem.

Having said that how much does any of this chatter in the blogosphere matter or for that matter in the thinking press either. I found out yesterday that the Scotsman has a circulation of a little over 50,000 and the Herald not much more. The thought that goes into politics from many is just none too much.

For me the line that the LibDems are taking makes sense. They’ve kind of lost their way as a separate party and if they are not careful could end up being squeezed out as the UK heads towards a US style two party system, obviously in Scotland alone this is a bit skewed!

]]> By: Jeff http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/comment-page-1/#comment-83120 Jeff Mon, 14 May 2007 21:56:26 +0000 http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/#comment-83120 My point wasn't as simple as you made it out to be, I blame the way I wrote my first post rather than a deliberate misquoting by the way. Of course we bloggers can see where the Lib Dems are coming from. But to people on the street who only really see the headlines and don't get into the nitty-gritty of the story, they may well be thinking, as I wrote: “Why are Greens able to maturely sit at the top table and come to an arrangement in the best interests of Scotland but Nicol Stephen can’t?” I understand why the Lib Dems can't, you understand why the Loib Dems can't but Alex Salmond is still managing to make them look childish in the eyes of the not-so-politically-educated. My point wasn’t as simple as you made it out to be, I blame the way I wrote my first post rather than a deliberate misquoting by the way.

Of course we bloggers can see where the Lib Dems are coming from. But to people on the street who only really see the headlines and don’t get into the nitty-gritty of the story, they may well be thinking, as I wrote:

“Why are Greens able to maturely sit at the top table and come to an arrangement in the best interests of Scotland but Nicol Stephen can’t?”

I understand why the Lib Dems can’t, you understand why the Loib Dems can’t but Alex Salmond is still managing to make them look childish in the eyes of the not-so-politically-educated.

]]> By: Richard Havers http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/comment-page-1/#comment-82977 Richard Havers Mon, 14 May 2007 11:59:45 +0000 http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/#comment-82977 Jeff asks, "Why are Greens able to maturely sit at the top table and come to an arrangement in the best interests of Scotland but Nicol Stephen can’t?" Simple, the Greens agree on independence. They don't have MPs at Westminster from Scottish seats and they are so tiny in terms of votes that this is the only way they can get noticed. Jeff asks, “Why are Greens able to maturely sit at the top table and come to an arrangement in the best interests of Scotland but Nicol Stephen can’t?”

Simple, the Greens agree on independence. They don’t have MPs at Westminster from Scottish seats and they are so tiny in terms of votes that this is the only way they can get noticed.

]]> By: Jeff http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/comment-page-1/#comment-82921 Jeff Mon, 14 May 2007 10:23:52 +0000 http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/#comment-82921 My take on it has been the following: SNP may have been a bit nervous that the Green's 2 votes could potentially have got Labour back into power. Granted this wasn't highly likely given how close the Green manifesto is to the SNP's. But further to this, I think the SNP-Green agreement has been a masterstroke for one reason. Irrespective of what they actually agree on it helps to show up the Lib Dems in the eyes of the electorate. Why are Greens able to maturely sit at the top table and come to an arrangement in the best interests of Scotland but Nicol Stephen can't? The SNP are showing their commitment to consensus politics and are now bringing the Tories on board. Get involved with it and you look good, sit at the side and you are holding Scotland back. I think Alex is playing a blinder so far, even if nothing too concrete has actually happened yet! My take on it has been the following:

SNP may have been a bit nervous that the Green’s 2 votes could potentially have got Labour back into power. Granted this wasn’t highly likely given how close the Green manifesto is to the SNP’s.

But further to this, I think the SNP-Green agreement has been a masterstroke for one reason. Irrespective of what they actually agree on it helps to show up the Lib Dems in the eyes of the electorate. Why are Greens able to maturely sit at the top table and come to an arrangement in the best interests of Scotland but Nicol Stephen can’t?

The SNP are showing their commitment to consensus politics and are now bringing the Tories on board. Get involved with it and you look good, sit at the side and you are holding Scotland back. I think Alex is playing a blinder so far, even if nothing too concrete has actually happened yet!

]]> By: Angry Steve http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/comment-page-1/#comment-82708 Angry Steve Sun, 13 May 2007 22:38:07 +0000 http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/#comment-82708 What a bunch of Luddites. But then, we've known that nobody votes Green for a long time. I have also blogged about this match made in hell. The party list system is shown at its worst here, where parties that nobody actually voted for has gained sympathy seats, and can sap tax payers money in the parliament, when no constituency has clearly voted to say these people are worth the time of day. What a bunch of Luddites. But then, we’ve known that nobody votes Green for a long time. I have also blogged about this match made in hell. The party list system is shown at its worst here, where parties that nobody actually voted for has gained sympathy seats, and can sap tax payers money in the parliament, when no constituency has clearly voted to say these people are worth the time of day.

]]> By: Richard Havers http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/comment-page-1/#comment-82110 Richard Havers Sat, 12 May 2007 10:08:39 +0000 http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/05/11/whats-in-it-for-them/#comment-82110 The Greens just want to dine at the top table. Never forget that power is a drug. However, their agreement is daft. No Nuclear and climate change reduction was always a part of the SNP manifesto. The Greens strategy is probably to keep them more visible, particularly in the short term, and hopefully rise again next time. This is especially apposite given the fact that with a minority govt. the chances of an early election are increased. As far as the Lib Dems entering a coalition is concerned I think they need to watch themselves on this. If a vote for the Lib Dems is always a vote for someone else then they are not going to be a viable party for much longer. LibDem Scotland is clearly under the control of LibDem London and Ming is very definitely pro Union, for many of the same reasons as GB and Co. I get the what does it matter argument because independence through a referendum is not going to happen, but it rather drives a coach and horses through the whole idea of having any principles. The Greens just want to dine at the top table. Never forget that power is a drug. However, their agreement is daft. No Nuclear and climate change reduction was always a part of the SNP manifesto. The Greens strategy is probably to keep them more visible, particularly in the short term, and hopefully rise again next time. This is especially apposite given the fact that with a minority govt. the chances of an early election are increased.

As far as the Lib Dems entering a coalition is concerned I think they need to watch themselves on this. If a vote for the Lib Dems is always a vote for someone else then they are not going to be a viable party for much longer. LibDem Scotland is clearly under the control of LibDem London and Ming is very definitely pro Union, for many of the same reasons as GB and Co.

I get the what does it matter argument because independence through a referendum is not going to happen, but it rather drives a coach and horses through the whole idea of having any principles.

]]>