AV will not bring the government down….

In the decisive battle for Labour voters this has become something of a central question, for obvious reasons. Labour Yes tell us that a Yes vote will leave Cameron reeling and Labour No urge us to give a bloody nose to expedite the already terminal decline of Liberal Democrats and Nick Clegg. Both are right, either outcome will damage the government in the different ways they outline but neither will tell you the fundamental truth – neither result will bring the government down or really hasten its fall.

I can’t imagine Conservative right-wing sharks wanting to return to the Shires to announce they had brought this government down over AV. They don’t like AV in these True Blue heartlands but that’s beside the point; the business of bringing down a government requires precise timing and crucially a pretext which will motivate core sections of support behind it.  AV isnt the issue that will destroy Cameron. What will break Cameron in the eyes of the right is his dependency on weak and vacillating Liberal Democrats who will waver in the hour of need; when people are on the streets and the fires of widespread popular revolt are lit. It is then they will make their move in the ‘national interest’.

Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats have been played for fools by Cameron but they are not so stupid as to do anything that precipitates an early meeting with the wrath of a vengeful electorate. So, if No wins they will not leave. Clegg’s days as leader are numbered; their collapse as a Party inevitable, but they are locked in a deathly embrace with the Conservatives that only the Conservative right can release them from.  They will do so in time, the time will come when this force will shed itself of both the Cleggerons and Cameroons, but as I said the day of reckoning will not be on May 7th….whatever the outcome of the AV Referendum.


About darrellgoodliffe


12 responses to “AV will not bring the government down….”

  1. Gillig says :

    A referendum vote will lead to rule by authoritarian dictatorship, by unelected bureaucrats, to the detriment of national sovereignty.
    Do you, and to your knowledge Labour, have any intention of including voter recall in your manifesto?
    Lib had a version last election. It’s something that Con would avoid.
    UKIP include it, it’s certainly a vote winner with disgruntled students!


  2. John Reid says :

    Imagine If laobur had formed a Coalition with the Liberals in 1992, And the left of Labour had been annoyed Not only becasue they felt that Shirley Williams,Roy Jenkins etal were traitors for leaving in ’81, but at the #92 election Kinnock had promised to change some of the Thatcherite Union legislation, and that if there had been a Lib/lab coaliton then the Liberals would have said stick to current union legisaltion for the Price of a deal, the Left of Labor would have felt annoyed, this is similar to the Right of the Tories now,
    I look back at some of the Things I was defending I didn’t really beleive in at the recent eletion Just becuase I wanted to show Labour unity and Didn’t want the Tories in, So I could say to the Tories after the Election when they didn’t win and felt that they deserved too, Now you know how we felt in #92 when we felt we deserved to win then, But The right of the tories may have felt they deserved to win and GO back to beign the William Hague style aprty, But the Public rejected them, The fact that there annoyed with the coalition they will settle down and say it’s either a moden one nation Tory led govenment or another generation in the wildness,
    The tory right will defect toUKIP if Cameron survives for four more years’


  3. Gillig says :

    It’s no good sulking because a referendum can’t produce politicians worth voting for. To bring the government down, you could try getting policies and a leader. Meanwhile, excuse us talking amongst ourselves
    @John Reid
    I have never had to support party policies that I disagree with, perhaps because of the size of UKIP.
    Looking from outside the main Left/Right division in British politics, it is clear to me that LibLabCon are so tied up in confrontational politics that they have lost touch with the people. To me it’s beyond doubt that extreme policies either Left or Right don’t lead to a better quality of life. The confrontational setup in the commons is outdated; both sides are pretenders for the centre ground. This dumb referendum is a fine example. The people don’t want it, need it, or understand why we are having it.
    I am canvassing for the local’s and have to say you are a bit late with your observation that the Tory right will defect, they already have. To me, the valuable votes are Labour and the people who don’t vote.
    Don’t believe UKIP are right wing, we can’t be categorized in terms of Left/Right. The press keeps trying, they still seem unable to mention UKIP without saying BNP, but you have seen Darrell struggle for the moral high ground on racism and immigration.
    UKIP can pick the best policies for the people regardless of ideological origin, so we will seem far right to you, far left to the committed right and devils spawn to Libs. It’s a long way from the single issue protest party that I have so enjoyed, but someone has to clear up the LibLabCon mess when we get out of the EU.


  4. John says :

    If I can use the Comparison with Laobur and I don’t mean that Piers merchant is Like Scargill OR Tebbit like Scargill like George Galloway or Ken, But when New labour first came in Scargill and Co. left, but itwas after one term of New laobur where the Trotskyites got the message they were’nt ever going to infultrate again that they left and As much a debt the Country owes tebbit, he’ll be the Next to leave when Cameron says the Tories will for ever have to live with the Fact they were wrong on Section 28.Apartied or selling council houses so cheap without having hte resources to replace them and responsible for homlessness and utter poverty that it had caused by 1990


  5. Gillig says :

    Trying to establish why the unions started loosing support to Thatcher, I borrowed your observation from a previous post, about the closed shop being a step too far for socialists. Brilliant!
    Tebbit has stated his support for UKIP, and says it’s only his age and refusal to be bullied by the Cameroids that keeps him Tory.
    I don’t know what section 28 is, or what the Tories have to do with apartied. I certainly don’t want the state to provide any housing other than sheltered.
    The last Labour idiot gave us state owned banks!


  6. John says :

    Section 28 was the Government saying that libraries shouldn’thave any book that’s said homosexualit was a viable alternative to hetrosexuality,
    the last Tory gov’t supproted the holocaust of African People in South Africa during apartied ,yet were quick to criticise the soviet union, but both regimes, saw people wihtout the vote slaughtered and the tories stood by traded and treated them like an ally, As for the state not woning housing, the high interest rates despite the money the Country owned (some due to the empire pillariong other countires and Some due to North sea oil, the Late 80’s saw 1000’s of people sleeping rough on the streets of london couldn’t get any moey from getting a job becuase the tories like high unemployment as away of controlling hte unions, and were prepared to see people starve to death on the streets, Yet 8% o the Public owned 95%
    of the land in the U.K as such and is to expensive for people to buy land to build there won accomadation, Yes maybe council houses are wrong but that sort of poverty led to mental health problmes ,something that saw care in the community and people beign killed by others with mental health problmes as they could’nt cope in society and also ended up homeless,

    Yes Tebbit has said that he won’t be turfed out the tory party as Cameron admits the Tories were wrong on being anti gay pro a Fascist racist regime on South africa and IDS says that homelssness is wrong and the Tories attitude on encouraging it was wrong too, MAybe the State owning council houses is wrong, but they should’nt have sold them dirt cheap and put in the condition that those who bought them couldn’t sell them on a few months later to landlords who would rent them out at high rates,
    As for the Banks, the reason tehy went bust was due to giving out high mortgages, the reason that those mortgages were high was , the Tories selling houses so cheap that those houses were sold on at extraudinate rates to landlords who pushed the housing market price up.

    My borthers been a motorbike traffic cop for 15 years constantly scraping dead boides off the road in Hacknety and Tottenham as such he dirves around on his own, while trying to resusitate people he constantly gets locals coming up to him threatening to beat up one of Thathcers pigs, He’s got no love of the Left, But he hates the tories with a vengeance ,the reason that child poverty quadrupled while the last tory Government was in,
    the same way the unions were repsonsible for losing labour votes to Thathcer by the load in teh 80’s. the Thatcherite attitude to poverty let people who still won’t vote tory now, Labour HAD to distance itself from the Unions to get back in, in the 90’s ,For the Tories to ever win a majority Goverment agian they will ahve to distance themselves from the Tebbit Thatcherite view , there’s no such thing as society,and If he fgoes to ukip so be it,

    I realise that Not all Ukip are ex Tories some in Labour like Kate Hoey have been tried to be wooed.


  7. Gillig says :

    Section 28 type policy is not for governments to decide. It creates victims and the backlash when it is rescinded is disproportionate. So the Tories are to blame for Dame Mandleson. That works or me!
    The blame for all the other stuff is the business of those it affected, as long as everyone learns the lessons.
    You are off the mark on the reasons the banks failed, although your facts are true. Government have no right to use public money to bail them out. They should have been handed to the receivers, with prosecutions for fraud as appropriate.
    The attitude of the police changed during Thatcher. They lost my respect and I have since found them to be arrogant and unhelpful every time I have encountered them. I speak as I find and I have not met your Bro.
    I am surprised by the number of people I am canvassing who say they will never vote Tory again, never vote Labour again and (really angry) never vote LibDem again.


  8. Gillig says :

    As an afterthought, have you any AV attitude?


  9. John says :

    For it ,look at the Mayoral election, Ken is just more popular than Boris and mloswt liberal will vote Boris as second choice,so Boris will win on second preferences


  10. Gillig says :

    So, no relevance, like all elections while we are ruled by Brussels.


  11. John Reid says :

    I;ve just heard that Harriet harman has compared the Tories to the Slave traders due to the cuts. honestly harreit


  12. Gillig says :

    Its’ a difficult time for Harriet, (shadow deputy leader), she has to behave, with a Royal Wedding on Friday. She left the country during Chas n Di’s! She is intelligent enough to see through the nonsense and the dangerous political message the family inadvertently carries about the legitimacy of inherited wealth and talentless fame.
    Where did you get the news? She bangs on about slavery a lot, usually immigrant sex slaves.
    A “NO to AV “leaflet came in my post and it’s in the UKIP colour scheme! They still won’t say who is funding the no campaign. I am voting yes to AV and Winston Truman McKenzie for Mayor. (Dukes Bro)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: