NationStates Jolt Archive

Should we have got rid of charlie?
Is the new guy up to the job?
Discuss if you will :)

Mainly the fact that Liberals, wont really care if there candidate is a drunkard, conservatives would.

And project if you wouldnt mind, whether Liberal-Democrats will lose or gain seats in the next election, whether they will ever be a main party again.

:)

First post not complete without... :fluffle:

I'm not sure. I agree with the policies of the Liberal Democrats but I don't see a leader who is strong enough to lead the party. If they find a strong candidate then I see no reason why they can't get into power.

Well, I would never vote for a party stupid enough to remove its most successful leader for 80 years and replace him with, well, an old teabag.

Churchill was a drunken old sod, and also our greatest PM, so who gives a damn anyway?

I think the Dems are taking Congress back in Nov. I think the reason they will is because the current crop of Reps have so completely betrayed their conservative ideals. The problem now for the Reps is to get a bunch of disaffected Rep voters to the polls and to get the ones that do go there not to vote for third party conservative candidates. Whether the Dems can come up with a real presidential candidate in the next two years remains to be seen.

Hurray.
Fellow Charliists.

Charles Kennedy was a household name, whereas the new guy is hardly known.
In fact in a recent poll, a large percentage still regard charles kennedy as the leader of the Lib-Dems.

Shocking

Easily the most atttractive and effective Lib Dem and as has already been pointed out to be a truly great British politician you need a drinking habit.

I think the Dems are taking Congress back in Nov. I think the reason they will is because the current crop of Reps have so completely betrayed their conservative ideals. The problem now for the Reps is to get a bunch of disaffected Rep voters to the polls and to get the ones that do go there not to vote for third party conservative candidates. Whether the Dems can come up with a real presidential candidate in the next two years remains to be seen.

Wrong idea deary but interesting nonetheless :)

I agree with this statement actually :D

Wrong idea deary but interesting nonetheless :)

I agree with this statement actually :D
Wrong idea but you agree? :confused:

Wrong idea but you agree? :confused:
Im assuming you are refering to American Republicans and Democrats.
We are refering to the British Liberal Democrat party.
Hence you have the wrong idea, but i agree with your statement :)

Im assuming you are refering to American Republicans and Democrats.
We are refering to the British Liberal Democrat party.
Hence you have the wrong idea, but i agree with your statement :)

What is it with the name Kennedy (I don't think Charlie is related directly, but...)?

We might as well assume that any political figure named Kennedy has a bottle of whiskey in his pocket.

Im assuming you are refering to American Republicans and Democrats.
We are refering to the British Liberal Democrat party.
Hence you have the wrong idea, but i agree with your statement :)
Yeah, I saw the name Kennedy...

What is it with the name Kennedy (I don't think Charlie is related directly, but...)?

We might as well assume that any political figure named Kennedy has a bottle of whiskey in his pocket.

Yes indeed :P
or ANYONE named kennedy in fact.




Disclaimer. If your going to take offense go away.

What is it with the name Kennedy (I don't think Charlie is related directly, but...)?

We might as well assume that any political figure named Kennedy has a bottle of whiskey in his pocket.


Some have pills instead. Otherwise it is a fair cop.

I really liked Charles Kennedy. He struck me as a nice guy.

Yeah, I saw the name Kennedy...

No worries.
Could be worse.
You could be a klan member :)




Disclaimer.: i hate you. (not you PsychoticDan)

You could make the argument that a nice guy like Kennedy would be best suited to stealing votes from the colder politicians of the other parties, but wouldn't succeed as well if the Lib Dems ever got in a position to potentially run for the top spot, especially with the drinking problem. They still shouldn't have got rid of him. Especially considering the self destruction that followed.

Should we have got rid of charlie?
Is the new guy up to the job?
Discuss if you will :)

Mainly the fact that Liberals, wont really care if there candidate is a drunkard, conservatives would.

And project if you wouldnt mind, whether Liberal-Democrats will lose or gain seats in the next election, whether they will ever be a main party again.

:)

First post not complete without... :fluffle:

I'm impressed you didn't use the :sniper: , :mp5: or :gundge: emoticon on your first post, very good indeed.

I'm impressed you didn't use the :sniper: , :mp5: or :gundge: emoticon on your first post, very good indeed.

Lies.
They are just invisible.

Should we have got rid of charlie?
Yes. Not because he was an alcoholic, but because he had no new ideas to take the party forwards and win more votes at the next election.

Is the new guy up to the job?
Of leading? Yes. Of turning the Lib Dems into serious candidates for power? No.

And project if you wouldnt mind, whether Liberal-Democrats will lose or gain seats in the next election, whether they will ever be a main party again.
The Lib Dems never were a main party. They always have been and will, for the forseeable future, be the third party.

Yes. Not because he was an alcoholic, but because he had no new ideas to take the party forwards and win more votes at the next election.


Of leading? Yes. Of turning the Lib Dems into serious candidates for power? No.


The Lib Dems never were a main party. They always have been and will, for the forseeable future, be the third party.

Ah yes, point taken.
However the Liberals were in fact THE main party. The social democrat-Liberal merger happened after the fall from power.

Ah yes, point taken.
However the Liberals were in fact THE main party. The social democrat-Liberal merger happened after the fall from power.
The Liberals were indeed the main party, but their peak was when Gladstone was alive. And he died over 100 years ago. The last time they were in power was in the coalition government of 1918-22.

Menzies Campbell made a terrific Foreign Affairs Spokesman... But he makes a terrible leader, he's doing a lot of damage to the party. But it seems we are stuck with him for now (unless the Party want to seem divided and internally politicising like the other two).

Ahh well, that was a good potential Liberal revival we had a few years back :(