Discussion

Main Board| Accommodation Wanted| Accommodation Offered
Start a new discussion on this board

Let your next career move come to you.

Swinson

I don't think she is peforming well.    I do think it is incumbent on a lib dem leader to be likeable and reasonable, as they sell themselves as the nice reasonable party.  Swinson is not likeable - she has no charm whatsoever and appears grumpy most of the time.  Swinson is not reasonable, she badly misjudged the rant against the possibility of Corbyn leading a unity government last month and says she will not work with either Labour or the Tories after the election which is a nonsensical position because it is 90% certain that is the choice she will be faced with.  Finally, the revoke position without a referendum is undemocratic, extremist and likely to lose the party votes in my judgment (certainly one).

She is far from being the best person in the party for the job anyway, and the extra media exposure is showing up her worst characteristics imo. Right when they need someone with gravitas. Very. Bad. News. 

I mean, she's fine I think. Honest enough to admit the Liberals are massively Europhile and don't much care about democracy, which suits the party's base very well. The fact that she's humourless and Scotch will put off a lot of floating English voters off though. 

To have gravitas you must either possess a penis or be someone who can "break balls".

 

There you go.  Everything that's wrong with politics, law and business in a one liner.

She doesn't literally break balls. It was a turn of phrase to show that she has the charisma, passion and energy to be a successful leader. Frankly, yes, you do need that.

Agree it is not "lack of gravitas" which is the problem (I don't really know what gravitas means other than being a grey haired male who speaks slowly in a posh accent) it is lack of charm, and it appears lack of judgment.

I never knew that the lazy sod known as David Davis, was a senior exec at Tate and Lyle. You would of thought given that he would have been better on the detailwhen he was appointed Brexit Sec

Sorry but if "modern gravitas" means that somebody in their 30s lacking in experience is a suitable candidate to lead a country, then it is not surprising that the modern world is up the spout.

No, Boris doesn't have gravitas either. He's an idiot.

If you don’t like the word ‘gravitas’, replace it with a few more that mean the same thing but without the projected overtones of old white male. ‘Authoritative’, ‘considered’, ‘reasoned’. All of which JS lacks. 

They don't need a leader.  They don't need to exist.  They are a waste of fooking time and pointless.

Just a load of cretins with no proper views and when they finally do express a view it goes against everything they are supposed to stand for.

They are just a hostel for homeless MPs.

They are an affront to society.  I hope they are crushed at the ballot box - if they have the guts to allow any of their MP's to face it!! 

 

She's awful.

From Private Eye (before Swinson won the leadership contest):

"WHILE the Tory leadership thoroughbreds gallop towards the final furlong (shurely knackers’ yard? – Ed) there has been less attention paid to the other contest, to lead the Lib Dems. Although Jo Swinson was the early favourite, the result is likely to be closer than expected after a surprisingly strong showing in hustings by Sir Ed Davey.

However, Sir Ed’s campaign has struggled with his various flip-flops over nuclear policy. Before the coalition, he was described in an academic journal as “the architect of the previous anti-nuclear Liberal-Democrat policy” from his days as a backroom policy wonk in the 1990s.

Accusations of hypocrisy
Yet as the coalition’s energy and climate change secretary in 2012-5, it was he who gave the go-ahead for the first new nuclear reactors in a generation, and even as late as 2016, after losing his seat, Davey was still defending his pro-nuclear record and insisting he secured “a good deal” on reactors. Davey has now drawn further accusations of hypocrisy, as he tours the country assuring the Lib Dems’ avowedly anti-nuclear membership he now opposes nuclear energy again.

Meanwhile, Swinson has difficulties with her own record. She has made little secret of her desire to have the party’s whip withdrawn from Lord Rennard over long-standing sexual harassment allegations (which he continues to deny, highlighting a “no further action” recommendation from the Met). After she told the New European that he “shows no remorse, no contrition for what happened and he remains a Lib Dem peer”, the paper speculated that Rennard might take legal action against the party to stop it banishing him.

Why is Swinson now so keen to be seen as proactive in this area? Could it be anything to do with the allegations of one of Rennard’s accusers, former Lib Dem candidate Dr Alison Smith? Back in 2007, Smith took her Rennard allegations to the party’s chief whip, Paul Burstow – and to Jo Swinson, then the party’s women and equalities spokesperson. “It very quickly became quite Kafkaesque,” Smith later recalled. “They were saying, ‘No one wants to make a formal complaint’, and I was saying, ‘I’ll make a formal complaint’, and they were saying, ‘That’s a shame because no one wants to make a formal complaint.’”

Both candidates look and sound decidedly “establishment” – Sir Ed with his knighthood, Swinson with her CBE – and both are to be found defending their voting records in coalition. Lib Dem members are left wondering if it’s much of a choice."

BC - Jo Swinson was 27 in 2007 and the Lib Dem’s Minister for Scotland - I’m not clear what magic wand she was supposed to have held as W&E spokesperson to convince the party to take the allegations more seriously. 

There are many issues with Swinson’s record but this one is particularly weak.  

According to the complainant she deliberately, directly and personally stopped the complaints against Lord Rennard from becoming formal / progressing at all and shut them down.

She's absolutely terrible but so is her whole party, so in that sense she's doing a good job.

Brexit was a good chance for them to trick the public into forgetting that Lib Dems are terrible, so Jo being out there and keeping it fresh in people's minds is public service. 

An utterly pointless party completely devoid of any values. 

I don't think she's that bad (as Clergs says, I think the main problem is that she is a woman), but she does lack gravitas and I think the revoke postion is a tactical error. Not even the Tories or Labour would be able to get more than 50% of the vote, which is what you would need to win in order to make revoking Artcle 50 without a referendum a legitimate course of action.

It is not just revoking A50 - she went in far too hard against a unity gov led by Corbyn and has had to row back ever since.   More fundamentally a Lib Dem that really cares about stopping brexit should be building bridges with Labour possibly leading g to electoral arrangements not slagging them off 

Becuase she needs to win over some conservatives and the conservatives uniquely have never ever elected a female prime minister?

Thatcher and May were/are arguably more robot than anything else.

Still stuck in that mantra of what you think is fact.

I sincerely hope to come across you on the other side of a matter some time - will certainly afford some comedy...

I sincerely hope to come across you on the other side of a matter some time - will certainly afford some comedy...

Vanishingly unlikely.

Don't suppose you prepare bundles to you Lady P...

Eh?

The only trouble Is the clear position she has set out is not reasonable and would if followed through with plunge the country into an equally awful crisis of a different nature.  Grown up  politicians don’t adopt clear positions for the sake of it when the issue is nuanced 

It's just required of the LibDems. Take a great position of occupying the vacant centre/centre right and then go full retard by e.g. partnering with the Conservatives, veering towards one of two extremes of the EU debate etc. etc. Now is the closest the Tories have come to putting dogma above power, and instead of sensibly navigating that they have someone blurting out whatever comes into their head. If it was BJ he would be saying official policy is to do whatever keeps BJ the Narcissist in the spotlight.

Not read the thread and agree her manner is unattractive and lacking of any charisma which BJ has shown is all one really needs to lead. But what she's doing is actually smart. There are only 2 policies currently which will get a party into power or not.

In or out. Tories are out. Labour don't know what they are. Lib Dems are in so they have a chance. Simple.

lol @ the idea that it's because she's a woman. 

No it's because she's being fully up front about turning the Lib Dems into the pro-European Tory party (in case anyone thought they weren't post coalition). 

Never mind all the scumbags she's embraced as Lib Dem MPs, the other day she was out giving pro-austerity interviews about how we have to make tough choices and there's no magic money tree.

Their whole platform is now the 2010 Tory manifesto with a post-it note saying "remain?" stuck on the front. 

It is disappointing that the whole strategy of the Lib Dems seems to be to prepare for all out war with the Labour party for the Remain vote when in fact some level of co-operation may be required to ensure a remain parliament after the next election.  If Farage stands his people down Johnson will win a landslide unless Lib Dems Labour and Green have their own electoral pact.

There isn't appetite for another referendum - the choice of questions, the margin of majority required to be definitive enough to scupper demands to go again.  This is a cut and dry position and as IG says, LibDems are pinning their colours on the only way to secure a definite remain...

I have yet to speak to anybody who thinks revoking without a referendum is justifiable, but plenty want another referendum so I don't think you are right anotherday.   The Lib Dems will lose voters through this.

I think the point is she thinks Leavers are smart enough to see through that one, Lady P, so she might as well defend her actual position. 

It doesn't matter whether leave voters "see through it" or not, since their votes aren't the ones she's trying to win.

I'm quite pissed off with her 'we refuse to work with Labour or Tories' approach. It's still likely to be a hung parliament and everyone is going to have to compromise.I know they got burned before but FFS.

The 'we will revoke' position is utterly pointless as the party carries no weight.

Ironic that Labour's current (non) position seems the most sensible 

Agreed Queenie - she should know that if there is another election before a referendum she will have to work with labour to keep out Johnson.  She should not be limiting her options now 

She won't work with Labour to keep out Johnson. Everything they've done so far has suggested the Lib Dems will take Brexit ahead of Corbyn, and that will not change. 

'We will revoke' seems to me to be a perfectly honourable position to hold and to present to the electorate as an option.  It has very wide appeal amongst Remainers.  Most of the proposers of a second referendum want the choices to be between Remain and Remain  anyway, so why not be honest.   Indeed, even as a Brexit supporter,  given a choice between Revoke and May's deal, I would support Revoke.

Pancakes, I hope that you are right.

She's now playing the 'I'm a woman - it's not a weakness card'.

Agreed that being a woman is not a weakness.  Trying to play on it to make up for the fact you are completely incompetent is.  

Piers Morgan took her apart on GMB - it was an absolute slaughter to the point it wasn't even funny and I started to feel sorry for her.

Talk of the Lib Dems getting 300 MPs - I mean WTF have they been smoking at that conference. 

Anyone remember Clegg Mania, which actually turned into a loss of seats come election time?  

Would not surprise me if the Lib Dems actually lost seats at the next election.  

I thought Clegg mania returned a huge increase in seats in 2010 which they then blew by propping up the Tory austerity government and selling the policies people actually liked (no tuition fees) in exchange for referendum on STV that nobody outside the party gave a rats arse about and which they lost anyway.

The net product of Clegg Mania was the loss of 5 seats.

The post election wash-up was that Cegg Mania caused the Lib Dems to believe their own hype and target obscure seats that, in reality, they had no prospect of winning.

In the process of all of this they forgot to shore up their core vote, hence the loss of seats.

I can see history repeating itself if there is an election in the next few months - Lib Dems believing they can win obscure seats in Tory and Labour heartlands and actually losing seats in the process.

 

 

 

 

The FPTP system is amazing.  UKIP got something like 3.8 million votes at the 2015 election and only 1 MP.

The SNP got about 1.4 million and 50 MPs.  The Lib Dems 2.4 million and 8 MPs.

 

 

From the horse's mouth ...

Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson lent on the memory of Paddy Ashdown in her keynote speech this afternoon. Swinson mourned “I wish he could see our party now.”

Did she reference Charles Kennedy? No

Did she reference Ming Campbell? No

Did she reference Nick Clegg? No

Did she reference Tim Farron? No

Did she reference Vince Cable? No

Did she reference Paddy Ashdown? Yes. Because he is the hard one to follow

The only seats the LDs will lose are those of the defectors.

Revoke is the only sensible platform for them to adopt on the basis that:

(a) an LD Govt is not really going to be able to implement a Brexit if a referendum goes against them

(b) more importantly its difficult to campaign for a re-run of the EU ref whilst arguing against a re-run of the Scottish referendum.

Its perfectly democratic if they win a majority on that manifesto pledge.  They might lose some voters like Guy,  they will gain far more voters than they lose though.

The more troubling policy is the refusal to work with Corbyn. In a Lab/Lib marginal, a waverer might wonder whether, if Lib/Lab wont work together, returning a Lib MP could let the Tories into power in the likely event of a hung parliament. Much better to return a Lab MP in the hope of a Lab  majority?

The problem Ashdown and then later Kennedy had is that it was very hard to distinguish the Lib Dem’s with Blairite Labour - they basically agreed on most things.   A charismatic savvy leader now  when the other alternatives are extremes could do a Macron - Swinson is not it

Her rhetoric and her policies will go down an absolute storm with their core voters. They will also severely limit the potential growth which the party could have seen.

The Lib Dems will see their vote share increase quite substantially purely by virtue of being the only nationwide and mainstream Remain party. The extreme policy regarding Article 50 isn't likely to win them too many votes that they wouldn't otherwise have got, but it is a massive and easy stick with which to beat them which will lose them potential converts.

i’m a Remainer who was going to vote LibDem for another ref but not now she is just going to cancel the outcome of the first without any debate. Thats as bossy as no deal.

fuxache she has just lost them 17.4m votes plus mine et al

Minkie I agree with you on principle but Lib Dem’s  are never going to get a majority- if you want another ref vote tactically for Lib Dem or labour to defeat your Tory/brexit candidate 

Arguably her position could work.

The Lib Dems had little chance of getting any leave voters before this decision. Its clearly positioning them as the Party of Remain. You then compare this to Labour's position which accordingly to Magic Grandpa is 'let the people decide'. Its a brutal policy will alienate some but is clear and not waffle like labour's position. Its an clear message to spin. Bollocks to Brexit. 

I think she has an opportunity to look different to the other leaders in being (a) female and (b) relatively young. However, not sure about her presentation style. She can come across as hectoring and doesn't have great charm.

Its a brave policy and a gamble and is very clear. However, could go wrong.

Amber trouble is I have lots of hard core remainer friends and contacts and they all feel the policy is fundamentally wrong - I cannot see who she will gain.

in truth if she was really concerned about brexit over party politics she would trying to align positions with labour on a ref not trying to create an even wider differential- the Lib Dem’s could be the ones to hand Johnson a majority to push through no deal

She comes across as a Sixth Form Deputy Head Girl swot who's got to play lead as Lib Dem leader in the end of year play.

The act is massively over-enthusiastic and transparent.

They need someone with gravitas and a proven track-record outside of politics, not a career politician keen-bean prefect.

Guy, there are a lot of Remainers who did that in 2017 and got burned repeatedly by Brexiters as having effectively voted for a pro-Leave party. 

Personally, if Corbyn puts out a manifesto that says nothing about “respecting the referendum vote” I might consider voting tactically again. Otherwise there’s no way I’m trusting Labour with a vote again. 

I quite like her actually, she’s pitching the right ‘sensible option’ level for many former Conservative voters like me.  She has my vote.

Despite the LA thing showing a lack of judgement.

Chill - labour will have a referendum with option to remain in manifesto. They will have to deliver on that not least because the vast majority of MPs and members want it.  I implore you if you want a referendum vote tactically - if people fail to do so we could easily be looking at a no deal Parliament 

What Guy said.

Ultimately remainers need to vote for whoever is most likely to keep or get the Tories (or possibly the Brexit Party) out.

But if there is a hung parliament then (despite how shit Corbyn is) it is essential for remainers that Labour get more seats than the Tories and the first crack at cobbling together a working majority.

And Jo Swinson is not going to say no to working with Labour (no matter who the leader is) if the alternative is Boris Johnson (or his successor) being given the opportunity to form a no deal government.

Guy - I don’t want another referendum. I think to put the matter to bed you would need a strong Remain majority and I don’t see that happening. It’s been 3 years of disaster and the polls are still only 45/55 in favour of Remain.  

Lady Penelope 18 Sep 19 14:21

But if there is a hung parliament then (despite how shit Corbyn is) it is essential for remainers that Labour get more seats than the Tories and the first crack at cobbling together a working majority.

As ever, ill informed nonsense stated as fact by my less than learned friend Lady P.  If there is no majority the incumbent has the first opportunity to form a coalition...

No, Cameron got the priority in forming a coalition because he had the highest number of seats and anything else would have been undemocratic and unworkable.

Lady Penelope18 Sep 19 15:25

Is that what happened in 2010?

???18 Sep 19 15:28

Yes. Gordon Brown clung on desperately for the best part of two days before Cameron and Clegg kicked him out.

Lady Penelope18 Sep 19 15:37

No, Cameron got the priority in forming a coalition because he had the highest number of seats and anything else would have been undemocratic and unworkable.

Are you playing at retarded or is it your natural default? GB attempted to woo NC, NC played both sides and chose DC. But don't let fact or procedural requirements get in the way of your version of reality...

I would like this mess to get sorted as soon as possible. The govt has tried to get Parliament’s approval for a hard Brexit and a no deal Brexit and have failed. They do not seem likely to get a majority for another type of hard Brexit (though we shall see). 

So we either need a new government, who might try soft Brexit, or revoke, and/or a new Parliament which will change up the numbers. 

My fear is it will just be another hung Parliament, and whether Boris, Corbyn or AN Other are in charge it will be years more of this nonsense until the EU finally just refuse to extend. 

And still no clearer - nobody would say they don’t want the mess sorted out  the question is how?

like no deal revoking without a referendum sounds superficially tempting as a way of just getting something done but just like no deal it would create a whole new set of crisis it would not be the end of brexit.

 

nobody would say they don’t want the mess sorted out  the question is how?

Yes, well that would be the job of governments, rather than us tedes on a lawyer’s message board. 

The govt has spectacularly failed to command a majority for successively harder and harder Brexits. If Corbyn or Keir Starmer or Jo Swinson can do a better job then good luck to them. Honestly even if Boris finds a Parliamentary majority for NI-only or no deal I would accept it as it would be constitutional. 

My preference would be to revoke Art 50 and so I plan to vote for an MP who supports that position. I tried voting tactically last time and it did not work. 

Join the discussion

Login Register