Tee hee

An internal Liberal Democrat document reveals that the party is braced for a complete wipeout in the European parliamentary elections.

Meaning that we’ll get UKIP, Labour, Tories and Greens as the four major groups. And that, in turn, means that next euro elections the Lib Dems won’t be part of the BBC’s coverage of the big boys. For what determines whether you are at that top table (ie, during the election period, if they’ve got a Tory on then they’ve got to be balanced and have the other three top parties on) is your performance at that type of election last time around.

11 comments on “Tee hee

  1. Don’t worry Tim, the BBC will find an excuse to promote the Lib Dems.
    They’ll probably hire them as presenters and interviewers just before the election. After all, if they’re not one of the main parties then they have to be impartial. Don’t they?

  2. Meaning that we’ll get UKIP, Labour, Tories and Greens as the four major groups

    The important question is whether this is a foretelling of their fate in the next general election. One can hope so. After all, there is good reason to think so – they have always been the party of utter irresponsibility. They can promise anything because there was never any chance of being in power. So their voters are a bunch of misfits who like striking empty poses but don’t like making tough choices.

    Since being in government they have got all the offices and cars, but they have had to make choices. Their voters will be unhappy with that.

    On the other hand, if the Tories are in trouble too, is it a good idea for British politics to become more polarised?

  3. is it a good idea for British politics to become more polarised?

    As much of the perceived problem with British politics is that it is difficult to fit a cigarette paper between the actual conduct of the major parties (their declared policies, even their manifestos being mere verbiage), then you could rationally argue that a bit of polarisation would actually give us some meat to think about.

    Then, we could decide who to vote for on something other than tribal identity or sticking a rocket up their Westminster-bubble arses.

    YMMV.

  4. What Tom said. There is zero possibility that LD talking heads won’t be on the Beeb for the next Euro election if they finish outside the top 4 in this one. They’ll fix it one way or another. They’ll be ‘veteran political commentators’ or suchlike.

  5. “A BBC spokesperson said, although the 2014 election produced MEPs for the Labour, Tory, Green & another party, it would be patently undemocratic to deny Libdem voters a voice in the coming debates. They will therefore be included amongst the four parties to be represented.”

  6. “is it a good idea for British politics to become more polarised?”

    Loser’s lament.

  7. Surreptitious Evil – “As much of the perceived problem with British politics is that it is difficult to fit a cigarette paper between the actual conduct of the major parties (their declared policies, even their manifestos being mere verbiage), then you could rationally argue that a bit of polarisation would actually give us some meat to think about.”

    But who sees it that way? The point of being a nation with a shared history is that most people are more or less of the same mind. Great advantages of living in a country like that.

    It is true that Dave and Ed only offer us two more Lib-Dem parties and so there is not even a small difference between them, but there is an optimal range of choice. It is not the Dave-Ed-Nick love-in. But neither is it Farage calling in the Army to remove Caroline Lucas from Number 10.

    Gamecock – “Loser’s lament.”

    No one despises the Lib-Dems more than me. That is the point. I would actually hang them all. I don’t think that is good for democracy. The problem with the Left is that they have become so extreme that in the end it can only come to blows. Democracy works when everyone agrees to give others space and not pursue extremes.

  8. Or the BBC will change the rules of how they select who gets mentioned and who gets – never “censored” just – not reported by the balanced state owned BBC.

    Perhaps I am overly cynical and the BBC would never be corrupt enough to do that. Any bets?

  9. U.S. press reporting big gains for UKIP in elections. I rather expected to read a report here, Tim. Are you planning one?

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.