so is there anyone with the guts to admit they were wrong when they voted tory at the last election??

[ssd]

or are you all proud of yourselves now???

the country is going to hell, except for the well off, thanks to this government

so is anyone going to admit they were wrong?

loopyloops, what do you think they should have done? (after the election).

I deeply regret voting for the Lib Dems and I can safely say I will never vote for them again.

How could they?

NEVER!

I think the only correct thing to do would have been to call for a re-election.

Lib Dems and tories are were so diametrically opposed that it should never have been considered as an option. I understand that the LDs weren't in a position to go into cahoots with Labour (which would make more sense) or go it alone. Labour could do nothing. So failing a re-election, perhaps they should have allowed the callmedave crew try alone until they screwed everyone over enough to not be voted in for another 20 years.
Sadly, now we only have two main parties. On a positive note, perhaps the left-winged vote will no longer be split?

I voted Tory, I will again.

Cuts have to fall because Labour buggered up the country. There is no other choice.

If Lib dems had publically backed th elabour party regardless of the public voote then it would have been the beginning of the end of the Lib Dems as a political party. If they are ALWAYS going to side with labour then why bother voting Lib dem - just vote labour.

I voted Lib Dem and wish i had voted tactically instead...

Tories LOVE cuts no matter what inheritance they have. And the last government truly screwed up. The current government are in their cutting element.

The Tories will always despise the common people. And you can bet that social problems, social disparity and social desperation will rise and rise and rise under this government.. ... .. .

No-one disagrees that cuts are necessary.
BUT it is possible to make savings in a way that is fair and equitable.
It is possible to make cuts in a way that do not cause fundamental damage to the welfare state.
It is possible to protect the most vulnerable.
What is not necessary is to aim that those cuts affect the poor and vulnerable far more seriously that the better off.
Look at what the Institute for Fiscal Studies says about how the last budget affected the rich and poor relatively.
Look the research published in the last week about which areas of the country will be most seriously affected by the cuts.
Look at the research into which parts of the population will be most severely affected by the cuts. Those with money in the bank? with lots of capital? with high incomes? those who can afford it most, or those who can afford it least?
These decisions are a conscious choice, an idealogical choice, by the coalition.

Harp..CHOICE by the coalititon?? No these are tory choices not held back by the lib dems! Clegg must be proud, he has single-handidly made the lib dems a non party for the next 20 years!! I wanted an end to see-saw politics. The lib dems handed us Thatcher+ without a mandate! Many thanks Clegg!!

Good post, Harpsichord.

what, exactly, are the libdems doing, then?

NOTHING!!

I'm voting Green next time.

Oh, the other, plausible and best thing that could have happened would have been a rainbow coalition. It would have been tight, but just enough seats to do it.

I may vote monster raving looney! They can't be worse than this bunch

I honestly don't get why you would think the Lib Dems and Tories were diametrically opposed, though. If you read the manifesto, read speeches etc. it's obvious that there was a fair bit of common ground with at least part of the Tory party, despite the obvious differences.

I think the problem is that a lot of people just projected on to the Lib Dems what they wanted the party to be, regardless of what the party actually said. There was this perception that the Lib Dems were to the left of Labour, which wasn't true.

Re. what influence the LDs have had in government - you just need to look at the list of Tory complaints to get an idea of that. Capital gains tax increase (remember how the Telegraph fought that), keeping out the inheritance tax cut, keeping out the marriage tax break, keeping the 50p rate as longfingernails pointed out, introducing increase in tax threshold, Danny Alexander now pushing for no tax cuts during this parliament, no hardline policy against the EU, Ken Clarke's prisons policy wouldn't have appeared in a Tory minority govt., etc. The LDs got the threshold for immunity from public sector pay freezes cut. Human Rights Act staying (which is a major victory, for now anyway). And the AV referendum. Pupil premium (although this was partly Tory policy too?)

Obviously I could also make a list of what I'm not happy with, but the LDs make a fair amount of difference (ask John Redwood).

And there's a lot that's agreed on, and not just by some Clegg cabal, as people like to paint it - things that the centre of gravity of the party are behind.

Re. forcing a new election - that would have been completely irresponsible in the financial climate.

a rainbow coalition would have been a disaster with those numbers. It's not surprising that Labour wasn't keen on it either - it would have been too tight to work.

lfn, re. Royal Mail - I'm not sure either, I was just judging by what Vince Cable said when he said it was going further than the manifesto.

i'd vote Conservtive again. My husband would Liberal again too.

"I think the problem is that a lot of people just projected on to the Lib Dems what they wanted the party to be, regardless of what the party actually said"

I think this is very true. Traditionally, the Lib Dems were always to the right of Labour, but New Labour moving into the middle ground presented them with a big strategic problem (similar to that presented by Tesco to Sainsbury) and they became a bit of a "none of the above" vote. The coalition has given them the opportunity to push Labour left again.

It's a gamble but I think it might actually pay off for the Lib Dems as the time may well have come for a party which is how they have historically been and they can pick up support from the margins of both the other parties.

I don't understand how anyone can make cuts which will affect the better off worse than the poorer section of society. The better off don't receive benefits in the way the poorer do. They put money into the economy rather than removing it through benefit schemes. They were therefore never going to be affected the way the poorer are going to be.

You could do additional taxation but then the rich will remove their income through tax dodges and the treasury will effectively get less, which is counter-productive. And also, not a benefit cut.

Surely everyone knew this?

I voted Tory, and would vote for them again.
The country was **ed with a madman at the top of it. I have no regrets about getting Labour out.

"cuts" aren't necessarily benefit cuts - there are cuts planned to public services.
and the effect isn't just to be measured in absolute terms, but in relative terms.
but yes, of course, one could raise tax. that would raise revenue. and how would that mean that the treasury get less because the rich can choose whether or not to pay tax how DOES that work?

They are doing so well. There is so so much waste to root out. We are only just beginning. We are so lucky to have the current government.

The state does little very well and the less of the state there is the better.