Why don't people like Nick Clegg

[CalmShambala]

I know there is a thread on him already but not sure that OP will like me hijacking hers.

Why don't people like Nick Clegg?

I am not a Lib Demer so wouldn't vote for them, but I actually quite like him. He seemed quite honest and level headed to me, not on a power trip like most of the other MPs. I know he renegaded on uni fees but when it comes to lying through your arse and U turns, he seems to be better than the others.

What have I missed. I felt really sorry for him at the election.

Sorry that should say who would believe.

He sacrificed his party for his own vanity - he loved being deputy PM. I couldn't believe it when I heard he was going into coalition with Tories and thought he was signing his own death warrant at the time.

I've heard him talk in real life about the tuition fees thing. Apparently he and Vince Cable didn't want it to be part of the Lib Dem manifesto at the time but because of the democratic way in which the Lib Dem party runs things when the membership wanted it included he couldn't insist on it not being included himself.

I also think he was caught between a rock and a hard place re.the Coalition. It's (relatively) easy to be the Opposition but this was the Lib Dem's only chance of being in power and they (bravely) took it. They definitely had a tempering effect on Tory policy during the Coalition years.

I like him, I think he's a good principled politician and I hope he doesn't walk away from politics now. I think he's especially useful to have around as a committed Remainer.

Unfortunately the black and white approach we have to parties and policies in this country means that we are unhappy with the idea of compromise and consensus. We remember people only for the thing they said they'd do that they didn't achieve, not for all the things they did achieve.

Look at all the people on this thread saying NC was vain and loved the power. We have such an odd attitude to people who are genuinely trying to do what they believe is best, but who don't always succeed. I think Tim Farron's summing up was right; NC put country before party and people can't forgive him for that.

I think it's a very limited and not very mature way of thinking about politics, but I think our entire political structure (Us Against Them) leads to immature and tribalistic thinking. What we need is discussion and compromise. What we get is entrenched positions.

I disagree. He wanted to be able to actually influence policy and govern, and was far better able to do that in coalition with some of his MPs on the front bench than as a small 3rd party.

He and the other LD's did so much good in their time in office I don't understand why people won't forgive them for the tuition fees - things could have been so much worse if they hadn't been involved.

No one at the time foresaw the brexit shambles so saying he should have kept his powder dry for that fight would have required a supernatural level of precognition!

Slow typer - I disagree with Lillian

I've heard the argument that the Lib Dems restrained the Tories worst excesses on the doorstep. But isn't the point that if they hadn't gone into coalition the Tories wouldn't have been able to get much done anyway as a minority government. They wouldn't have needed restraining as they were already restrained by not having a majority. Isn't that effectively what would happen now if the DUP decide they don't want to support them?

I have no problem with him being in a coalition, But he had a chance to temper the damage that the tories did and he folded on every single pledge that he made.

I don't understand why people won't forgive them for the tuition fees

Obviously an extra £24,000 plus 6% interest is nothing to you. In which case, please send the money our way.

I don't get the tuition fees thing - and neither does my 18yo DD who will be starting her degree this autumn, loan forms all filled out already, and she understands better than most how it works (she and DH did some modelling of how much she will pay when for a variety of scenarios. Yes, its a lot). But, either the individual pays - when they are earning enough - or everyone does. A service 'free at the point of delivery' is good if it is something which applies to everyone (e.g. primary and secondary education) and progressive if it is particularly beneficial to the less advantaged/vulnerable (e.g. NHS). But tuition fees are of benefit mainly to the more advantaged half of young people. Regressive, not progressive.

Obviously an extra £24,000 plus 6% interest is nothing to you. In which case, please send the money our way.

Erm...£27k assuming a 3 year degree? And actually the raise has had a direct impact on my OH's life and reduced his choices. But anyway, I worded it badly. What I meant is I don't see why people see NC as responsible for the tuition fee raise when there was nothing he could have done, in coalition or not, not have stopped it.

He could have not gone into coalition, but agreed to support the Tories on a vote by vote basis. Then whenever the Tories proposed something at odds with what the people who had elected Lib Dem MPs wanted, he and his colleagues could have voted against it.

He chose to go into a coalition with a party that was diametrically poles apart in values (and I could be mistaken, but I believe that the majority of lib dem voters would be more akin to ally themselves with Labour). He could have refrained from a coalition and went on an issue by issue basis. You lie with the dogs, you get fleas. Im surprised that Nick Clegg wasnt savvy enough to realise that Lib Dem voters would most likely punish them at the next election for getting into bed with the Tories. Or he did, but it was a worthwhile sacrifice to be deputy pm.

The Lib Dems in coalition were responsible for the introduction of Pupil Premium which has had a huge impact in the way disadvantaged pupils are dealt with at school.

As a Remainer, I really enjoyed hearing him talk about Europe. Unlike some others where it was all politics and what's in it for us, he genuinely sounded enthusiastic about the values of the EU.

He could have not gone into coalition, but agreed to support the Tories on a vote by vote basis. Then whenever the Tories proposed something at odds with what the people who had elected Lib Dem MPs wanted, he and his colleagues could have voted against it

But then the LibDems wouldn't have had a seat at the table. I think the coalition government was much better for having Clegg and Cable in it than a minority Conservative one would have been.

I like Nick Clegg. I agree with noblegiraffe regarding pupil premium.

The LibDems only had 57 seats. I think they thought they could temper the Conservatives in a coalition and they did.

It was no coincidence that David Cameron decided to change tuition fees immediately. It was the first thing he did in the coalition and it was to put Nick Clegg in his place.

It wasn't the Lib Dems who raised tuition fees. Nick Clegg acknowledges now that free tuition wouldn't have worked - as JC will find one day, maybe.

The Conservatives had 306 seats compared to Lib Dem's 57. People who blame Nick Clegg for the tuition fees should remember that.

Personally I think he's a really intelligent and decent bloke and the only one willing to stick his neck out about the complete and utter disaster Brexit will be.

Seat at the table? Ahhh. So it was about power.

I think they thought they could temper the Conservatives in a coalition and they did that's true and maybe they did - they trouble is that is something that can't be measured. What people can see is what actually happened - it is impossible to know what the Tories could have done as a minority government. For good or for bad the party is now forever associated with that nasty austerity government. What is more significant is that at that time the Lib Dems had 57 seats - now they have just 12 (and before that just nine!). That's why people don't like Nick Clegg - because the Lib Dems had been making progress and growing their party and now they are completely insignificant. Which is a shame. Personally I like him and I think his voice will be sorely missed, but at the same time I believe he is the author of his own misfortune and that makes me cross.

Well, why not 'power', if it was the power to actual do some good and mitigate the bad? much better to be at the table and be able to put their ideas on it, engage in discussions rather than merely deciding to support, or not, whatever the conservatives alone came up with.

alltouchedout You sound very naive if you think politics is now about power!

I agree Op - I quite like him.

Im also confused about the tuition fees issue - Labour introduced tuition fees in the first instance but it's like everyone has rewritten history & forgotten this

If you remember at the time the coalition was formed there was a lot of pressure to get on with the cuts and reduce the deficit. The country was obsessed with getting rid of the deficit as quickly as possible. If he'd been 'as vocal as possible' and prevented all bills that he disagreed with he'd have been slammed for stopping the country moving forward. He was damned if he did, damned if he didn't. He did the best he could with the power he had.

I was delighted he lost his seat. He should have been voted out last time.

I know he renegaded on uni fees and tripled them once he got into bed with the Tories.

ImperialBlether yes, because that's exactly what I said . Do you understand my post better if I replace 'power' with 'status'?