Why is Clegg cosying up to Cameron?

[AmberTheHappyLuddite]

I know that it would be numerically easier to form a majority government, but don't the Tories represent everything the Lib Dems supposedly campaigned on? Surely a cheap shot at power is not worth alienating everybody who voted Lib Dem?

Genuinely confused here!

The numbers mean that Lib+Con is more or less the only alliance that could work.

I guess Con+DUP+SNP might just work but the price would be so high.

Can you imagine how unstable Lab+LD+SDLP+SNP+Plaid+Green would be? That is what is required, in purely arithmetic terms. Lab+LD wouldn't be enough.

Also, and not to belabour the point, Cameron and Clegg are more or less the same politically.

Cameron is a very liberal Tory, and Clegg is a very free-market Liberal Democrat.

They obviously both like each other and get on.

The problem for both is their parties.

The Tories are way to the right of Cameron, on average. The Liberal Democrats are way to the left of Clegg, on average. They need a deal they can sell to their parties, but personally, I suspect both would often prefer working with each other than with their own parties!

the Lib Dem MPs are not left of Clegg, the hippy sandal-wearing activists are, but they aren't representative of the voters or the MPs.

SomeGuy - where's the 'like' button when you need one?

Because he hasn't got a Clegg to stand on!

newyorkshire "seeing as how Clegg ... got so few votes from the population."

Yes, it was definitely too early in the morning if you truly believe that - just check the numbers (649 results of 650) :-

portion count party
23% .... 6,827,938 ... Lib Dems
29% .... 8,604,358 ... Labour
36% ... 10,706,647 .. Conservatives

It doesn't matter which party you support, getting over 60% of the "winning" count, and nearly 80% of the "second" count, hardly makes it "so few votes".

If others who voted tactically for Labour or Conservative parties had voted for the Lib Dems it may have been second in portion of the voters, if not winner.