Dear Sir/ Madam
I can do better than your survey.
The minimum it would take for me to consider voting Lib Dem again is the removal/ resignation of Nick Clegg and people like Danny Alexander, David Laws etc..
I voted for the party after its long development, and during, with hope, on the basis of its manifesto. What we got instead was completely different. Nick Clegg referred to politicians lying, with all that litter in the broadcast, but he turned out to be the biggest liar of them all.
Those who depend on benefits - the law says you need x amount to live on - will get clobbered by the 1%, by council tax contributions and by a spare bedroom tax. Liberal Democrats sign off these policies One month Alexander says, 'We protected the poorest' and next it's the 1% to join the others.
And what of the banks and all their credit expanding policies and bogus 'insurance' products when prices fall? Absolutely nothing.
The party built up by Ashdown and Kennedy has been destroyed by the present 'Orange' leadership that just loves the Conservatives. They're all economic liberals and of a social class.
No one believes the statistics for unemployment. People on various benefits and schemes aren't counted as unemployed. They want to work but the jobs aren't there and they just go round and round the system.
You haven't even managed any constitutional reform.
The sooner the coalition ends the better. Instead we get Nick Clegg further enthusing with his partnership with Cameron. Well, the electorate sits, waits and when the time comes you'll know what's coming. The Liberal Democrats will be destroyed at the next election and will deserve every rotten result.
I won't touch you again until the poison has gone.
2 comments:
Quite right Pluralist, but the trouble is that the political class have got the system sewn up. When the next election comes most of the people will be persuaded – by their obedient servants the mass media – to vote for one of the big parties, so nothing much will change.
The real reason for the increased poverty is not some impersonal ‘economic situation’ but the increasing polarisation of wealth. The ultra-rich are continuing to amass ever-greater wealth and power at the expense of everyone else. What’s needed (apart from doing something about the environment, which is more important still) is a substantial redistribution of wealth. That will bring a redistribution of power, and people will be freer. But it will only happen if voters can be persuaded to vote for candidates who support it.
Quite so; I agree. Applies to corporate, individual and global (geographical-national) imbalances of wealth and power.
Post a Comment