I don't agree about trains but as you agree with the subsidy point in general then it's purely a practical manner. Buses should be subsidised as well but we definitely need to run them when they are not busy.

If you ever go house hunting round the country you will see a very significant price rise close to trains stations. It's part of the housing problem apart from anything else - can't commute far to the cities by bus

We could maybe create a game of farage or satire, except I'm not sure they are distinct categories half the time.

"If you increase the minimum wage, you may actually even attract more migrant labour.

Don’t forget, the minimum wage in Britain is now nine times what it is in Romania. If you increase it even more people would want to come. I want to see the market adjust this.

The current proposal to increase the minimum wage, which is the Labour proposal, to put it up by 2019 to about £8 an hour, I don’t think a marginal increase is really going to make a difference."
http://www.cityam.com/213969/nigel-f...any-immigrants

Increasing min wage, bad for immigration, also won't make a difference. The only thing stopping that horde of Romanians is that they can only earn nine times as much here than back home. Increase it to over ten times as much and oh boy.

Milliband has gone ahead in the market for PM for the first time in ages. Still neck and neck mostly though.

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/...neral-election

Spent the evening listening to our local candidates. Green was a trainwreck, Con incumbent was massively scared of UKIP, UKIP guy was ranty but fairly reasonable, Labour guy seemed very good, pity about his party's policies, Lib Dem was just bland

The conservatives still the favorites for the most seats by over 20+ right though? Can the Conservative/Lib Dem coalition live on?

Not really. The Tory gains will come at the expense of the lib dems, whilst the lib dems will also lose seats to Labour. The numbers don't really add up.

Added to this is the possibility that Clegg will lose his seat or that he will be ousted as leader and his replacement declines a coalition.

Considering that Labour, the Snp, Plaid Cymru and the Greens would introduce a no confidence bill on a Tory minority government, it's hard to see how they can continue.

I think there is a decent chance that ukip don't poll as well as thought and that a lot of ukip voters tactically vote Tory instead.

Yes I think it can but on a few contingencies. It's hard to see on current forecasts them winning enough seats between them. However, I have expected the totality of the Lib Dem crisis has been slightly overstated. Most of the betting lines for seats seem to be at about 26.5, and I think it may be shrewd to jump on a few more. I wouldn't be surprised to see them break the 30 mark. The Tory line seems to be at about 282.5. In short, if both end up having a slightly better night than previously expected, and they hit the 326 mark, then I believe Clegg will respect the Tories right to form a government, even if he doesn't remain on as leader. This is the 3rd favourite in most markets behind a Labour and Conservative Minority at about 6/1.

The Tories don't have the right to form a government in a coalition though! Clegg seems just eager for power regardless of the political costs and consequences. Will be just back anyone who will offer him the chance of power?

Do u think there is the possibility of a lib dem revolt against clegg? He's basically screwed them.

A Labour / SNP / Greens / Plaid Cymru / Lib Dems coalition seems the obvious solution to me? The Lib Dems have lost their support and identity by going into coalition with the Tories. Those who are still Lib Dems understand they had little choice in 2010, but surely won't stomach another 5 years of coalition with their ideological enemy, when they have other options?

Clegg could well end up losing his seat as well.

Lib Dems are going to be utterly eviscerated in this election.

Hate to say it but I can't see past a Labour coalition government.

Yes they do. The first right to form a government falls to the incumbent prime minister. Also, the Lib Dems, and Clegg in particular have said that they will respect the right of the largest party to form a government.

I doubt it'll be much of a revolt. If they have a bad night, I doubt he'll try clinging on to power, if they have a better night then expected (keeping half or more of there seats), he may well stay on, that's obviously just conjecture though.

Labour have ruled out coalitions with the SNP and Plaid, and the Greens are only realistically looking to retain the one seat they have. Far more likely is a Labour Minority, or perhaps a Lab/Lib with the SNP abstaining on English issues.

The problem with a Lab/Lib coalition with the snp not voting on English issues is that Labour would not be able to pass most of their policies.

What I meant was that the Lib dems don't have to throw in their lot with the Tories just because they are the biggest party.

Well in the scenario I gave I was assuming that Lab+Lib > 326-SNP seats, so they'd be able to pass anything as a usual government would. It would look good for them as the Tories wouldn't be able to complain about the SNP running riot.

Yes, they don't have to, but I think they'd be keen to stay in power and, as noted above, have said they'll give priority to the biggest party.

I love how Clegg getting the party into government allowing them to shape policy and push policies is seen as a negative by the immature children (young and old) who vote for the party.

He screwed them by giving them more than they could have ever dreamed of before he took over the leadership.

Oh no, a party leader wants his party to be relevant and hold power. What a disgrace. He should be happy having two questions a week at pmqs and the ability to propose stupid policies no one ever takes seriously enough to question.

These weren't Clegg's only options.

What he could have done was support some kind of Confidence and Supply arrangement, yes it would keep him on the opposition benches but given Cameron would still have required LibDem support to get through the budget and the Queens speech he still leverages power.

That he didn't do this will contribute to him losing a ton of seats at this election and will go someway to ensure the LibDems don't retain a say, they've been waiting a long time for this power and they took a line that pretty much ensured they'd have a bit of it for 5 years max.

Lib dems are the sort of voters more concerned about principle than power - that's partly the nature of a UK type liberal and partly because if they weren't they would be supporting a major party.

Plus they appealed as a protest party - tough to maintain when you're in power.

if the snp abstained then that leaves ~600 seats for everything else, so they'd need 300, which is more or less what the line is for lab+lib at the moment, so i don't see what the issue is

also the lib dems "getting more than what they could have ever dreamed of" is kind of funny. they lost seats under clegg, and only had relevance as labour didn't manage to wreck the economy quite enough for the tories to get a majority. reading through the grauniad's summary of what they've actually managed to implement of their manifesto is quite sad reading, and what they didn't do, or what they completely turned on, are the sorts of things that are very likely to rustle their voters

I'd be surprised if the Lib Dems formed a coalition with anyone other than the tories tbh. Tories are likely to win the most seats, and I doubt a repeat of the Lib/Con coalition would be as hard a sell to the Lib party members as many are making out.

I've lumped on at 6.8 though, so that's the main problem with it.

The SNP suggested back in 2014 that they may review their current policy of abstaining on English only laws. If you consider that devo max or whatever will only reduce any Labour governments effectiveness if the SNP abstain on English only votes it would do neither of them any favours with the Labour party reluctant to grant more powers to Scotland when it reduces their ability to govern south of the border.

This also suggests that the LibDems are switching to the Greens and Labour in greater numbers than the Tories. It also may mean that their is stronger support for a Tory / LibDem coalition rather than LibDem/Lab

I think the lib dems would have zero problem continuing in coalition with the tories if they have the numbers - those who vote lib dem this time are effectively endorsing the coalition.

so that graph is saying that, assuming a similar turnout:

- ukip will get about 4 million votes, under/over line is about 4 seats
- greens will get about a million votes, under/over line is 1 seat
- so together they get about 5 million votes and 5 seats
- snp get about a quarter of that combined total and ten times the seats

first past the post ladies and gentlemen!

At the moment the Tories are polling about 280 seats and lib dems about 25-30. Even if a Tory lib dem coalition did go through under these numbers, they wouldn't have the strength to implement hard line Tory policies. You have to imagine a lot of lib dem mps will be more resistant to Tory policies knowing all their mates lost their seats because of them before.

A lot of people voted for nick clegg and the Tories based on their manifesto and their policies. They didn't vote for them because they were their mates and they were doing them a favour. A lot of coalition policies were in complete contradiction to their manifesto.

Ja fptp a load of bollocks