If you join the LibDems in a forest...

rjsterry

You get the drift.

Post all your mockery of the LibDems here.

Terrible bar charts a must.

Happy to expand to other minority parties if required

pblakeney

sungod

they'll need to try harder if they want to be mocked

Mad_Malx

Some of my best friends are LD. In my posh part of the country they are the only realistic opposition. They (and I) despair over their invisibility and dodgy bar charts though.

focuszing723

pblakeney said:

That's the wrong type of weed for the horse eaters.

Stevo_666

The Lib who?

photonic69

Mad_Malx said:

Some of my best friends are LD. In my posh part of the country they are the only realistic opposition. They (and I) despair over their invisibility and dodgy bar charts though.

Yes, but it's a posh part of the country inhabited by idiots. I just love the comments in the local rag by readers berating the 'LibDums' for legislation brought in by the previous Tory council. You couldn't make it up!

ddraver

Is this a second thread set up just to troll RC..?

Not a great look boys

Jezyboy

I presume it's just so that rjs can now tell someone that this subject has its own thread whenever they try and shoehorn the lib Dems into conversation

rjsterry

No.

Would hope it's fairly obvious that's not what I did.

rjsterry

Tim Farron is good on Twitter, though.

https://twitter.com/timfarron/status/1622960048530915331?t=P7QnHIfi2Q447afCRXJG_g&s=09

rick_chasey

Tim Farron is a really interesting case in the thought police fwiw.

Happy to discuss if anyone is interested.

The rough summary (knocking out the nuance) is he felt pushed out of the Lib Dem’s for his own faith and his views on things like homosexuality (because of his faith) despite the fact his voting record was as tolerant and liberal as you get.

He’d constantly get pressed about what he thinks about x and y, and he’d point to his voting record and they’d just ask again.

Jezyboy

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

No.

Would hope it's fairly obvious that's not what I did.

Not to everyone, it would appear

rick_chasey

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

What you do, always what you do. Above what you say, far less what you think.
I give you BJ and rest my case. 😉

rjsterry

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

FFS, just enjoy the joke.

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

What you do, always what you do. Above what you say, far less what you think.
I give you BJ and rest my case. 😉

So there’s an interesting thing happening there right?

Certainly in quite a few Lib Dem circles the fact he was open about his faith and how that informed his own views did not go down well.

There is more focus on beliefs and not voting track record.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

What you do, always what you do. Above what you say, far less what you think.
I give you BJ and rest my case. 😉

So there’s an interesting thing happening there right?

Certainly in quite a few Lib Dem circles the fact he was open about his faith and how that informed his own views did not go down well.

There is more focus on beliefs and not voting track record.

That says more about the people doing the focusing than it does about him.

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

What you do, always what you do. Above what you say, far less what you think.
I give you BJ and rest my case. 😉

So there’s an interesting thing happening there right?

Certainly in quite a few Lib Dem circles the fact he was open about his faith and how that informed his own views did not go down well.

There is more focus on beliefs and not voting track record.

That says more about the people doing the focusing than it does about him.

I suspect it's most people in politics tbh. I recon we are all more familiar with the general constellation of beliefs of politicians than we are their voting record, not least as they will often say one thing and vote another, and the coverage is on what was said and not the vote, unless it's especially close. Plus there is a whipping system.

kingstongraham

The way the Lib dems take completely opposite positions from the national policy when it is locally expedient is not a good look. What you do does matter.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

What you do, always what you do. Above what you say, far less what you think.
I give you BJ and rest my case. 😉

So there’s an interesting thing happening there right?

Certainly in quite a few Lib Dem circles the fact he was open about his faith and how that informed his own views did not go down well.

There is more focus on beliefs and not voting track record.

That says more about the people doing the focusing than it does about him.

I suspect it's most people in politics tbh. I recon we are all more familiar with the general constellation of beliefs of politicians than we are their voting record, not least as they will often say one thing and vote another, and the coverage is on what was said and not the vote, unless it's especially close. Plus there is a whipping system.

That feeds into media and their bias, along with the public choosing their confirmation bias feed.
The bold bit makes sense from a party view but not from a constituent view. This is wrong but won't be fixed.

rick_chasey

kingstongraham said:

The way the Lib dems take completely opposite positions from the national policy when it is locally expedient is not a good look. What you do does matter.

The tories do this constantly on a local level but don't get punished for it.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

The way the Lib dems take completely opposite positions from the national policy when it is locally expedient is not a good look. What you do does matter.

The tories do this constantly on a local level but don't get punished for it.

See the campaign against the ULEZ expansion.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

The way the Lib dems take completely opposite positions from the national policy when it is locally expedient is not a good look. What you do does matter.

The tories do this constantly on a local level but don't get punished for it.

See the campaign against the ULEZ expansion.

Pet hate of mine. The line the local candidate used was he'd get a fairer hearing because he's one of them.

kingstongraham

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

The way the Lib dems take completely opposite positions from the national policy when it is locally expedient is not a good look. What you do does matter.

The tories do this constantly on a local level but don't get punished for it.

I guess nobody expects them to pretend to tell the truth.

Pross

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

What you do, always what you do. Above what you say, far less what you think.
I give you BJ and rest my case. 😉

So there’s an interesting thing happening there right?

Certainly in quite a few Lib Dem circles the fact he was open about his faith and how that informed his own views did not go down well.

There is more focus on beliefs and not voting track record.

That says more about the people doing the focusing than it does about him.

I suspect it's most people in politics tbh. I recon we are all more familiar with the general constellation of beliefs of politicians than we are their voting record, not least as they will often say one thing and vote another, and the coverage is on what was said and not the vote, unless it's especially close. Plus there is a whipping system.

That feeds into media and their bias, along with the public choosing their confirmation bias feed.
The bold bit makes sense from a party view but not from a constituent view. This is wrong but won't be fixed.

It's a tricky one, the MP has been voted in on the basis of their Party's manifesto so you can argue that they should therefore be voting in line with the Party as that is thei mandate but then they are also supposed to represent the interests of their constituents and the two don't always align.

rick_chasey

I mean to me, running your politics more liberally than your own personal view because you recognise not everyone thinks the same is a core tenant of liberalism, right?

People on here often seem to refuse to believe you can think one thing but want things run another way.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

I mean to me, running your politics more liberally than your own personal view because you recognise not everyone thinks the same is a core tenant of liberalism, right?

People on here often seem to refuse to believe you can think one thing but want things run another way.

Iwould say that every time there is a new leader there is a hunt to figure out what they truly believe in.

Ihave no idea what religious beliefs you are referring to but I would assume that if somebody had some deeply held beliefs that if they got the chance to push them on to the rest of the population then they would think that the correct thing to do.

And if that sounds harsh then for context I would not vote for anybody with deeply held religious beliefs

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

I mean to me, running your politics more liberally than your own personal view because you recognise not everyone thinks the same is a core tenant of liberalism, right?

People on here often seem to refuse to believe you can think one thing but want things run another way.

Iwould say that every time there is a new leader there is a hunt to figure out what they truly believe in.

Ihave no idea what religious beliefs you are referring to but I would assume that if somebody had some deeply held beliefs that if they got the chance to push them on to the rest of the population then they would think that the correct thing to do.

And if that sounds harsh then for context I would not vote for anybody with deeply held religious beliefs

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/10/tim-farron-regrets-saying-gay-sex-not-sin

The former Lib Dem leader Tim Farron has said he regrets telling people he did not believe gay sex was a sin when he was forced to clarify his position during the election campaign.

Asked by Premier Christian Radio why he suddenly changed his tune and whether he had felt under pressure to say gay sex was not a sin, Farron said: “Yeah. I’m going to write about this more in the coming weeks. But the bottom line is yes, of course I did.

“There are things, including that, that I said that I regret. There was a sense in which I felt, look, I’ve got to get this off my table … I would say foolishly and wrongly I attempted to push it away by giving an answer that frankly was not right.”

And his voting record is here:

FactCheck analysed his voting record, dating back to 2005, and identified 22 instances where he voted on same sex marriage or other LGBTQ issues. On the whole, he has voted in favour of equal rights, but there are some notable exceptions. They generally relate to the right of individuals to uphold their personal beliefs and include:

Voting against a law that made it illegal for public services to be denied to gay people
Voting to allow registrars not to carry out gay marriages if they object on religious grounds
Voting to increase protections for people who don’t want to conduct or participate in a same sex marriage ceremony
Voting to make it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of their beliefs about the definition of marriage
Farron also abstained from a key vote on legalising gay marriage, despite voting in favour of it previously.

Equality Act
In 2007, he went against his party by voting against the landmark Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations, which criminalised many types of discrimination against gay people. The law was ultimately passed and hailed by campaigners as a major step forward towards greater equality.

So clearly he didn't vote every time in favour of gay rights, in general, he has voted in favour, nor did he make the Lib Dems vote in a certain way on the topic, and regardless, the voting is in general a very liberal approach.

pblakeney

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Jezyboy said:

Slightly arsey response...he was a pretty dull leader. Maybe if he'd had something more to him the media might not have put such a focus on the region angle.

Sure but what’s more important as aomeone in power; what you privately think or what you actually do?

What you do, always what you do. Above what you say, far less what you think.
I give you BJ and rest my case. 😉

So there’s an interesting thing happening there right?

Certainly in quite a few Lib Dem circles the fact he was open about his faith and how that informed his own views did not go down well.

There is more focus on beliefs and not voting track record.

That says more about the people doing the focusing than it does about him.

I suspect it's most people in politics tbh. I recon we are all more familiar with the general constellation of beliefs of politicians than we are their voting record, not least as they will often say one thing and vote another, and the coverage is on what was said and not the vote, unless it's especially close. Plus there is a whipping system.

That feeds into media and their bias, along with the public choosing their confirmation bias feed.
The bold bit makes sense from a party view but not from a constituent view. This is wrong but won't be fixed.

It's a tricky one, the MP has been voted in on the basis of their Party's manifesto so you can argue that they should therefore be voting in line with the Party as that is thei mandate but then they are also supposed to represent the interests of their constituents and the two don't always align.

This is why there is a disjoint in this country's political system. You can have a situation where an MP votes against the best interests of their constituents.