UK Election: Observer Latest Paper To Abandon Labour (For The Liberal Democrats)

[Turborama]

Source: Sky News


The Observer, which has traditionally supported Labour, is the latest to announce it is switching to back the Liberal Democrats.

In an editorial, it praises Mr Brown for "reversing a generation of Tory under-investment" but concludes he "failed to inspire".

Dismissive of the Conservatives' claims it offers something new, it argues only the Lib Dems represent a "radical, positive change in politics".

Read more: http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Newspapers-Declare-Political-Allegiancies-In-An-Attempt-To-Sway-Voters-Ahead-Of-The-General-Election/Article/201004415623333?lpos=Politics_Second_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region_9&lid=ARTICLE_15623333_Newspaper

---

Nick Clegg is the candidate of change

The Liberal Democrats offer a prospect of renewal which has been denied them by a grossly unfair voting system

Source: The Obsever

The rotten parliament is dissolved; this week a new one will be elected. Scores of incumbents who fiddled their expenses will be evicted. Many who did not are standing down anyway, too defeated by the public's loathing of politicians to face the campaign trail.

So change is inevitable. Parliament will be full of novice MPs. It might also, if current opinion polls are borne out, be hung.

The Conservatives have spent much energy campaigning against that outcome. They have publicised their irritation that voters could deprive David Cameron of a majority much better than they have explained why he deserves one in the first place.

Mr Cameron warns portentously that a coalition might lead to instability, economic jeopardy and "more of the old politics". Perversely, he also rejects the need to change the current voting system, which has, he says, the merit of delivering clear results. Except this time it might not. What then? Mr Cameron's view is that the system would work fine, if only everyone voted Conservative. This is sophistry draped in hypocrisy. He backs first past the post, while agitating against one of the outcomes that is hard-wired into it. He is campaigning against the voters instead of pitching for their support. He defines change in politics as the old system preserved – but run by the Tories.

Full endorsement: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/01/liberal-democrats-endorsement-observer

[Captain Hilts]

1. Gordon Brown is paying the price for not being telegenic enough. nt

[IndianaGreen]

2. He is paying the price for continuing Blair's wars

Let this be the end of New Labour!

[Captain Hilts]

3. That is certainly part of it. I agree. But style-wise, he's a no-gainer. nt

[kgnu_fan]

5. I had to laugh... telegenic like Palin would get American vote! nt

[Joe Chi Minh]

4. That's bullsh*t. The Observer and the Guardian were always 'champagne

Socialists'.

They found NuLab(c), until recently a more subtle version of the Tory neoliberals, quite acceptable. (Even now, Gordon's got some way to go towards returning the country to a proper welfare state).

One director of the Guardian was a real fan of Blair, though I believe they've generally always favoured the Lib-Dems. Come election time, it just wasn't/isn't practical. Well, when the Gang of Four seceded from the Labour party to form and lead the Social Democrats, before they merged with the Liberal Party in 1981, to form the Lib-Dems. If I remember correctly, at that time, the Guardian and Observer were keen supporters of their breakaway party. So, supporting the Lib-Dems now is not exactly a revolution. But the right wing are using it, as if it were.

In fact, their over-riding priority is keep the Tories (the only pathologically hostile obstacle to proportional representation) out, so they have been encouraging their readers to vote tactically, i.e for NuLab(c), where they are the only viable opponents to the Tory candidate. Under PR, the Lib-Dems would certainly prosper; the Tories, suffer further marginalisation.

PR would be an enormous blessing to the country, while the mere thought of it horrifies Big Business. So they're vehemently claiming it will lead to weak government. Never mind that Germany and France, and other successful European countries, seem to have been doing rather well compared to us. But then we all know, that Germany and France are the 'sick men of Europe'. Every country but the wildly successful UK.