Vince Cable is Chairmanda's new leader.

Who else could it be other than Cable?

Can we stop being distracted by Vincent kennedy Cable, and get back to the real issue here of Sluffy being a complete Dick.

Sluffy, have you been diddling Mrs RustyNail because he seems to have it in for you for no reason.

RustyNail wrote:Can we stop being distracted by Vincent kennedy Cable, and get back to the real issue here of Sluffy being a complete Dick.

34 posts in 4 years suggests Rusty may be a lurker. Why raise the subject again other than to cause unrest?

Reebok Trotter wrote:34 posts in 4 years suggests Rusty may be a lurker. Why raise the subject again other than to cause unrest?

Perhaps he only just found out about sluffy and Mrs RustyNail?

I can't weigh up why some folk go to the trouble of signing up on here but rarely if ever contribute.

Reebok Trotter wrote:I can't weigh up why some folk go to the trouble of signing up on here but rarely if ever contribute.

To read what I post of course.

Point taken.

I try to comment when I can, nowadays....


As it is, unlike other parties, a LibDem leader can only be chosen from those who are existing MP's.  In current case we have 12 MPs and only one of them put themselves forward and he is now leader.

Vince is a well known, and well respected MP not by majority n LibDems but also from other parties, he had many a run-in with the Tories during the coalition, and although he does get blamed for the Post Office fiasco (which actually came under Osborne remit and not Vinces), his reputation for the business world is second to none.  His care for the social system (which is actually a LibDem baby and not Labours) is also second to none, and his word is far better than words that come from either May or Corbyn.  He also does not allow religion get in the way of his politics - in fact like many in LibDems he is basically agnostic but believe that many people still need their faith for so-called strength.

Rustynail.  You are a gobshite.  Go back to BA.

























OH YEAH....... UNLUCKY

Chairmanda wrote:

wessy wrote:The truth is that they have very little to choose from, so maybe a stop gap. He's the only one with any experience and stands unopposed. 

Manda not sure that that's the way to go, a leader who is not an MP is a bit like having a football captain who never plays. How could you form a government with a leader who cannot attend PM's questions.

UKIP had a leader that was not an MP he craved election but failed and look at them now.

it depends what you think the role of leader of the party is, West. Absolutely you need a leader in H of C, for the reasons you mention above, but a leader of Libdem's currently needs to spend a lot of time on the road, visiting local branches, dealing with regional problems, enthusing the wider membership, having lengthy policy discussions. I'd argue that the skill set should for those roles aren't often found in the same person who is good at the oratory and political positioning needed from a MP leader.

Hi Manda i accept the need for the roles you outline, but in truth a leader should be all encompassing, The aim of any political party is to gain influence through power, ie forming a government either by an outright win or coalition, So to have a leader that is incapable of leading the parliamentary party, would make you unelectable.

 So as a voter i would find it hard to take such a party serious in terms of winning an election. I realise you would not expect to win, but the Liberals are an historically serious party with real and honest policies (2010 apart) who may look  to influence future governments. I doubt Nick Clegg would have been invited to the table if he was not an MP.