The Lib Dems' hunt for an issue may lead them to an Afghan pull-out
Peter Hoskin 3:29pm
As Anthony Wells says over at his UK Polling Report, there are plenty of reasons to doubt whether Labour could convert a third of Lib Dem voters over to their cause. But the article in today's Times on Labour's new strategy will still give Team Clegg pause for thought.
The problem for the Lib Dems is that they haven't yet managed to hit on an attention-grabbing issue to make their own – their favourite, perhaps only, election strategy. The cause of Parliamentary reform could have done the trick, but – beyond Nick Clegg's call to prevent MPs from taking their summer holiday – very few of the Lib Dem proposals have received much coverage. Likewise, electoral reform, which Labour now seem to be comandeering for their own manifesto.
This will always make some Lib Dems worry that other parties could sally onto their ground. In which case, I rather suspect that they're going to start making more of their opposition to the conflict in Afghanistan. Clegg has already road-tested a "Let's do the the job properly, or let's get out" message. The first half of that may well disappear before the next election.
Previous
Danko
December 7th, 2009 4:15pm Report this commentIt would not surprise me. The LibDems get no attention for a very good reason; they are unfit to form a Government. If they were to pursue such a policy as withdrawal from Afghanistan, all it would do is garner some angry left wing votes and reinforce the overall opinion in the minds of everyone else, that is to say that Lib Dems = a shameless political joke.
NorthernJohn
December 7th, 2009 4:57pm Report this commentDanko - I don't think the LibDems would see this as a strategy to propel them to government.
Might just pinch a few votes (and seats) from Labour, though, which is all good for the Tories.
Hysteria
December 7th, 2009 4:59pm Report this commentwhere's the "next" button ??? Is the absence a subtle comment on the LibDems perhaps?
Jeremy
December 7th, 2009 5:18pm Report this commentI think that a "get out of Afghanistan" policy would be in our own national self-interest. We need the armed forces in Britain in order to re-assert our national independence and national sovereignty in the face of encroachments made upon both by the United States and Europe.
Given that we have a leader of the Conservative Party who appears to have jettisoned the whole concept of "nation" - therebye making a mockery of Disraeli's claim that the Conservative Party was the "national" party - it is a shame (and of course a sham) that a policy as good as this should have fallen so low as to land in the laps of the Liberal Democrats.
Hysteria
December 7th, 2009 6:04pm Report this commentJeremy "We need the armed forces in Britain in order to re-assert our national independence and national sovereignty in the face of encroachments made upon both by the United States and Europe"
erm - you proposing we invade Europe then?
Jeremy
December 7th, 2009 6:29pm Report this commentHysteria....you are well named.
TrevorsDen
December 7th, 2009 7:32pm Report this commentWho says the LibDems are interested in government?
They are doing very nicely milking the system from the sidelines in the surefire knowledge that they will never have to make a hard decision in their lives.
A vote for libdems is a totally wasted vote whose only purpose is to keep Brown in power.
In2minds
December 7th, 2009 10:09pm Report this commentThe LibDems looking for something to do with their time - “The cause of Parliamentary reform could have done the trick”. No not any more, it's now clear that the reform of the UK parliament is away down their list and at the top cozying up to the EU.
Danko
December 8th, 2009 11:27am Report this commentThe LibDems would want to be in a position where they are threatening to be the main Left of Centre party, to do this they need additional votes from dissatisfied Labour voters, they can do this by swinging behind the “Get out now” vote.
In response to Jeremy; if we get out of Afghanistan now, as a nation, the U.S. would probably fill the gap with their own soldiers, however it would lead to an increased pressure on Obama to get out sooner rather than later. This then destabilises the region on a larger scale, this is what we are there attempting to stop.
Patrick Mercer has it right when he talks about the threat to Pakistan. If we lose Afghanistan, we have FAR greater problems in maintaining a stable Democratic Government in Pakistan. Pakistan as you will remember has Nuclear Weapons and whilst I will grant you these are probably not assembled all that is needed is a warhead and hey-presto, you have a dirty bomb. This is why we are there and this is why we need to remain. The Conservatives must ensure that we do remain. It will be painful, it will be bloody and it will be bad politics, but it will likely produce a far better outcome in the long term than getting out now.
Jack
December 9th, 2009 8:57am Report this commentPatrick Mercer,is wrong there is little truth in his propaganda about the nuclear threat and he knows that the warheads are electronically locked to make certain that they cannot be detonated. The Government has spent £56 million on mass decontamination units for use in the event of chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) attack, such as a "dirty bomb". It’s unlikely anyone would die from a dirty bomb.
Bring our boys home now the real threat to the UK is already within.
Back to top