Get on with it!

Ugh. It's going on a bit. So I shall too.

LibDems have still not made up their mind. LibDems and Tories can't agree, they are poles apart on beliefs. Yeah, a tempered Tory government would be a great thing and LibDems would have achieved a miracle if they got concessions towards their policies under Tory rule. But for an entire term, could a coalition between Tories and a party that the majority of voters presumably see as primarily Not Tory ever work? I don't see how.

Yet, a coalition of all those that lost the election is wrong, even if it does make a infinitely more palatable government. I don't often agree with David Blunkett, but I do on that.

Whatever happens, the Tories will want what they want, and the others will want what they want.

Letting the Tories form a minority government is fair, albeit vile, and then the parties have their usual voting power. Which after all, is the whole point of MPs and parties having seats and whatnot, each seat should represent a vote on issues in the Commons.

Simplistic, yes. Am simple.

Should a coalition go ahead, then at least two parties are in a position where they have to compromise their principles. Which means all who voted for them are being let down. Should the LibDems ever abstain on anything the Tories propose, they are not doing what they were voted in to do. Should the Tories make concessions to the LibDems, they are not doing what their voters believed them to do. If the Tory voters are opposed to PR and tax relief for the poor (which is hard to comprehend, but they did vote in the - presumed - knowledge of the policies) then they are being denied that by the very party they voted for.

It's not democracy, it's compromise all round and nobody getting what they wanted. Parties sticking to their beliefs and a fair vote (if such a thing does exist) is how it should be. The distribution of seats should mean that the Tories can't push through things the others would oppose. Should.

Naive, yes, everyone's for pretending it's not all corrupt.

I wish they'd just decide to do nothing.

For posterity, for the 18th time, the leader of the Labour Party? DavEd Milliballs.

Yeah. I know.

And the result is... pending.

How disappointing. The people of England voted for the smug one. Presumably they're either bigots at heart or swayed completely by the media.

The people of Scotland did not. One Tory seat in Scotland. One. Which actually makes me proud to be Scottish, and newly open to the idea of independence.

I had a moment of over excitement at 1am and trotted off to the college at which the Kirkcaldy result would be declared. And stood outside for a while, got fed up, came home, and watched as Gordon Brown overwhelmingly held on to his seat. It looked promising for a while, as the seats that were always going to be Labour came in as Labour holds. But this morning, the news was bleak. Admittedly less bleak than it might have been, given the media annihilation of Brown/Labour, the people didn't actually all vote Tory. So there is a streak of independent thought throughout the electorate. Conservative do not have the majority, Smug Cameron isn't PM and there isn't a result yet.

Nick Clegg is the man of the moment. Who probably should/would be PM if we had a fair voting system and a less mogul controlled media.

Initial shock as Clegg stated that Cameron should have the first opportunity to form a government, spent some time feeling let down and appalled that he could even consider any co operation with the Tories. It seemed that anyone that had voted Liberal Democrat had in fact voted for a Conservative government. How disappointing to discover that the hero who championed what I believe in (mostly, but it's nice not to be a freak that thinks differently from the entire population on all issues) had sold out in the name of having power.

But then it dawned (admittedly probably NOT "today") that he may in fact be the ultimate hero. He could in fact be the key to the party who received the most seats getting to form the government, which is after all "fair" under the current system, but be in a position to get them to rethink some of their policies.
Except, Smug's comment on Electoral reform stated quite categorically that they don't want Proportional Representation.

PR seems to be the issue most people (that aren't Tory) care about. I am certainly furious that voting for what I believe in is akin to not voting, because the vote would count for nothing in the constituency of the PM.

So, it remains to be seen. The only "fair" outcome would be for the Smugs to govern, but fingers are crossed in fervent hope that a Tory government is avoided. Alex Salmond has stated firmly that a) they support Labour and will do anything to help Labour remain in power and b) that Scotland will not willingly support a Tory government.

If Nick Clegg gets a Tory government that backs down on some issues, he will be a hero after all. And he will allow the Tories to be the most unpopular government in history (again) and thus safeguard against any future Tory rule. Much as I hate to admit it, I think that would be the fairest and most logical solution. A Labour government that so many people voted against would have no chance against the media and public opinion would swiftly fail to support them. Which isn't exactly healthy, even if it keeps the b'tards out.

Why am I writing this? One thing I have learned this week is that nobody fully agrees with anyone else on political matters, and nobody should talk about politics. I think that may be it.

Ha!