'Of course the right are too, but at least they don't close down opposition and open discussion like politically-correct lefties.'

I wonder if Tory Rob has been following the media in the run up to the election? The majority view expressed was that St Dave will put the country to rights,Angel Nick will stand at his side, and Gordon the Devil would return to hell.
I love the right-wing ranters, they are just so funny!

Five myths of the Left:

1) Nobody won the election - true, there was no *conclusive* winner, but the Conservative Party took the largest share of the vote. To ignore that would be a tad absurd.

2) That a Lib-Lab Pact has a mandate because 23 + 29 > 50. That is deeply disingenous. The LibDems campaigned heavily against Labour, and a little under half their voters would choose the Tories as a second choice. (There's a BBC poll to illustrate this somewhere, but I can't find it atm)

More to the point, 23 + 36 > 50 as well, and by a larger margin, rendering the argument rather moot.

3) That Gordon Brown is being "statesmanlike" by reaching out to other parties - no, he has finally decided to accept power-sharing, after having spurned it for years, because it is the only way of surviving. Had he put together a coalition in 2007, or even before the election, he would have some mandate to claim that now. But he didn't, he didn't and he doesn't.

4) That Cameron "failed" - on the contrary, considering the state of the Conservative Party in 2005 (fewer MPs than Labour returned in 1983) to become the largest party is pretty stunning. Labour took no fewer than three elections to do that.

5) That the people are crying out for PR - Uh.... no. Labour's proposal is AV, which is a good deal *less* proportional than FPTP. A majority of the electorate voted for parties that propose or support a majoritarian system of some kind. A significant fraction (~30%) voted for PR, but most people care less about the voting system and more about the economy, education, et cetera. You know, actual issues.

It's really not about 'conclusive' winners, it's simply about getting past the post. The Tories didn't manage it and that is all there is too it. Thankfully we have a constitution, Cameron will look pretty silly to harp on about mp's obeying the rules if he thinks he can 'govern' on some moralistic ground, he can't!. Any deal he stitches up with the Libs will be short lived and then we're back to the polls. Cameron can turn it around all he likes, but the reality is he had a pretty unimpressive result because people just don't trust him on the economy. It's got to be another election in the relatively short term when Labour and Liberals can put things together properly, with Milliband, the public will go for that with a resounding majority and then the Tories can lick their wounds and talk about finding another lack lustre leader as well as find a chancellor a tad more impressive than Osborne!

But Nick Robinson on the BBC keeps telling me the Conservatives won!

I still think it most likely that Cameron will form a pact with the LD's.

Clegg will then get doubly shafted, IMHO.

First by Cameron not granting a real route to PR in time for the next election (a referendum on the same day as the next GE would NOT be at all acceptable).

Second the LD's will come a cropper at next years local elections in the inevitable swing against the ruling party - either to Labour or "Ratepayer" type independent Tories.

Tory Rob is clearly a total arsehole.
probably born of the silver spoon and the first person to engage in the class war with such vigour. 'politically bankrupt little class'

what i find highly amusing is that despite the fact it would have been a record for labour to get a fourth term (the general public are always exposed to the bad sides of a partys term) through the hateful media we have in this country.

a media system that takes pleasure in cutting people down and highlighting shock stories to sell papers. all we have heard over the past years is repeated statements about labours financial incompetence.

i do hope people on here can still remember the financial and social chaos the tories presided over. 15% interest rates! inflation out of control.

this never happened in 13 years of brown. his only failing apparently being the totally unprecedented global meltdown! how in the hell was he supposed to stop that?! you moron.

then we have good old salmon chops (D.Cameron) who managed to conduct all three television debates without an answer with any substance at all!! he is a qyarter of the man that brown is, making his accent to prospective prime minister with nothing but a substantial financial backing. so desperate he was he states in the Sun newspaper that he 'watches friends' his favourite program, what an utter tosser.

even after all this, two wars, a global recession and three terms in government the useless tories still could not win!!! its amazing.

no wonder your so frustrated! for the record labour got 422 seats in 97!! nearly 120 more than the conservatives pathetic effort.

i hate you conservative selfish bastards. you ruined the coutry with your extreme privatisation. to the point that we own next to nothing in our own country anymore. water, gas, nuclear, north sea oil, railways, electricity generation! all sold for the quick buck, for maggie thatcher to keep over 3million on the dole.

now look at what you left us. pricks

Douglas, your views so some good reasoning. however can i just point out that the conservatives had the same amount of seats give or take 10 in 1997 as they did in 2005. thats after three elections!! on the third election for labour 1997 they attained a landslide 200+
seat majority (over cons)so d.cameron really hasnt done very well at all.

please research your fcats everyone.

The Tories did well in the election? That’s piffle? If you consider the amount of money and the four years media effort pumped into defeating labour and the PR behind Cameron. Cameron is a failure.
Cameron promised to stop Yar-Boo politics, support good government policy but backed Osborne. ‘Let the banks fall.’
GB saved all saver’s money in all banks and in Icesave. Cameron should have backed the Labour Gov. How many times did he blame GB for ‘Boom and Bust;’ When no such thing happened in GB’s time as chancellor. Then Cameron blamed GB for the Global recession. This, as everyone with half a brain knows, is a lie.
The charge that GB didn’t mend the roof when the sun was shining is a lie. No sir! Wrong again. GB and labour mended the NHS, mended impoverished state schools, and cured roaring inflation. GB set up the AFS to try to control banks. GB is trying to get Global Agreement on control of banks. Cameron was no help in any of these matters. Cameron didn’t support physcal policies or quantative easing, insulating houses, boiler replacement, or car scrappage schemes to support and save jobs, mortgages, Child credits.
People abuse systems and they should be routed out, lazy people should have to ‘workfare’ for dole money. The welfare state should be reduced and simplified. No doubt, but Softly, softly catchy this monkey, because a ruthless all-out attack will cause widespread disruption on the streets. Then Mr. (Naïve) Cameron could kiss goodbye to his precious triple AAA rating and face the double-dip recession which we all fear.
I can’t for the life of me see the Liberal party, Clegg, Cable, et al promising to vote for rubbish like that. People suspected Tories, they didn’t give Cameron the power to risk everything. Cameron failed his masters.

A bit about Tories…..

There are two breeds of this horrible species, one from wealthy backgrounds; usually recipients of some inheritance handed down through generations with an inherent wish to hang on to all they have with little regard to too much else outside of their self centred selves, the other is a newer breed. A new breed promoted by years of Thatcherism where homeowners from working backgrounds assumed some over inflated sense of belonging to the first species; like little lords in their castles of very modest proportions. Both species have a horrible habit of teaching their offspring the importance of belonging to the Tory breed because it’ll put them ‘a cut above the rest’. So little Tories grow into big Tories and usually develop a horrible double chin through self indulgence on all that classy food they buy from more expensive supermarkets. Luckily for the first kind they can think about savings and growth in their investments as well as planning for their retirement, unfortunately the second kind talk about such security but the majority of them haven’t got a pot to piss in! Sadly many of the rest of us ‘lesser mortals’ can only dream of being handed down an unearned fortune from some previous generation, a sad element assume their new found status from lesser mortal to a Tory ‘belonging’ upon acquisition of their lucky break hand downs. Strangely it’s these ‘Tories’ who condemn modest state handouts to benefit recipients (many of whom are genuine rather than scroungers of the State) although somehow it’s okay to take an inheritance from a generation without ever really earning it at all. The Tories seem to harbour a heartfelt belief that they are British and all that’s British should remain within our tiny island, it’s not really a patriotic belief; it’s just greed and a touch of bigoted racial hatred borne out of an unwillingness to share. They’re a strange breed the new Tories, not posh at all, quite common really with their tattoos and houses full of everything on maxed out credit. They feel safely cocooned in their enormous gas guzzling four by fours; it gives them a sense of being powerful as they tower above those lesser mortals as they peer over their long bull bar faced bonnets on the ½ mile journey to take their little Tories to school. Unfortunately, money and inheritances and all that wealth (even if it does come from an overstretched Visa card account) doesn’t bring with it manners or intelligence just greed and over inflated opinions and that’s the problem because at election times these are the same people who ultimately are in charge of determining who runs the country and unfortunately they don’t really understand such things as manifestos when they put that cross in the box. Oh why can’t we just get rid of this horrid outdated species and just create a society of decent hard working, caring, sharing people who think a little bit more about others than they do themselves!

Not to mention the "largest number of seats since 1931" sleight of tongue...

Probelm with the above analysis, is the numbers. The only viable combination is LIB-Tory for a reasonable majority. Any other grouping is likely to be a minority govenment with the attractive tag, the alliance of losers.

Out of all this eccentric thread, the one I like the best is the gloriously snobbish and pompous "Nick." The self-regarding and self-styled intellectuals whom, with good reason the English have always distrusted, are out in force today. Wot larks.

Ok, Tories didn't win but Labour definitely lost. I'm no fan of the Tories but Cameron morally has the right to have first crack at forming a government. As for Brown and his acolytes, their arrogance is breathtaking. An unelected PM for three years and now rejected by the voters, but he's still trying to cling to power. Even Tony Blair wasn't that shameelss.

Stop talking this nonsense about the anti-Tory vote. I could argue that a vite for the Lib Dems was an anti-Labour vote. The Lib-Labour alliance is a myth. You may be anti-Tory but stop being desperate. The Conservatives came first so just accept the result with good grace like Blunkett.

Of course Brown is defying the public. Your legalistic explanation may be correct but it is morally defunct. And you know that.

Put the nation first and ditch the Labour tribalism.

I've always respected your opinions even if I sometimes disagree. But for the first time I think you're being shameless.

I would just add that where I'm coming from; Welfare Reform, has been something which the Labour party has embraced with very effective impact. I work day in and day for those who have had positive benefit from Labour's very good anti-recessionary measures (lowering of inflation, mortgage pre-action protocols, earlier payment of SMI to name but a few) which I see on a daily basis has helped those in need see the awful times we witnessed under Thatcher. But to scotch a myth, Labour is no walk over on benefit handouts, the introduction of Employment Support Allowance and new rules on claiming have done loads to lessen an expectation that the state is there to prop you up whatever; it's very rigourous and no where near the easy ride the Tories try to infer, same on immigration, there is simply no way people can claim in the way the Tories tell you, new law saw to that in 2004. So the Tories plans to make such cuts on welfare won't work because they've been in place for some time under various Welfare Reform Acts introduced by Labour, Cameron sold you all a dud with that one when he misled you on the debates, or is it simply he isn't that familiar with the facts? Don't ever forget it's the Tories who have the track record on mass unemployment and nothing will change on that one til he sees the light and realises you just can't make the savings on cost efficiency, it doesn't work!! It just leads to more and more people down the Jobcentre. And do you know just how much that'll cost you in increased vat and anything other than NI/Tax, not to mention your greatly increased mortgage payments caused by peaking inflation! Any way lets wait and see whether Cameron has to face the humiliation aznd wear one of those awful 'I agree with Nick' tea shirts eh!

The miners strike. the tory party who used police like a secret police.they always got looked after and their pay increases. until they were like maggies secret police.

anyone who forgets what that bitch did to anywhere north of the midlands should rot in hell.

we are a third rate country thanks to the tories. we led the world in research and development in nuclear power, clean coal technology even rail technology. then they were all sold off to the highest bidder.

now what do we do apart from call centres?? privitisation was a short term solution to her immediate problems that has left this country a laughing stock. yes they needed modernised to some degree and made more efficient but now we have neither.

and the reason it is possible for the 'lefties' to hate so much is due to the fact that they had to suffer through her awful regime. the toffs were still looked after and will never feel the pain so many felt.

i hope the conservatives hang themselves once and for all. the class system has held this country back for decades.

that is why so much hate towards an awful party, and group of people.

Are you assuming that all non-English MPs follow the SNP example and agree to abstain on purely English matters like Health and Education? The maths comes out very differently if you make that assumption.

I have to agree. I'm watching the election coverage, mostly BBC, from New Zealand. The mindset of most of the commentators is astonishing. Surely the election is a clear win for the centre-left with well over 50% of the popular vote and a greater share of the seats than the right. Any outcome involving Cameron as PM would be a travesty and surely spell the end of Lib-Dem credibility for all time...

This has to be their one shot at creating a strong, stable, democratic electoral system. Looks like they're going to botch it.

good grief the sight of joan collins and her put on upper class accent almost wrecked my election , hadent seen her at a tory election function since the days of hitler / sorry i mean thatcher . well , well , well fifteen years in the cold and the once great conservitive govt cant even win a majority . camrons days are numberd .for the labour party that result in terms of seats wasent that bad 258 seats ? haguys how would you like to be wee willy hague and only have 150 seats left like in 1997 . labours only 50 seats behind the torys not over 200 liike the torys in 1997 . the labour party has been left in a strong position just 40 behind the cons , labours in a strong position to live to fight another day .do not feel to down about it , we had 3 terms and the tide for change was against us . 18 months ago we were 28% behind in the polls looking at an electrol train wreck , so dont feel two bad labour. camrons weak , a coalition with the libdems will be vary rocky , and the commons had the votes to stop some of little margrets thatcherite agenda . awell done and well done to gordon brown ? mr brown brought us back from anialation 28% behind the cons for that he disserves credit . WE MAY YET ROO THEY DAY GORDON BROWNS HAND IS NOT ON THE TILLER IN THESE UNCERTIN FINANCIAL TIMES . IN NZ COALITION GOVENMENT IS STABLE AND PRODUCES CHANGES OF GOVENMENT THEY HAVE PR , THE SKY HASENT FALLEN IN .BUT IT WONT WORK BEOUCE ITS NOT IN THE CONSERVITIVES DNA TO SHARE POWER WITH ANYONE , BUT THEY WILL LEARN IN TIME IF WE GET PR IN BRITAN . JUST AS THE CONSERVITIVES LERNT IN NEW ZEALAND IT TOOK THEM LONGER THAN IT DID LABOUR THERE TOO GET USED TO SAHREING POWER WITH OTHER LIKE MINDED PARTYS . HELEN CLARK WAS THE MASTER OF COALITION POLITICS THE NEW ZEALAND PRIME MINISTER .LABOUR PRIME MINISTER ELECTED THREE TIMES IN A ROW .

At last someone who doesn't buy the Blair Lite(Cameron) version of what happened. Following the farce from Cambodia, I had all but despaired of British commentators none of whom seemed to grasp that there wasn't a winner just three losers.

Why did Clegg choose the words (that Cameron should prove himself) 'capable of seeking to govern'?

Of course he is capable of seeking to govern.

But Cameron's claim that his offer to the LDs is 'comprehensive' is just not true. He's basically setting out areas they both agree and making a few minor tax concessions.

I hope that Clegg doesn't go along with it, just because he wants to look like a mature politician.

The democratic system is not fair or representative. The Tories are ruthless and would pursue their own self-interest. The Lib Dems should seize this chance for PR. They may not get it again this lifetime.

We need sensible thought on appropriate policies and reliable ways forward, not this running round jeering "Loser, loser", self-justified (as with all little boys) by inventing new "rules".

My last post - one or two typos's! but you get the gist! Please throw away the morality argument that the Tories should get in it's not what was constitutionally agreed before the election, you have to have rules and this one is there for a very good reason: you need one more vote over 325 to have a fighting chance of getting motions passed in a house full of 650 politicians! This a crucial time to have consensus and the best way of achieving it is by coalition but not between the tories and liberals, they will never agree on anything because they are at completely opposite poles, they won't attract! Cameron is deluded and Brown is being democratic by following the correct rules on the constitution. It was first past the post and despite all, Cameron didn't break past the winner's tape!

Yes Tory Boy, I have contemplated that awful thought. But do remember that any marriage tween Clegg n Cameron may well be subject to a very brief honeymoon....followed by a very quick n bitter divorce! So your theory on a life long aituation where labour live in the dark shadows of a minority could very quickly change. Mind you have you thought how a deal on PR could very quickly dimminish the Tory vote at a forthcoming next election?

No party has gained 50%+ of the popular vote since the 1931 election (which wasn't democratic either). FPTP has guaranted minority rule ever since. Mussolini needed the Acerbo law to rig elections and the Americans, Rhodesians, South Africans and 'Israelis' need/ed apartheid to get this. This begs the question of how minority rule is obtained in countries which do have democratic elections.