Conficius he say, man who simultaneously outflank you both left and right suffer severe anatomical dislocation ..

The only thing that should ever matter in this party is how liberal you are.

It needs to be pointed out that how liberal you are and how hard you are prepared to work are two very different things. Indeed at times they can come across as rather mutually exclusive concepts (at least when it comes to some of the more tribal and communitarian versions of our campaign techniques).

I don’t think it helps to get doctrinaire about what we should support – different policies are successful under different circumstances, so I’m more interested to start with in what actually works than what people would like to work. Afterwards experience tells me we see convergence between the two.

Why should we conform to our opponents conception of the political spectrum when they consistently fail so spectacularly? Why should we continue to march to their left-right drumbeat? Liberals of all stripes and spots should be setting our own agendas and writing our own futures.

I’m not entirely sure what “simultaneously outflanking both left and right from a liberal democratic standpoint” means, but I’m sure it must be very different from outflanking the Tories on the right, which is what I said …

I for one am very pleased that the party is simultaneously outflanking both left and right from a liberal democratic standpoint.

Ah well, if that’s all you mean, obviously we all know we can only speak for ourselves.

And I suppose even members of the Flat Earth Society can tell round-earthers that “that’s only the world as you see it”.

No chance at all of the minority who don’t believe in “left” and “right” doing that, I suppose?

Don’t worry, I just felt that, given my unique perspective (I’m married to one of Chandila’s opponents for the Presidency), I ought to clarify.

Besides, the LDV woods are full of Marks, with Messrs Pack, Reckons and Wright, to name just three…

I think you might have to accept that this is merely “the world as you see it”, Herbert Brown. I for one can see those terms evolving into meaninglessness right before my eyes, the further we get from the third quarter of the twentieth century.

If can can stop being “nauseated” long enough to read properly what I wrote you’ll see that I didn’t (of course) say anything about “[wanting] those that don’t exactly believe in [my] views to depart”. I referred to people who wanted to outflank the Tories on the right.

And it’s ridiculous to assert that “right” and “left” are meaningless. Of course they’re not. It may be convenient for Lib Dems to make that claim, for tactical political reasons, but that’s a different matter.

Start as you mean to carry on – not actually telling the truth. Possibly what counted against them most in the intrenal party election was a lack of evidence that they played an active role in anything much.

Geoffrey, the Bones Report was an inside stitch-up, not something that has any credibility a serious attempt to reform the party from the grass roots. I suspect that had ordinary party members had a realistic chance to contribute to the report, and their opinions been respected, then the final report would have been very different. I have every respect for any Lib Dem who refused to touch it with a bargepole.

Anyway as someone who spent time with both these people at conference, in London and at their home I am extremely disappointed with their decision(I read it in The Standard same as most…although with less surprise)

I fear that going after what they may think is guaranteed glory with the Tories will disappoint.
I have personally had many personal knocks within the party but defect! NEVER, just as I could not stop supporting my football team no matter how crap they are I could not so quickly & easily change my political outlook.
Whatever Nick did it seemed it was not enough(although Chandila along with myself & 2 other colleagues did some telephone canvassing for Nick)

The disappointing of them not getting in to a “position” in the party angered them, although both still very young in political terms they seemed to take it as a direct personal snub.
The issue of minorities not being represented well enough is true of all parties but to get elected just because of the colour of your skin, I think not.

I agree(as they both will) that they always flirted with the Tory party in the past far too easily, mostly because they thought the Tories as having more ambition….or as I see it a lust for power.

I believe as many have said they will be seriously wrong and I would publically question their motives on defecting on ideological grounds.
I am no shrinking violate, I once was desperate to “command” a position within the party(we am soon leaving the country so it longer applies) but to defect on a flimsy hope that it may happen with the Tories!

It is their choice(Mark V is always the voice of reason), but my God I thought I made some stupid moves….guys you have just trumped me 100 fold!

Disappointedly yours, Rab.

Looked at another way, perhaps this just reflects the fact that he was misguided when he said “I like the way Nick Clegg is taking the party, and want him to go further.”

Thankfully the rightward movement didn’t go further – in fact it reversed to some extent. Thankfully there is no longer any danger of the Lib Dems trying to outflank the Tories on the right. So it’s only appropriate that those who favoured that strategy should depart.