Best Of

We need to rediscover radical liberalism from the last century. The party created modern Britain in two phases, giving us universal education, healthcare and welfare. Britain is broken at a basic level, so radical shifts are once again needed.

In short, we need a new leader. I think Ed did a fantastic job transforming our prospects after the coalition, but he’s topped out.

No, I don't think we do need a new leader. Davey is highly competent and knows how to run both local and national campaigns. The next GE will be about consolidation of those 72 seats, and adding a modest amount of further ones.

@GarethoftheVale2 gets a couple of things wrong in his header, the first being the lazy stereotypes, when actually the polling shows that the LDs have some of the most even support by demographic groups. The second is his interpretation of the gap between the 17% NEV in the locals and the 14% nationally. Yes, GOTV counts, but as well as that there is a willingness of LD voters to vote tactically, and to recruit tactical voters nationally. That seam of voters has plenty left. The next GE will be a festival of tactical voting, with voters trying to keep out Reform. LDs stand to benefit.

In terms of overall policy I think the LDs are right to not buy into the "Britain is Broken" meme being driven by the populist right and Social Media. The country is not fundamentally broken, at least not more than it ever was, and that sort of relentless negativity and hate driven politics needs opposition. There's a lot of people out there who are fundamentally decent, happy to help their neighbours and happy with both diversity and international co-operation. A lot of us don't want to burn the country to its foundations.

I'm sorry if you think I'm stereotyping. My point is that in 2005 the LDs had a much broader range of seats including places like Leeds NW and Chesterfield where they have completely dropped off now. Whereas now the new seats are often demographically alike such as Wokingham and Tunbridge Wells. Nice England as someone said.

If you look at the figures in Yougov tables for example, with the LD voters on 16% nationally, this is strongest in Rest of South at 22%, but is 10% in both North and Wales, 15% in Scotland, but 6% in the Midlands. So there is significant LD support well outside your stereotype. The same goes when looking at breakdown by social class and age. Indeed the LD support by age is the most even of all national parties.

I interpret this to mean there's potential in a lot more places (10% or less of the vote was typical polling throughout most of the last parliament). Even in apparently barren areas like the Midlands we have quite a lot of support. The LDs are the second largest group on Leics County Council now, after Reform.

I think a lot of LD voters already vote tactically in national elections particularly in seats where the prospects are gloomy, and similarly in many LD held seats many of the voters would Identify as Labour, Green or even Cameron Conservatives, but voted LD tactically.

Davey's challenge is to get those inward Tactical Voters to identify as LD, and also to pick target seats in the remainder of the country. I think the Leics Tory seats are vulnerable to a LD/Reform squeeze for example, with LDs recruiting the Labour support in those seats. I am sure there's similar prospects elsewhere.

Good article, and analysis. Thanks for writing it.

We need to rediscover radical liberalism from the last century. The party created modern Britain in two phases, giving us universal education, healthcare and welfare. Britain is broken at a basic level, so radical shifts are once again needed.

In short, we need a new leader. I think Ed did a fantastic job transforming our prospects after the coalition, but he’s topped out.

No, I don't think we do need a new leader. Davey is highly competent and knows how to run both local and national campaigns. The next GE will be about consolidation of those 72 seats, and adding a modest amount of further ones.

@GarethoftheVale2 gets a couple of things wrong in his header, the first being the lazy stereotypes, when actually the polling shows that the LDs have some of the most even support by demographic groups. The second is his interpretation of the gap between the 17% NEV in the locals and the 14% nationally. Yes, GOTV counts, but as well as that there is a willingness of LD voters to vote tactically, and to recruit tactical voters nationally. That seam of voters has plenty left. The next GE will be a festival of tactical voting, with voters trying to keep out Reform. LDs stand to benefit.

In terms of overall policy I think the LDs are right to not buy into the "Britain is Broken" meme being driven by the populist right and Social Media. The country is not fundamentally broken, at least not more than it ever was, and that sort of relentless negativity and hate driven politics needs opposition. There's a lot of people out there who are fundamentally decent, happy to help their neighbours and happy with both diversity and international co-operation. A lot of us don't want to burn the country to its foundations.

How do the LDs stand to benefit from tactical votes to keep out reform? Where are these LD/Reform battlegrounds? A couple in the SW maybe but the LD battles are almost all vs the Tories.

The foundation of any party's GE campaign should start with retaining their existing seats, so these are the first place to recruit anti-Reform tactical voters. Labour needs to consider this too, and that will require appealling to LD inclined voters (the disparity between LD local and national vote shows that a lot of LD inclined voters already tactically vote).

I think the Tories have the hardest job defending their existing seats, being squeezed by both the Reform party and the LDs. I think Tory seat numbers will fall further. They have no USP, just reflexive voters like BigG who have always voted Tory, and those are dwindling further.

Quick experiment for everyone to try.

Try to imagine a Generic Liberal Voter. Now do the same for a Generic Liberal Constituency. Easy-peasy.

Now do the same for Reform. There are a couple of possibilities, but that's fine. Same for Labour.

Now try the same for the Conservatives. What does a Conservative seat look like these days? It's certainly harder to picture, and it might be impossible.

Scottish border constituency.
Which, given there are only three of them, I accept is somewhat limiting.

[part 2]

3. A market economy again. The economy for so many people doesn't pay their bills no matter how hard they work. Points 1 and 2 address the cost of living, which means more disposable income. But we need productive labour. Companies have stopped investing in kit and in people, but were given fat tax breaks away. So if you want your discounted council tax and a discounted UC-supported work force, you need to invest in skills and training. Make Capitalism Great Again. Borrow, invest, make a Return on that investment. For industry, the state, regions and local government. Stop burning cash on administration and start investing.

4. Smash the Treasury idiocy. Apparently we can't afford police officers or criminal justice - as if crime is cost free. We can't afford teachers but can afford emergency supply cover and crisis management. Can't afford NHS medical capacity - doctors, nurses, beds - but can afford 400 levels of market-driven management tiers.

A local example. Aberdeenshire council - faced with an ever-widening funding hole thanks to the SNP taking £34m a year off them - are faced with a choice of unpalatable cuts. So have declared they will remove half the grit bins. Which apparently will save money. Will lead to a load more accidents and costs both on the NHS and on business as people fall over, but that cost isn't on this year's council budget so its therefore zero cost. Bullshit. Same with cutting the police and the courts and teachers and not building roads and railways and airports.

I could go on all day. Plus add in that the UK in its current form is largely unworkable, so go federal. etc

There's much in that.

Shifting resources away from things where the consequences are someone else's problem is, of course, appealing to hard pressed councils (and others) trying to balance books. But often a terrible idea for the country.

On topic:

This iteration of the Lib Dem map looks a lot more coherent and stable than previous ones, which often tracked a mixture of hyperactive activists, by-election wins and opportunistic campaigns (like tuition fees). On top of that, it's quite a bit bigger, and still has some room to grow. It helps that the Conservatives appear to have given up on the "nice England" part of their former coalition.

The catch is that Nice England gets you a solid block, but nowhere near winning nationwide. In their glory days, the Conservatives had the shires and the suburbs. The Red Wall was only ever the jam on top, and probably more trouble than it was worth, coherence-wise. Labour got the cities, the suburbs and the wall. Reform appear to be uniting the shires and the red wall, which looks mad but seems to work for now.

What's the next type of place for the Lib Dems to attack?

Middle England Towns and Their Hinterlands.

The urban core is likely to stay Labour, or left of Labour. The rural shires are a Tory/Reform battleground. This leaves places that could be really "naice" if they were a bit more prosperous.

The problem is that these towns often have more working class parts.

Let me give you an example in my area. Sandhurst is a nice town and the LDs won the council wards there at the last local elections. However, Sandhurst is in the Bracknell constituency whose largest part is Bracknell, which is a very working class town and a LD desert.

Last time the LDs got 10.9% in the constituency and came 4th:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracknell_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

The recent Yougov MRP showed Ref 28%, Con 25%, Lab 25%, LD 11%, Green 10%

Even if LDs send all their Wokingham activists over the border it's still going to be difficult to try and persuade people that they are the answer to stopping Reform when Con and Lab are much closer.

This is why national vote share matters so much. If they could get up to 15-20% nationally then that puts them into contention in a lot more seats.

We need to rediscover radical liberalism from the last century. The party created modern Britain in two phases, giving us universal education, healthcare and welfare. Britain is broken at a basic level, so radical shifts are once again needed.

In short, we need a new leader. I think Ed did a fantastic job transforming our prospects after the coalition, but he’s topped out.

No, I don't think we do need a new leader. Davey is highly competent and knows how to run both local and national campaigns. The next GE will be about consolidation of those 72 seats, and adding a modest amount of further ones.

@GarethoftheVale2 gets a couple of things wrong in his header, the first being the lazy stereotypes, when actually the polling shows that the LDs have some of the most even support by demographic groups. The second is his interpretation of the gap between the 17% NEV in the locals and the 14% nationally. Yes, GOTV counts, but as well as that there is a willingness of LD voters to vote tactically, and to recruit tactical voters nationally. That seam of voters has plenty left. The next GE will be a festival of tactical voting, with voters trying to keep out Reform. LDs stand to benefit.

In terms of overall policy I think the LDs are right to not buy into the "Britain is Broken" meme being driven by the populist right and Social Media. The country is not fundamentally broken, at least not more than it ever was, and that sort of relentless negativity and hate driven politics needs opposition. There's a lot of people out there who are fundamentally decent, happy to help their neighbours and happy with both diversity and international co-operation. A lot of us don't want to burn the country to its foundations.

How do the LDs stand to benefit from tactical votes to keep out reform? Where are these LD/Reform battlegrounds? A couple in the SW maybe but the LD battles are almost all vs the Tories.

The foundation of any party's GE campaign should start with retaining their existing seats, so these are the first place to recruit anti-Reform tactical voters. Labour needs to consider this too, and that will require appealling to LD inclined voters (the disparity between LD local and national vote shows that a lot of LD inclined voters already tactically vote).

I think the Tories have the hardest job defending their existing seats, being squeezed by both the Reform party and the LDs. I think Tory seat numbers will fall further. They have no USP, just reflexive voters like BigG who have always voted Tory, and those are dwindling further.

Quick experiment for everyone to try.

Try to imagine a Generic Liberal Voter. Now do the same for a Generic Liberal Constituency. Easy-peasy.

Now do the same for Reform. There are a couple of possibilities, but that's fine. Same for Labour.

Now try the same for the Conservatives. What does a Conservative seat look like these days? It's certainly harder to picture, and it might be impossible.

You know when you go to the garden centre and they have a big bus trip of OAPs in, such that people in their 40/50s are the youngsters knocking about the place.

I know what you mean, but quite a lot of them will have wandered off to Reform.

"Secretly admiring Farage without quite having the nerve to vote for him" isn't a winning niche.

Under FPTP a larger party with aspirations to build an election-winning coalition has to some extent to fight against its core image and reason for being. Labour has to insult unions and socialists. The Tories have to hide their callous bastard instincts.

We are seeing the rise of Callous Bastards worldwide.

The Tories, so bad they're losing in a rising Callous Bastard market.

Because they lost their Callous Bastard edge.

They might regain it under Alan Jenrick B'Stard...