There are already threads on here about the Labour Party under Keir Starmer and the Conservatives under Kemi Badenoch (and one on the potential threat of a Trump-style takeover under Farage), so I thought how about a thread about the Lib Dems under Ed Davey. What are your thoughts about their recent performance and potential future election prospects?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The Liberal Democrats under Ed Davey
- Thread starter AY1975
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
brad465
Veteran Member
Very good on local issues and local representation, however this often leads to contradiction with national policy platforms (especially regarding NIMBYism). They could also do with their own social media operations as the broadcast media are clearly not platforming them much, despite the 3rd highest seat tally in Parliament, and Ed Davey had to have a mid-life crisis in the campaign in order to get attention.
I think the Lib Dems are in quite a good position especially since Trump was elected as that gives them a USP. They also appear to be in a stronger position than 1997-2015 as most of their seats have quite substantial majorities now. I know people who voted LD in various LD seats at the last election such as NE Fife, N Shropshire and Harrogate.
My only major issue with the Lib Dems is their opportunistic behaviour at a local level sometimes (and I know all parties do it but not to the same extent).
For example the LDs won a local by election in my area of Edinburgh pointing out that they had the only candidate who lived in the ward apart from the Tories and then after she won she was forced to resign within a week as it turned out she had put her house on the market as her husband was moving to Dubai.
My only major issue with the Lib Dems is their opportunistic behaviour at a local level sometimes (and I know all parties do it but not to the same extent).
For example the LDs won a local by election in my area of Edinburgh pointing out that they had the only candidate who lived in the ward apart from the Tories and then after she won she was forced to resign within a week as it turned out she had put her house on the market as her husband was moving to Dubai.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Despite being the third largest party in Parliament the LibDems appear to be pretty much invisible.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 9,779
I'm a LD supporter/voter; and take interest in what's written about "us" in the press and social media. Yes, we do appear to have an invisibility cloak but that might not be a bad thing; let the other parties fall apart instead! But the good news is that we are holding steady in the polls, there doesn't seem to be any shift from us to any other party.
Think we should keep playing the Care/NHS card, especially if Reform and Tories (or ReCon if they merge) start to frighten the public with "pay for the NHS directly or by insurance). Chances are we + the SNP might hold the balance of power in a hung Parliament, which might mean we get another vote on (at least) the single market in return for propping up the next government - if it's Labour.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
My inclination would also be to support the LDs but where I live it would be a wasted vote most of the time. I can understand why support is holding steady, as the Tories certainly aren't offering anything to the centrist voter and while Labour might in theory, they have messed up on a number of things which makes it difficult to support them right now. This may change if they get their communications right and we start see benefits from their actions, in which case I might be happier voting Labour again next time. But most of the LibDem MPs have Tory opposition rather than Labour, so that sort of development probably won't affect the number of LD seats next time.
It's just a shame that Farage, with a similar number of votes and far fewer MPs, gets so much more airtime. I agree Farage is vulnerable on the NHS and if Labour don't choose to call them out on it, then that's a cudgel the LDs could take up. Also I think the LDs should be pushing the European angle more, which Labour is reluctant to probably because they depend on Red Wall voters who are some of the diminishing number of Brexit supporters. That is gradually changing as elderly more pro-Brexit voters are replaced by younger and more European-minded ones, and other start to see what a bad idea it was, and the LDs have an opportunity as that tide gradually turns.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 9,779
That's the problem, where I live my LD vote is one of around 3000, never enough to beat Labour or Tory so I have to "lend" my vote to another party. If we had PR then I reckon a lot more would vote LD as their vote would then count, and it's not just the LD's, there are other constituences where it's a two-way fight so supporters of the remainder's vote is wasted.
On the flip side it means Reform get more MP's! That aside, I wonder how many wanting PR now to assist Reform have been against PR in the past because either it would assist the LD's or it simply suited them??
edwin_m
Veteran Member
I consider electoral reform is essential to address the sort of polarisation we have in UK politics. The USA is an extreme example.
ChrisC
Established Member
It‘s the same here. The Lib Dem’s in both the 2019 and 2024 elections didn’t even quite manage to get as many as 3,000 votes. However, previous to that they were struggling to even get 1,000. I suppose it’s a low priority constituency for them so not worth putting in much effort. Therefore it’s a complete wasted vote for me. As a former Conservative voter I did vote LD in 2019 and 2024 mainly due to the Conservatives stance over Brexit and as a centre right voter the general direction the Tories were going. I didn’t feel there was anyone else I could vote for.
I thought they had a real chance when they joined the coalition. They did ride somewhat on the tuition fees pledge (a testament to NUS on a successful campaign instead of another march down Whitehall). When the coalition agreement was formed, the Lib Dems negotiated an allowance to abstain on the tuition fees vote. This made is politically daft, in my opinion, to vote for the tuition fee hike. Even if they'd all abstained, the vote would've gone through just the same, but they'd have saved face with students at least being able to say, look, we were part of a coalition and we negotiated abstaining and that's all we could do. Instead they voted for it and their support from student voters (who in all honesty are a core part of the LD voter base), and they've been relegated to irrelevance ever since.
It certainly doesn't help that Davey seems to be taking elections as a joke. Johnson got away with it, but that doesn't mean any old politician can position themselves as a gaff machine and do well from it.
The Lib Dems only got as many seats as they did in 2024 because of the ineffectual nature of opposition parties.
Unfortunately I don't believe there's an easy answer for them, other than electoral reform, but any suggestion of that is put down by Labour/Conservatives due to the bungled AV referendum.
It certainly doesn't help that Davey seems to be taking elections as a joke. Johnson got away with it, but that doesn't mean any old politician can position themselves as a gaff machine and do well from it.
The Lib Dems only got as many seats as they did in 2024 because of the ineffectual nature of opposition parties.
Unfortunately I don't believe there's an easy answer for them, other than electoral reform, but any suggestion of that is put down by Labour/Conservatives due to the bungled AV referendum.
I don't see the Lib Dems benefitting much from an electoral reform, their seat count is more or less exactly equivalent to the share of votes that they got
I don't think we should extrapolate voting patterns under FPTP to other voting systems.
I'm a Labour/LD voter (depending on the body being elected), but only because voting Green would be a wasted vote where I am. I suspect there are lots of people, potentially millions of people, who would vote differently if we had some form of PR for example.
In fact in many elections, if there's two parties effectively competing with each other, they drop leaflets through doors saying things like, "This is a two-horse race", or, "Labour can't win here!", with bar charts showing past election results.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
It would be very interesting if pollsters asked which party people would ideally want to see in power, as well as which one they would actually vote for (the second question being influenced by tactical considerations in the respondent's consituency).
They could have said the same on many other issues, explaining that the constraints of being in a coalition made their influence very limited. And the way Clegg looked so smug about being in power didn't do them much good either. They were also shafted by Osborne on things such as the electoral reform referendum, which was scheduled at the height of the party's midterm unpopularity, and on other things too. That came back to bite him (and the rest of us) when Cameron committed to the Brexit referendum in the likely expectation that he wouldn't win outright and he'd "have" to cancel it as a condition of LibDem support.
If they go too hard on social care they run the risk of it being another tuition fee issue for them in a future election - an expensive policy they are very publicly committed too, and they find themselves a junior partner in a coalition where the other party is unwilling or unable to concede it.
they'd spent 2015-2024 in the parliamentary wilderness because of FPTP distortion. Third by votes, but a distant fourth by seats. That allowed the SNP to rise to prominence with the guaranteed PMQs questions, placement on committees, etc.
And as others have said, if people could vote for smaller parties without it feeling like a wasted vote, that could hugely benefit them (and yes it would probably also benefit Reform, which is why Farage also wants some sort of PR). Even AV would have helped there.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Along with most of the rest of the past century.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 9,779
I'd put money on Daisy Cooper being the next leader, think Ed will stand down within 2 years of the election, Cooper is getting a lot of airtime/profile (not much by Reform's standards but a lot for the LD's) obviously being deputy leader gives her a kick start, but before the election many were unknown/invisible to the public; maybe with the exception of Moran. Think I can guarantee that she won't be windsurfing, but then again...!
FinsburyPark
Member
I've always like Lib Dems and voted for them more or less every time (except once or twice). They are one of the few options left for people who niether like either Tories or Labour.
They in some ways are a true opposition to Reform. Reform is the party that likely has the most Brexit supporters and Lib Dems are the party that likely has the most Remainers/Rejoiners.
In some ways both are parties of protest in that niether have 'made it' so far politically but both serve to campaing for thier respective causes, despite not being in power.
Also while Lib Dems never get it perfecly in the centre, Lib Dems are the party thats mostly in the centre ground on a lot of issues.
They in some ways are a true opposition to Reform. Reform is the party that likely has the most Brexit supporters and Lib Dems are the party that likely has the most Remainers/Rejoiners.
In some ways both are parties of protest in that niether have 'made it' so far politically but both serve to campaing for thier respective causes, despite not being in power.
Also while Lib Dems never get it perfecly in the centre, Lib Dems are the party thats mostly in the centre ground on a lot of issues.
Nailed on favourite.
Falcon1200
Established Member
I have voted Lib Dem in the past, particularly when the much-missed Charles Kennedy was their leader, but will not do again, because; No point, as they will never win in my constituency, and (despite having voted Remain) I do not agree with their refusal to accept the Brexit referendum result.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Whereas to me that's a principled stand, considering the measures the Leave side went to to deceive the electorate. Just a shame the LibDems are keeping so quiet about Brexit now.
If there’s one change which would benefit our democracy, it’s an obligation of electoral honesty.
Who decides what the 'truth' is? Politicians claims are often subjective, or depend on a point in time. It seems a dangerous route to put a body in place that would censor political statements.
No, censorship is not a good route. However, it's against parliamentary rules to mislead the house but not the electorate.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
National Statistics complained about Vote Leave claiming £350 a week was sent to the EU, as it was factually wrong and known to be at the time. That was the figure before the rebate, and the rebated money never physically left the UK. To stay marginally on topic, I suspect at least one LibDem complained too.
That's a bit different from the other end of the bus saying we should spend it on the NHS instead, which was a political "promise" that might or might not have be kept (and in this case wasn't).
Yes I think it would be interesting also. I do also think it would be hard to extrapolate into actual predictions though, as a lot of people don't really know how the current voting system works, let alone proposed systems. In fact when the AV referendum came around it was one of my first votes, and frankly I didn't understand it.
I run a polling station for elections and the number of people who come in and ask who the "X" candidate is, and we have to be impartial so we just direct them to the list of candidates, then they kick off because nobody from "X" is standing, or they can't find person "Y" on the ballot paper (when person "Y" is the party leader, not the local candidate), suggests to me that a lot of voters wouldn't immediately recognise different voting systems (though I'm sure they'd understand it after a brief explanation).
The difference being, for the tuition fee vote it was explicitly negotiated the ability to abstain in the coalition agreement. On the other major topics either the coalition agreement forced a vote in a particular way, at which point your party line to the public is, "We had to vote this way because we're a minority party in a coalition, and we had to make compromises." On tuition fees, they spent months saying we'll vote against raising tuition fees, negotiated abstaining on the raising tuition fee vote in the coalition agreement, then vote for raising tuition fees. I was working in a students' union at the time, and we saw our internal support for Lib Dems drop off a cliff.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Not too surprising - lots of people are likely to be disillusioned with Labour, have no reason to give the Tories another chance, but aren't prepared to support Farage. So I suggest this is more about disgust with the alternative than any great love for the LibDems.
brad465
Veteran Member
The 2024 election for once saw the Lib Dems get a seat share more or less proportionate to their vote share. But they still support voting system reform and yes I think they will get more support with a more proportional system in place.
I'm not sure about this. You only have to look at the devolved elections or say Spain for example where liberals do very badly on the list vote.
I find it ironic how the Lib Dems have hit the sweet spot under FPTP albeit they still have a ceiling of about 100 MPs.
- Status