Where did it all go wrong for The Liberal Democrats ?

[TravelDream]

I do find it rather hard to understand why Lib Dem support is not higher, as I think I have said before.

Pre-2010, the Lib Dems had an odd coalition of voters made up of:
- The well-off urban upper-middle class (Twickenham, Richmond Park etc).
- The rural fringes (rural Wales, the Scottish Highlands and Islands and a couple of 'alternative' parts of England).
- Seats in cities with a high proportion of students (Sheffield Hallam, Cardiff Central, Bristol West etc.).

It's really only the first category where they remain very strong. Understandably student heavy seats swung hugely to Labour and a few I mentioned now have the largest Labour majorities in the country.

They also relied, and still rely, heavily on personal vote. People like Norman Lamb and Tim Farron won their seats with huge personal votes. This happens with other parties too, but nowhere near to the same extent as with the Lib Dems.

They are now very clearly the fourth party across the UK so get much less media coverage than before which hurts a lot too.

 

[Butts]

Pre-2010, the Lib Dems had an odd coalition of voters made up of:
- The well-off urban upper-middle class (Twickenham, Richmond Park etc).
- The rural fringes (rural Wales, the Scottish Highlands and Islands and a couple of 'alternative' parts of England).
- Seats in cities with a high proportion of students (Sheffield Hallam, Cardiff Central, Bristol West etc.).

It's really only the first category where they remain very strong. Understandably student heavy seats swung hugely to Labour and a few I mentioned now have the largest Labour majorities in the country.

They also relied, and still rely, heavily on personal vote. People like Norman Lamb and Tim Farron won their seats with huge personal votes. This happens with other parties too, but nowhere near to the same extent as with the Lib Dems.

They are now very clearly the fourth party across the UK so get much less media coverage than before which hurts a lot too.

Are you intimating their working class vote is effectively risible ?

 

[nw1]

Media coverage is one aspect and the continued perception of it being a “two party country”. People often vote for the “least worst option too” so not so much they voted for Johnson but AGAINST Corbyn because - rightly or wrongly - many softer Tories saw him as just too radical and a threat to their way of living.

The LDs are in almost a chicken & egg scenario; can’t get coverage without representation but can’t get MPs without coverage.

Obviously the big hit was the coalition / tuition fees. The Lib Dems positioned themselves as a fresh approach and then alienated a number of left-leaning supporters due to their actions in the coalition. Whether this was fair is neither here nor there - the Tories capitalised well in 2015 and being the junior partner they really suffered & have never quite recovered. Much of the electorate seem them as a bit of joke now. Or they can’t visualise the shift from good working local councillors to say, running the country.

I would say there are signs of sustained rocevry though - a huge growth in 2nd places, a thumping by-election win, a more back-to-basics approach to winnable seats and a realisation that they can’t overstretch (Some of Jo Swinson’s remarks in 2019 were fanciful). Could double their seats at the next election if they play their cards right.

I will admit that Swinson was an egotist and that really didn't help. She sent a leaflet proclaiming her as the "Next Prime Minister of the UK". Rather unlikely.

I think the tuition fees issue was a huge mistake - but that doesn't really explain the swing from Lib Dem to Tory across the whole of the south-west in 2015 (even Bath briefly went Tory, but only for two years) which I agree with other posters was the main factor in Cameron getting a majority - the SNP issue was really a red herring.

Perhaps the anti-Tory vote in these seats split and Labour picked up votes in the SW?

What would be interesting to see is a map of what I call 'real Tory' seats, those in which they gained more than half the vote as opposed to those which they won due to FPTP. Paterson's seat is one I'm sure, but one might suspect that in the SW the number is rather fewer. A perfect illustration of the big problems of our electoral system.

 

[Acfb]

I will admit that Swinson was an egotist and that really didn't help. She sent a leaflet proclaiming her as the "Next Prime Minister of the UK". Rather unlikely.

I think the tuition fees issue was a huge mistake - but that doesn't really explain the swing from Lib Dem to Tory across the whole of the south-west in 2015 (even Bath briefly went Tory, but only for two years) which I agree with other posters was the main factor in Cameron getting a majority - the SNP issue was really a red herring.

Perhaps the anti-Tory vote in these seats split and Labour picked up votes in the SW?

What would be interesting to see is a map of what I call 'real Tory' seats, those in which they gained more than half the vote as opposed to those which they won due to FPTP. Paterson's seat is one I'm sure, but one might suspect that in the SW the number is rather fewer. A perfect illustration of the big problems of our electoral system.

The Southwest (certainly Cornwall and Devon) is now largely a Tory stronghold. What is surprising is how Eurosceptic previous Lib Dem areas like Torbay and North Cornwall are and that they now have truly enormous Tory majorities. A lot of 2010 LD support went on to vote UKIP in 2015 and then Tory in 2017/19 in these areas.

There was also a strong Labour recovery in two of the Cornish seats in 2017/2019. Labour almost won George Eustace's seat in 2017 and could win Truro and Falmouth next time (due to the student vote etc).

 

[Typhoon]

What would be interesting to see is a map of what I call 'real Tory' seats, those in which they gained more than half the vote as opposed to those which they won due to FPTP. Paterson's seat is one I'm sure, but one might suspect that in the SW the number is rather fewer. A perfect illustration of the big problems of our electoral system.

In a different thread there was talk about George Eustice so I had looked up stats for Cornish seats. Of the 6, 4 have absolute majorities:

Camborne and Redruth - 53% Conservative, Lib Dem 3rd, over 23,000 votes behind

North Cornwall - 59% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2015

St Austell and Newquay - 56% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2015, Lib Dem now 3rd

South East Cornwall - 59% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2010, Lib Dem now 3rd.

All Cornish seats were Lib Dem until 2010. Only in St Ives do they have a chance of gaining the seat (majority less than 5k and in second place), even there the conservative vote was just over 49%.

Hasn't their EU stand hit them here?

 

[nw1]

In a different thread there was talk about George Eustice so I had looked up stats for Cornish seats. Of the 6, 4 have absolute majorities:

Camborne and Redruth - 53% Conservative, Lib Dem 3rd, over 23,000 votes behind

North Cornwall - 59% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2015

St Austell and Newquay - 56% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2015, Lib Dem now 3rd

South East Cornwall - 59% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2010, Lib Dem now 3rd.

All Cornish seats were Lib Dem until 2010. Only in St Ives do they have a chance of gaining the seat (majority less than 5k and in second place), even there the conservative vote was just over 49%.

Hasn't their EU stand hit them here?

Thanks for the replies, so surprisingly it looks like a lot of these seats are 'real Tory' seats. Quite a swing to the right.

Given the independently-minded nature (or at least that is my perception) of much of the SW, particularly Cornwall, and the desire to have their own identity separate to the rest of England, it's quite a surprise to see such seats voting for the most 'English-nationalist' of the parties. Also in the 90s, the SW seemed to be quite a fashionable area, loved by many alternative groups, and the non-Tory character of much of the SW compared to the SE perhaps helped in this.

It does seem that the SW has thus become much more inherently Conservative and perhaps more English-nationalist than hitherto. I wonder if this is partly due to demographic changes in the area and people from more traditionally Conservative areas moving in?

It's now the case that there is perhaps not a single rural seat in England held by a non-Conservative, except the aforementioned Westmorland and Lonsdale. That is a bit sad.

 

[Horizon22]

In a different thread there was talk about George Eustice so I had looked up stats for Cornish seats. Of the 6, 4 have absolute majorities:

Camborne and Redruth - 53% Conservative, Lib Dem 3rd, over 23,000 votes behind

North Cornwall - 59% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2015

St Austell and Newquay - 56% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2015, Lib Dem now 3rd

South East Cornwall - 59% Conservative, Lib Dem seat until 2010, Lib Dem now 3rd.

All Cornish seats were Lib Dem until 2010. Only in St Ives do they have a chance of gaining the seat (majority less than 5k and in second place), even there the conservative vote was just over 49%.

Hasn't their EU stand hit them here?

Cornwall - like Wales - was a little odd in that it had a 57% leave vote but also had masses of EU funding given to it over the past 20 years. Sort of like turkeys voting for Christmas. It may be some of the impacts have not yet been seen. Saying that the Lib Dems have also performed very poorly on the local council in 2021, so there's probably some wider discontentment.

 

[nw1]

Cornwall - like Wales - was a little odd in that it had a 57% leave vote but also had masses of EU funding given to it over the past 20 years. Sort of like turkeys voting for Christmas. It may be some of the impacts have not yet been seen. Saying that the Lib Dems have also performed very poorly on the local council in 2021, so there's probably some wider discontentment.

Quite - and besides the financial reasons, I also find the leave vote hard to understand given that (as I said above) I would expect the main threat to Cornish identity to be not from the EU, but from the other parts of England and Anglo-Saxon capitalism.

In my eyes it's the forces of the free market which has most adversely affected local identity in the UK. Other European countries which have more of an 'independent small business' ethos, but are still in the EU, seem to have more national character than the contemporary UK; 'Brexit Britain' is rather anodyne and lacking in character compared to the UK of the 1980s, 1990s and even 2000s. The UK had more 'healthy' national character - think unpretentious rural pubs for instance - 20 or 30 years ago.

 

[Horizon22]

It does seem that the SW has thus become much more inherently Conservative and perhaps more English-nationalist than hitherto. I wonder if this is partly due to demographic changes in the area and people from more traditionally Conservative areas moving in?

It's now the case that there is perhaps not a single rural seat in England held by a non-Conservative, except the aforementioned Westmorland and Lonsdale. That is a bit sad.

On the other hand, several seats in the Home Counties are within spitting distance of the Lib Dems to win which is partly due to demographic shifts away from London of younger families that are highly educated and more left-leaning. Chesham & Amersham by-election showed these people are quite receptive to the Lib Dems in the right circumstances. In a General Election, there's no way the Lib Dems could pile in as many resources as they did for a one-off by-election, but with the right focus, they can make some choice gains as they have a lot more competitive 2nd places than they did in 2015 or 2017.

 

[nw1]

On the other hand, several seats in the Home Counties are within spitting distance of the Lib Dems to win which is partly due to demographic shifts away from London of younger families that are highly educated and more left-leaning. Chesham & Amersham by-election showed these people are quite receptive to the Lib Dems in the right circumstances. In a General Election, there's no way the Lib Dems could pile in as many resources as they did for a one-off by-election, but with the right focus, they can make some choice gains as they have a lot more competitive 2nd places than they did in 2015 or 2017.

It's an interesting one. The other hope is that the apparent Corbyn-phobia of the last election will not apply next time, so you won't get people in the SE voting Tory out of fear (as discussed above) next time. As well as the Lib Dems failing to regain Winchester for instance (surely a prime target for them), even independent - and ex-Tory - incumbents such as Dominic Grieve or David Gauke failed to hang on last time. The scale of the Corbyn-phobia must have been quite staggering - enough to make remainers accept a hard Brexit over whatever a Lab-Lib coalition would have had in store for the country (spoiler: I suspect it would have produced more of the same that we had enjoyed since 1973, not some sort of Soviet republic as some feared).

 

[MattRat]

They should have held the Tories to ransom by telling them that it was genuine proportional representation or nothing. Clegg was riding high, and it would have been an extraordinary gamble on the part of both Brown and Cameron to go for a second election. Brown in particular was clinging on by that point, a second election may well have caused Labour to fall behind the Lib Dems in terms of the popular vote.

The Tories must have delighted with the eventual agreement on the PR referendum, because it was guaranteed to confuse the electorate and be rejected.

They could have used the threat of a second election to secure a better deal maybe, but if it actually came to one, the voting public would be furious, as all the media had banged on about beside Brown's supposed failure was how we didn't have time for a second election and needed leadership now, and it isn't too far a stretch to think people would end up fully blaming the Lib Dems for that second election.

As for the PR referendum as you call it (although AV referendum would be more accurate), it wasn't guaranteed to confuse the electorate, it was the media who made it sound overly complicated. Even though I was 14 at the time, when I actually did the research myself instead of just relying on the media, it made perfect sense to me. Honestly, thinking back now, it was probably one of the first warning signs (in my life) how tight knit most politicians and the media were, as the main two parties didn't want the referendum to pass.

 

[Butts]

Cornwall - like Wales - was a little odd in that it had a 57% leave vote but also had masses of EU funding given to it over the past 20 years. Sort of like turkeys voting for Christmas. It may be some of the impacts have not yet been seen. Saying that the Lib Dems have also performed very poorly on the local council in 2021, so there's probably some wider discontentment.

A lot of you seem to be forgetting Cornwall was a Royalist Stronghold during The English Civil War.

Seems it is returning to it's establishment roots.

 

[TravelDream]

Are you intimating their working class vote is effectively risible ?

What is working class?
That's a bit of an issue today as the class structure is far less clear than it once was.
It's one of the big chasms of the modern political system with the surge the Tories had in the north.

If you're talking 'traditional working class' seats like those in the north, their vote actually used to be quite reasonable and they were generally the main opposition to Labour pre-2010.

On the other hand, several seats in the Home Counties are within spitting distance of the Lib Dems to win which is partly due to demographic shifts away from London of younger families that are highly educated and more left-leaning. Chesham & Amersham by-election showed these people are quite receptive to the Lib Dems in the right circumstances. In a General Election, there's no way the Lib Dems could pile in as many resources as they did for a one-off by-election, but with the right focus, they can make some choice gains as they have a lot more competitive 2nd places than they did in 2015 or 2017.

This is the new Lib Dem coalition. Most student heavy seats in cities and most of 'the fringe' are now out of reach (except in Scotland where things have moved to a unionist vs SNP dynamic).
Their new 'positive' area is what I would call the real blue wall. Wealthy, well-educated, very middle-class and quite pro-remain. Chesham & Amersham was actually one of the more difficult seats of this type for them to gain and they managed it with a huge swing. Obviously they won't be able to concentrate resources like a by-election, but will surely be targeting some of the closer seats.

 

[Horizon22]

This is the new Lib Dem coalition. Most student heavy seats in cities and most of 'the fringe' are now out of reach (except in Scotland where things have moved to a unionist vs SNP dynamic).
Their new 'positive' area is what I would call the real blue wall. Wealthy, well-educated, very middle-class and quite pro-remain. Chesham & Amersham was actually one of the more difficult seats of this type for them to gain and they managed it with a huge swing. Obviously they won't be able to concentrate resources like a by-election, but will surely be targeting some of the closer seats.

Definitely, at it seems like strategically they know this too and are working towards it. There's a slight split in these seats too though:

• Seats they used to hold for substantial periods which may/may not be aligned to key demographics (Eastbourne, Cheltenham, Lewes, Winchester) - still largest segement
• Changes in core strategy / Remain that have put new areas into play (Cambridgeshire South, Guildford, Woking, Wimbledon) - a few new ones and seats held only once.
• Specific targetting for previous defectors / specific Tories (Esher & Walton [Raab], South West Surrey [Hunt], Cities of London & Westminster)

There are very, very few Lib Dem / Labour battlegrounds (an interesting one is Sheffield Hallam) so if both sides work on an informal "non-agression" arrangement in key areas, there may well be no overall majority come 2024 (or earlier)

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Why so many people in remain seats voted for a hard-right nationalist party (Johnson's Tories) in 2019 is beyond me

They didn't. They voted for a party that was moderately right wing, culturally more conservative and therefore much more comfortable with open displays of patriotism than either Labour or the LibDems, and promising to proceed with enacting the results of the then-recent-ish referendum. The 'hard-right nationalist' stuff isn't reality, it's more like, what left-wing and Labour people tell each other in a 2-party system that encourages people to demonize their opponents.

I'm not particularly trying to defend the Tories and don't want to derail the LibDem topic of this thread - I actually voted remain in the referendum and would probably vote for the LibDems if there was an election tomorrow. But you're never going to be able to understand why so few people vote LibDem and so many people whom you'd like to vote LibDem are actually voting Conservative if you try to explain it by just making stuff up about the Tories.

The Southwest (certainly Cornwall and Devon) is now largely a Tory stronghold. What is surprising is how Eurosceptic previous Lib Dem areas like Torbay and North Cornwall are and that they now have truly enormous Tory majorities. A lot of 2010 LD support went on to vote UKIP in 2015 and then Tory in 2017/19 in these areas.

Why do you think it's surprising? Those areas were, as you say, inclined to be Eurosceptic. They voted strongly LibDem at a time when the EU wasn't really an election issue, and therefore the LibDems' strongly pro-EU stance wouldn't have really affected how most people voted. Then the EU did become a big election issue so that people would have become much more aware (and would have cared much more) about where the parties stood on the EU. The LibDems made a big thing of very publicly being pro-EU, therefore alienating lots of people in Devon and Cornwall who'd previously voted for them (Probably, tuition fees and that issue causing people to lose trust in the LibDems played a part too, at least in 2015). Result: Large Tory majorities across most of Devon and Cornwall. I don't see anything surprising there (other than the LibDems apparently not thinking through how their EU policies would have looked to many of their previous supporters).

 

[Busaholic]

All Cornish seats were Lib Dem until 2010. Only in St Ives do they have a chance of gaining the seat (majority less than 5k and in second place), even there the conservative vote was just over 49%.

St Ives is certainly an exception. Andrew George was the MP from 1997 to 2015 and gained a Cornwall Council seat in last year's local elections. It is entirely possible he will stand again for the Lib Dems at the next General Election, and will attract a considerable personal vote. His chances in the last General Election were hampered (perhaps, or perhaps not!) by then leader Jo Swinson's refusal to visit the constituency due to personal animosity between her and George (she travelled to neighbouring Redruth/Camborne which was always a lost cause.) The animosity was a result of George criticising her grandiose statements on 'winning' the forthcoming election at the Lib Dem conference beforehand. In return for her pettiness George had all his election posters printed in Lib Dem colours but without mentioning the party and none of the election material I saw mentioned Swinson's name nor featured any photos of her. I told him I'd display a poster for him and would be voting for him on a personal basis, but not for Swinson's Lib Dems. George is very much on the left of his party and acted as Campaign Manager for Charles Kennedy's successful bid to become leader. If such a party still existed, I think he'd be a natural Social Democrat.

 

[Typhoon]

They didn't. They voted for a party that was moderately right wing, culturally more conservative and therefore much more comfortable with open displays of patriotism than either Labour or the LibDems, and promising to proceed with enacting the results of the then-recent-ish referendum. The 'hard-right nationalist' stuff isn't reality, it's more like, what left-wing and Labour people tell each other in a 2-party system that encourages people to demonize their opponents.

I'm not particularly trying to defend the Tories and don't want to derail the LibDem topic of this thread - I actually voted remain in the referendum and would probably vote for the LibDems if there was an election tomorrow. But you're never going to be able to understand why so few people vote LibDem and so many people whom you'd like to vote LibDem are actually voting Conservative if you try to explain it by just making stuff up about the Tories.

I think it is more complicated than that. If we take May's Conservative Party, the ERG tended to hold views that could be described as Thatcherite as well as being anti-EU. The pro-Eu Conservatives tended to be more moderate. When Johnson purged the party of 'Remoaners' pre the 2019 election, more moderates either walked or were removed than Thatcherites. There was a third group who kept their heads down. A lot of new MPs were elected in 2019, so far few have made a name for themselves so no-one really knows what they stand for, not helped because Johnson's presidential posture, and events, have tended to overshadow everything. You would be hard pressed to work out what the majority of ministers stand for (besides staying in office). The flag waving I reckon is no more than a vote gathering exercise by Johnson (although many ministers would disagree, trying to outdo one another - 'my flag is bigger than your flag') designed to make many opposition politicians out to be unpatriotic.
A Johnson government was never going to be 'hard right' simply because he can never resist the temptation to spend tax payers money on projects (usually physical) of which he can say 'I did that'. He is driven by staying in power (by being popular) more than anything else. He prizes loyalty (to him) more than ideology (but is not always loyal in return). If he thinks that cutting taxes will get him elected, he'll cut taxes; if he thinks that restricting rises in energy prices will, he'll move heaven and earth to ensure it happens (or rather he'll make sure sure others do). He's not the first, but the most extreme that I can remember.

The LibDems have been skewered by Brexit, too many of their constituencies voted leave (and there was little sympathy with Stephen Lloyd when he said that he would respect the views and abide by the votes of his Eastbourne constituency when they did). They have also lost most of their personalities, most LibDem MPs mean nothing to me.

ERG - European Research Group (or something similar)

 

[nw1]

LD Peer and former Leader Ming Campbell on my Flight from LHR to EDI tonight ....so much for their Green Credentials !!

I think you can still be somewhat 'green' without militantly avoiding flying. Sometimes you need to get somewhere in a hurry, and the plane may be the only option. And for some destinations (notably outside Europe, but also more distant European locations such as E and SE Europe) flying is the only viable option unless you have a lot of time to travel overland.

Unless the LDs are actively discouraging flying, I don't think this is of any consequence. Or even if they are, Ming Campbell is not active in the parliamentary party now, anyhow.

I think it is more complicated than that. If we take May's Conservative Party, the ERG tended to hold views that could be described as Thatcherite as well as being anti-EU. The pro-Eu Conservatives tended to be more moderate. When Johnson purged the party of 'Remoaners' pre the 2019 election, more moderates either walked or were removed than Thatcherites. There was a third group who kept their heads down. A lot of new MPs were elected in 2019, so far few have made a name for themselves so no-one really knows what they stand for, not helped because Johnson's presidential posture, and events, have tended to overshadow everything. You would be hard pressed to work out what the majority of ministers stand for (besides staying in office). The flag waving I reckon is no more than a vote gathering exercise by Johnson (although many ministers would disagree, trying to outdo one another - 'my flag is bigger than your flag') designed to make many opposition politicians out to be unpatriotic.
A Johnson government was never going to be 'hard right' simply because he can never resist the temptation to spend tax payers money on projects (usually physical) of which he can say 'I did that'. He is driven by staying in power (by being popular) more than anything else. He prizes loyalty (to him) more than ideology (but is not always loyal in return). If he thinks that cutting taxes will get him elected, he'll cut taxes; if he thinks that restricting rises in energy prices will, he'll move heaven and earth to ensure it happens (or rather he'll make sure sure others do). He's not the first, but the most extreme that I can remember.

My assessment of the current Tory government as 'hard right' was based on a number of things, but fiscal conservatism is not one of them, I will admit that. Namely, in approximate order: its hardline anti-immigration stance (including requiring existing EU residents to apply for 'settled status'); its seemingly petulant refusal to remain in the single market; its hardline law-and-order attitude, most easily seen through Patel (and the Elections Bill and Policing Bill); and the prominence of the 'Britannia Unchained' lot in the government who seemed to believe that British employees are lazy shirkers. They're quite happy to wave the Union Jack but seem to also be quite happy to slag off a good proportion of the British public. But perhaps the people they slag off are not 'their people', so don't matter.

Not to mention Johnson's apparently racist comments about Muslim women's dress, too. He seems to be able to get away with stuff that would see instant dismissal for anyone else, because 'oh, it's just Boris'.

And I would agree the May government was _not_ 'hard right'. The moderates like Phillip Hammond and the like refused to stand in 2019 presumably because while they could stomach May's more diplomatic approach they disliked the hardline approach of Johnson.

So for example, and getting back on topic, I'd have expected more people that would have been happy voting in May but not happy voting in Johnson, and voting Lib Dem as a consequence.

The LibDems have been skewered by Brexit, too many of their constituencies voted leave (and there was little sympathy with Stephen Lloyd when he said that he would respect the views and abide by the votes of his Eastbourne constituency when they did). They have also lost most of their personalities, most LibDem MPs mean nothing to me.

I do find it staggering how badly people like Lloyd, and Dennis Skinner, were treated by their seemingly ungrateful constituents. These guys actually appeared to support, or at least vote for, some form of Brexit, but it wasn't enough for their voters. Almost all the high profile casualties of 2019 were MPs worthy of at least some respect, in one way or another.

 

[edwin_m]

The scale of the Corbyn-phobia must have been quite staggering - enough to make remainers accept a hard Brexit over whatever a Lab-Lib coalition would have had in store for the country.

Labour's policy on Brexit was very unclear until the final stages of the campaign, and has returned to being so. I think it was a classic case of the vote being split between the two anti-Tory parties. Things might have been very different if LibDems had avoided the "next prime minister" rhetoric, and "done a Farage" by not standing in seats where the Labour candidate was pro-remain and had the best chance of beating the Tory.

Meanwhile public support for Brexit continues ticking downwards and the LibDems could yet find their anti line pays off in the long term.

My assessment of the current Tory government as 'hard right' was based on a number of things, but fiscal conservatism is not one of them, I will admit that. Namely, in approximate order: its hardline anti-immigration stance (including requiring existing EU residents to apply for 'settled status'); its seemingly petulant refusal to remain in the single market; its hardline law-and-order attitude, most easily seen through Patel (and the Elections Bill and Policing Bill); and the prominence of the 'Britannia Unchained' lot in the government who seemed to believe that British employees are lazy shirkers. They're quite happy to wave the Union Jack but seem to also be quite happy to slag off a good proportion of the British public. But perhaps the people they slag off are not 'their people', so don't matter.

Not to mention Johnson's apparently racist comments about Muslim women's dress, too. He seems to be able to get away with stuff that would see instant dismissal for anyone else, because 'oh, it's just Boris'.

And I would agree the May government was _not_ 'hard right'. The moderates like Phillip Hammond and the like refused to stand in 2019 presumably because while they could stomach May's more diplomatic approach they disliked the hardline approach of Johnson.

As far as I'm concerned it's hard right on social issues, but similar to 1970s Labour on economic ones.

 

[The Ham]

Whilst not a big swing over the last few elections there's be a shift locally from Tory to LibDem.

Previously the Conservative MP had a 50% vote majority (i.e. the other parties didn't reach 25%), last time the LibDems just scraped 25% (in part due to a halving in the Labour vote), such a swing may not continue, however it does highlight that there's still plenty willing to vote for them.

Given the current impact from the vote on standards it wouldn't be a surprise if there was more of a shift away from voting Tory.

 

[Acfb]

They didn't. They voted for a party that was moderately right wing, culturally more conservative and therefore much more comfortable with open displays of patriotism than either Labour or the LibDems, and promising to proceed with enacting the results of the then-recent-ish referendum. The 'hard-right nationalist' stuff isn't reality, it's more like, what left-wing and Labour people tell each other in a 2-party system that encourages people to demonize their opponents.

I'm not particularly trying to defend the Tories and don't want to derail the LibDem topic of this thread - I actually voted remain in the referendum and would probably vote for the LibDems if there was an election tomorrow. But you're never going to be able to understand why so few people vote LibDem and so many people whom you'd like to vote LibDem are actually voting Conservative if you try to explain it by just making stuff up about the Tories.



Why do you think it's surprising? Those areas were, as you say, inclined to be Eurosceptic. They voted strongly LibDem at a time when the EU wasn't really an election issue, and therefore the LibDems' strongly pro-EU stance wouldn't have really affected how most people voted. Then the EU did become a big election issue so that people would have become much more aware (and would have cared much more) about where the parties stood on the EU. The LibDems made a big thing of very publicly being pro-EU, therefore alienating lots of people in Devon and Cornwall who'd previously voted for them (Probably, tuition fees and that issue causing people to lose trust in the LibDems played a part too, at least in 2015). Result: Large Tory majorities across most of Devon and Cornwall. I don't see anything surprising there (other than the LibDems apparently not thinking through how their EU policies would have looked to many of their previous supporters).

I meant more in retrospect that people were voting Lib Dem for so long despite their Europhilia. The peak of the Lib Dems (including in the west country) was when they were most Europhile in the early to mid 2000s under Charles Kennedy and they even supported a referendum on the Euro in 2001.

As a Labour supporter I don't really understand the current level of dislike of the Lib Dems at the national level nowadays from some people who claim to be centrists even if their behaviour is a bit cringeworthy at the local level and in by elections.

 

[Busaholic]

I meant more in retrospect that people were voting Lib Dem for so long despite their Europhilia. The peak of the Lib Dems (including in the west country) was when they were most Europhile in the early to mid 2000s under Charles Kennedy and they even supported a referendum on the Euro in 2001.

As a Labour supporter I don't really understand the current level of dislike of the Lib Dems at the national level nowadays from some people who claim to be centrists even if their behaviour is a bit cringeworthy at the local level and in by elections.

Human nature is your answer. Like the new MP in Parliament being told by one of the 'old guard' that ''those on the opposite bench are your opponents those around you are your potential enemies.'' You'll always be more annoyed that other people of a supposed similar mindset both may not agree with you on an issue and seemingly are hellbent on getting their own view accepted as party policy. This will get exaggerated by the familiarity of seeing these people all the time when personal likes and dislikes emerge. I remember Neil Kinnock saying words to the effect that the only people who liked Ken Livingstone were those that had never met him!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I meant more in retrospect that people were voting Lib Dem for so long despite their Europhilia. The peak of the Lib Dems (including in the west country) was when they were most Europhile in the early to mid 2000s under Charles Kennedy and they even supported a referendum on the Euro in 2001.

Ah fair enough, sorry I misunderstood your earlier post.

As a Labour supporter I don't really understand the current level of dislike of the Lib Dems at the national level nowadays from some people who claim to be centrists even if their behaviour is a bit cringeworthy at the local level and in by elections.

I guess a lot of Brexiters (and some people who were Remainers but regarded the issue as settled once the referendum was over) would dislike the LibDems because of their 'revoke without a referendum' stance. I have to admit I hadn't really noticed that many people actively dislike them for other reasons, I thought it was more a case of, many people scarcely even noticing the LibDems these days.

I think though the LibDems are increasingly harming themselves by presenting themselves as a 'progressive' party that would work with Labour but sees the Tories as the enemy. Nothing wrong with being progressive, but preferentially siding with Labour too much doesn't really gel with the need to have a distinctive identity of their own - and it must also make it harder for people on the centre-right to vote LibDem, even if they are dissatisfied with the Government.

 

[Busaholic]

I think though the LibDems are increasingly harming themselves by presenting themselves as a 'progressive' party that would work with Labour but sees the Tories as the enemy. Nothing wrong with being progressive, but preferentially siding with Labour too much doesn't really gel with the need to have a distinctive identity of their own - and it must also make it harder for people on the centre-right to vote LibDem, even if they are dissatisfied with the Government.

But who are those of the centre right meant to support, given that if/when Johnson gets some sort of comeuppance he'll only be replaced by another on the right of the Tory party or with their support.? Gauke, Greening, Rudd, Grieve, Hammond, Stewart and Soubry have gone. I suspect Sunak is another Blair, with little in the way of ideology beyond protecting his own wealth, but he'd need the backing of the ERG crowd and their associates. The LibDems must work with Labour imo, but not merge with them. Cornwall, for instance, despite the native poverty has never been a happy hunting ground for Labour: Methodism combined with Liberalism/Whiggery was the template and it lives on in the continued support of elderly activists, if the arthritic set can be so described!

 

[Sm5]

I find it interesting so many read so much into politics when i think much of it is pretty simple…

Non-aligned People vote based on their emotion, which is guided by their perception at the time (ie personal economics, feeling towards the current party, country, media etc).

If they are feeling hard done by, and thinking the incumbents are corrupt, they vote for the counter party, if the perception if that party is they cant be trusted they vote for the third choice, failing that just protest to any, or just dont vote.

The last election in my mind was corrupt, it shows that anyone with enough money to risk on losing a deposit can rock up a no fake/hope party, steal a few votes which is just enough to tip the balance in another parties favour and buy an election/government.

Next election will be very different, the “war” might be over, Brexit done, Covid past and economic carnage, depression, inflation, crash currency and high interest rates, whatever brimstone comes from the sky.. even if the worst is past and things start picking up… everyone will be fed up and blaming dodgy Boris and just like Winston after WW2, turf him out…

But that assumes he’s still here and the party susses that out themselves.

As for Keir Starmer, he started out right but fizzled out, it might be he’s saving his best for the election, lets face it its years away so theres no point fighting now, but equally he could be damp powder and fails to ignite.

As for Liberals… who is the leader ? - I’m writing here and I don't even know, yet I live in what used to be a several decades long liberal safe zone in Surrey, that several MPs got unseated by the dodgy last election…and the new Tory in this town.. well he’s certainly the most active MP ive ever seen, he’s not planning on losing the next election as he’s everywhere in this village.

will it change anything .. will the electorate wake up to the fact they've been ripped off… its quite possible, but around here a Liberal comeback isn’t assured by any means, nor is it a safe Tory seat, and its certainly not labour, but the Tories are fighting to keep it now, and that might make a difference.

The Liberals around here were in sleepy self belief before, and seem to still be now, nothing changed, apart from losing, so if they dont care, why would the voters ?

 

[Typhoon]

As for Liberals… who is the leader ? - I’m writing here and I don't even know, yet I live in what used to be a several decades long liberal safe zone in Surrey, that several MPs got unseated by the dodgy last election…and the new Tory in this town.. well he’s certainly the most active MP ive ever seen, he’s not planning on losing the next election as he’s everywhere in this village.

will it change anything .. will the electorate wake up to the fact they've been ripped off… its quite possible, but around here a Liberal comeback isn’t assured by any means, nor is it a safe Tory seat, and its certainly not labour, but the Tories are fighting to keep it now, and that might make a difference.

The Liberals around here were in sleepy self belief before, and seem to still be now, nothing changed, apart from losing, so if they dont care, why would the voters ?

To put things into context, Surrey has only elected one LibDem/ Liberal since 1974.

But to take up your point about LibDems, they used to be active where I live (East Kent), we had 2 or 3 councillors, they sometimes had a stall in the market and we received a regular newsletter. Now nothing, not even at election time; in contrast to the Greens. There are a few councillors on the district councillor, mostly representing rural areas, but most have been around for years and are getting on. They don't seem to be able to attract new blood, many of the younger activists seem to have drifted away. I can understand why not much effort is made at a General Election (but not even a flyer to say that they are still around), its a safe seat, but I would have thought that targeting a council seat was; that's what the Liberals were good at. Unfortunately, as the LibDems are very much the fourth party. they are infrequently invited to discussion programmes so remain anonymous to the average voter.

By the way, their leader - Ed Davey. Think over-worked civil servant from Caterham and you are not far wrong (I note Caterham has LibDem councillors). Is this an opportunity to ask why Sam Gymah didn't contest east Surrey for the LibDems?

 

[317 forever]

The Southwest (certainly Cornwall and Devon) is now largely a Tory stronghold. What is surprising is how Eurosceptic previous Lib Dem areas like Torbay and North Cornwall are and that they now have truly enormous Tory majorities. A lot of 2010 LD support went on to vote UKIP in 2015 and then Tory in 2017/19 in these areas.

There was also a strong Labour recovery in two of the Cornish seats in 2017/2019. Labour almost won George Eustace's seat in 2017 and could win Truro and Falmouth next time (due to the student vote etc).

Truro & Falmouth could also be the most likely loss for the Tories as it had a local Remain vote in 2016.

 

[brad465]

Truro & Falmouth could also be the most likely loss for the Tories as it had a local Remain vote in 2016.

Except Labour would be the best placed candidate to beat them based on both the 2017 and 2019 results, not the Lib Dems. The latter's best chance only exists in North Cornwall and St Ives.

 

[317 forever]

Except Labour would be the best placed candidate to beat them based on both the 2017 and 2019 results, not the Lib Dems. The latter's best chance only exists in North Cornwall and St Ives.

There is indeed some notable Labour support there. Labour even held a Falmouth & Camborne constituency in 1997-2005, only subsequently gained by the LibDems following the Gulf War.

 

[Sm5]

To put things into context, Surrey has only elected one LibDem/ Liberal since 1974.

well thats false as they have 2 MPs in Surrey right now, and thats a fall.

Richmond Park
Kingston & Surbiton

Back in 2010 they additionally had :

Carshalton & Wallington
Sutton & Cheam.

some have been lib dem for years, others come and go, Wimbledon is very marginal.

A lot of woollies, among the bankers in this area.