Can we talk about the collapse of Lib Dems?

[heylilbunny]

I was reading that the Lib Dems had strong support in areas that had many university students and professional educators as well as with well educated voters. It seems so unintelligent and short-sightened of them to support the increase in university fees. That is the one issue everyone remembers that overshadowed any other policies they were advancing. Do you think they would have recovered if they had ejected Clegg earlier or was their choice to go into coalition fatal?

I am very interested because they received such a significant amount of votes in 2010 and were truly the third party at that time. I did think like everyone I know that Clegg was a dead man walking but wondered if the Lib Dems would retain support at the local level. Instead so much of their support - say in the West of the country - went to the Conservatives, taking them over the top.

What's your opinion?

The student loan business was a massive mistake. Also the teaming up with the Tories. You voted LD in 2010 and got the Tories. That was grim for LD voters. Even this time they were leaning to go into coalition with Labour or so it seemed according to reports. How can anyone vote for a party who might side with Labour might side with Tories they didn't know. I think that's why they're all but finished for the time being.

They didn't have to go into coalition with anyone. They could have let Cameron form a minority government, and then issues would have been thrashed out one by one. That is what I wanted to see.

To me, it seemed that power went to Nick Clegg's head.

Polly Toynbee was on the Sunday Politics yesterday and she said she thought the LibDems were "finished". She thought the Greens would take their vote in future. Nick Watt of the Guardian was less apocalyptic, he said it would probably take them 20 or 30 years to recover.

We forget, I think, that the Lib Dems are a hybrid of the SDP and the old Liberals. Perhaps this is partly responsible for their misfortunes?
Unbelievably there is still a remnant of the old Liberals around.

pausing No- labour plus lib dems = no majority in 2010, so Cons plus Ulster could have voted down the budget.

He didn't have to form a coalition but I think we're forgetting the mood at the time which has definitely for some sort of coalition/ stable government. The question was never "will he" but "who with". It's easy to forget that 5 years later, but 2010 was a tough year. Not being able to pass key legislation was going to make everyone scream.

I have never voted Lim Dem, don't agree with a lot of their policies, but I do think NC has become a whipping boy, and it's somewhat unfair.

LaVolcan - I think that's the problem, too many people last time round thought they were voting for a party that was really just a Labour splinter group. If the LibDems can properly spell out what they stand for, they'll have a better chance of winning people who want them, not "what I wish the labour party was"

Plus how long it takes them to bounce back really depends on what the main 2 parties do next. If the Conservative government goes really hard on the poor and marches rightward, then people will see that the LibDems did curtail them over the last government and might well get more appriciation for what they did. If the people (like Polly Toynbee) who are basically calling for Labour to go more to the left get their way, or Labour spent the next few years navel gazing and in-fighting, the LibDems will pick up support.

On the other hand, if the Tories and Labour are fighting over the middle ground with very similar offerings, then LibDems will be squeezed out rather.

One problem the LD's had was that under Blair, Labour moved to the right and "stole" the centre ground from the LD's, who pushed out to the left. NC then managed to capitalise on the anti-Labour sentiment (war monger Blair, unpopular Brown), moved a bit further right and became quite fashionable. Throw in a cheeky smile and a good leader's debate and Nick's suddenly centre stage. Trouble is he didn't do quite well enough to become a serious force, so both parties need him, but he doesn't have enough seats to really be a serious coalition partner. I have to say I think Labour will move right again now. No point in moving left with Scotland seats now gone to the SNP. They have to woo the English electorate.

I'm another one who joined the Lib Dems over the weekend. I'm horrified by the GE result and decided it was time to step up.

I think the future could be good for the LDs. Voters might feel that they've taken enough of a beating this time round and that the result was unfair to them - it will exorcise the demons of going into a coalition and the tuition fees thing. If Cons go more right wing and Labour can't get themselves together, voters will be happy to give a centrist party another chance.

I think their best chance is to move the debate on to new areas - it was shocking how little discussion there was about international affairs at the GE and I think Lib Dems should exploit this. And they should go hard on a very pro-EU message when the referendum comes around. They have nothing to lose, but I think they'll pick up a lot of support from people who don't want to leave.

I voted Lib Dem in 2010 and again last week. I like my local Lib Dem candidate. He was the only local guy standing.

I think the Lib Dems have been blamed wholly for people's frustration with the coalition. On the whole, I think the coalition has worked ok and been stable (considering the financial storm they've had to steer).

The Lib Dems paid a heavy price for their pledge on tuition fees. It was pledged with the freedom of thinking they'd never be in power. When they got power, they didn't have the last say.

They've been between a rock and hard place throughout. However, now people have seen them has simply power hungry and swaying which ever way the wind blows. Unfair I think, but that's people's view.

I hope they recover. In my opinion Paddy Ashdown was a great Prime Minister that never was.

I am in a strongly Conservative area. Our LibDem candidate was suspended at a late stage.

Even before then, we saw nothing of the LibDems and nothing of Labour either.

The Conservatives were out in force. I bumped into my MP so often he probably thought I was stalking him
We had the Conservatives knocking on doors - on our council estate, that's unheard off. We also saw UKIP canvassing. Both parties had representatives at the polling station.

Conservative won; UKIP came second.

It felt like the other parties just gave up and I honestly believe that is why the Conservatives won: it really is that simple - they went out there and put in the hard graft talking to people of all political persuasion.

I strongly believe that the Liberal Democrats will bounce back by 2020, but to what extent will depend on European events and the other non Conservative political parties.

Firstly though, as alluded to by posters above, the Lib Dems under Clegg probably punched above their weight in 2010 as promised two things the other two main parties that would form the 2010-2015 parliament couldn’t; if either Labour or Conservatives were to seriously BEGIN addressing the annual UK deficit/overspend lower student fees and tax cuts could not be in their manifestos, and a ’change’ in the way government worked, the latter being the key buzz word.

Back in 2010 as now, citizens across Europe (even if they know how deep their country is in the do doos) want painless solutions to those problems, so as far left or far right party offering no detailed derivatives of ‘financially pain free’, under the mantras of ‘change’, ‘better’, or ‘different’ – gets the votes of the desperate but deluded masses.

But ONCE IN government needing to make those decisions, they are no longer in opposition ‘sticking it to the man’; they ARE ‘the man’, offering no financially pain free solutions and claiming that they taught the Conservatives to lower taxes when the fall in ‘real’ wages from 2008 showed no sign of changing, is (based on their record) like teaching a gummy granny to suck eggs. Ironically Clegg got PUNISHED for his pre 2010 election promises that gave him those extra seats.

So how can the Liberal Democrats come back strongly? By being an opposition party again, but with CV experience of government that DID save this nation from a crisis and watching those other ‘protest parties’ lose their attraction - but to what extent, is out of the Lib Dem hands, but there is a real chance.

UKIP; Has become the main party of protest, not just in European elections, and have done so due to one man, Mr Farage, who people think ‘talks common sense’, but in reality is tricksy adopting platforms and policies, giving it ‘a bit of wee, a bit of woo’, adopting the opposite to less popular individual party policies, and ‘ducking and diving’ in between.

The fact is Farage resonates with voters from most parties to one extent or another, but what happens to UKIPs current vote if Farage is no longer leader and the UK EU Referendum in 2017 settles the case for another 40-years? Moreover if we stay ‘in’ the EU, the Lib Dems would no longer lose votes championing our membership of the EU.

The Greens; the one party I love to be intellectually baffled by the Green issue stance and expertise, but IMO so far left in other non Green issues their policies are badly thought out for the real world, if under any scrutiny by those who understand such non green ‘stuff’. How will they position themselves between now and the 2020 General Election as a ‘protest party’?

SNP; As I have written elsewhere, the quicker the SNP are given what they want re control of their own taxation, the quicker what begins to be a pre Labour 2015 platform of ‘progressive’ politics pisses off everyone in-between the richest and poorest, as an SNP find they need tax creep on everyone else - including businesses that again have the choice to break for the border – and whose taxes will need to be replaced by, those in the middle.

Labour; One has to give the party machine the benefit of the doubt that they can turn themselves around, but as many are only now just learning that their 13-year record, 2015 general election manifesto and leader was shite, they probably won’t know whether to have a shite or a haircut for another 5-years, never mind pick a perfect leader from an ugly contest of inclusive talent. Again, a smaller more focused Lib Dems on a more centre ground message could run rings around this lot.

In Conclusion; in football parlance, the Lib Dems IMO need to concentrate solely on their own game, and watch to what extent the other parties of protest and opposing, implode. Come 2020 without another global meltdown (god willing), the UK will be in such a good position, domestically and internationally, those political parties looking for ’change’ from that success will look stupid – while the political party instrumental in building the foundation of that recovery, will be in a good position to start owning that record, instead of keep apologising for much of it.

Heads up Lib Dems, get your own ‘stuff’ together and by 2020 if set your own stall out successfully you’ll get recognised for what you did and what more you have to offer from that record - versus the current mob of different colours, who just sound like an old whining record.

I can never think of Paddy Ashdown without remembering a mortifying incident when the vicar was praying for him in church when his affair came to light (clearly a Lib den voter) and my little sister yelled "He said his name wrong. It's Paddy Pants-down" My mum started going to a different church after that .

The Tories didn't bother to canvas round my way. No doubt just assumed that the seat should naturally belong to them.

The LibDems spent too much time telling us not to vote Labour, which was a complete waste of time and money because Labour never achieves anything round here. If they (LD) had bothered to tell us how they had moderated Tory policies they might have got a better chance - the seat was LibDem for 18 years, but no, they wasted that opportunity.

Tanith if you are in a strongly Conservative area, how many people do you think are actually in the Labour party in your constiteuncy?

And how many of those are willing to do the job of knocking on random strangers' doors to discuss politics? Particularly if it's a strong Tory area and they're likely to get abused and threatened (I hasten to add I'm not criticising Tories specifically, same would apply the other way round)

Voters seem to think that the party chiefs wave a magic wand and canvassers appear on their doorstep. Nope, it's all volunteers, and it takes you to be pretty keen; and to cover any substantial number of doorsteps you need a lot of person-hours.

I doubt the Conservatives would have bothered canvassing if they hadn't had UKIP on their heels.

In 2010, I struggled to make a decision. I saw Labour as broken and having been incompetent and irresponsible with the country. The Liberal Democrats were the closest fit, but they were away with the fairies having policies that were just unrealistic. And the Conservatives were just too right wing. In my mind my ideal solution was a Liberal Democrat / Conservative coalition which was more pragmatic and libertarian in nature than either of the two on their own. I thought it was extremely unlikely but that's what I got.

I still think in hindsight it was the best thing for the country we had in 2010. It provided us with a stable government and a change from the past government which had become morally corrupt from being in power for too long. It gave the Liberal Democrats a lesson in governing and too away their idealistic side and instead gave them something of a taste of reality. I think this is a good thing which will serve them well for the future despite all the losses they have suffered. I also think that when the true colours of the Conservative become apparent that it will do the electorate good as well. I think we will see 'what the point of the Liberal Democrats' is, albeit too late.

I have always found it difficult to understand why Clegg was viewed as a traitor, when the party has a firm belief in coalition politics with its commitment to PR. I find it incredibly ironic hearing all the cries for it when 5 years ago everyone was complaining they didn't vote for a coalition. No one votes for a coalition because you can't.

Equally the stuff about tuition fees I find to be a hangover from idealism. As people start to realise how much the LDs did manage to do in coalition I hope there will be revisionist thought on that, as the system whilst not free is a damn site cheaper and fairer for many, particularly the poorest than both the previous system and the £6000 one proposed by Labour this time round.

I think that unfortunately the Liberal Democrats tend to be more educated in thought, and this is something that is very difficult to translate into simple short soundbite type messages. The thinking is deeper and the strategies more complex than their counterparts which appeal to more populist or more stereotyped thinking rather than the realities. It makes them a victim of their own success in trying to get to the root causes of problems and 'do the right thing for the country' rather than appeal to the public.

I see politics done well as something where you have to make decisions which are unpopular which is why I have the upmost respect for Clegg. I don't think anything would be different had he not gone into power with the Conservatives. And its worth remembering that their 2010 campaign appealed to both the left and right of centre - to keep Labour out as well as to keep the Conservatives out. So they were on a hiding to nothing over it.

Their campaign this time around also put them in difficult territory. Their strapline was about choosing between turning left or right. The idea being to choose an alternative. However this played into the Conservative campaign of a choice of Labour/SNP or the Conservatives. The polls also suggested this and suggested that there was a strong chance of another LD-Con coalition, especially if you listened to Nick Clegg ruling out working with the SNP. The maths suggested that Labour couldn't do a LD-LAB coalition and Nick Clegg also said he would favour the party with the most seats. Paddy Ashdown has also come to this conclusion as a major factor in the collapse of the vote. It lead to LD voters feeling they had to choose LAB or CON in a tactical compromise.

What no one expected was this, combined with UKIP taking chunks out of the vote in target LAB seats, that this would lead to a CON Majority. Everyone was reasonably sure parliament would be hung.

In the cold light of day, people have panicked and realised they need to engage better and promote liberal values in the face of a conservative majority.

The issue is now whether the Liberal Democrats will end up moving more to the left, or stay on the centre ground which Labour abandoned? And where will Labour move?

I think I worry about the Lib Dems moving too far left as this abandons some of the practical lessons they have learnt and the gains they did make in this area. They need to stay in the centre, with perhaps a moderate shift to the left.

Despite the collapse of the vote, I think their way forward is much easier than the future Labour faces. There is much enthusiasm for liberalism and its easier to pick up votes from both disaffected Labour and Conservative voters from the centre. Labour meanwhile is in a situation where it ends up rather damned regardless of direction imho as it faced an attack on it from multiple directions - a collapse in its core working class vote to UKIP and an even more total collapse in Scotland. The question of Europe will prove difficult for Labour in this parliament. The Lib Dems have a very clear line on this which could prove a real saving grace. They may also find an easier way back in Scotland if people become disaffected with the SNP if they are unable to deliver anti-austerity - they may end up being blamed for not doing enough to persuade the Conservatives as much as the Conservative will be viewed as the enemy.

I think that in 2020 the election will be very interesting. I do wonder whether people will succumb to tactical voting in quite the same way or whether it will be the lasting legacy of this election and a lesson the electorate learns the hard way.

Sorrytodisturbyou: that doesn't seem to have worried the Conservative and UKIP candidates. I may live in a strongly Conservative constituency, but I also said I live on a council estate: an area that has always been a lone Labour seat on the Council.

We've never had a Conservative round here before and he was actually treated with courtesy and a good deal of discussion.

No sign of Labour or LibDems, though. Not even posters in windows, which was really strange!

All three members of your local labour party were probably off campaigning in a seat that was actually winnable!

And also, if the Labour/Lib Dems knew they weren't going to win but that UKIP were gaining on Conservatives, they might have quietly decided to run a low-key campaign and let the anti-UKIP vote coalesce on one party.

You make a lot of good points redtoothbrush but I do want to point out that the Lib Dem manifesto of 2010 was the only party's that was fully costed out to the extent that the figures actually added up (amazingly for a manifesto). I think. Have not searched to confirm.

We were very sensitive to the charge that we were a bunch of cuddly idealists with no idea about the real world. Oh, to turn back the clock to the days when that was the worst thing people thought about us!

Tanith: I'd be interested to know - did Labour keep the council seat, despite the lack of campaigning? We've had a lot of council seats fall to the Tories round these parts.

No, they didn't. Went to the Conservatives.

It wasn't about cost that I had a problem with in terms of 'realism' Boulevard. It was more about the reality of some policies in practice and the knock on consequences of them.

Persp I'm one who joined the libdems this weekend. It was partly a need to join someone/anyone to protest against austerity (I looked at Greens as well), partly because I was horrified to see what happened to them - I think they're good for british politics & partly because a friend sent me a link to their constitution & it felt something I could embrace & get behind.

My eldest son is very severely disabled, he'll be an adult in 2 years entirely reliant on social care, and today his future looks very bleak. I feel getting behind the libdems is doing something towards building a better future for him as well.

I had always vote LIbDems before, but switched to Green this time (for the general election). As I am in a massive Tory area, my vote doesn't "count" anyway.

This was for these reasons:

1. I felt betrayed that the LDs didn't insist on a PR referendum and instead agreed to AV which didn't have a hope in hell as it was too complicated. I also felt betrayed on tuition fees to a lesser extent.

2. I didn't like how they had gone right as I am a left of centre LD supporter.

3. I do not like Clegg now I know him. He has no backbone and no actual beliefs.

4. When I did the "who shall I vote for" things on various websites, for the first time LD did not come up and instead my views were represented by the Green and Labour to an extent. The manefesto was also wishywashy.

I think the LibDems were wrongly condemned for going into coalition. I agree, the country did not want a minority government (and also agree it would have been a bloodbath if Labour and the LDs had tried to rule together with the largest party in opposition). Frankly I would much rather the Tories in coalition with the LDs than the DUP.

But the country appears to fear coalition politics - and what I don't like about them is the fact it exposes the machinery of politics much more than a majority government. The deal making and compromises, we all thought about what each party would trade with the others last week - without any of the parties confirming anything.

I agree they should have pushed harder and I think would have done if they had anticipated the scale of the backlash. Will they ever agree to go into coalition again? I would want some MAJOR concessions given the inevitable punishment at the end of the term.

I think the LibDems were wrongly condemned for going into coalition. I agree, the country did not want a minority government (and also agree it would have been a bloodbath if Labour and the LDs had tried to rule together with the largest party in opposition). Frankly I would much rather the Tories in coalition with the LDs than the DUP.

But the country appears to fear coalition politics - and what I don't like about them is the fact it exposes the machinery of politics much more than a majority government. The deal making and compromises, we all thought about what each party would trade with the others last week - without any of the parties confirming anything.

I agree they should have pushed harder and I think would have done if they had anticipated the scale of the backlash. Will they ever agree to go into coalition again? I would want some MAJOR concessions given the inevitable punishment at the end of the term.