Lib Dem Polls - How Low Can They Go?

[the button]

As noted on the 8 May p), it was a case of coalition at all costs for the LibDems. This YouGov poll for The Sunday Times has: -

Tories: 40% (up 4% from election result)
Labour: 32% (up 3% from election result)
LibDem: 18% (down 5% from election result)

Where you might have expected LibDem share to go up (having demonstrated that they're capable of being in government), it looks like the electorate is not too happy with Nick.

No wonder they were so keen on the 55% thing for dissolution of parliament.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Wonder how long it'll be before this is spun into a LibDems being absorbed by Tory party story?

 

[Jazzz]

Apparently in New Zealand, where coalition governments are a normality, it is common for the smaller of the two parties in the coalition to break up. So I heard.

 

[shagnasty]

Yes the national liberals now that was a good idea

 

[butchersapron]

Go home lib-dems.

 

[Quartz]

I'm not convinced that Cameron is really in charge. He bent right over to get the LDs on board, and Clegg successfully scared him with the negotiations with Labour. Give it time and good PR and the LDs can turn this around.

 

[butchersapron]

You're well nutty on political stuff aren't you?

 

[Quartz]

You're well nutty on political stuff aren't you?

Hasn't stopped me being correct before.

 

[gentlegreen]

"Reverse SDP" anyone ?

 

[butchersapron]

Hasn't stopped me being correct before.

Where and when?

 

[butchersapron]

Mail has them on 19% today. 39/32/19.

 

[the button]

Right-wing bloggers like Guido Fawkes have been itching for the LibDems to split -- his latest one being a breakaway led by Simon Hughes (semi-believable cos the bloke's an egomaniac and probably desperate to lead something) and Vince Cable (wtf?).

 

[the button]

Mail has them on 19% today. 39/32/19.

Hardly the kind of "bounce" in the polls that new parties of government normally experience, eh?

 

[butchersapron]

Right-wing bloggers like Guido Fawkes have been itching for the LibDems to split -- his latest one being a breakaway led by Simon Hughes (semi-believable cos the bloke's an egomaniac and probably desperate to lead something) and Vince Cable (wtf?).

That'll be a split to the even-further-right then.

It's amazing that anyone still buys Cable's PR bollocks. (I don't for a second believe that those mentioned above do btw - their attempts at damaging shit stirring are transparent)

 

[butchersapron]

Hardly the kind of "bounce" in the polls that new parties of government normally experience, eh?

There's a good division of labour here (even better till Laws decided to get caught being a lying thief). The tories do the looking good and professional side and the lib-dems do the getting taken to the cleaners side. Coalition can work.

 

[trevhagl]

As noted on the 8 May p), it was a case of coalition at all costs for the LibDems. This YouGov poll for The Sunday Times has: -

Tories: 40% (up 4% from election result)
Labour: 32% (up 3% from election result)
LibDem: 18% (down 5% from election result)

Where you might have expected LibDem share to go up (having demonstrated that they're capable of being in government), it looks like the electorate is not too happy with Nick.

No wonder they were so keen on the 55% thing for dissolution of parliament.

is 'capable of being in government' a euphanism for "agreeing with everything Disco Dave wants" ?

 

[ericjarvis]

I'm not convinced that Cameron is really in charge. He bent right over to get the LDs on board, and Clegg successfully scared him with the negotiations with Labour. Give it time and good PR and the LDs can turn this around.

Of course Cameron isn't in charge. The billionaires that fund the Tory Party are in charge.

 

[butchersapron]

3 by-elections with lib-dem incumbents since the coaltion was formed. They lost two to the tories and one to the greens. That's their vanishing future writ small right there.

 

[free spirit]

3 by-elections with lib-dem incumbents since the coaltion was formed. They lost two to the tories and one to the greens. That's their vanishing future writ small right there.

you could well be right.

as far as I can see, the only hope the lib dems have got of salvaging this situation is to be seen to deliver on as much of the good stuff from the manifesto as possible while in government, drop the shit ideas, and prevent the worst excesses of the tories.

it's too early to tell properly, but from where I'm standing it's not looking particularly promising

 

[the button]

you could well be right.

as far as I can see, the only hope the lib dems have got of salvaging this situation is to be seen to deliver on as much of the good stuff from the manifesto as possible while in government, drop the shit ideas, and prevent the worst excesses of the tories.

it's too early to tell properly, but from where I'm standing it's not looking particularly promising

Leaving aside whether the "curbing the excesses" line is true or not, it's going to be a tough one to take come the next election. If your hustings position is "Yeah, I know, but you should see some of the mad shit they *wanted* to do lol," then: -

1. The immediate question is why the fuck did you help put them into power and sign up to a measure that makes it harder to get rid of them (the 55% thing)?
2. It makes it a lot harder to form a second coalition goverment with them in the event of another hung parliament.

FWIW, I think the second point is more significant than the first. In terms of parliamentary politics, one of the most interesting things in the next five years is how the LibDems fight the next general election -- or, indeed, if they fight it as a distinct party in their current form.

 

[butchersapron]

Right-wing bloggers like Guido Fawkes have been itching for the LibDems to split -- his latest one being a breakaway led by Simon Hughes (semi-believable cos the bloke's an egomaniac and probably desperate to lead something) and Vince Cable (wtf?).

Incidentally, why isn't Hansard reporting Dennis Skinner shouting "have you had any of the white stuff lately?" and "how many lines today?" at George Osborne earlier this week (as reported by the above blog)

 

[butchersapron]

Leaving aside whether the "curbing the excesses" line is true or not, it's going to be a tough one to take come the next election. If your hustings position is "Yeah, I know, but you should see some of the mad shit they *wanted* to do lol," then: -

1. The immediate question is why the fuck did you help put them into power and sign up to a measure that makes it harder to get rid of them (the 55% thing)?
2. It makes it a lot harder to form a second coalition goverment with them in the event of another hung parliament.

FWIW, I think the second point is more significant than the first. In terms of parliamentary politics, one of the most interesting things in the next five years is how the LibDems fight the next general election -- or, indeed, if they fight it as a distinct party in their current form.

Come next election they'll be a political typhoid mary - tories will have had their use out of them, labour will be picking up their old tactical anti-vote thereby losing the lib-dems many many seats.

 

[the button]

Come next election they'll be a political typhoid mary - tories will have had their use out of them, labour will be picking up their old tactical anti-vote thereby losing the lib-dems many many seats.

The old "vote LibDem, get Tory" line will be a lot more effective, certainly.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Right-wing bloggers like Guido Fawkes have been itching for the LibDems to split -- his latest one being a breakaway led by Simon Hughes (semi-believable cos the bloke's an egomaniac and probably desperate to lead something) and Vince Cable (wtf?).

Heh and I got derision when I suggested Cable quite to distance himself ready for a future leadership bid...

 

[butchersapron]

But he's not done any such thing. (Have another careful read of that post you've replied to as well)

 

[Kid_Eternity]

But he's not done any such thing. (Have another careful read of that post you've replied to as well)

I did, guido isn't just itching for it, he's seeing a possible outcome.

 

[butchersapron]

I meant the one where the chances of Cable leading a split was scoffed at, not the blog one. But ask yourself why a rabidly pro-tory blog would like to see a lib-dem split?

 

[joevsimp]

3 by-elections with lib-dem incumbents since the coaltion was formed. They lost two to the tories and one to the greens. That's their vanishing future writ small right there.

where were those btw?

 

[butchersapron]

where were those btw?

Isle of wight
Whitle
Rugeley, Western Springs

 

[free spirit]

Leaving aside whether the "curbing the excesses" line is true or not, it's going to be a tough one to take come the next election. If your hustings position is "Yeah, I know, but you should see some of the mad shit they *wanted* to do lol," then: -

1. The immediate question is why the fuck did you help put them into power and sign up to a measure that makes it harder to get rid of them (the 55% thing)?
2. It makes it a lot harder to form a second coalition goverment with them in the event of another hung parliament.

FWIW, I think the second point is more significant than the first. In terms of parliamentary politics, one of the most interesting things in the next five years is how the LibDems fight the next general election -- or, indeed, if they fight it as a distinct party in their current form.

1 - as I repeatedly pointed out at the time, once significant numbers of labour MP's had come out against a coalition, there was no option other than a tory government either with the lib dems in coalition, or as a minority government with the lib dems supporting them on a case by case basis. As for the 55% thing... no idea, I can sort of see the logic behind it, but don't think we should have gone for it.

2 - IMO the Lib Dems would need to be able to go into the next election with a track record they can point to of specific stuff that they'd done that wasn't in the tory manifesto, so presumably wouldn't have got done without the lib dems being in the coalition. If they can do this, then the next election could be ok, if not then they'll be pretty screwed probably. If done in this way (which really is the only way that regular coalition government systems can work), then I don't see it causing any problems with them going into coalition with either labour or tories after the next election if that option was available.