So what does the Guardian do to cheer itself up when a poll has shown Labour support is falling? Ah yes, they just write about how rubbish life is for the Liberal Democrats. Words like perilous, doom and resigned are peppered through the piece. I’m not suggesting that our prospects are the best they’ve ever been, but so much of what’s written about us is not so much “glass half empty” but “no liquid anywhere near the glass.”
I’d like to think that when Patrick Wintour and Nick Watt were doing their research for this, they were shown the vibrant Team 2015 operation, the busy and spirited things going on across the country in our key seats and that they just chose not to write about it because it doesn’t fit in with the pessimistic narrative. There are many things about the party’s campaigning that it can take a huge amount of pride in. There are bright and talented people in HQ who are doing the best they can with the material available to them. Did Wintour and Watt get to talk to the Austin Rathes and Steve Jollys of this world? I hope so.
The piece is depressingly Westminster Bubble focused – and it is with some dismay that I saw key campaigners missing from the list of our general election personnel. It’s really important that there is a way of feeding back what quickly what is working and what is not on the ground.
The article features heavily on how we are focusing on the soft Tory vote, which I’m not sure is entirely accurate. After all, in those seats we need Labour leaning people to vote for us so we have to have something that appeals to them. It’s that centre ground thing again.
There’s a sense that we’ve written off all of those people who voted for us because of Iraq. Some of them are probably gone for good, but we should still be saying to those people that we came into government at a time when there was no money and gave extra money to disadvantaged kids and helped people get better mental health services.
Where the anonymous “party strategists” are right is that we are doing a lot better than the national polls suggest in areas of strength. We know that from the Ashcroft polls.
What we are going to find in our world is that in places where we are not strong – and where we piled up votes in previous elections because of our position on Iraq or because people were fed up with Gordon Brown but didn’t trust the Tories – there is a risk that we will suffer disproportionate declines. Where we are strong, the evidence on the ground is that we are doing much better than the national opinion poll ratings would indicate.
The journalists made one very basic error. Sal Brinton stepped down from the Coalition negotiating team when she becomes party president.
There’s also a foreshadowing of a potential debate on the proportion of the book balancing to be achieved by tax rises and spending cuts.
The party, unlike the Tories, would allow spending to rise after 2017-18 in line with growth in the economy, and it would not target an overall surplus by the end of the parliament, allowing extra borrowing for capital spending. The Lib Dems are also closer to Labour on how to pay for the consolidation. But Cable, who wants the split between spending cuts and tax increases to be around 50/50, was annoyed when Clegg’s team recently claimed the split would be 75/25. He says the leadership should openly say that the profile for the three years covering 2015-18 is 60/40 and that the figure should be changed again towards a 50/50 split.
Mark Pack is looking for supporters for an amendment to commit to that 50:50 split. I’ve signed up to it. You might want to contact him if you want to know more.
It’s interesting that the article focuses on spending cuts and deficit reduction, suggesting that Nick Clegg is reluctant to make spending commitments – but doesn’t mention what is effectively an over £9 billion commitment to increase NHS funding. It’s £8 billion for England, but there will be additional Barnett Consequentials for Scotland and Wales. That’s massive and health is by far the issue that concerns voters most. It’s a big omission.
I was amused, however by the description of Deputy Campaign Chair Olly Grender:
Grender knows the party inside-out and has the ability to temper some of Ashdown’s hastier enthusiasms.
Of the ten people listed, though, only two have any serious connection with the important grassroots. I’d be happier to see people like Kath Pinnock who has daily practical experience as a councillor and isn’t based in a target seat around to keep everything realistic and relevant.
Another key factor left out is the Scottish dimension. I know that people like Tim Gordon really get what’s happening north of the border but a message that appeals to soft Tories south of the border is not going to cut it against the SNP up here. We need to be talking much more than we are about jobs and opportunity on the UK stage.
While the Guardian’s emphasis may be different than my own perspective on what’s happening, there are things in that report that I think we still need to resolve, particularly to do with the way we communicate what we are about. We have a bright story to tell and we need to do it with more passion.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Josh Babarinde makes the case for his Domestic Abuse Bill
North London's expanse
West End Ward Tuesday Surgeries #dundeewestend
Big brother state
Matthew Radmore
tom arms
Roland
Paul Reynolds
Jonathan Brown
54 Comments
Certainly if the campaign is focused on gaining soft Tories – as Clegg almost certainly wants, from all his language in the past, Caron, it will not only lose inScotland, but all over the place. I am quite amazed that we haven’t found a way of moving away from this by now. You mention “Westminster Bubble” – the trouble is that from the comment in the piece about “deep sense across the party that our record is not being highlighted” in a positive way, is definitely Westminster focused. That is what MPs believe, not what is seen out here on the ground, which is why I trust more of what the Guardian has to say about our prospects than what HQ is trying to sell us. Yes, we will fight this election hard, but until there is an understanding that we have become too “soft Tory” and an acceptance we need deep change as a party to shift back, we will continue to seriously underperform. We have lost a large section of our support, and whatever the wheelhouse says, we need it back. Why would soft tories vote in another way than Tory? We are not going to manufacture a Tory split!
“The journalists made one very basic error. Sal Brinton stepped down from the Coalition negotiating team when she becomes party president.”
Can you remind us who replaced Sal Brinton on this negotiating team ?
If no replacement has yet been announced — I am available. 🙂
It is such a shame to read that I could have saved the party “a small fortune”.
I read and weep when I see The Guardian report — “….Ryan Coetzee – the party’s general election director of strategy….. – has spent a small fortune polling in the party’s 57 seats. Analysis of those polls gave the party its key campaign insight: its chances are best in “Tory-facing seats” and less good in seats, such as Redcar, where Labour is the main challenger.
If only RC had asked me!
Or he could have asked anyone with a smidgen of common sense or an O-level in the Bleeding Obvious.
Things must really be very different in the Western Cape!
Caron – can you tell us how much extra taxes the 50:50 split (rather than 60:40) will mean and what taxes we should increase?
Though no fan of Patrick Wintour, I found the Guardian article to be remarkably fair as far as it went. One needs to remind oneself that the article is describing the prospects of a political party which has lost support and elected representatives further and faster than any Party has in the UK since about the first world war.
What I thought was comical was reference to the views of “one strategist”. The Lib Dems currently have no strategists. To have strategist, you first of all need to have a strategy. The Party’s fortunes at present depend almost entirely on teams of bright tacticians in 30 to 40 seats across the UK. The only role that the centre have is to ensure that they do not do something incredibly stupid during the next ten weeks that will scare the horses.
As Caron has said, the poor NCOs in Great George Street ” are doing the best they can with the material available to them” Unfortunately, that material has been determined by those far above them hierarchically though cheek-by-jowl with them geographically. The phrases ‘silk purse’ and ‘sow’s ear’ come to mind.
It was only when the Guardian article began to list “The LIb Dem General Election Team” that it begins to depress. With notable exceptions, it is possibly a less useful team than those whose efforts in 2010 gave rise to such an embarrassing national Lib Dem underperformance. The good news, however, is that political skills in this Party are not by any means confined to those who are strapped to the tiller in the Titanic’s ‘wheelhouse’. They include a number of Members of Parliament (none of whom are in the ‘Leadership’) and individuals all over the country who will not allow this Party to die or be killed off. Perhaps the next interesting Guardian article will focus on those ‘contracyclical’ Lib Dem Local Parties who have gained electorally during the Coalition against the national tide? I would not bet a gin palace on it.
I have been a Guardian reader for 50 years and over the last 10 years it has increasingly sprinkled news reports with opinions and speculation rather than facts.
In my opinion, the Guradian journalists regard Lib Dems as Labour lite. Consequently when the Lib Dems went into coalition with the Conservatives they saw it as a betrayal of Labour. An example of hating the Conservatives so much that they hate the Lib Dems even more for cooperating with them to save the country from the same fate as Greece.
The Independent also has a pro Labour biased so we should accept that there are no Lib Dem supporting newspapers.
JohnTilley18th Feb ’15 – 12:11pm
“The journalists made one very basic error. Sal Brinton stepped down from the Coalition negotiating team when she becomes party president. – Can you remind us who replaced Sal Brinton on this negotiating team ?
If no replacement has yet been announced — I am available. ”
John, I understand that traditional authentic mainstream preamble-believing Liberal Democrats need not apply 🙂
Caron
Re ” But Cable, who wants the split between spending cuts and tax increases to be around 50/50, was annoyed when Clegg’s team recently claimed the split would be 75/25. He says the leadership should openly say that the profile for the three years covering 2015-18 is 60/40 and that the figure should be changed again towards a 50/50 split.
Mark Pack is looking for supporters for an amendment to commit to that 50:50 split. I’ve signed up to it. You might want to contact him if you want to know more.”
Could LDV not run something more up front on Vince and Mark’s 50:50 suggestion? Perhaps something like the old members-only surveys?
The surveys are still going to happen – Stephen Tall is still in charge of them so I will mention it.
I’ll certainly ask Mark for an article – I was talking to him about this only last night.
Mistakes all mine – but here is what the Ashcroft polls are saying – not that we are doing better there than elsewhere – rather that we have further to fall in held seats.
Ashcroft polls – Lib Dem Holds Total = 12
(% = Ashcroft poll Lib Dem lead)
Thornbury & Yate 23% Steve Webb
Carshalton and Wallington 20% Tom Brake
Eastbourne 19% Stephen Lloyd
Sutton & Cheam 18% Paul Burstow
Eastleigh 15% Mike Thornton
Colchester 14% Bob Russell
Southport 13% John Pugh
Kingston & Surbiton 8% Ed Davey
Cheltenham 8% Martin Horwood
Hazel Grove 6% Lisa Smart
Brecon and Radnorshire 4% Roger Williams
Cheadle 4% Mark Hunter
Ashcroft polls – Recount/Margin or error Total = 9
Birmingham Yardley 3% John Hemming
Bermondsey & Old Southwark 1% Simon Hughes
St Ives 1% Andrew George
North Cornwall 0% Dan Rogerson
Torbay 0% Adrian Saunders
St Austell & Newquay -1% Stephen Gilbert
Cambridge – 1% Julian Huppert
North Devon -1% Nick Harvey
Watford -2%
Ashcroft Polls Labour Gains Total = 6
Sheffield Hallam
Hornsey & Wood Green,
Cardiff Central
Redcar
Brent Central
Burnley
Ashcroft polls Conservative Gains Total = 8
Berwick Upon Tweed
Taunton Deane
Chippenham
Somerton & Frome
Solihull
Wells
Mid Dorset & North Poole
Portsmouth South
Ashcroft polls SNP Gains Total =2
Gordon
Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey
No Ashcroft Poll yet but likely to be lost Total = 7
% = Majority at last election
Norwich South maj 0.7%
Bradford East maj 0.9%
Manchester Withington 4.2%
East Dumbartonshire
Argyll and Bute 7.6%
Aberdeen West and Kincardine 8.2%
Edinburgh West 8.2%
No Ashcroft Poll – 4 – likely to be recounts
Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk 11.8% Michael Moore
Lewes 15.3% Norman Baker
Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross 15.3% John Thurso
North East Fife 22.6% Tim Brett
No Ashcroft Poll – probable Lib Dem Hold 10
Twickenham – 20.3% Vince Cable
Bristol West 20.5% Stephen Williams
Leeds North West 20.9% Greg Mulholland
Ceredigion 21.8% Mark Williams
Yeovil 22.8% David Laws
North Norfolk 23.4% Norman Lamb
Westmoreland and Lonsdale 23.8% Tim Farron
Bath 25.2% Steve Bradley
Ross, Skye and Lochaber 37.5% Charles Kennedy
Orkney and Shetland 51.3% Alistair Carmichael
The latest poll in Scotland, puts the Lib Dems on 4%, in line with all the other Scottish polls this year.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/scottish-voting-intention-2.
There are 59 seats in Scotland, in 2010 the Liberal Democrat won 11, polling 465,471 votes 18.9%
4% would be around 98,512 votes in the whole of Scotland. Divide that up however you like,
the Lib Dems won’t be winning more than a couple of seats unless their poll rating changes drastically.
Caractacus, your assumption that seats like East Dunbartonshire and Edinburgh West and WAK are going to be lost is based on what exactly? Tories have given up in WAK – they don’t consider it a target.
East Dunbartonshire is one of our best organised seat in the country and Edinburgh West is up there too.
I looked at the list of campaign team – Paddy is brilliant, but he won his seat in 1983. For the rest we just have to look at by-election and euro-election results. I feel sorry for the people running the ground war and poor NCOs in Great George Street, who can only do their best whilst following instructions.
When people like Mark Pack, have to point out “Neither the party’s strategy for the European elections (on which see Liberal Democrat Newswire #48) nor for the summer (on which see Liberal Democrat Newswire #52) worked. The party is still marooned in the high single digits / low double digits in nearly all” polls.http://www.markpack.org.uk/84624/liberal-democrat-newswire-53is-fix-lib-dem-strategy/#mctoc2
and Lord Ashcroft Focus groups show Clegg and Tuition fees still to be toxic time is running out.
Has there been any planning for a second election in 2015 ? Money ? Staff ? Candidates ? Newly marginal seats ?
Caron, I did make the relevant point at the bottom of my post. Also one might assume from the average drop in support that the seats would be lost or the fact the Ashcroft is predicting losses further up the Lib Dem held list might be pertinent.
Charles, Ming, Danny Alexander, John Thurso and Malcolm Bruce got 68,938 votes between them in 2010, as I say, the polls are predicting less than 100,000 across Scotland.
According to the Ashcroft polls, Danny Alexander with a much bigger majority than the seats you list is toast and I am sure all the things about organisation, profile, incumbency apply to him in spades.
Meanwhile over at Huff Post —
“The Liberal Democrat’s share of the vote has collapsed.
Our January voting intention polling – analysing more than 16,000 interviews – shows the Liberal Democrats on 8.9%, a sharp fall from the 23% of the vote they secured in the 2010 General Election.”
“Nearly three quarters of current Liberal Democrat support comes from those who voted for the party in 2010 – it has done little to attract new support.”
In one of Paddy Ashdown’s books he describes a fascinating event in his military life when he passed through the torpedoe launch tubes of a submerged submarine breathing through a hose-pipe and then swam to shore in a country teaming with the enemy. His instructions were to complete his mission on land in complete silence and without being detected and then at an appointed time swm the two miles or so back out to sea and wait for the submarine to find him again.
Sounds like a doddle compared to his present task.
The Guardian were the only UK paper to actively endorse the Lib Dems in 2010, and over Labour too.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/apr/30/the-liberal-moment-has-come
For years they’d have high profile commentators arguing for the Lib Dems in coalition, Martin Kettle in particular.
Even now they don’t treat the party with the scorn that below the line commentators do or journalists on other papers.
You really are biting the one hand still prepared to drop you the occasional morsel of comfort while struggling to learn the lessons of Ashcroft’s polling.
“So what does the Guardian do to cheer itself up when a poll has shown Labour support is falling? Ah yes, they just write about how rubbish life is for the Liberal Democrats. ”
Ermm, you do remember the Graun as well as the Observer endorsed the LibDems in 2010 ?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/apr/30/the-liberal-moment-has-come
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/may/01/liberal-democrats-endorsement-observer
we need Labour leaning people to vote for us so we have to have something that appeals to them
And after 5 years of being in coalition with the Tories, what exactly is the pitch to Labour leaning, or Green leaning voters?
What was your purpose in writing this comment, Caron?
I thought that it was an interesting, informative, and fair article. It contains virtually no egregious errors of fact (I had forgotten myself that Sal had stepped down from the negotiating team until the other day) and has obviously had a lot of input from senior members of the campaigns staff. Wintour and Watt recognise our key strengths: our MPs’ personal votes, the resilience of the Lib Dem brand in many held and target seats, and not least the never-say-die attitude of our activists! It also points to a couple of seats where we have the potential to buck the trend and taking seats from our opponents. At the same time, it’s realistic about the difficult political environment in which we are now fighting this election. More of the same, please, political journos.
The broad equivalent to Edinburgh West was one of the best performing constituencies in the 2011 Scottish Parliament elections. Though not much use if facing a massive tidal wave!
Self pity won’t win votes.
@Caracatus
“probable Lib Dem Hold… Yeovil 22.8% David Laws”
Don’t think so. I can’t speak for other SW seats, but certainly the Yeovil support for the Lib Dems is very much the continuation of Paddy’s Rainbow Coalition of Anti-Tories – further, Paddy’s character generated a lot of warm support locally. Laws is seen as a cold fish by comparison. The Rainbow Coalition is ended by the more recent one with the Tories. Finally, the Tories will ensure the expenses issue will come up time and again.
Ashdown prevented the perception that the Lib Dems took local support for granted from ever taking root; I don’t think Laws will be able to extirpate that feeling now. I suspect he’s toast in May.
An extremely good question from JUF—
JUF 18th Feb ’15 – 4:31pm
“…And after 5 years of being in coalition with the Tories, what exactly is the pitch to Labour leaning, or Green leaning voters?”
I am not even sure what the pitch is to genuine, mainstream Liberal Democrat voters.
Clegg and all those people in The WendyHouse seem to be blinkered.
Any voter outside of “soft Tory” in the South East seems to fail to appear on the leadership radar.
No wonder our seats in Scotland are so under threat.
Oh dear, oh dear! When things are going wrong and the media report that fact, what’s to do? Blame the media, of course. It’s what all politicians do. It’s just as well that, in this county, they no longer have the power to shoot the messengers.
@John Tilley
“I am not even sure what the pitch is to genuine, mainstream Liberal Democrat voters.”
You have nowhere else to go.
@Nick Collins
“Oh dear, oh dear! When things are going wrong and the media report that fact, what’s to do? Blame the media, of course.”
I think you’re missing the point. As far as I am concerned what the Guardian article says is perfectly reasonable – it’s just that it takes 1600 words to say absolutely nothing new, but do it in a “nod and a wink” fashion.
Caron Lindsay 18th Feb ’15 – 1:26pm
“The surveys are still going to happen – Stephen Tall is still in charge of them so I will mention it.
I’ll certainly ask Mark for an article – I was talking to him about this only last night.”
Thank you on both counts Caron.
A commitment to the 50/50 split would be an important indicator of Liberal Democrats believing in the idea of us ‘all be in it together’. On the basis that users of public services and the poorest have already been disproportionately hit, I personally could easily be convinced of the need to go further but having an indication of where we stand as a cross section of the party, would be a reasonable place to start.
My impression is that a lot of political support is rather soft for all parties these days. Liberals have always had to work hard for votes.
The Guardian, that once great Liberal Manchester Guardian is only a pale shadow of itself.
The Independent has yet to learn the error of tts ways and return to its founding principle and improve its journalism.
Bring back the News Chronicle.
Defeated by a Kindle once again … should of course read ‘all being it together’!!!
Oh I give up … I should stick to a keyboard!!!!!
Bolano 18th Feb ’15 – 8:50pm
“You have nowhere else to go.”
That is no longer the case as Simon Hebditch illustrates in another thread in LDV. He has decided to go and help The Green MP in Brighton. At this rate there will soon be as many genuine Liberal Democrats in the Green Party as there are in The Liberal Democrats. It is not a move that I have made. not yet …
But I fully understand why any Liberal Democrat who campaigned for the Liberal Democrat manifesto in 2010 for such things as reform of the House of Lords, protecting the NHS, an end to Trident, no new nuclear power stations and phasing out existing nuclear power stations, public transport mprovements, proper local democracy and against sending troops to Iraq would look elsewhere.
Clegg offers more of the same pro-Establishment, pro-Banker, pro-Benefits Cuts, pro-nuclear, disguised as bland and insipid Coalitionism for Eternity.
I know today is the start of The Year of The Sheep, but to follow Clegg down his chosen path one would have to be particularly woolly minded.
I thought the Guardian piece had a positive edge to it – it’s saying the party will get more seats than current polling suggests. Asides that, this is one of those rare occasions I find myself in agreement with Simon Shaw, so there is hope yet for unity in some unspecified future, after some of the big problems have been addressed (new leader, new strategy for engaging the under-represented, new approach to manifesto/policy, etc). The party must admit a level of failure on core competencies in areas that we should be very good with, such as equality and internal democracy. Admitting things are wrong within the party goes against the Lib Dem psyche, but that must and will change. Very much agree with J.Tiley, g, Bolano, J.King and D.Allen too, it would seem that most people here interpret the Guardian piece in much the same way I did. I think Caron’s perspective on this subject odd, the Graun is more pro-LD than any other publication – when you’re low on mates, you don’t start criticising them just before a critical event!
If the party wasn’t so shambolic, people might vote for it. I hope to one day, but you’ve got to indicate a willingness to change, or face extinction.
Given that our national campaign appears intended to complete the conversion of the party into Tory Party Lite 1.0, I don’t think that this comment or most of the responses are at all helpful unless you support that aim. Frankly, Caron, I find that hard to believe of you. So, as Tony Greaves asked, why?
@ Simon Shaw. I’m sorry you think I’m missing the point. You may be right; like others on this thread, I’m wondering what exactly Caron ‘s purpose (i.e point?) was in writing this piece. But, then again, I find myself wondering that about a lot of the content on LDV these days
Caron, you asked Caractacus, ”your assumption that seats like East Dunbartonshire and Edinburgh West and WAK are going to be lost is based on what exactly?” and added “Tories have given up in WAK – they don’t consider it a target.” but he didn’t respond.
I would suggest on the basis that in 2011, in each of the Scottish parliamentary constituencies that form part of those Westminster seats we failed to win. In East Dumbartonshire we finished fourth in both Scottish seats, in Aberdeedshire West and Kinkardine we lost both the seats we held to the SNP and in Edinburgh again we lost our seat to the SNP. Why you mention that the Tories have given up in WAK, I really don’t know. It’s the SNP that are the opposition there. I thought you knew that.
The Guardian has never forgiven of forgotten the SDP/Lib merger when “their” team did not take over
the Libs. Merger it was, not a takeover. So they continue to mourn the loss of a non-Blair blairite party
where credit card members were more important than pavement- pounders. So, move on, forget them
and focus on real people who vote. Not many people actually read the Guardian.
@John Tilley 19th Feb ’15 – 8:30am
I perhaps should have said dare rather than pitch.
With regard to “genuine Liberal Democrats”, one hopes for a future opportunity for them to return from exile.
@richard boyd OBE DL 19th Feb ’15 – 7:37pm
“Not many people actually read the Guardian.”
Indeed. Why should we worry about the Guardian when we have so many other papers firmly behind us. The paltry few hundred thousand who pass through their website can be counted a mere bagatelle in our big numbers game (RC’s slumbering millions). Tally ho!
Though there is a surface attractiveness in the Greens to many Lib Dem supporters, on closer inspection their statist, interventionist sheer busybodyness really isn’t liberal in any meaningful sense.
IMO
richard boyd OBE DL 19th Feb ’15 – 7:37pm
I have some sympathy with your view re the Guardian and the Liberals merging with our like-minded friends in the SDP rather than our being taken over by the Owenites. Polly Toynbee springs to my mind. That said, I stopped buying it several years ago. With friends like them …
Last time I looked at the readers online comments area that was even worse for its partisanship. It reminded me of one of the main reasons why I am an egalitarian Liberal and not a libertarian socialist 🙂
Phil Rimmer 19th Feb ’15 – 12:50pm
“Given that our national campaign appears intended to complete the conversion of the party into Tory Party Lite 1.0 …”
Phil, sadly I think you are out of date. I think they are presently up to version 1.9 due to the number of policy and position revisions since 2010.
It is vital LibDem-lite version 2.0 is not launched in May or else the party of traditional authentic mainstream preamble-believing Liberal Democrats (Lib Dem Ultimate) will undoubtedly descend into open civil war.
Caron, another question for a Stephen Tall survey – which newspapers and other news media do we use and how often?
Following my reading some of the foregoing posts, I am going to give the Guardian another chance. I had thought at least you knew where you stood with the true-blue Tory Telegraph but they have clearly sold out to their big business advertisers.
The free market is getting ever closer to enslaving us all and the relevance of the traditional Liberal Democratic message is greater than ever. The last thing we need is another party supporting the status quo but throwing in free school meals and improved mental health measures to help people cope with the effects such a society brings with it.
When a small organisation is really going down the tubes it’s members start criticising each other, splitting into small groups and defining themselves by more and more esoteric beliefs. So I will ignore the comments about the SDP for now and merely say hurray for Lib Dem women. They’re the only ones who are keen to keep up morale, come up with positive alternatives to the present party policies and encourage others to get out on the doorstep! At least judging by this weeks LDV
In Ed Miliband Labour have a leader that stabbed his own brother in the back and forced him out of politics in order to serve his own ambitions. If he can do that to family what chance do the rest of us have should he become PM. He is their Achilles Heel but no-one is targeting that. Play the man who cannot be trusted not the ball and we may get somewhere against Labour. With the Tories their weaknesses are their policies so we need better ones and I don’t hear them clearly enough, in which case the electorate at large have zero idea of what we are offering.
Atrocious that a man had the sheer brass neck to stand against his brother then win ! To garner sufficient votes to win the election must forever be to his shame. Any normal man would have known his place & stood aside for his elder brother.
Meanwhile, in 21st century Britain, a democracy permits all manner of people to stand for election & as far as I’m aware, we haven’t slipped back into the days when primogeniture was the order of the day.
Stevan Rose
In Ed Miliband Labour have a leader that stabbed his own brother in the back and forced him out of politics in order to serve his own ambitions.
So why do you say one brother deserved the position so much over the other? If the other Miliband had stood, would you have said the same? If not, why not?
I mean if the other Miliband had won.
OK, vote Ed if you want, I merely point out a flaw in his character that is worth exploitation and one that influences my view of the Labour leader.
“Flaw in his character”? Flaw in yours, I’d say. MartinB nails that one.
Have been out knocking on doors today and the big surprise to me that so many people who say ther voted tory last time are changing this election.
Have been out knocking on doors today and earlier in the week and a very different picture to the doom and gloom being expressed in some of the comments,The big surprise has been ex tory voters adamant they will not be voting tory this time .Our vote seems to be holding up well even some voting for us for the first time, Dont write us off just yet we have a pretty good track record on beating the odds.
Matthew Huntbach 20th Feb ’15 – 6:18am in response to Stevan Rose.
I agree Matthew.
If two brothers decide to stand for the same post then there can only be one winner. To vilify the successful one for winning is plain daft. To suggest that the successful Miliband then forced the other out of politics is probably more so. Disappointment, hurt pride, the constant media attention and brotherly love are all more likely motivators of the elder one walking away.
MartinB 20th Feb ’15 – 1:01am
Absolutely!
“Why would soft tories vote in another way than Tory? We are not going to manufacture a Tory split!”
Because they’re soft? That is kind of the whole point of the label, it means they might vote for us. At this election, where the Tories are losing support and Labour is gaining it (relative to last election), of course it will be easier for us to attract soft Tories than soft Labour: we don’t need to ape Tory policies to do so however.
As for the Tory split, they’re doing just fine on that themselves- have you noticed 2 Tory MPs recently defected to another party?
Oh well you’be convinced me. I shall vote Ed the Winner and allow my Lib Dem membership to lapse. Don’t want irrationality creeping into voting choices do we. There’s a novel idea for an election campaign. Let’s point out all the positive attributes of the competition.
Matthew Huntbach
So why do you say one brother deserved the position so much over the other?
The real answer to my question is that the right-wing press had already picked the other brother as the natural next leader of the Labour Party, and ever since their nominee lost have been abusing the winner because of the lèse-majesté of the Labour Party in not doing what it was told by our Lords and Masters.
Of course, we in the Liberal Democrats DID do what we were told. The reality is that the right-wing press will always dangle the prospect of more sympathetic coverage in front of you if you do what they tell you, but underneath their real loyalty will always be to the Tories.