It was just gone 7am, and Boris Johnson couldn’t resist it. ‘Let’s get breakfast done!’ he said, to great laughs. And therein lies part of the secret to why he won a general election with an 80-seat majority – it was a corny line, but people could relate to the awful humour.
There’s a massive lesson for us in that as we choose our new leader. Being embedded in the world of politics, we so easily overlook just how little politics resonates with most people in this country, in fact one polling analyst said the public engages so little with politics that he had even heard some people asking whether Nigel Farage was the leader of the Liberal Democrats. And we forget that some people vote simply on whether they see a politician as a normal human being or not.
This is where Johnson scores. A normal human being he is most assuredly not, but he makes the same kind of bumbling mistakes we all make in our daily lives, and that makes him relatable. His slogan ‘Get Brexit done’ was so effective as to drown out the inherent mendacity of it. The lesson for us is that the next Lib Dem leader needs to be relatable on a human level and to keep it simple.
To those of us who are Lib Dem members, we may wish more for a social liberal or an economic liberal, we may want someone who reaches across the divide to other parties or is more tribal, who respects the liberal tradition more than the social democratic tradition, or vice versa, who is uncontaminated by the coalition or not. All this is fine in terms of satisfying ourselves, but if we want to cut through with the voters, we need a leader the public can see in a largely positive light, who says things in simple terms that we can all understand.
What makes a person a relatable leader is open to us all to interpret. Politics is full of Marmite characters, but given that a complete and utter Marmite character has just convincingly won an election, we shouldn’t be scared of that. What they must be is confident – if our new leader is asked a difficult question, they should be able to come back with gusto; it almost doesn’t matter what they say as long as they say it as if they mean it.
Policy is important, but more important is that the new leader has a way of communicating in a handful of simple words what the Lib Dems stand for. It could be a slogan along the lines of ‘compassion with sensible economics’, so our social credentials are emphasised alongside our sense of fiscal responsibility. Or it could be something else that you can think of as much as I can.
Political battles these days are won in air wars, with emotion carrying more weight than cogent arguments. That’s why our ability to cut through a media landscape that either ignores us or cites us solely to deride us is so important. ‘Make Britain great again’ would do the job but that’s rather been claimed; ‘free sex with the Lib Dems’ would catch attention, but not quite the way we need it to. There is a slogan out there just waiting to sum us up positively.
There are no simple answers here, but I offer the ‘simple and relatable’ test as a good measuring stick by which to judge anyone standing for the party leadership. We can carry on our philosophical arguments internally, indeed that is what motivates many of us. But if we harbour any hope of making progress with the voters, we need a leader who is relatable and can keep things simple. We should be looking for those qualities as we seek our new figurehead in 2020.
* Chris Bowers is a two-term district councillor and four-time parliamentary candidate. He writes on cross-party cooperation, was the lead author of the New Liberal Manifesto, and is unofficial coordinator of the Yorkists.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Good news on political donations?
Conference booked
New chair of North Northamptonshire Council stands down over social media posts
Are Labour going to cross another red line?
Steve Trevethan
David Raw
Katrin Harding
Peter Martin
42 Comments
Johnson scores because he stands for the rich and is about keeping the rich rich never mind the poor. He’s paid by the rich to do that. And because of that he can get away with saying and doing things that if someone else did they would be seriously condemned. Someone who was exactly the same in terms of behaviour, making the kind of bumbling mistakes we all make in our daily lives and so on, but who stood for left-wing politics, would be highlighted and condemned for that, in fact to some extent that’s what happened to Jeremy Corbyn.
Agreed about the PR image of the Leader BUT the message itself is vital and must be based upon a deeper strategic policy; therein lies the problem over and above an unatractive leader. We have not sufficiently defined ourselves or what our offering is to the electorate. A leader needs a message and message needs a messenger. I don’t think we have either. This is urgent and important business and the Spring Conference is the place to have that debate and not just the same old format for those who can afford to attend.
Chris,
If only it were so easy.
It would be great to have a simple slogan that resonates emotionally, which the public felt encapsulated why they wanted to vote for us.
If it doesn’t ring true, it’ll be useless.
The reason Johnson’s “Get Brexit Done” was so effective is that it rang true. For many voters, sick of years of endless squabbling over Brexit, of the divisions it has created in our society, and desperate for life to move on, the slogan rang true (even if in practice Brexit is going to be with us interminably for decades).
If we want an effective slogan, we need to look for what the public are desperate for, and, by our words and actions, gain the public’s trust that we the ones to give them what they want. Only then will a slogan that captures that desire be effective.
This creates a problem for us. If we look at the red-line issues which we care most passionately about, are they the ones the public care most passionately about? If not, are we willing to relegate those issues from being red-line issues, and instead focus on the issues the public most care about? If not, I fear any slogan we create won’t ring true.
The most important factor was Brexit. A great many people detested those who ignored the referendum result then started campaigning all over again. The time for campaigning was before the referendum. The Theresa May fiasco didn’t help, but the public thought that the decision was clear and political parties should honour it.
Some politicians from all parties disgraced themselves by refusing to accept the democratic decision. I’m afraid this entire Party did that in its entirety, then made matters worse by the claim to reject a second referendum result if it was to leave then the revoke policy was the last straw.
Now, to my sadness, many people see nothing wrong with all of that, but believe me, the voters certainly did. Look at what happened to the Tory politicians who betrayed their manifesto. There must have been a couple of dozen of them. As far as I can see, not one survived even though quite a few joined this party. Oh, enough of what went wrong.
The public don’t forgive or forget readily. Senior members of this party are now an electoral disadvantage, not benefit. A new team with a different attitude is needed.
Peter – there was nothing democratic about the referendum – the winners lied and cheated in order to win. This is not democracy, it is lying and cheating, plain and simple.
Peter,
You voted to send us to the school for fools as the lessons start scape goats will be required. Depeffle will try to make that the EU but dear Peter others will be looking for others to blame and that will be your role. Tis sad but Brexit isn’t over, why it has hardly begun by the end the finger pointing will be endemic and the country will not be the better for it. Already we have poor Peter crying don’t blame all our coming woes on Brexit and yet he knows all to soon he fill face the question he dreads ” Are you proud of devastating Sunderland now Nissan are pulling out”. He will have no answer but questions like that will fly as Depeffle aims for hard Brexit.
We need a steady Eddie with a good grasp of Economics because the country is heading into a bloody great pit if we’re not in one already. And the Tories don’t have anyone. So Ed Davey please stand up to the plate.
I felt that we had our best leader (Clegg, Farron, Cable being the others) since I’ve been following the party closely.
Johnson manages to get away with things that leaders of left leaning parties would not. The Conservative message “Get Brexit done” worked well. It was backed up by a well funded party machine able to campaign across the UK.
By far the biggest threat to this party is learning the wrong lessons from this election.
“The system is broken”.
Chris Bowers: “His slogan ‘Get Brexit done’ was so effective as to drown out the inherent mendacity of it.”
This was a slogan that Boris Johnson used, but according to an expert writing in the Sunday Torygraph it is unlikely to have been designed by Boris Johnson or by Conservative Central Office. It had simplicity, brevity and resonated with what a lot of people were thinking. He thinks that it probably came out of a focus group, and, perhaps, someone listened and wrote it down.
He did not say that it is the mirror image of “Stop Brexit”, but it is, in its brevity and simplicity.
There was a warning in the opinion polls that Remain voters were affected by stasis, thereby undermining the likelihood of another referendum reaching the opposite conclusion to 2016.
On BBC2 at 21.00 Laura Kuenssberg takes us back to the point where Jeremy Corbyn refused to agree to an election.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Kuenssberg
Did Labour know what was coming? Labour and the SNP are not close friends.
The late Charles Kennedy said “Speaking as a Scot, they hate each other.”
The Tory election communication here said “A vote for any other party will help Jeremy Corbyn reach Downing Street.” There was no SNP candidate here, but, although that was obviously true of a vote for Labour, it insults the intelligence of the electorate.
If democracy can only be said to exist where nobody lies, or manipulates, or indeed “cheats” (nice malleable word), then democracy, it can be confidently asserted, will never exist.
It’s a shame, no doubt, that few ambitious or effective politicians are possessed of Olympian idealism, and that only a small minority of the public are both deeply interested in political debate and skilled in logical analysis. But it’s so.
“Democracy” is the rule of the people: it’s not a public examination with professional standards of invigilation. It’s not government by the sensible and right-thinking. It is in fact a pretty awful system of government – except, as has been remarked before, that it’s better than all the others that have been invented so far.
In short, the referendum may have been deeply flawed and profoundly unwise in both design and execution, but don’t pretend it wasn’t “democratic”. It was the very messy and imperfect epitome of democracy.
It’s quite a complex issue. Apart from the strategic folly of Revoke we needed a leader who could strike a positive chord with the wider electorate. Sadly, we seemed to have the opposite.
We must not judge things purely on the basis of our own logic – that’s not how millions of other people are going to view things. We must also not forget the emotional element of how people either see things or can be persuaded to see things. That is not to be populist, but there is no point shouting at people ‘we are right’.
My impression before the start of the campaign was that there was a general feeling of ‘Oh no, not more Brexit’. We could have adapted our campaign to skilfully develop on that – but clearly we didn’t!
The Conservative party are a ruthless and self centred bunch who have used their wealth and well honed skull duggery to win yet another election helped by a narrow minded blinkered opposition leader. Our next leader must find common ground with other parties on PR and try and stop a hard Brexit, not easy I know as Johnson and his backers have cleverly cleared the deck from their own party of pro remain MPs and packed their benches with right wing politicians. I hope his lies soon come home to roost.
Barry
I think your statement
“The Conservative party are a ruthless and self centred bunch who have used their wealth and well honed skull duggery to win yet another election”
Should be inscribed on every Lib Dem membership card and that card should be waved at anyone considering getting into bed with the Tories.
@ JH – You imply that 17.4 million people were fooled by lies. Even it that were true, it has nothing to do with democracy. The result is still perfectly valid.
I think that remaining in the EU would be huge mistake but I respect your right to believe that it would be wonderful and I respect your vote to remain.
Peter,
Very bad things are about to happen, you will
need to be able to justify them and to be honest you are taking a rubber spoon to a gun fight. Reality marches on and as I’ve endlessly told others of your ilk ” Poor isolated countries cannot afford to feather bed the economically inactive” and that is what the majority of Brexiteers are so brace yourself for bad times ahead.
@frankie, Please can you elaborate on your final sentence. I did not understand at all what you were trying to say.
I suspect Johnson’s bumbling idiot act works on a countersignalling level ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersignaling ). It doesn’t really matter if you recognise it as a carefully cultivated act. Just to get through life and be where he is at any particular point in time, people assume, he must surely be something special if he can achieve it while constantly making a fool of himself. It works because people have plenty of other cues that he’s not an actual idiot, and the more it works the more those cues are reinforced. So much so that he can actually get away with a lot of mistakes, and even have people wondering whether the mistakes are all part of his plan.
Of course it’s handy that humour disarms people, making them less distrustful, and makes it easier to laugh away contradictions and lies. This is more along the lines of the relatable argument I guess.
Needless to say, I don’t think we should be electing a bumbling idiot as leader. Apart from not having any in the parliamentary party, that schtick has been claimed and another would be seen as a poor imitation. Similarly, trying to push a smooth talking, grinning, presidential-esque Tony Blair figure would probably just remind people of the worst aspects of his government. We need the next mold-breaking figure, not the last one.
“Very bad things are about to happen”
Frankie you are just guessing. Brexit could go pear shaped or Johnson may get a free trade deal by the end of the year and everything could go smoothly. Lets give him the benefit of the doubt and if it doesn’t work out then have a go at him. I agree that the Lib Dems need a leader who people can relate to. Lets face it Charles Kennedy was great at that, those that followed have not been very good. I think Jo Swinson may have grown into the role, but sadly now won’t have the chance. You may have to choose someone who’s not yet ready, but will hopefully grow into the role. Lets face it there will be plenty of time before the next election.
@malc
“a free trade deal by the end of the year and everything could go smoothly”
A free trade deal would be a massive downgrading of our current relationship and the introduced friction would not “go smoothly”.
@Roland Postle
I think you have it about right. Most of the electorate think that Boris is flippant with the truth, a bumbler, a buffoon and much else. But he gets things done. Most of the people wanted to get Brexit done.
The alternative was Corbyn and his split party which eventually decided to avoid making a decision, even though everyone knew that Corbyn was a leaver who wouldn’t admit it and the rest of his shadow cabinet were staunch remainers. In addition, the Labour policies were terrible and the man himself a poor leader.
What about Lib Dems? Not much good if you want to leave and pretty bad if you respect democracy, which most people do.
In the end, the decision was a “no brainer” unless you were a left wing extremist or a keen remainer. People weigh these things up and make their decisions. For normal people it is the result of weighing up, not because they were stupid, conned or anything else. They made a judgement. Now, if most of the judgements did not favour your party, you have to work out what you did wrong.
“When John Smith died in 1994, she became the first woman to lead the Labour Party”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Beckett
A BBC tv programme “On the Record” interviewed her, having looked at the Labour Party constitution, and announced the reality. She WAS the Labour Leader. She agreed, but she did not lead the Labour Party in a general election.
Peter – clearly not all the 17.4 million were fooled by lies, but many of them were – few of them knew much about the EU and a lot of what they discovered about it were the lies, dis-information, half truths and urban myths perpetuated by the Leave campaigns and BJ’s articles going back 20 years (I lost count of the number of people I saw on QT saying “I dont want the EU telling us whether our bananas can be bendy so I voted Leave” or words to that effect, people actually believed that stuff and voted accordingly. Your suggestion that its somehow still a valid result is nonsense, unless you have no respect for truth and decency.
There are many things wrong with the EU, but yes I think we should remain (your sarcastic use of the word “wonderful” is childish and actually suggests that you do not respect my vote to remain). Similarly, there are also many things wrong with the UK but I wish for it to remain intact . . . not that its likely to if Brexit does happen. I know it seems likely it will happen now, but I m still not so sure its gonna be as easy as some people think even with a massive majority. Cant wait to see the report on Russian interference. Would the referendum result still be valid if it turns out there was interference from Russia Peter ?
I agree that we need a relatable leader. This means someone who most voters like, even if they disagree with them. Broadly speaking, anyone seen as an ultra-remainer or ultra-unionist will hinder the liberal comeback.
“f we look at the red-line issues which we care most passionately about, are they the ones the public care most passionately about? If not, are we willing to relegate those issues from being red-line issues, and instead focus on the issues the public most care about? If not, I fear any slogan we create won’t ring true.”
If not, what is the point of us as a political party? We’re either an issues-based campaigning group (or debating society, to be less kind) backed up by a handful of MPs, or a political party that wants to address and resolve the real-world problems that matter to voters.
We can afford a few indulgences, but we need to spark the public’s imagination on the key issues of the day, or we will be consigned to irrelevance. We don’t have the numbers in parliament so we will need to work even harder out of it.
@JH- The lies on both sides probably cancelled out. There were a great many on the Remain side such as people on this site insisting that it was nonsense to say that the EU had control over UK regulations, UK laws or even UK sovereignty.
And that is really the crunch – Who should rule the UK? You think it should be the EU though you may quibble about my wording, I think it should be the UK. Maybe you will agree that it is a fair point on which to disagree.
Malc/Peter
Depeffle has reintroduced uncertainty into the future hence why the gains in the pound have been wiped out. While uncertainty persists nothing will get done and while nothing gets done the economy will continue to tank. Already the financial headroom they bragged about is gone. Going forward they face a dilemma print more money to fill the gap to buy the things they promise or make cuts. Now they may try to print but that only works while faith in currency persists and a small country butting head with giants soon runs out of faith. So we move onto cuts, but what can they cut? Overseas aid is a given but after that the cuts hurt the public, cut more police, cut the NHS will not be enough so what other cuts can you make? Look at the largest recipients of public money the economically inactive ( mostly the old) and I’d guess you have your answer.
The truth is our economy has been stealing the youth of the world but particularly the EU to keep the economy going. That source is being turned off, access to the single market is being lost and both will cost money and that needs to be covered. Now trade deals with the rest of the world may fill the gap eventually ( I doubt that) but the key word is ” eventually” but who fills the gap in skills and Labour? Are the boomers going to rush back to work to fill the gaps or will we raid Asia, even if either option is taken again dislocation will arise and we have that word again ” eventually” things might be OK. So we face a poorer future and as I’ve said time and time again ” Poor countries don’t feather bed the economically inactive, they can’t afford too”.
I tend to agree with Paul Fisher on this one. I think Lib Dems have done a pretty good job of finding relatable, human leaders. The problem has been the sharpness of vision and clarity with which it is communicated, in my view. BoJo may be relatable, but he also articulate has a pin-sharp vision of where he wants to take the country and how he wants to do it — perhaps not always, you know, true, but it’s energetic and it makes it quite easy to guess how he might react to the unexpected. I think many people struggle to understand the same of the Lib Dems — which way will a Lib Dem government jump? Part of the post-coalition challenge is a chunk of Lib Dem voters bought into a “left of Labour” understanding of what the party stood for and were rudely awakened from their misapprehension with the balance of tax cuts vs. spending that was negotiated with the Tories.
The Lib Dems need that middle-layer of message — sort of the 10-year vision for the country — that sits between the core values (also not well articulated) and whatever is in the latest manifesto. That hasn’t really existed for a while. Even “Stop Brexit” — stop Brexit and then what? “Get Brexit Done” builds on a bunch of (albeit questionable) promises for what post-Brexit will look like. It fits together narratively.
So, it is heartening to see so much thinking on these pages about what the party’s vision is for a post-Brexit Britain. While the Lib Dems also need a(nother) accessible, human leader, that’s what’s going to make the difference.
Peter – currently at least, we are part of the EU and therefore we have control because we agree a set of rules with 27 other nations, repeating the tired old lie that we dont have control doesnt make it any truer it just suggests that youre trying to convince yourself that it is true. And agreeing a common set of rules with 27 other nations does not in any way mean that we re ruled by the EU. I m beginning to wonder if youre Dominic Cummings in disguise.
Peter – “There were a great many on the Remain side such as people on this site insisting that it was nonsense to say that the EU had control over UK regulations, UK laws or even UK sovereignty.”
There’s a good reason for that – namely that it is nonsense. The EU, like any other international body,
only has authority in areas that its members agreed it should have authority, which means that any regulations or laws it impacts are EU ones. And to point out the obvious, if the EU controlled U.K. sovereignty, the only way that Brexit could arise would be if the EU permitted it to arise (much like Scotland can’t become independent without Westminster permitting it).
Paul R – perfectly put.
A good article and I also agree with Dan M-B that “we need to spark the public’s imagination on the key issues of the day”. To put it simply, we need a simple message that resonates with someone who doesn’t follow politics daily, that tells voters who we are and why they should vote for us. The leader is key to this as they are the face of our campaign.
Firstly I’d argue that strength of conviction is more important than a simple message, there is a lot to be said more nuance.
Deduction, it is elementary itself my dear Watson. If a little ruthless.
Of our current crop of MPS you remove the Scottish ones, should we get another Swinson Situation. You take out anyone from the Coalition. You, unfortunately, move away from strident Europeanism.
Result a choice of Daisy Cooper, Layla Moran, Sarah Olney or Munira Wilson.
Who is up for the job and actually capable, are two questions in need of answers.
A new leader or slogan is all well and good, but if it doesn’t have the ‘currency’ that voters want it’s pointless.
I delved into the LDV archives to see how the 2014 EU elections were analysed in the comments.
What happened in 2014 is that effectively Lib Dems lost 11 MEPs, and Ukip gained about 10 of those MEP places.
The general LDV view (then), was that this crash of Lib Dem MEPs was voter punishment for Cleggs tuition debacle. However the real punishment beating for Lib Dems came a year later in 2015.
Another possibility for the 2014 ‘swap out’ of MEPs from Lib Dem to Ukip, is that this was the ground-swell pre-cursor to Brexit. For example, you also missed the rise of Ukip, the anti-EU referendum result in 2016, the extraordinary rise of the Brexit Party (Ltd), the public frustration at the three year stagnating tussle to get Brexit through parliament, and finally the ‘Get Brexit Done’ GE result last Friday.
You seem to constantly miss-read the mood, and you seem to always review failures with the same conclusion that “ we must shout our policies, principles and values from the rooftops even louder and simpler”. Trust me; the voters can hear you it’s just that they don’t trust you or want what you are selling.
Boris (or his advisers), seem much more in tune with public mood. They know that taking politics back from the EU to Westminster is not the full Brexit picture. They know that places like Leigh in Wigan is on loan to the Tories. They’ve worked out that Brexit is not just about turning to face away from Brussels, it is about turning to face the regions of Britain that centrist politics ‘lost’ over three decades.
I suspect the Tory machine is shocked that places like Leigh have turned blue, but it’s about reading this mood correctly which will win for them in 2024. They know that Leigh haven’t given the Tories their votes, they have given them their trust.
The valuable ‘currency’ of politics in the 2020’s will be trust
This EU fetish is over. Instead your new leader must ask themselves what Lib Dems can do for your fellow British citizens, to re-gain, and keep their trust.
This thread is about the next Lib Dem leader but does seem to go off track. There is a media obsession with the Labour Party leadership at the moment so I would like to hear and learn more about the Lib Dem contenders. There are some very good candidates from re-elected MPs such as Layla and Wera and of the new MPs, I am hearing very good things about the MP for North East Fife but do not know much about her. More information about the candidates and where they stand would be useful on here. For me personally it will be a question of whether the contenders are centre left social liberal in outlook or libertarian orange booker. Charles Kennedy, a social liberal, gave the party it’s best ever result in the 2005 election with over 60 MPs so for me and for the party to be successful, the next leader needs to be on the social liberal wing, untainted by the coalition.
We need a Ronseal leader, someone who leads, not someone ready to back up the Labour Party. Given the opportunity they would crush us and fail to get elected themselves.
With a leader you get followers, that’s what translates into votes.
Blaming the media or the system doesn’t work when so much of what went wrong could have avoided and was in our power to decide.
A leader who leads.
That’s pretty simple.
A leader who shows a little optimism and believes in this country would be a start. It did feel at times as if the Lib Dems were in despair about the future. Charles Kennedy would have spoken about Brexit, Climate Change, lack of council housing etc, but he would also have reminded people what a great country we live in. Not perfect by any means, but pretty damn good, with hopefully a great future. Only the Tories spoke like that and the voters liked it.
The next leader its a tough act. Job has to be done in stages as its a long time until the 2024 GE : first membership: retain and expand, and community listening: go to various parts of these islands and put themselves out there. In first year re-balance more on grass roots and community with a few policy lines to match (local sustainability initiatives, housing, town centres renewal, etc), retain focus on keeping close to EU (but not rejoin at this oint). No point in deciding about progressive alliances etc now – wait until we see what Labour do and the outcome of Brexit trade talks. So the leader has to be good at relating to people and pavement politics foremost and a clear honest communicator. Its a long slow build from the bottom up. The last 6 months showed that the public felt that we pitched ourselves too high – less hubris and more humility required. My last point is that the new leader has to be seen to be on the moral high ground – we strayed from this in putting up candidates against strong remainers in unwinnable seats, attacking individuals and producing too many dodgy leaflets
The new leader would have to come from the current pool of MPs that have been elected to parliament. The problem is, and it just so happens that there is one, that the one best suited to the position is now interim leader, and is not even expected to even run as leader. If a leader is elected than he/she would have to be something of a stop-gap leader, that stays in that position for roughly the next 5-10 years, until such a time as the right person can be elected.
Ed is good but not sure he should be leader. I like Layla, but I think she is a bit too nice. The ideal leader, Chuka, sadly, didnt win his seat.
A couple of points:
(1) What’s the rush? Ed and Mark Pack can hold the fort well enough for a few months and it will give the newbies time to settle in whilst Westminster politics is relatively stable and predictable (unlike Jane Dodds’ baptism of fire).
(2) Westminster could become extremely turbulent again by this time next year if the country is threatened with a No Deal Brexit and Scotland &/or Northern Ireland &/or Gibraltar start kicking off. We need someone experienced at the helm with a good record as a media interviewee, and I don’t think Ed ‘s Coalition record need disbar him.
If the leader must be an MP what is the position should there be no MPs ? So why cannot Chuka Umunna not be leader if he was the right person for the job ?