
Subscribe
-
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
We do have a two tier system, Part 2 (Neil Hickman)
-
A Federal Britain: 3. Fiscal Federalism and a complete constitutional settlement (Iain Donaldson)
-
Tom Arms’ World Review (Tom Arms)
-
Liberal Voice for Women poll doesn’t say what they say it says (Tanya Park)
-
Alison Suttie writes: Thank you to our volunteers (Alison Suttie)
-
The mysterious mole men of New York caught on video
-
Doing better? The goal must be Sufficeincy
-
Michael Meadowcroft (1942-2026) - A Liberal to His Core
-
Damian Collins at Hereford Military History Festival in September
-
The Joy of Six 1529
-
Blondie: Sunday Girl
-
Liz Saville Roberts to Give the David Lloyd George Memorial Lecture at Gwyl Cricieth Festival
-
Richard Rhys O'Brien Gives Talk on Margaret Lloyd George - Photos
-
Labour deputy claims that Farage is a threat to democracy
Recent Comments
Jason Connor
The Greens, Lib Dems and Conservatives are all standing. They all see sense and believe in democratic choices....
Mick Taylor
@Lawrence Cox. To read your comment one might want to believe that the Triple Lock has ensured pensioners have decent pensions. It hasn't and UK state pensions ...
Chloe
A Blue Labour response recent events in Hampshire. Well worth a read. https://www.paulembery.com/p/for-the-race-obsessed-british-state...
theakes
A new strategy/approach requires a new leader...
Kira Collins
You use the phrase “fiscal federalism” and “financial autonomy” but have not used the phase I had hoped to see that is drawn out of both: fiscal autonom...


6 Comments
Ahem. Would you kindly shrink that bloody great big graphic? 🙂
Oh, if I must…
Can you really assess popularity in this way? Doesn’t opinion polls look at the electability of parties?And yes I know that this ie effected by the standing of the party leader. Therefore, there cannot be a true a comparision between 1989 and 2006.
What you can say is that each party leader has had a positive inpact on the fortuntes of the party. Paddy (+6) helped achieve this more than Charles (+4).
Ming does have the great advantage of having had Paddy and Charles before him. He is seeking to leave a similar increase when he leaves (whenever that is, which I think will be a while), and a party in fit shape for government.
People thought that we’d have massive poll drops with the trouble at the beginning of the year, but we’ve shown them to be wrong.
I’d be interested in the changes in poll ratings over the 9 months and the personal ratings.
(and of course, these are also affected by outside events…)
I’m always keen to remember what Mark Twain said about statistics 🙂
Comparable satisfaction ratings for how X is doing as leader of the Liberal Democrats
Ashdown -6
Kennedy +18
Campbell -9
Healthcheck warning though – At one stage Paddy was at -24 – by the 1992 election he was on +25 so how much weight you can attach to these figures I don’t know. I suspect very little.
If you look at Mori’s long term leader attributes statistics Charles never significantly bettered Paddy’s performance on the positive attributes – even in his “stong” areas like “down to earth” or in overall figures.
Like Charles and Paddy before him Ming has strengths and flaws. I didn’t vote for him but he was clearly the best performer at the hustings I went to for example. The key thing is to play to his strengths and they will overcome his flaws.
Sorry – source for those figures is Mori – http://www.mori.co.uk – Leader satisfaction ratings.