The more I read LibDemVoice, the more convinced I am that we could usefully direct more of our incredible online energy outwards.
There are – as we know all too well – plenty of small-L liberals out there, but there are so few big-L Liberals taking on the crazed adherents of NuTory that even comment threads on a relatively centre-ground site like the Beeb can descend into mud-wrestling matches to determine who can be rudest about the Lib Dems.
“Useless”, “a joke”, “opportunistic” are three of the less offensive turds that regularly get dropped into our waterpipe. The last one always puzzles me – how can a party that is, by the lights of these same howling detractors, so far from actually holding power be called opportunistic? The other gem, of course, is “What is the point of the Lib Dems?”. Probably best not do what I do, which is to respond “What is the point of [name of poster]?”
Most perplexing of all is this constant charge that we “don’t know what we stand for”, as if a party with sixty thousand members, sixty-three MPs and more committees, policy reviews, working parties and Risos than the mind can comfortably conceive could just arise as a result of some random wave formation pattern. Presumably the theory of these people is that sooner or later the wave will collapse and we’ll all wake up with a little start, go “Wha…?” and return to our normal NuLabTory lives. Actually, hell, some of them pretty much say this.
But of course, there is a serious point here. When they say we don’t know what we stand for, what they mean is they don’t know what we stand for. I suppose, sigh, we’ll just have to make a better job of telling them.
So I’m going to drop a few links every now and then here on Lib Dem Voice under the above title, and if you’re feeling energetic, righteous and bullish (or even pragmatic, sceptical and reasonable) you can go and slot your tuppence worth in. It doesn’t have to be a long setpiece. It certainly doesn’t have to be confrontational. The more often you can keep it to a simple statement of fact about party policy, the better, I reckon (I don’t always take my own advice on this, mind).
Think of it as leafletting from the comfort of your own home, with the difference that you tailor every Focus for the individual letterbox through which you plan to drop it.
Of course, online activity doesn’t reach significant chunks of the electorate, but that’s Lord Rennard’s problem to resolve, not ours. And of course, ninety per cent of the people on these threads won’t listen to you. They’re already committed voters – they probably wouldn’t be wasting perfectly good eyesight on political articles otherwise. That doesn’t matter either. If even one person a month has their perceptions changed, their view of us informed for the better, that would be an immeasurable victory.
A few whiles ago I blogged about an example where a very simple and factual posting from me on a public thread appeared to actually make a difference. And it was heartening, it really was. The pattern of poll ratings and press coverage (basically, the one rises with the other) overwhelmingly suggests that people really don’t know much about us, but like us when they learn something.
Turn around our relative anonymity and it becomes an advantage. We don’t have a nasty party tag or a front bench dominated by the Bullingdon Club, we haven’t been in power for ten years with all the accompanying ministerial attrition that has resulted in the present bunch of jokers. We don’t have to “decontaminate” our brand, or “get back in touch” with our core vote. All we have to do is talk to people, and we’re good at that.
No-one’s actually being that nasty to us at the moment. In fact, no-one is mentioning us at all, and that’s ridiculous, and I shall explain. Many of the active comment threads of the moment are related to Tory policy position vague notions on tax. Actually, I’m being unfair – there is a Tory policy at the moment, and it is to attempt to look cuddly and say the word “family” as often as possible.
Now, I observe that the Torygraph is mounting something of a campaign on this issue – it believes the Tories must offer tax cuts if they are to get back into office, something many Tories agree with. Last month, the paper showcased this call for lower, fairer taxes from Tory MP Michael Fallon.
Against this touchy-feely backdrop, Osbourne has recently announced that his party “couldn’t promise” tax cuts. Yesterday his deputy, Philip Hammond, went even further, allocating tax cuts to an ostensible “second term” in office. The Torygraph, like many of its readers in the comment threads, is not impressed:
At a stroke, this policy disfranchises that entire tranche of the population who are looking desperately not just for some relief from the financial burden of direct and indirect taxation but also for a glimmering of sympathetic understanding from at least one political party.
We know one wot’s got it. Don’t we? (alltergether now…). It is perfectly possible to have a set of costed tax cuts and not affect the overall tax take in a climate of recession, so long as you’re prepared to make up the slack from taxes that primarily affect the wealthy – capital gains, green taxes, higher rate pension relief and so on.
We are still the only party offering a tax cut to the lowest earners. The Tories will continue to hide behind their sham “sensible economists” approach because they don’t dare tax their core voters, concrete proof if it were needed that they are simply, as Nick Clegg said in his conference speech, “in favour of being in power and against being out of it”.
As for the supposedly Labour government, they have, to my lasting shock, made the 10p band into a 20p band and got away with it, and in two weeks time it will hit everyone earning below £18k where it hurts. It makes me… what is this unfamiliar sensation in my uber-rational liberal’s gut?… Yes! It makes me angry that no-one appears to know all this. Hopefully it makes you angry, too. All they need is information. Fly, my pretties, fly!
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
A swamp of lies and disinformation
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
Jamie Dobson
Mick Taylor
Tristan Ward
Peter Martin
Rob Heale
12 Comments
Agreed. What always amuses me is just how wound up about us some people get. It’s as if they’re incapable of understanding that there’s more than just two positions on any topic – and because of the confusion this causes in their brains, they react with barely concealed hostility. Reminds me of the Hartlepool “monkey hanging” legend . . .
Telling people about our key policies is some of the answer. WBut we learnt the hard way in 2005 that voters just don’t go for long lists of policies.
People communicate best by telling stories – with characters, a beginning, a middle and an end and, most importantly, a moral point.
The most powerful political narratives – stories – use some kind of archetype or myth to provide the point. Look at Barack Obama, offering Democratic voters some kind of release, or salvation. His stories are essentially Biblical in character.
Remember Margaret Thatcher, who told stories of enemies within (miners) and across the water (the Soviet Union). So did Queen Elizabeth I.
You say that
“We don’t have to “decontaminate” our brand, or “get back in touch” with our core vote. All we have to do is talk to people, and we’re good at that.”
Well, kind of. We don’t have to decontaminate our brand because we don’t really have one. The task is to create a Liberal Democrat brand. The engine for any successful brand is a story.
Talk to people? Yes, of course. But it’s time to start telling them compelling stories and frame Lib Dem issues in ways that will work for us.
That’s what the Tories are now trying to do by going on about “the family” all the time.
Nick Clegg is starting to find some frames for our policies; for instance, a “better Britain”.
But there’s a long way to go.
We’re yellow. Red and blue are way cooler. We would get more votes if we were white, or brushed gunmetal. That’s my theory.
I agree entirely, Alix. There are more and more small-l liberals. Our job is to make them understand that they are liberal, as the word is something of a dirty word with the David Blunketts, Paul Dacres and Richard Littlejohns of this world. And to relentlessly hammer home the point that the two “main” parties may contain liberals but they are not liberal.
The London mayoral election could bring us out in force. People will use their second votes for Paddick even if they don’t put him in first place. The vitriol of the Hate Mail, Scum and like-“minded” organs isn’t going to wash in this century.
By the way, although an advanced, progressive person probably shouldn’t be letting himself be swayed by this, you’re really pretty 🙂
http://hh-asquith.blogspot.com/2008/03/this-should-be-speech.html
We should drop the bar charts.
Thanks Asquith, not sure whether to be all flattered or clobber you sternly over the head with a sensible handbag 😀
Hm, I think yellow is cool actually, in that offbeat way. We get to have Yellow Submarine as our song for a start.
Neil S: “Talk to people? Yes, of course. But it’s time to start telling them compelling stories and frame Lib Dem issues in ways that will work for us.”
Sounds great! Go and do it! Much though I enjoy having long conversations agonising about branding and message, my point here was rather more workaday: let’s all go and put a good word in for ourselves in whatever way seems best to us, and see if any encouraging stories arise from it. It would be so much more effective if I wasn’t the only one out there doing it.
And on that note I’m glad Laurence has turned up because he is a prime example of a liberal mouthpiece that clearly needs to be turned onto an unsuspecting world. Once he gets rid of certain silly database-related notion, of course 😉
Yes, Yellow Submarine. We can sing it whilst (cough, sneeze) in a good mood, (cough, sneeze) towards the end of the evening. 🙂
Thanks a bunch Alix,
I am “doing it” and what you call the “workaday” stuff as well. And I think you’ll find you are not alone on the latter.
My point is that in all our communications, we need to have something interesting to say (duhh!) and it needs to add up to something coherent. For years and years now, a lot of “workaday” campaigning amd message spreading has been done. Whilst I would never knock that (partly because I do some), we as a party still don’t have a brand or a story, so people don’t have a quick way of understanding . . . wait for it, what we stand for.
On the ground campaigning helps to build a brand, or not, as the case may be. What people learn from TV matters more in the longer term. But we mere mortals could have much more impact if we were clearer what the “story” was.
So let’s not con ourselves into making a false choice of “narrative” vs. “campaigning” vs. “policy”. It’s all part of the same thing – getting our message across.
Um, honestly didn’t mean any offence, Neil, so I’m sorry that it was caused 🙁 That was a jollying “Go and do it!” rather than a draconian “Go and do it!”.
I wasn’t offended – just concerned to keep the debate focussed on the real issue – but ok.
I’m glad Laurence has turned up because he is a prime example of a liberal mouthpiece that clearly needs to be turned onto an unsuspecting world.
Ah, so I am liberal after all. It’s good to be back! 🙂
Good column…the fact is that Americans are much better at using the web politically. Blogging and ecampaigning is an integral part of American political culture and even makes the news in itself (witness the recent ‘strike’ of pro-Clinton bloggers on DailyKos).
I take slight issue with you saying that these things reach only a small portion of the electorate; the fact is that ecampaigning is no substitute for traditional letterbox leaflet bashing but a significant percentage of Britain is online in some way….its going to get bigger…..
It always baffels me how underused the web is as a progressive resource…it links us to the world and that should suit internationalism right down to the ground….interventions and developments in this area are always to be welcomed…