Each of the two major parties enjoys the support of a substantial core of voters who are undisturbed by issues, candidates, meetings and literature…The typical voter is loyal to an “image” which his party has built up by annexing a limited range of sloganized issues.
Mark Abrams, 1951, reported by David Kynaston
The Lib Dem core vote has always been a lot lower than that of the other main parties, and has for some time stood at around 12%. Labour and the Conservatives have a core vote of around 30% of the population.
That gives those parties a huge advantage. In 2005, Labour won power by taking their core vote and adding just 5% of voters to it. To have achieved the same feat – of an overall majority – the Lib Dems would have had to take their core vote and add nearly 30% of voters to it: almost every uncomitted voter would have had to cast their vote for the party.
Increasing the Lib Dem core vote will be critical for the party’s fortunes in years to come. Getting that figure up from 12% to 15% or 20% would make a massive difference.
And the way to achieve it has less to do with philosophies and narratives and more to do with slogans.
The party already uses slogans effectively – and not just at election time.
If you’re lucky enough to live in an area where the Lib Dems are active, you’ll probably have seen leaflets with slogans along the lines of “Keeping in touch all year round” and “A record of action, a promise of more”. The precise words vary, but the underlying message clearly and consistently promotes Lib Dem activists, councillors and MPs as working for residents 52 weeks a year, keeping in contact with people and getting things done.
The result is more people who’s natural default position is to vote Lib Dem in local elections – giving us a fighting chance against Labour and Conservative opposition who often need do nothing more than get out their ‘natural vote’ to win a seat.
Now the party needs equivalent slogans for national politics outside of election times.
Slogans to sum up the way the Lib Dems stand for people being allowed to live their own lives their own way, with interference only when the way I live my life interferes unfairly with the way you want to live yours.
Slogans that capture the Lib Dem aim to give everyone a fair chance in life – with more funding for schools, lower tax for those less able to pay, and so on.
Slogans trumpeting our commitment to the environment and tackling global warming.
Election slogans – from all parties – are inclusive and bland. They’re designed to attract as many people as possible and turn off almost none. Obama’s “Yes we can” could have been used by any politician of any political persuasion at any time.
These Lib Dem slogans would have a different purpose. They aren’t aimed at persuading every voter to cast their vote for the Lib Dems just this time. They’re aimed at persuading ten percent of voters that, rather than being people who normally vote Lib Dem, they are people who are Lib Dems.
A word of warning though: to achieve that, the slogans have to reflect reality and we have to accept that a bunch of other people will be persuaded, correctly, that they aren’t Lib Dems: no meaningful slogan of this sort can or should appeal to everyone.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
We do have a two-tier policing system but it is not what our homegrown racists think it is.
Lib Dems are reviewing policy and strategy says PoliticsHome
From Norman settlement to a civic square
Church Green video
Tom Bailey
Alex Macfie
William Wallace
Iain Donaldson
20 Comments
I don’t think this is right – slogans are not why more people are committed to the other two parties. Ultimately they know that Labour is more likely to help the poor and to give a bigger role for the state, and that the Tories are more likely to help the well-off and have a smaller role for the state. If you are poor/rich and vote from self-interest, it is easy to work out your default support. Equally, if you think that the state should run the railways/schools/hospitals/housing/etc, Labour is more likely to be the party for you, and vice versa.
The Greens have a clear raison d’etre as well – but one that attracts only limited support. Our “problem” is that while we have a clear raison d’etre (civil liberties, bottom up power) it is one that is supported by 12% of voters. To go beyond means all the messy compromises and campaigning on this and that, and all the Rennardism and hard work that goes with it. Liberalism + Rennardism = 20%, 60 odd seats and currently a role in govt, Liberalism without Rennardism is 12%, very very few seats indeed and no hope of changing the way the country is run.
Lib Dems base their policies on evidence, the proof is in what we have achieved.
or perhaps
Vote LIb Dem and vote for evidence over ideology.
Liberal?
Democratic?
Then you’re a Liberal Democrat.
Tim- I think you’re wrong in your first paragraph. Labour is no longer more likely to help the poor and is definitely not about state run services, it is now more about state run private lives. Equally alot of what the Tories are now talking about, irrespective of Lib Dem influence is leaning towards Liberalism.
The problem we have as Lib Dems is that our argument is an intellectual one. The other parties have very simplistic and almost animalistic messages that tap into a persons baser instincts. In this age of soundbites and slogans if you can’t afford to buy up all the billboards and your friends don’t own the press then you’re a little bit stuck because even if you have the slogans you still need to get them across to the public.
Also, whilst we have slogans like, ‘working all year round’ and ‘a record of action’, these are not Lib Dem specific. We need slogans that no other party can claim- like the Big Society- that’s a Lib Dem concept. The Tories don’t even understand it properly- we need to take it back as ours.
People tend to vote Labour because they perceive Labour to be the party of the working-class and against the rich (reality is somewhat different, but that is the old perception); while the Tories are seen as the party that favours the rich, and believes in order, deference to authority and subservience to elites.
I susepct that the Liberal Democrat core vote is built around three themes:
(1) The party that is neither of the others.
(2) The party that is associated with civil liberties and individualism, that is uncomfortable with anything that is too big and too powerful.
(3) The party that is associated with the place where you live. Mike Hancock is Portsmouth’s champion, Bob Russell, Colchester’s champion, etc. I wonder how much of our support in the West Country derives from the perception that we are the party “of” that region?
Our North American owned media have done their best to compromise (1) by seeking to portray Lib Dem politicians as corrupt and licentious, just like the others. (2) is at risk from our participation in the “coalition” government. (3) is perhaps the most robust, but what is the point of having Lib Dem MPs as junior ministers in this so-called “coalition” when the effect is to make them spend less time in their constituencies?
@Sesenco what is the point of having Lib Dem MPs as junior ministers in this so-called “coalition” when the effect is to make them spend less time in their constituencies?
Another common claim against voting LibDem is that the LibDems have “no experience of being in Government” and so wouldn’t know what to do. Yes, this is a crazy argument, but it’s been repeated to me so many times, by so many people that I think it is worth considering as serious.
By being Junior ministers in the Coalition, LibDems are gain experience of being in Government – squashing the idea that they wouldn’t know what to do. (Though quite evidently we can see that experience in government just means you can mess things up more effectively – Labservatives, looking at you.)
Further, many constituencies are proud that their MP is a Minister.
“You know the wolves in sheeps clothing ? …. we’re the woolly bits”
Lib Dems:
Maxium influence, minimium interference.
Lib Dems:
“Freedom for the Tories to do whatever they want”
sorry
Liberal Democrat is the name, Liberal Democracy is the game.
“The Lib Dem core vote has always been a lot lower than that of the other main parties, and has for some time stood at around 12%. Labour and the Conservatives have a core vote of around 30% of the population”
I’m not sure I agree with what you mean by a “core vote”. I think a lot of people habitually vote Labour because they hate the Tories, and vice versa. They aren’t really loyal to their own party, nor are they much influenced by slogans. And some of our 12% are probably people who hate the other two!
Good slogans might help a bit. But only a bit.
Lib dem slogans,um,well what about “viva la cuckold”
Here a few anagrams or liberal democrats for you little cherubs ,A Barrelled Sitcom,A Scrambled Lie Rot,A Braced Smell Trio,A Clamberer Sold It.
Good to see some intelligent comment at last, republica – thank you for your contribution.
@Tim – I trust it’s clear that the slogans are the means rather than the end. People don’t follow slogans (or advertising campaigns or whatever marketing buzz-word we might want to use these days for essentially the same thing). But they can effectively convey the ideas that people will follow.
I think you’re right that the distinctive Lib Dem position isn’t necessarily one that appeals to a vast majority of people; but I don’t see any reason to think that 12% is some magic number we can’t improve on. I don’t believe it’s the case that everyone who might support that position knows the Lib Dems stand for it.
You are very welcome Iian,can you tell me why the new improved lib dems who stand for all that is great and good stand when it come to gove using anti terror legislation to rush his free schools programme through as is doesn’t sound very liberal to me,maybe thats why they are not actually going to change some of the barmy laws my lot brought in and are just reviewing it so they can use it by saying we are going through an “emergency”but i suppose as i saw happen under labour that morals can be bought for around 140 grand a year and a ministerial car.
“Our “problem” is that while we have a clear raison d’etre”
Since the formation of the coalition- and your entrance into government with the Conservatives- you don’t. Your existence is dependent upon Cameron and Osborneas is your purpose.
I can only see this sublimation ending and you reforging a separate identity if Hughes et al give Clegg an ultimatum circa 2012 and he accepts: rather than splitting off with his 16-20 parliamentary Orangemen to support the Conservatives till the bitter end in 2015. On a platform based on trying to bribe the middle class with income tax cuts. Not “Progressive”: though it will be ‘distinct’.
Rob – I don’t think you’ve quite grasped how coalitions work. You may find it helpful to look at some of the many other countries that have them as a matter of course, such as Germany, the Netherlands and the nordic countries.
So in the broadest of strokes (possibly coloured just a little by my own prejudices 😉 …
Conservatives: Small State, Benefits Wealthy.
Labour: Big State, Benefits Poor.
Lib-Dems: Small State, Benefits Poor.
Obviously the devil’s in the details, but to me that’s the “four word summary”.
I liked “Change that works for you”, it annoyed me greatly during the election campaign because it was a brilliant riposte to “Its time for change” and actually sums up the core concept of Liberal and Social Democratic politics. The right wing Conservatives are still blaming Cameron and Osborne for the lack of a meaningful message from their campaign.
I’ve been reading “Neither Left Nor Right” and it’s pointed out how the Liberal Democrats lack a core vote, partly because there isn’t a clear image of what they stand for. Labour have the image of helping the poor while Conservatives have the image of having low taxes. (whether either party live up to this image is another question, but it’s the image that causes the core vote to identify with the party and show loyalty)
Henry said above that it’s in the name:
Liberalism – how we promote freedom for individuals.
(i.e. unlike Labour we respect social rights and don’t expect the public to be subservient
and unlike the Tories we recognise that freedom requires people to have both skills and opportunities and that public investment is required to make this possible.)
Democracy – We seem to be the only party committed to reforming politics.
On every level of politics we want to give the common person more power over how their country and communities are run.
Having a clear image and values is not the be all and end all, but it’ll be good for winning core voters and activitists.