Remember the 1990 local elections? Some of us do. It was a night when the Conservatives took a helluva drubbing, but still held the flagship councils of Westminster and Wandsworth. Kenneth Baker went on TV to proclaim what a fantastic night it had been for the Conservatives and the media, bless 'em, swallowed it hook, line and sinker.Eighteen years on the Liberal Democrats deployed a similar strategy Although their results were not a disaster in those terms - they upped their councillors by a measly 31 - they know full well that they have now becomes victims of a classic Tory squeeze. This is how Professor John Curtice (no friend of the Conservatives) puts it...
Outside London the Liberal Democrat vote slipped for the fourth year in a row. With 25 per cent of the equivalent national vote, the party recorded its weakest local election performance for a decade. Fortunately for Nick Clegg, his party's slide was masked by a modest net gain of 31 seats and Labour's even more dismal performance. But in London, where there was no such camouflage, the party's vote was down on 2004 by between five and six points in both the mayoral race and the assembly contests.
Nigel Evans MP on Centre Right agrees...
What must be worrying for the number crunchers in the Lib Dem Cowley Street HQ is that Clegg and the Lib Dems should have been the natural depository of the dustbin vote of those who are fleeing from the disaster which is Gordon Brown. People normally feel comfortable lending their support to the quirky Lib Dems in order to give their usual party a kick up the pants. NOT THIS TIME... The starkest example of this was in London. Cosmopolitan London should feel secure in having a dalliance with the Lib Dems. Their mayoral candidate was a London personality with a bit of indie edge. Just up their street you would have thought... So what happened?. The Lib Dems scored 9.63%.... a single digit score.... a complete drubbing.... a bloody good hiding! No excuses on this one. No defence of "we was squeezed Gov". The people of London overwhelmingly rejected them using this Lib Dem voting system and flocked to the two major parties. So dress it up as they may, or indeed feel they have to, it is a very bad night for the Lib Dems. Added to which their national share of the vote declined further below the % at which Ming was deemed no longer fit to lead them. They will display their crumbs, but they are crumbs of comfort to them alone.
Yes, the LibDems marginally overtook Labour, yes they won 30 odd more councillors. But they know in their heart of hearts that the game is up, and when the votes are counted at the 2010 election, rather than gain seats, they will end up with a net loss.
21 comments:
This is so true. The Lib Dems are in a horrible situation and to be honest, I am not surprised. I have never considered the possibility that they had a chance of ever getting into government. They never did and never will.
People vote according to their wallets - QED.
Now now Mrs Dales Dairy pull the udder one !!
You wouldn't want to be selling rotten eggs outside their sell by date would you ??
Both the Conservative and Lib Dem number crunchers will be looking carefully at the parliamentary seats polled on Thursday. In most of the Lib Dem seats - South Lakeland, Eastleigh, Colchester and others, the Lib Dems took seats and substantialy outpolled the Conservatives.
2010 may not be as bad for the Lib Dems as you predict .... and lest we forget you do have personal parliamentary form in underestimating the Yellow Peril.
"..they won 30 odd more councillors".
Surely you mean "30 more odd councillors".
In 2004 the LibDems got a huge boost from their principled opposition to the Blair brainstorm into Iraq.
No one could expect them to make further progress now.
This is a Labour disaster, and a Conservative victory, especially in London.
Let's not be churlish to Mr Clegg.
Very good ak23566. I had a good laugh thanks to you comment. Well done.
Rubbish. In southern LibDem seats like Eastleigh, Colchester, and Cheltenham, Oxford, Cambridge, and so on, the Tories either lost seats or are nowhere. These are surely seats that the Tories should be poised to take, and they are not.
And in the northern cities where Labour will lose ground next time, it is the LibDems who are in control (Newcastle, Hull, Sheffield, Liverpool). The Tories are again nowhere.
In London I think that, unfortunately, candidate personality is of great significance in many voters' minds - most likely only in a subconscious way (I'm not being rude and condescending to them 'a la Steve Richards') - but I belive it is a key factor.
And Brian Paddick hasn't got much more charisma than Gorgon Brown.
Would this by any chance be the same John Curtice who said in advance:
"It looks pretty difficult for Nick Clegg to come out of these first elections looking as though he's going to be a net gainer. The odds are the party's going to lose seats, and it's certainly far from
inconceivable that those loses will stretch into three figures."
In other words, even on his own terms, the results were pretty good.
The Liberal Democrats did not overtake Labour in national equivalent vote. Their national equivalent vote was 23%, behind Labour on 24%. See Rallings and Thrasher in the Sunday Times.
The Lib Dems weren't ahead of Labour in 2004 either.
Yes, David at 5.58pm, everything is fine. Labour is coasting to victory, everyone loves Gordon Brown, and pig iron production is at record levels.
Re Stuart said:
Don't fall for the LD spin about Cheltenham - the Lds pulled out all the stops and still polled less votes than the Conservatives -in both the Borough and Cheltenham parliamentary constituency.
Stuart, it would take a complete idiot to make the reply you just made to a simple comment that merely corrected a misunderstanding.
It's a squeeze. The electorate wants a change - desperately. If i were a Lib Dem (I'm not!), and voting Tory helped get rid of Gordenron, I'd do the dirty deed.
Two years down the line, I'll be voting for anyone to get rid of him and his lousy cabinet!
I agree about "odd (LibDem) councillors" -- I know some for whom that description would be apt, personally :-)
The electoral system employed for the London elections aren't ones that the LibDems favour. For some time on the uk.politics.electoral newsgroup party members have said that the "alternative vote" system is the worst of both worlds, and I don't think they are keen on the top-up list system for GLA members either.
Whatever the system, if it isn't a straightforward, clear cut and unambiguous style of contest it will be subject to confusion and an unrepresentative (to some extent) result. Fiddling the system to suit one party or another is not the right way to operate elections.
Does anyone think there is a good chance the Labour Party will not actually survive being in opposition for the next 18 years? I mean, they didn't last time....
Well, i'm glad the Libbies got the heave-ho in Oxford. What a bunch of patronising do-gooders. What did Alex Salmond say about the Libbies:-'They don't like it up 'em!' I think he was 'aving a laugh there!
Oxford - Lib Dems up 1, Tories lose both their seats and now 0. Who got the "heave ho"?
Iainm you judge everything by whether or not a party in question will get in to government next time. Being a Lib Dem means being in it for the long haul. That means holding on in bad years and making progress in good years.
If winnig 30+ seats is a bad year then the good years will be very good.
David- you said the Libbies 'went up' in Oxford?! Makes a change from them 'going down' i suppose! Well, the Libbies DID lose control of Oxford City ( i commiserate- oh, all right- no i don't!), and the 'Tories' lost 2 of their seats-if you count LD defectors as Tories; i count 'em as too embarrased to be identified as Liberal Democrats!
Crikey, Iain, I didn't realise it was just a game? That explains picking Boris to be Mayor then!!
Nick's right; we Lib Dems are in it for the long haul and personally I think 34 more councillors is not bad for a bad year!
London is bad news for us; partly classic squeeze and partly that everybody has a fptp approach (including us) and we just don't know how to do PR elections down here. We will learn, though.
Apols for the 'crikey'; just coming to terms with a Boris London (or is it really a Boles London?)!!
Post a Comment