There has been a lot of speculation as to why the Lib Dem campaign has failed to launch. I stick to my assertion that it got off to a good start, but I think it was always doomed for many reasons. One which I didn’t expect to see arise has been the degree to which presidential politics has been a factor. I knew it would be with Theresa May, but it’s interesting to see how, in the latter stages of the campaign, Labour have started to put Corbyn more to the fore as well, somewhat by default and with mixed results.
This has resulted in the election becoming about who you want to be prime minister, Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn, and very little else. I know several people who have voted Lib Dem all their lives who are voting Labour this time for that very reason (which shocks me still, but there you have it). It isn’t even a left or right thing, really, although obviously that’s a factor in determining which side of this question you fall on. It just comes down to the two individuals involved and which you prefer.
It has scuppered the Lib Dems’ main line of attack, that of the Liberal Democrats being the sole party that can stop Brexit. People on the Left have figured out that there is very little the Lib Dems could do about Brexit unless they gained a massive amount of seats, which no one believes is possible. In spite of Corbyn having whipped through Article 50, most Remainers have come to the conclusion that Corbyn becoming prime minister would result in the best possibility of Brexit not actually happening. Yes, he’s a life long Eurosceptic, but if you look at how he makes policy, in his own words, he does it on a collegiate basis. “The party decides,” as he told Paxman the other night. Given most of the members are passionately pro-European as well as most of the PLP, the idea that Corbyn wouldn’t either stall Brexit intentionally, try and reverse Article 50, make some deal where we become Norway, or just bugger the whole thing up so badly we just sort of stay in the EU forever by default is not really plausible. If somehow he won the election, or became PM through a coalition/supply and demand thing, Corbyn would very possibly halt Brexit quickly through sheer weakness. And, as I say, Remainers have figured this out.
The question is, have Leavers? Because if they have – and my hunch is, they have – Theresa May’s bacon will be saved by Brexit in this election. This is why I still think the Tories will win big – there are a lot more Leaver constituencies in the country than Remainer ones, sadly.
As a result, my prediction of the Lib Dems ending up with six seats is looking optimistic. I don’t know what the floor is, but it could be zero MPs. I really, really hope not.
Oof. You may well be right-ish. However the Fox hunting and dementia tax were campaign errors, so the labour surge was also a bit of ‘nasty party’ reaction. May is on safer Brexit ground now, and no doubt regaining her lead as we speak. Presidential elections? Yes it is absurd, we should be choosing our best constituency representatives, not voting for May versus Corbyn.
Correct up to a point. That point is the Lib Dem target seats. Twickenham, Kingston & Surbiton and Richmond Park are a sea of orange Lib Dem posters. People here know that the Lib Dems are the main opponents to the Tories, and that Labour can’t win. whether it’ll be enough to make this part of London Lib Dem again remains to be seen, but I am cautiously optimistic. I suspect it’s similar in other seats the Lib Dems are targeting (Carshalton & Wallington looks good as well in terms of posters).
Nick –
First, the presidentialisation of British elections isn’t a new development. This has been said about British elections many times since the 1960s. Some years ago I sat in on several focus groups which left me with the firm impression that quite a few ‘ordinary’ voters’ see general elections as a kind of US-style prime ministerial electoral college process: hence the explanation for the popular use of the constitutionally dubious phrase ‘unelected prime minister’. The Liberal Democrats needs big hitters if they want to compete at this level.
Second, I don’t think Brexit is the main driver of election voting intentions. It’s important, yes, but not that significant. Peter Kellner in Prospect magazine (30 May 2017) reports that according to a recent ICM poll only 17% of respondents gave Brexit as their main vote determining issue and a mere 7% were Remainers. The Liberal Democrats have made a strategic error in trying to turn anti-Brexit into a vote winning issue. Anti-Brexit as an issue seems a bit lacking in salience with voters to be a big vote mover.
Third, I would suggest that the movement in the polls towards the Labour party has more to do with the fact that the public are surprised to see that Jeremy Corbyn isn’t quite revolutionary ogre painted by the press. Instead he appears to be a polite, allotment-tending old gent with interesting hobibies who has presented the nation with a party manifesto that is against nasty things like austerity, savage Tory cuts and capitalist corporations, while being in favour of lots of nice things like more public spending on just about everything and with free unicorns on the NHS thrown in for everyone. (For those in doubt, I made the last one up). Mr Corbyn has, I think, won over what former Liberal Democrat MP Jeremy Browne called the ‘fluffy bunny vote’ and which will be guaranteed to hop off elsewhere at the first sign of trouble or hard choices to be made in government.
This
I still find it inconceivable that Corbyn could win, however I had reached similar conclusions. From an outsiders point of view a Corbyn win would be hilarious. On Brexit, would he put Hoey in charge? The prospects for negotiation are ludicrous enough with the Tories; throw in abolishing tuition fees and some other uncosted pledges the government would face gridlock.
Where I think you are mistaken, Nick, is the extent to which people are bothered by Brexit; for many, most I would say Brexit is still an abstraction. This is why May has been able to fumble through her election without having to spell out what Brexit implies.
Prediction – whoever wins this election (and I find it hard to avoid the conclusion that it will be the Tories by whatever majority) the reality of the outcome of Brexit negotiations will be so debilitating for the UK that it will become necessary to consult the people by referendum again. In other words the Liberal Democrats will be completely vindicated. The trouble from their point of view is that they are struggling to survive in the current election with sufficient parliamentary strength to be a factor in the ongoing situation. Their national campaign has lacked the cut through that it has deserved but the real reason I see for this is the persistence of the big lie (way bigger than the £350M on the bus) that the EU will offer the UK virtual continuance of the benefits of single market membership without (a) paying anything, (b) permitting any freedom of movement of people and (c) submitting to any jurisdiction of the European Court, while at the same time insisting that all “the 27” continue to tolerate all these obligations. Utter and complete cloud cuckoo land.
Here’s another prediction – the UK will re-join EFTA, (which it helped to found), and use it as the main forum to mediate its future trading relationship with the EU, while supplementing this with various Swiss-style bespoke deals which will come into force after a transitional period (or several periods) over the space of half-a-dozen years.
The great British public will wear that sort of arrangement because the nearest thing to a ‘national religion’ isn’t the NHS, as Lord Lawson (understandably) claimed it was, rather it is free trade and cheap food – the British love a bargain. (How often do you hear the killer political retort: “That’s all very well, but how much is it going to cost?”) What they won’t wear, because they have already rejected it, is anything smacking of European political integration, supra-nationalism, federalism – call it what you will.
One of the revelations of the campaign is how mind-bogglingly incompetent Tim Farron has been as a party leader. Gay sex cock-ups aside, I’d naively expected him to have some sound instincts about how to come across well. It seems he has none. It’s not clear the party will survive the second electoral disaster that is now imminent.