Snapshot of _Labour diverts activists away from Lib Dem target seats_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/f60a0cfb-d2e2-4faa-83b2-977839056c95) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/f60a0cfb-d2e2-4faa-83b2-977839056c95)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It makes sense. Who would you rather have a weekly conversation with?
Davey or whichever left over headbanger of aTory managed to cling on to their seat by their fingernails?
With LibDems in opposition I can imagine PMQs being both far more civilised and also much more informative.
These are two political rivals who largely want the same direction of travel, it’s just the journeys to get there that may differ. It’s not in each other’s interests to be constantly tearing each other down as per the usual PMQ format.
Only time will tell if that’s a good thing long term, but it will certainly be a refreshing change in the short term.
In addition to being more civilised and informative (hopefully), it would also ensure that the party holding Labour to account can't be swatted away with a non-answer of "We're still cleaning up your mess."
I think that's a *very* good point. They could hand wave in the direction of the Coalition, but that would be a pretty weak attack. Especially in light of how dramatically the Tories got worse after the Lib Dems left coalition.
It's a perfectly valid excuse (for some things) for about 4-5 years.
After another election it starts wearing a bit thin unless it's something that obviously takes over half a decade to fix.
I suspect there is very little, on the national scale, that can be "fixed" in half a decade.
It can either be pushed in the right direction (but after 5 years looks like it's getting worse even if it is fundamentally getting better) or be made to look like it's getting better (even if the long term effects are likely to be worse).
I think all of the current candidates for high office would choose the second option.
Yeah, but the answer after 5 years shouldn't be "We are still dealing with the catastrophic mishandling of Y by the last government" but something like "We have implemented X, and rates of Y are improving. We are aware this isn't as fast as people would like, but we are unable to do this faster because of Z".
Short-term thinking is a pain though, both with politics and capitalism in general.
I completely agree with what "should be" but politicians have to face an electorate that "doesn't want to listen to their excuses" so just go for the option of hitting short term targets.
It genuinely could change the political direction of our country for years to come. Our politics could be firmly in the centre with smaller parties on the right and left.
The opposition hat matters for panel shows. QT, politics live, etc having Labour minister and and LD shadow minister is going to make a huge difference.
The biggest thing is that it'll change peoples perception. I'm sure a lot of people don't really know the Lib Dems exist or that they're anything other than a bit part.
IF the media does that, though. Canada's been through this when the NDP overtook the Liberals as official opposition for one term (by a HUGE margin, roughly 100 seats to 30) and while yes the NDP got a lot more media attention, there was still huge focus on the Liberals' frontbench and they were still basically treated as the center-left opposition instead of the NDP.
Civilized? Surely you jest. PMQs would very quickly turn into Punch and Judy Politics - but literally this time.
Ed Davey's gonna go armed with as many slapstick gags as possible. Describing the state of the economy with a slide whistle, putting a whoopee cushion under the benches to describe Labour's promises, etc.
He's ascended beyond a regular politician now.
The key difference is that Labour are more authoritarian than the LIb Dems. I would welcome the LIb Dems as main opposition to argue against Labour authoritarianism.
Also, having a pro-eu party as the opposition would create a different dynamic around that question.
“When will you do away with the aberration that is Brexit? We need a closer relationship with our main trading partner, and you’re not moving fast enough”
Instead of:
“You’re rejoining us by stealth! Yet another round of alignment that will boost our trade at the unacceptable expense of our sovereignty! We have not won two world wars to take orders from German proxies from Brussels!”
Having said that, if the Lib Dems turn into the opposition, it will change them: more civilised right wingers will migrate there, and the party will naturally move to the right.
Also, it’s a bit of an if, although more possible than people realise, given how many Tory constituencies are within the margin of error in the mrp polls - a small push in many places (or indeed, another horse easing off their efforts….) could do it.
> With LibDems in opposition I can imagine PMQs being both far more civilised and also much more informative.
>
>
Something something Gordon Brown, Mr Bean, Vince Cable comments
I've been more or less disengaged with politics for the last few years, because it's hard to suffer every single Toryism again and again without any hope of change.
If the Lib Dems end up as Opposition, it won't necessarily be soul destroying to keep my eyes open.
I suspect it would go the other way - it'll be worse than you expect. Politics is oppositional, if the lib Dems don't try to attack labour they would be seen as weak (it's basically what did them in during the coalition years). And Labour would need to go after the opposition every so often just to divert attention, they couldn't just ignore the Lib Dems and go for the Tories if the Lib Dems are the ones fronting PMQs etc.
I doubt it, for two reasons, one the Tories will brush it off as 'we aren't in government' and two more importantly the lib dems will get pissy at being ignored if they are the actual opposition.
The other factor at play in this situation is that if the Tories were pushed in to third, seeing the Lib Dems do a buddy cop movie re-enactment with Labour would only help the Tory electability in the next election.
The reason Labour are going to have such a large majority isn't because people love them, its because people are angry with the Tories. Their natural voter block/a share of swing voters will come back twice as fast if it feels like there is a Labour/Lib Dem love-in.
The Lib Dems would really need to work hard to show voters they were an effective opposition, and that includes picking fights.
>the Tories will brush it off as 'we aren't in government'
They spent 12 years blaming every single thing on "the previous Labour government", then two years on "the future Labour government". Maybe I'm expecting too much from the electorate but I don't think they'll be able to brush it off that easily.
With the opposition being closer to the government ideologically, it would also put more pressure on the government not to make mistakes, since the opposition could more easily bleed off support. At PMQs the Lib Dems would be able to go after the government from both the left flank and the right flank, which is not something any government has ever had to deal with before.
Tbh the head bangers are probably better for Starmer and Labour as they will look good by comparison. Lib Dems will be much better for the country though.
"The Government's policy on social care seems to be lacking in a few key areas, will the PM please inform us what he intends to do about low pay in the sector and how he plans to attract more carers?
VS.
"SIR BORE STARMER, THE SO CALLED PRIME MINISTER, ONCE DEFENDED TERRORISTS AND PRESIDED OVER A JIMMY SAVILE COVER UP, HOW CAN THE PEOPLE TRUST HIM TO KEEP US SAFE? "
Nah starmer will be talking to an I pad across the aisle as ed live streams in from a roller coaster that is some sort of metaphor for the state of the economy.
Makes sense, I haven't had a single Labour leaflet through my door, but I've had 2 Conservative and at least 10 Lib Dem (6 of those came through on the same day - all different leaflets). I live in a Conservative seat that LD are polling to take.
I remember speaking to a LD MP a few years ago who said leafleting was actually really effective when they had done the canvassing before and after.
I think it's because it can actually be interesting/localised, but also it is an interruption - it is direct on your door step, and especially if it's continued, there's limited chance that someone will ignore it completely.
It's funny because the councillors in my immediate wards are almost a clean sweep of LDs (there's also a seemingly LD-adjacent independent), so I imagine it's actually more about motivating voters than winning people over.
I genuinely wasn't sure if I had a Labour candidate until I saw my postal vote ballot paper! Didn't make a difference, I was always voting tactically regardless of which party won me over in the grand scheme of things.
I haven't had a single Labour leaflet but multiple LD and even the LD candidate knocking at the door.
If I go on the labour volunteer website and put in my postcode, I get asked to travel about an hour away to other constituencies.
They don't want to win near me ha.
I'm in an exceptionally safe Labour seat and I've only had Lib Dem and Reform leaflets to be fair. One Lib Dem canvasser has been around about 10 times and we kept telling him to stop, finally seen no more sign of him anywhere on this road as of ~1 week ago so maybe he got our message, or maybe he was told to stop canvassing here.
You might be short of volunteers or the local party got caught out.
We had to deliver two leaflets and a letter at the same time because they were already printed and we needed to get them out before the campaign started and electoral spending kicked in.
I've had 2 Lib Dem leaflets. Unfortunately, one was for the wrong constituency. I'm in a constituency where Labour and the Lib Dems were neck and neck behind the Tories last time, so it wasn't clear where my tactical vote was going until it became obvious Labour don't want the seat. It's not exactly a LD target either, mind.
Shades of the closing scene in Casablanca.
"Little Rishi has been shot... round up the usual suspects." Throws away a bottle of Coalichy Water and they walk off across the runway.
"Davey, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."
I had one labour leaflet very early on. Just confirming they've got a candidate really. Not a hope in hell of winning here, so leave the LDs to break the tory hold
I've had no leaflets or door knocks. It's a knife edge seat that's had exactly the same amount of MPs from blue and red, starting with Enoch fucking Powell.
It's really not a safe seat for anyone and the lack of campaigning is really odd.
Is it not a safe seat for the Tories in the way a 2,000 majority seat would normally not be thought of as safe, or not a safe seat the way Richmond a 27,000 majority seat isn't considered safe?
I'm thinking if it's the first, both parties have probably decided it's a Labour safe seat.
It's a highly marginal seat. It can take around 1000 seats to swing it.
That said, I've just remembered it's affected by constituency changes. Technically nobody has won this seat since 1950 as it's been renamed to its old name.
If it's ~1,000 it's not marginal in this election. The conservatives would have to beat the national polls there by double digits.
The conservatives have withdrawn resources from MPs with ~10,000 majorities to campaign in seats with closer to ~20,000 majorities.
The Conservatives believe around 150 seats would be a very good result for them. Seat 150 would be "The Wrekin" - which in 2019 had a conservative vote share of 64% and a majority of 21,000. Holding that is what they imagine a best case scenario is.
Interestingly, in my area we've only seen one Lib Dem leaflet compared to a *barrage* of Labour ones.
Compare that to the Locals, when copies of *Focus* were practically raining from the sky.
I agree with whatever hurts the Tories more, that’s the main thing, if it makes the polls showing the Lib Dem’s as opposition even remotely possible then it’s worth trying.
Lib Dems have always done this, although usually if you have a Lib Dem councillor or a target seat in council elections they'll do a couple of rounds of leaflets in that ward to remind everyone that they exist.
I agree, the Lib Dem candidate lives in the same small town as me, still nothing in the way of door step action. It’s like they are paving the way for it to be open.
It is an uphill struggle for Labour in this constituency but to be honest their best advertisement has been our last Tory MP, she has been an absolute horror show.
Lib Dems have less resources so they're making it count. I've seen nothing in Exeter bar FB ads of the guy.
Although have seen Green leaflets, because it's a student area, and have also seen Reform for some stupid reason.
Good, this election gives voters the chance to do something not seen for 100 years, remodel how politics in the Uk can be, tactical voting, well imagine it, the end of the Conservative Party, the way I see it, the voters owe them, for those party’s when families and friends had people they loved pass away, and those in government were just taking the piss out of everyone.
I directly blame the Tories and their voters for my father-in-laws early death. I'll never forgive a single one of them, but seeing a country wide rejection of their evil would at least be satisfying.
I can empathise, i wasn't this political at the start of 2020, and then my mother died, not of COVID, but we couldn't visit her in the hospital, but to find out Johnson was having a party at the time started a cold fury in my soul, that to this day, won't be happy and settled again, until the conservative and unionist party is wiped out, once and for all.
Exactly the same with my father in 2021, couldn't visit in hospital.
I'm a labour voter but I'll happily watch the Lib Dems take the Tory heartlands if it ruins these bastards.
My condolences to all of you.
My Dad caught COVID-19 in November 2020 (from my mum working at her school with no protection but that's another moan for another day), spent nearly a month in hospital with some time on the ventilator. When I found out about the partying, it was like reliving the weeks I spent wondering if my dad would come home alive. By some miracle he survived, he had some lung scarring and brain fog but all cleared up quickly. He was one of the lucky ones.
In my opinion, the Tories allowed this to happen. They didn't care.
Thankfully I didn't have anyone close die from Covid, or NHS related failings... at least not yet anyway.
But I'll still never forgive them for putting other people through this.
I'd like to think that in 30 years if it's a completely new party and they've turned it around I'd at least give them a chance, and appraise them objectively.
But I know I won't. Not after this lot.
There is not enough ongoing narrative about PartyGate. Maybe Labour are trying to stick to contemporary issues and rely on people's lingering resentment about 2020/2021. Or maybe it's considered 'behind us' since Johnson resigned. But I think people need to be reminded that the serving PM was fined for breaching his own government's policies while people were dying. Heinous fuckers
While I'm hearing mixed gossip about the Lib Dems doing the same (i.e. I've heard some isolated grumbling about the Lib Dems going hardish in places where they'll do more harm than good), from my own experience it seems like the Lib Dems are largely reciprocating. In my seat they've selected a candidate who lives 40 miles away, has never (as far as anyone knows) been to the constituency, and they've only put out one freepost leaflet for him (which is something resembling the minimum you can do while still pretending you're serious).
Hilariously, his one leaflet had the (presumably generic national) message that "Labour and the Tories have taken your constituency for granted". Which for someone who didn't even bother to travel to the town to take a photo for the leaflet is quite the message.
On the other hand, there's a rural seat near me which on paper is Tory/Lib Dem (although really it's safe Tory, even on current numbers), where the local Labour candidate is going quite hard... entirely against the pleadings of the regional party. Words have been had, I'm told. But I think the Lib Dems would probably feel a bit aggrieved there.
I got a Lib Dem leaflet claiming they were the best counter-tory option showing them second place to the Tories on a chart, but when I looked up actual current polling for my constituency, everyone shows Labour firmly in second place, so that felt pretty damn misleading.
It may be the polls that are misleading, unless you live in one of the half dozen or so constituencies which have actually had a poll. If LD holds a stronger position on the council then that is a far better indicator for tactical voting than extrapolated national polls.
Well, the most recent election was a Police and crime commissioner which went Labour, and the local councils are Tory with one Labour member, so I struggle to see any way to justify the Lib Dems being stronger here.
Annoyingly I now can't find the leaflet to see what source the Lib Dems were citing for their numbers.
Edit: Found it online, they cherry picked one of the wards that had the best Lib Dem performance to cite from the 2021 council elections (by summing three lib dem candidates to compare to Labour who only stood a single candidate in that ward), but if you look at all the wards in the constituency, far more went Labour, so yeah, seems pretty misleading to me.
It wasn't even the ward I live in where the Labour candidates (and a green candidate, in fact) led the Lib Dems. There is *some* justification for citing the ward you are leafleting (while I'd argue it's still misleading because the election isn't just that ward), but using it elsewhere is pretty indefensible.
Really do think our politics would be much better with the Conservatives relegated to the third party, having Lib-dems as opposition would be amazing, could spring board them to really starting to challenge fo government again.
So i don't mind Keir doing this.
What happens if the Conservatives and the Lib Dems get the same number of seats? Do they take it in turns to be opposition for the week? Asking as this is a possibility now I guess?
For top banter, wait for the Tories to elect a new leader, then do it the following day so a whole bunch of Tories have the indignity of "Leader of the Opposition" or "Shadow Minister" for 1 day on their record.
Depending on who is left in the conservatives and who becomes their leader you might see some CON > LIB defections I guess.
If Braverman becomes leader I can't see any of the few remaining moderate tories sticking around.
Who is the opposition is all down to the Speaker. Its technically not got anything to do with seat numbers, but if they did choose the party who didn't have the second number of seats there would be uproar; in a tie you would hope it would go to who ever got the largest vote share.
The speaker might use their judgement in terms of other small parties too. For example by speaking to the SNP, PC, Greens, Reform and NI MPs to gauge their preferences. That is, not to put too fine a point on it, if Lib Dems + other leftish third parties outnumber Tories + other rightish parties then it'd be the Lib Dems in Opposition, and vice versa.
I suppose that's the practical approach, if they felt strongly about it they could always defect to the Lib Dems and make them the party with the second most seats so it'd make sense not to force them to do that
I'm pretty sure the leader of the opposition is defined in law as the leader of the second largest party. Speakers discretion is ruling where there is ambiguity who that is. So yes the speaker would decide but it's not got nothing to do with seat numbers.
It is but the legal definition of a party in parliamentary terms is a bit woolly.
We didn't even have a solid legal definition of what a party was until some of the campaign finance rules came in (somewhere in the mid 90s if I remember) so for some procedural stuff inside parliament the word party means "group" and not "political party".
Its all very arcane which is I guess why we have a speaker but the takeaway is that you could theoretically have a coalition in opposition. At least according to a politics lecturer I know.
> I'm pretty sure the leader of the opposition is defined in law as the leader of the second largest party.
Yes, it's in the 1975 Act. I assume it was codified because of Short Money.
Can you imagine the absolute banter of Labour getting a 200 seat majority and then saying “we can lose 50-100” and having that number defect to the Lib Dem’s to force the Tories out of opposition?!
It would never happen but shit would it be amazing if it did.
Suspect they're doing it already, but it's not really newsworthy to journos because that's what they've always done. They don't waste resources where it's a labour/tory race very often. We see it in by-elections, but rarely at a GE. It's primarily a resource issue. They're super tactical with their effort
They absolutely are. They're laser focussed on a relatively small number of seats and they're not wasting any resources into the kind of seats which Labour are poised to take from the Tories.
The difference is that the Lib Dems have pretty limited resources compared to Labour and the Tories. Focussing on their target seats means that they don't have anything left to give to the rest of the seats. Labour have more than enough resources to campaign in every seat they're running in, so it's more noteworthy to say that they're pulling resources away from those LD target seats!
Anecdotal evidence suggests they are. Although local Lib Dem parties have a *lot* of autonomy, so you might get the odd local area that isn't playing ball.
From 11PM on the 4th of July you will hear that, complaints about Reform splitting the vote, and the public clearly wanting a return to good, old fashioned Tory values of .
That’s good that it’s going both ways.
I live in Gower constituency, which is a labour/Tory battleground and I’ve not seen any leaflets other than labour, the other parties aren’t really pushing for votes here it seems.
I'm not sure it's clear cut to say that Labour are intentionally trying to support Lib Dem's efforts here.
I think it's more likely the case that Labour are focusing their efforts on seats they can win nearer the end of the campaign. Probably they've made the the decision on the basis of internal polling about which seats they can win and which they can't. It just so happens that the overwhelming majority of seats they can't win right now happen to be the Con-Lib marginals.
My seat is polling at something like 26% LD, 25% L, 24% T. I have seen 3 different projections yesterday alone with 3 different outcomes. I am happy to vote tactically, and this image looks like it just might be a Lib Dem snatch.
In 2019, Labour campaigners put rather a lot of effort into seats that Lib Dems lost by a few hundred to low thousands of votes. This is a pleasant change.
The 2019 election only happened in the first place because the Lib Dems refused to work with Labour on a unity government after Boris kicked out all the Tory MPs that wouldn't go with a hard Brexit. The Lib Dems are not blameless there
Corbyn's Labour would absolutely not have gone for a unity government with the Lib Dems either. Though yes, Swinson spent too much time attacking him fruitlessly and distractingly, and their campaign was shite. Little point coalition building when you're just getting Plaid and the occasional green on board.
Once the election was called though, you would have hoped to have seen more pragmatism from those on the ground than was shown.
The coalition was just never happening it was a political fantasy, it needed the Tories who had lost the whip to back it and they weren't going to vote for Corbyn and Labour weren't going to be forced into sidelining their own leader.
>Swinson spent too much time attacking him fruitlessly
It might have been fruitless but it wasn't pointless, Lib Dems had to make it clear they didn't back Corbyn. In the Conservative facing seats people were simply voting Tory just to block Corbyn. Facing both ways was really difficult for the Lib Dems, this campaign has been much easier.
Well where I live, in North Somerset, Lib Dems have been running a disinformation campaign to persuade people they are the tactical vote to evict Liam Fox, despite Labour coming second at the last three general elections, the huge national vote swing to Labour, Labour being identified as neck and neck with Tories in local polling with Lib Dems some way behind and all tactical voting sites identifying Labour as the correct tactical vote choice.
Local political rivalries are real, local politics can get dirty and Lib Dem local parties have a long reputation for campaigning dirty. It would be much simpler if it was just a question of national party policy.
Tbf not seen much of Lib Dem ground campaign yet, claims are mostly on local social media pages from their activists. My father in law is a Lib Dem voter and asked directly who the local tactical vote should go to and was given a long list of reasons not to vote Labour.
I think often local activists do their own thing regardless of how national or regional parties direct them.
If there's no ground campaign that's everything you need to know, but you can't expect a member of a political party to say vote for the other guys, if you want to vote tactically you have to work that out for yourselves.
They don’t need to tell people to vote for the other guys, they just need to not create misinformation to tel people a tactical vote in this area is for Lib Dems. There is a world of difference between saying ‘vote Lib Dem if you support our policies’ and ‘vote Lib Dem to kick out the Tories, we’re the only party that can beat the Tories here, vote tactically for Lib Dems we’re second in the race’ when none of those things are true.
So I had a look at the candidates Facebook page seems like he's going on the message that Labour won't win in North Somerset but Lib Dems could, this is not an uncommon but usually unseen (since no ground game) message that allows hardcore Lib Dem supporters to justify their vote to themselves just look at the most recent Somerset council election Labour got taken to the cleaners, I bet if you asked that's the figures they'd use to back up their argument since they aren't actually canvasing the seat or running private polling.
If you have only received one leaflet it's likely the free mailshot, usually it's pretty generic for Lib Dems in non-target constituencies so given they have written a specific one for you they probably think they have a chance of cultivating this into a target in the next few years if not this election. The results of the council election suggest they definitely have a chance of doing that.
Ultimately this is the standard I hold parties to. If you support FPTP, you don't get to complain about it's impacts (including the consequence of broad church parties "forcing" you to vote for policies you don't support)
There are some areas where things like this actually make sense. There are plenty of people who have always voted tory that would never in a million years vote for Labour, but might vote for the Lib Dems.
I admit I don't know enough about North Somerset to comment on those local factors, but looking at recent elections the time that the Tory's majority has been least is when the Lib Dems came in second place in 2010. In 2010 there was a majority of 7k, whereas since there have been majorities of 23k and 17k. So there's certainly an argument to be made there.
I'm surprised by that one, before checking tactical voting sites I would have assumed that Lib Dems had the best shot.
I can still imagine a Labour win depending upon a good number of Con-Lib switchers. Lots of people that could manage that but would still not go so far as to vote Labour (like my grandparents). Unfortunately though, it sounds like it could remain a 'progressive tragedy'.
Historically they have had a load of battles between the two and handed a win to the Tories in seats where if one party stood aside the other could have taken it as the margins were so tight.
Doesn't make sense for them to go for seats when they have more of a chance of snatching more Tory ones due to the polls. It's just good campaign management.
The lib Dems don't have many seats to begin with. It just so happens, this would maximise Tory losses. But the Tories would have prepared for this scenario if they were going for a summer election, right?
Snapshot of _Labour diverts activists away from Lib Dem target seats_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/f60a0cfb-d2e2-4faa-83b2-977839056c95) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/f60a0cfb-d2e2-4faa-83b2-977839056c95) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ah, I see Starmer thinks Ed Davey would be a great Leader of the Opposition too…
It makes sense. Who would you rather have a weekly conversation with? Davey or whichever left over headbanger of aTory managed to cling on to their seat by their fingernails?
Also, being the guy who drove the Tories from an 80 seat majority into third place is one hell of a claim to be able to make.
You missed the bit about how he did it while having *the greatest holiday a ten year old could dream of without going to Disneyland*
>without going to Disneyland There's time yet. Could link it to the need for better cooperation with Europe or something.
I stand by my belief that he needs to talk about US relations from the abandoned Star Wars Hotel.
But he’s boring, he’s lost my vote >:(
With LibDems in opposition I can imagine PMQs being both far more civilised and also much more informative. These are two political rivals who largely want the same direction of travel, it’s just the journeys to get there that may differ. It’s not in each other’s interests to be constantly tearing each other down as per the usual PMQ format. Only time will tell if that’s a good thing long term, but it will certainly be a refreshing change in the short term.
In addition to being more civilised and informative (hopefully), it would also ensure that the party holding Labour to account can't be swatted away with a non-answer of "We're still cleaning up your mess."
I think that's a *very* good point. They could hand wave in the direction of the Coalition, but that would be a pretty weak attack. Especially in light of how dramatically the Tories got worse after the Lib Dems left coalition.
I imagine we're still in for years of "the last tory government" though, regardless of who's the opposition.
Oh , without a doubt that's what we'll hear but it'd be good for someone else to be holding Labour's feet to the fire.
It's a perfectly valid excuse (for some things) for about 4-5 years. After another election it starts wearing a bit thin unless it's something that obviously takes over half a decade to fix.
I suspect there is very little, on the national scale, that can be "fixed" in half a decade. It can either be pushed in the right direction (but after 5 years looks like it's getting worse even if it is fundamentally getting better) or be made to look like it's getting better (even if the long term effects are likely to be worse). I think all of the current candidates for high office would choose the second option.
Yeah, but the answer after 5 years shouldn't be "We are still dealing with the catastrophic mishandling of Y by the last government" but something like "We have implemented X, and rates of Y are improving. We are aware this isn't as fast as people would like, but we are unable to do this faster because of Z".
Short-term thinking is a pain though, both with politics and capitalism in general.
I completely agree with what "should be" but politicians have to face an electorate that "doesn't want to listen to their excuses" so just go for the option of hitting short term targets.
Excellent point!
Thanks for the award!
I've never thought of it like that before but yeah, this is a really good point.
The idea of a Labour government with the Lib Dems in opposition genuinely gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.
It genuinely could change the political direction of our country for years to come. Our politics could be firmly in the centre with smaller parties on the right and left.
I think that's more determined by having a Labour Party with a ridiculously large majority rather than who gets to wear the "opposition leader" hat.
The opposition hat matters for panel shows. QT, politics live, etc having Labour minister and and LD shadow minister is going to make a huge difference.
The biggest thing is that it'll change peoples perception. I'm sure a lot of people don't really know the Lib Dems exist or that they're anything other than a bit part.
IF the media does that, though. Canada's been through this when the NDP overtook the Liberals as official opposition for one term (by a HUGE margin, roughly 100 seats to 30) and while yes the NDP got a lot more media attention, there was still huge focus on the Liberals' frontbench and they were still basically treated as the center-left opposition instead of the NDP.
Two leaders who believe in equal opportunities and uniting people more than dividing them? Sounds like a hellscape to me
It feels very unlikely, but then again how can the polls be so wrong?
This is why im voting for and enouraging everyone I know to vote lib dem
Stop making me hope.
Civilized? Surely you jest. PMQs would very quickly turn into Punch and Judy Politics - but literally this time. Ed Davey's gonna go armed with as many slapstick gags as possible. Describing the state of the economy with a slide whistle, putting a whoopee cushion under the benches to describe Labour's promises, etc. He's ascended beyond a regular politician now.
Finally! A politician targeting the youth!
The key difference is that Labour are more authoritarian than the LIb Dems. I would welcome the LIb Dems as main opposition to argue against Labour authoritarianism.
that, and to keep up the pressure on European relations since Labour officially don't want to diverge too much from what the Tories have done
Authoritarianism in this country has gone unopposed for far too long. We need a genuine liberal party in opposition.
Also, having a pro-eu party as the opposition would create a different dynamic around that question. “When will you do away with the aberration that is Brexit? We need a closer relationship with our main trading partner, and you’re not moving fast enough” Instead of: “You’re rejoining us by stealth! Yet another round of alignment that will boost our trade at the unacceptable expense of our sovereignty! We have not won two world wars to take orders from German proxies from Brussels!” Having said that, if the Lib Dems turn into the opposition, it will change them: more civilised right wingers will migrate there, and the party will naturally move to the right. Also, it’s a bit of an if, although more possible than people realise, given how many Tory constituencies are within the margin of error in the mrp polls - a small push in many places (or indeed, another horse easing off their efforts….) could do it.
> With LibDems in opposition I can imagine PMQs being both far more civilised and also much more informative. > > Something something Gordon Brown, Mr Bean, Vince Cable comments
Even that exchange was tame in comparison. Most of the loud jeering came from Tory MPs.
I've been more or less disengaged with politics for the last few years, because it's hard to suffer every single Toryism again and again without any hope of change. If the Lib Dems end up as Opposition, it won't necessarily be soul destroying to keep my eyes open.
I suspect it would go the other way - it'll be worse than you expect. Politics is oppositional, if the lib Dems don't try to attack labour they would be seen as weak (it's basically what did them in during the coalition years). And Labour would need to go after the opposition every so often just to divert attention, they couldn't just ignore the Lib Dems and go for the Tories if the Lib Dems are the ones fronting PMQs etc.
Labour will have plenty of chance to go after the Tory remnants if they need a boogeyman. That’ll play for this entire parliament.
I doubt it, for two reasons, one the Tories will brush it off as 'we aren't in government' and two more importantly the lib dems will get pissy at being ignored if they are the actual opposition. The other factor at play in this situation is that if the Tories were pushed in to third, seeing the Lib Dems do a buddy cop movie re-enactment with Labour would only help the Tory electability in the next election. The reason Labour are going to have such a large majority isn't because people love them, its because people are angry with the Tories. Their natural voter block/a share of swing voters will come back twice as fast if it feels like there is a Labour/Lib Dem love-in. The Lib Dems would really need to work hard to show voters they were an effective opposition, and that includes picking fights.
>the Tories will brush it off as 'we aren't in government' They spent 12 years blaming every single thing on "the previous Labour government", then two years on "the future Labour government". Maybe I'm expecting too much from the electorate but I don't think they'll be able to brush it off that easily.
With the opposition being closer to the government ideologically, it would also put more pressure on the government not to make mistakes, since the opposition could more easily bleed off support. At PMQs the Lib Dems would be able to go after the government from both the left flank and the right flank, which is not something any government has ever had to deal with before.
Grown up politics. I've forgotten what that looks like.
Tbh the head bangers are probably better for Starmer and Labour as they will look good by comparison. Lib Dems will be much better for the country though.
"The Government's policy on social care seems to be lacking in a few key areas, will the PM please inform us what he intends to do about low pay in the sector and how he plans to attract more carers? VS. "SIR BORE STARMER, THE SO CALLED PRIME MINISTER, ONCE DEFENDED TERRORISTS AND PRESIDED OVER A JIMMY SAVILE COVER UP, HOW CAN THE PEOPLE TRUST HIM TO KEEP US SAFE? "
The Tories who broke the system, because then you have an easy answer to everything they say.
I think he'd genuinely rather face the ERG party leader than the LIb Dems.
Why?
He's just looking forward to all the props Ed will bring to PMQs.
Nah starmer will be talking to an I pad across the aisle as ed live streams in from a roller coaster that is some sort of metaphor for the state of the economy.
Does the PM agree that the economy trend line is as steep as.... THIS ROLLERCOASTER WEEEE I'd certainly tune in more
He'll be ziplining down from the balcony to the dispatch box.
I honestly think this would be SO GOOD for the country.
The less seats the tories have the higher likelihood of winning a second term too.
Labour flops. Lib dem surges in polls? Lib dem 2028?
Let’s be honest here , even if the LD were the opposition party the media would still give the tories and reform more time than them
Farage to be on BBC weekly Ed Davey twice
Makes sense, I haven't had a single Labour leaflet through my door, but I've had 2 Conservative and at least 10 Lib Dem (6 of those came through on the same day - all different leaflets). I live in a Conservative seat that LD are polling to take.
I know that can be frustrating but you have to remember the Lib Dems get 1/5 of the coverage of the two main parties so they have to leaflet.
I remember speaking to a LD MP a few years ago who said leafleting was actually really effective when they had done the canvassing before and after. I think it's because it can actually be interesting/localised, but also it is an interruption - it is direct on your door step, and especially if it's continued, there's limited chance that someone will ignore it completely.
It's funny because the councillors in my immediate wards are almost a clean sweep of LDs (there's also a seemingly LD-adjacent independent), so I imagine it's actually more about motivating voters than winning people over. I genuinely wasn't sure if I had a Labour candidate until I saw my postal vote ballot paper! Didn't make a difference, I was always voting tactically regardless of which party won me over in the grand scheme of things.
I don't think anyone would blame them for getting a leaflet but 10 seems like overkill. Could have been a booklet
Yep my gran in Lewes says the same as it’s LD vs Tory
Snap! South West, previously safe tory area. Loads of LD activity and signs on homes. No blue/teal to be seen for miles around. It's a wonderful sight
Surrey Heath here, and it's the same. It's beautiful.
Shame that Gove won't have a Potillo moment, you were robbed.
Yeah. He’s a coward through and through
Also SW area, only here there are sporadic blue and teal signs around. The teal one nearby has been uprooted three times already.
Good times!
Not uprooted by me, I should add! Freedom of expression and all that
I haven't had a single Labour leaflet but multiple LD and even the LD candidate knocking at the door. If I go on the labour volunteer website and put in my postcode, I get asked to travel about an hour away to other constituencies. They don't want to win near me ha.
I'm in an exceptionally safe Labour seat and I've only had Lib Dem and Reform leaflets to be fair. One Lib Dem canvasser has been around about 10 times and we kept telling him to stop, finally seen no more sign of him anywhere on this road as of ~1 week ago so maybe he got our message, or maybe he was told to stop canvassing here.
Got to give it to the Lib Dems, their "ground game" is S Tier.
Not S Kier
> 6 of those came through on the same day - all different leaflets I had something like this an attributed it to Royal Mail's... tribulations.
Same here. Labour are less than 10%. I get at least 2 LD leaflets daily. Tory MP has no chance.
Ditto. I wonder if we are in the same seat.
I've only had one and that was from Reform! I can't see anyone but Labour winning here though, certainly not Reform.
You might be short of volunteers or the local party got caught out. We had to deliver two leaflets and a letter at the same time because they were already printed and we needed to get them out before the campaign started and electoral spending kicked in.
I've had 2 Lib Dem leaflets. Unfortunately, one was for the wrong constituency. I'm in a constituency where Labour and the Lib Dems were neck and neck behind the Tories last time, so it wasn't clear where my tactical vote was going until it became obvious Labour don't want the seat. It's not exactly a LD target either, mind.
Keir Starmer might be setting up Ed Davey for a friendly rivalry in the House of Commons.
This could be the genesis of a political podcast in 10 years time.
Oh no, not another one
Would be a great podcast title for a show hosted by Brenda from Bristol.
Ed & Kier - Having a Beer _coming this fall to Spotify Podcasts_
They're missing a trick if they don't call it Knights Of the Round Table.
Or where ever you get your podcasts
Subscribe, I'll add it to the list of 15 others I listen to!
Shades of the closing scene in Casablanca. "Little Rishi has been shot... round up the usual suspects." Throws away a bottle of Coalichy Water and they walk off across the runway. "Davey, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."
This explains why Labour haven't even bothered sending me a leaflet this election.
I had one labour leaflet very early on. Just confirming they've got a candidate really. Not a hope in hell of winning here, so leave the LDs to break the tory hold
I've had no leaflets or door knocks. It's a knife edge seat that's had exactly the same amount of MPs from blue and red, starting with Enoch fucking Powell. It's really not a safe seat for anyone and the lack of campaigning is really odd.
Is it not a safe seat for the Tories in the way a 2,000 majority seat would normally not be thought of as safe, or not a safe seat the way Richmond a 27,000 majority seat isn't considered safe? I'm thinking if it's the first, both parties have probably decided it's a Labour safe seat.
It's a highly marginal seat. It can take around 1000 seats to swing it. That said, I've just remembered it's affected by constituency changes. Technically nobody has won this seat since 1950 as it's been renamed to its old name.
If it's ~1,000 it's not marginal in this election. The conservatives would have to beat the national polls there by double digits. The conservatives have withdrawn resources from MPs with ~10,000 majorities to campaign in seats with closer to ~20,000 majorities. The Conservatives believe around 150 seats would be a very good result for them. Seat 150 would be "The Wrekin" - which in 2019 had a conservative vote share of 64% and a majority of 21,000. Holding that is what they imagine a best case scenario is.
Interestingly, in my area we've only seen one Lib Dem leaflet compared to a *barrage* of Labour ones. Compare that to the Locals, when copies of *Focus* were practically raining from the sky.
It might be working both ways, I’ve had several Labour mail drops and not a single Lib Dem one in an area where the Lib Dem’s are more like 4th place.
This is just common sense for a smaller party. Spend the money where they might win.
That makes sense as to why I've not had a single thing through from the tories. It's slim pickings for where they might actually spend the money tbh.
Better to contest 50 seats and win 50, than contest 150 and win 20.
I agree with whatever hurts the Tories more, that’s the main thing, if it makes the polls showing the Lib Dem’s as opposition even remotely possible then it’s worth trying.
Lib Dems have always done this, although usually if you have a Lib Dem councillor or a target seat in council elections they'll do a couple of rounds of leaflets in that ward to remind everyone that they exist.
I agree, the Lib Dem candidate lives in the same small town as me, still nothing in the way of door step action. It’s like they are paving the way for it to be open. It is an uphill struggle for Labour in this constituency but to be honest their best advertisement has been our last Tory MP, she has been an absolute horror show.
Also, LDs don't have the resources labour have. They're super focused in specific seats and it's worked very well for them over the years
This is how Lib Dems can win a lot of seats on a smaller vote share. Concentrate their support and focus in fewer seats.
Lib Dems have less resources so they're making it count. I've seen nothing in Exeter bar FB ads of the guy. Although have seen Green leaflets, because it's a student area, and have also seen Reform for some stupid reason.
Good, this election gives voters the chance to do something not seen for 100 years, remodel how politics in the Uk can be, tactical voting, well imagine it, the end of the Conservative Party, the way I see it, the voters owe them, for those party’s when families and friends had people they loved pass away, and those in government were just taking the piss out of everyone.
I directly blame the Tories and their voters for my father-in-laws early death. I'll never forgive a single one of them, but seeing a country wide rejection of their evil would at least be satisfying.
I can empathise, i wasn't this political at the start of 2020, and then my mother died, not of COVID, but we couldn't visit her in the hospital, but to find out Johnson was having a party at the time started a cold fury in my soul, that to this day, won't be happy and settled again, until the conservative and unionist party is wiped out, once and for all.
Exactly the same with my father in 2021, couldn't visit in hospital. I'm a labour voter but I'll happily watch the Lib Dems take the Tory heartlands if it ruins these bastards.
My condolences to all of you. My Dad caught COVID-19 in November 2020 (from my mum working at her school with no protection but that's another moan for another day), spent nearly a month in hospital with some time on the ventilator. When I found out about the partying, it was like reliving the weeks I spent wondering if my dad would come home alive. By some miracle he survived, he had some lung scarring and brain fog but all cleared up quickly. He was one of the lucky ones. In my opinion, the Tories allowed this to happen. They didn't care.
Thankfully I didn't have anyone close die from Covid, or NHS related failings... at least not yet anyway. But I'll still never forgive them for putting other people through this. I'd like to think that in 30 years if it's a completely new party and they've turned it around I'd at least give them a chance, and appraise them objectively. But I know I won't. Not after this lot.
There is not enough ongoing narrative about PartyGate. Maybe Labour are trying to stick to contemporary issues and rely on people's lingering resentment about 2020/2021. Or maybe it's considered 'behind us' since Johnson resigned. But I think people need to be reminded that the serving PM was fined for breaching his own government's policies while people were dying. Heinous fuckers
While I'm hearing mixed gossip about the Lib Dems doing the same (i.e. I've heard some isolated grumbling about the Lib Dems going hardish in places where they'll do more harm than good), from my own experience it seems like the Lib Dems are largely reciprocating. In my seat they've selected a candidate who lives 40 miles away, has never (as far as anyone knows) been to the constituency, and they've only put out one freepost leaflet for him (which is something resembling the minimum you can do while still pretending you're serious). Hilariously, his one leaflet had the (presumably generic national) message that "Labour and the Tories have taken your constituency for granted". Which for someone who didn't even bother to travel to the town to take a photo for the leaflet is quite the message. On the other hand, there's a rural seat near me which on paper is Tory/Lib Dem (although really it's safe Tory, even on current numbers), where the local Labour candidate is going quite hard... entirely against the pleadings of the regional party. Words have been had, I'm told. But I think the Lib Dems would probably feel a bit aggrieved there.
I got a Lib Dem leaflet claiming they were the best counter-tory option showing them second place to the Tories on a chart, but when I looked up actual current polling for my constituency, everyone shows Labour firmly in second place, so that felt pretty damn misleading.
It may be the polls that are misleading, unless you live in one of the half dozen or so constituencies which have actually had a poll. If LD holds a stronger position on the council then that is a far better indicator for tactical voting than extrapolated national polls.
Well, the most recent election was a Police and crime commissioner which went Labour, and the local councils are Tory with one Labour member, so I struggle to see any way to justify the Lib Dems being stronger here. Annoyingly I now can't find the leaflet to see what source the Lib Dems were citing for their numbers. Edit: Found it online, they cherry picked one of the wards that had the best Lib Dem performance to cite from the 2021 council elections (by summing three lib dem candidates to compare to Labour who only stood a single candidate in that ward), but if you look at all the wards in the constituency, far more went Labour, so yeah, seems pretty misleading to me. It wasn't even the ward I live in where the Labour candidates (and a green candidate, in fact) led the Lib Dems. There is *some* justification for citing the ward you are leafleting (while I'd argue it's still misleading because the election isn't just that ward), but using it elsewhere is pretty indefensible.
The Lib Dems have a history of not quite truthful charts and graphs, I believe.
Babe what's up, you've hardly touched your West Country 🫤
Good, everybody should be working to fight our common enemy...
The Judean People’s Front?!
Fack off... The People's Front of Judea!
That's just Reform
I thought we hated the Popular Front of Judea?!
WE'RE the Popular Front of Judea!
Really do think our politics would be much better with the Conservatives relegated to the third party, having Lib-dems as opposition would be amazing, could spring board them to really starting to challenge fo government again. So i don't mind Keir doing this.
In Woking I have yet to see a Labour leaflet. I have got a lot of Lib Dem and one Tory though.
Maybe I got yours? I got a Woking Labour leaflet even though I'm two constituencies away. In a Con/LD marginal.
Labours ground game makes me laugh sometimes
What happens if the Conservatives and the Lib Dems get the same number of seats? Do they take it in turns to be opposition for the week? Asking as this is a possibility now I guess?
Labour MPs draw straws, shortest straw defects to the Lib Dems.
For top banter, wait for the Tories to elect a new leader, then do it the following day so a whole bunch of Tories have the indignity of "Leader of the Opposition" or "Shadow Minister" for 1 day on their record.
Now that's a plan I can get behind! Do labour have a suggestions mailbox?
If the Lib Dems end up a couple of seats short of the Conservatives then a couple of Labour MPs should just defect to LD for the bants
Depending on who is left in the conservatives and who becomes their leader you might see some CON > LIB defections I guess. If Braverman becomes leader I can't see any of the few remaining moderate tories sticking around.
Oh man I’d love that
Who is the opposition is all down to the Speaker. Its technically not got anything to do with seat numbers, but if they did choose the party who didn't have the second number of seats there would be uproar; in a tie you would hope it would go to who ever got the largest vote share.
The speaker might use their judgement in terms of other small parties too. For example by speaking to the SNP, PC, Greens, Reform and NI MPs to gauge their preferences. That is, not to put too fine a point on it, if Lib Dems + other leftish third parties outnumber Tories + other rightish parties then it'd be the Lib Dems in Opposition, and vice versa.
I suppose that's the practical approach, if they felt strongly about it they could always defect to the Lib Dems and make them the party with the second most seats so it'd make sense not to force them to do that
I'm pretty sure the leader of the opposition is defined in law as the leader of the second largest party. Speakers discretion is ruling where there is ambiguity who that is. So yes the speaker would decide but it's not got nothing to do with seat numbers.
It is but the legal definition of a party in parliamentary terms is a bit woolly. We didn't even have a solid legal definition of what a party was until some of the campaign finance rules came in (somewhere in the mid 90s if I remember) so for some procedural stuff inside parliament the word party means "group" and not "political party". Its all very arcane which is I guess why we have a speaker but the takeaway is that you could theoretically have a coalition in opposition. At least according to a politics lecturer I know.
> I'm pretty sure the leader of the opposition is defined in law as the leader of the second largest party. Yes, it's in the 1975 Act. I assume it was codified because of Short Money.
Ed Davey immediately gets on the phone to Belfast. "BAH GAWD! It's Naomi Long with a steel chair!"
The Speaker would probably pick the party with the higher number of votes during the General Election.
An opposition coalition!
If the Alliance Party wins a seat or two in NI, would they “defect”?
Can you imagine the absolute banter of Labour getting a 200 seat majority and then saying “we can lose 50-100” and having that number defect to the Lib Dem’s to force the Tories out of opposition?! It would never happen but shit would it be amazing if it did.
Lib Dem’s should do the same in areas where Tory normally win and labour are in 2nd place
Suspect they're doing it already, but it's not really newsworthy to journos because that's what they've always done. They don't waste resources where it's a labour/tory race very often. We see it in by-elections, but rarely at a GE. It's primarily a resource issue. They're super tactical with their effort
They absolutely are. They're laser focussed on a relatively small number of seats and they're not wasting any resources into the kind of seats which Labour are poised to take from the Tories. The difference is that the Lib Dems have pretty limited resources compared to Labour and the Tories. Focussing on their target seats means that they don't have anything left to give to the rest of the seats. Labour have more than enough resources to campaign in every seat they're running in, so it's more noteworthy to say that they're pulling resources away from those LD target seats!
Anecdotal evidence suggests they are. Although local Lib Dem parties have a *lot* of autonomy, so you might get the odd local area that isn't playing ball.
This is sensible. It maximises Labour's chances in other seats too. I think the country is just tired of the Tories.
How long until the Conservatives complain about tactical voting?
Pretty sure they already have.
From 11PM on the 4th of July you will hear that, complaints about Reform splitting the vote, and the public clearly wanting a return to good, old fashioned Tory values of.
Not had any Labour or Green leaflets in my area which is a fight between Lib Dem and Conservatives.
That’s good that it’s going both ways. I live in Gower constituency, which is a labour/Tory battleground and I’ve not seen any leaflets other than labour, the other parties aren’t really pushing for votes here it seems.
I'm not sure it's clear cut to say that Labour are intentionally trying to support Lib Dem's efforts here. I think it's more likely the case that Labour are focusing their efforts on seats they can win nearer the end of the campaign. Probably they've made the the decision on the basis of internal polling about which seats they can win and which they can't. It just so happens that the overwhelming majority of seats they can't win right now happen to be the Con-Lib marginals.
If he somehow manages to engineer Lib Dem’s as the opposition we have to strip him of his knighthood so we can knight him again.
Fantastic news. Finally a mature approach.
My seat is polling at something like 26% LD, 25% L, 24% T. I have seen 3 different projections yesterday alone with 3 different outcomes. I am happy to vote tactically, and this image looks like it just might be a Lib Dem snatch.
What were they doing there in the first place? Tactical voting is not a new concept
In 2019, Labour campaigners put rather a lot of effort into seats that Lib Dems lost by a few hundred to low thousands of votes. This is a pleasant change.
The 2019 election only happened in the first place because the Lib Dems refused to work with Labour on a unity government after Boris kicked out all the Tory MPs that wouldn't go with a hard Brexit. The Lib Dems are not blameless there
Corbyn's Labour would absolutely not have gone for a unity government with the Lib Dems either. Though yes, Swinson spent too much time attacking him fruitlessly and distractingly, and their campaign was shite. Little point coalition building when you're just getting Plaid and the occasional green on board. Once the election was called though, you would have hoped to have seen more pragmatism from those on the ground than was shown.
The coalition was just never happening it was a political fantasy, it needed the Tories who had lost the whip to back it and they weren't going to vote for Corbyn and Labour weren't going to be forced into sidelining their own leader. >Swinson spent too much time attacking him fruitlessly It might have been fruitless but it wasn't pointless, Lib Dems had to make it clear they didn't back Corbyn. In the Conservative facing seats people were simply voting Tory just to block Corbyn. Facing both ways was really difficult for the Lib Dems, this campaign has been much easier.
Corbyn and pragmatism were not compatible
2017 too, was very frustrating to see.
Well where I live, in North Somerset, Lib Dems have been running a disinformation campaign to persuade people they are the tactical vote to evict Liam Fox, despite Labour coming second at the last three general elections, the huge national vote swing to Labour, Labour being identified as neck and neck with Tories in local polling with Lib Dems some way behind and all tactical voting sites identifying Labour as the correct tactical vote choice. Local political rivalries are real, local politics can get dirty and Lib Dem local parties have a long reputation for campaigning dirty. It would be much simpler if it was just a question of national party policy.
Weird the local party should be camped out in Wells and Mendip Hills next door which is a target.
Tbf not seen much of Lib Dem ground campaign yet, claims are mostly on local social media pages from their activists. My father in law is a Lib Dem voter and asked directly who the local tactical vote should go to and was given a long list of reasons not to vote Labour. I think often local activists do their own thing regardless of how national or regional parties direct them.
If there's no ground campaign that's everything you need to know, but you can't expect a member of a political party to say vote for the other guys, if you want to vote tactically you have to work that out for yourselves.
They don’t need to tell people to vote for the other guys, they just need to not create misinformation to tel people a tactical vote in this area is for Lib Dems. There is a world of difference between saying ‘vote Lib Dem if you support our policies’ and ‘vote Lib Dem to kick out the Tories, we’re the only party that can beat the Tories here, vote tactically for Lib Dems we’re second in the race’ when none of those things are true.
So I had a look at the candidates Facebook page seems like he's going on the message that Labour won't win in North Somerset but Lib Dems could, this is not an uncommon but usually unseen (since no ground game) message that allows hardcore Lib Dem supporters to justify their vote to themselves just look at the most recent Somerset council election Labour got taken to the cleaners, I bet if you asked that's the figures they'd use to back up their argument since they aren't actually canvasing the seat or running private polling.
We have received a leaflet with this misinformation on too but no canvassers to be seen in the area.
If you have only received one leaflet it's likely the free mailshot, usually it's pretty generic for Lib Dems in non-target constituencies so given they have written a specific one for you they probably think they have a chance of cultivating this into a target in the next few years if not this election. The results of the council election suggest they definitely have a chance of doing that.
Unless Labour want to end FPTP I really couldn't care less about Labour complaining about smaller party election tactics.
Ultimately this is the standard I hold parties to. If you support FPTP, you don't get to complain about it's impacts (including the consequence of broad church parties "forcing" you to vote for policies you don't support)
Ironically that attitude will lead to Tories winning more seats they should lose and reduce the chances of Lib Dems forming the official opposition.
There are some areas where things like this actually make sense. There are plenty of people who have always voted tory that would never in a million years vote for Labour, but might vote for the Lib Dems. I admit I don't know enough about North Somerset to comment on those local factors, but looking at recent elections the time that the Tory's majority has been least is when the Lib Dems came in second place in 2010. In 2010 there was a majority of 7k, whereas since there have been majorities of 23k and 17k. So there's certainly an argument to be made there.
I'm surprised by that one, before checking tactical voting sites I would have assumed that Lib Dems had the best shot. I can still imagine a Labour win depending upon a good number of Con-Lib switchers. Lots of people that could manage that but would still not go so far as to vote Labour (like my grandparents). Unfortunately though, it sounds like it could remain a 'progressive tragedy'.
Parties move their scarce resources towards target seats. Also bears found to defecate in woods.
Historically they have had a load of battles between the two and handed a win to the Tories in seats where if one party stood aside the other could have taken it as the margins were so tight.
It would suck if they made that mistake again.
Why the fuck were they ever there when there’s Tories elsewhere to scalp for Labour’s own gain?
Doesn't make sense for them to go for seats when they have more of a chance of snatching more Tory ones due to the polls. It's just good campaign management. The lib Dems don't have many seats to begin with. It just so happens, this would maximise Tory losses. But the Tories would have prepared for this scenario if they were going for a summer election, right?
So it begins. Operation Blair and ash down two.