Why the Lib Dem Surge is a Good Thing

By Banzai · Apr 21, 2010 · ·
Categories:
  1. [Copied and pasted from my external blog. Please do take a look. I'm trying to update regularly, every few days or so]

    The immediate answer to this is obvious: because a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote not for the Tories.

    But I promised myself (and now am promising you) that this won’t be an anti-Conservative rant. I’ve done enough of that in the nineteen-and-a-half years I’ve been on this earth, and will no doubt do a hell of a lot more before 6th May. No, this is about something else. For those of you not familiar with British politics, allow me to do a quick background filler:

    The Liberal Democrats are the third party in Westminster. They have consistently in the last half-century been a weakened, ineffective force, and the but of many a political satirist’s joke. Their politics are middle ground, slightly left-leaning, and they are usually seen as the safe, protest vote against Labour or Conservatives. I don’t have a clue when was the last time they were serious contenders in an election.

    Except no. That’s not quite accurate any more. Over the weekend, the Lib Dems and their leader, inoffensive Cameron-a-like Nick Clegg, climbed to dizzying heights in the polls, and overtook the Tories. This really was breaking new ground. Since before the announcement of this election, the Lib Dems were touted as the kingmakers of any potential coalition government, being able to choose who would govern the country. But at no point would anyone have pegged them as being up their competing with Labour and the Conservatives.

    It’s a glorious blow to the Tories hopes’ of victory, and to David Cameron’s “patriotic duty” to become the next Prime Minister, and I have been loving every moment of it. Of course, it probably won’t last. Already the Tories are regaining the lead, and whether the Lib Dems will stay in the same kind of contention in two and a half weeks time is anyone’s guess. But what’s really worth commenting on is precisely how this came about.

    And say what you like about votes disenfranchised with the two major parties, or people liking their policies. That no doubt does contribute. But the real poll-swinger was the first ever televised party leaders’ debate. It was last thursday, on ITV, and took place on a set that looked like it had been borrowed from a cheap daytime gameshow presented by some washed up comedian or actor. Or Noel Edmonds.

    This was a historic occurring, the first time that any such debate had taken place. In the past, opposition leaders have frequently challenged the incumbent to televised debates, with the incumbent usually refusing on grounds that the election should be decided on policy, not personality. Personally, I agree with this argument, and wasn’t looking forward to the whole palaver, expecting a smarmy display of PR from Cameron, a lot of embarrassing blustering from Brown, and pretty much nothing from Clegg. I think everyone else was expecting the same.

    But I was wrong. David Cameron looked like a Madame Tussauds wax model (except for one memorable moment where he looked like a haunted Madame Tussauds wax model), Gordon Brown seemed relaxed and at ease, even cracking jokes, and Nick Clegg came across as the reasonable everyman. Personally I thought that Brown came out the best, but apparently the British public disagree with me, and I suspect that it’s because they have never seen or heard anything from Clegg before. The Lib Dems have been in the background so long, as British politics marches on towards a US-style bipartisan system, that everyone had forgotten they exist. Now they have gotten themselves noticed, and although their surge in support may just be a novelty, and may not last, it will hopefully last long enough to cause some bloody change when the election results come in.

    They won’t win, I’m not deluded enough to think that. But when the hung parliament is a reality, they will be major players in a coalition, rather than just the quiet kid picked at football to make up numbers. Frankly, any move away from a two-party system is a good thing (well, not if the third party were the BNP or UKIP, obviously). Bipartisanism leads to extremes. Two parties that are polar opposites of each other, with no happy medium. The Lib Dems, no matter what you might think of their policies (and believe me, they have some which I myself think they can go shove where the sun doesn’t shine), are that happy medium.

    And the irony of it is that this move away from a US-style bipartisanism, came out of a US-style televised political debate. Brilliant!
    Categories:

Comments

  1. madhoca
    Well, the Liberal Party as such was the most important reforming party (maybe in the Western world) until the Labour Party came along, i.e. its star started to fade about 100 yrs ago.

    However, I remember its last 'surge' in the early 1980s when it suddenly found itself with nearly a quarter of the country's vote--I think it was a response to all the terrible strikes which Labour seemed almost to instigate and the lofty attitude to social reform adopted by the Tories, I don't know. Anyway, when I was a student, being a member of the Liberal party became cool. And I was in there!

    I think that the merger to become the lib-dems, and all the other flirty little alliances that took place was the death-knell to true liberal thinking. At that point, I departed from what was left of the Liberals in disgust, only to find my mother had become a candidate for the Lib-Dems, so that our house was filled with the likes of Paddy Ashdown around for a free meal whenever they felt like it.

    To me, a third party simply dilutes the vote and actually polarises attitudes more than a bi party system, and it can even be quite harmful, rather as lots of little nationalist parties can carve up a country. In the good old days, there was a greater range of ideas catered for within the two main parties (I say this despite my dalliances with the Liberals!). But then, I am just a boring old fart...
  2. Forkfoot
    That's been the exact opposite of my experience here in the States, mate. They only seem like polar opposites because of all the hyperbole and rage directed at the other side; in practice the parties are nearly indistinguishable other than that one side has a few more females and people with darker skin color. They're only different if you listen to what they say rather than what they do. They found a few minor ways in which the majority of the country is split pretty much dead-even, and they designed a two-party system around it to give us the illusion of having a choice.
  3. Gallowglass
    I think the best thing that can happen is a complete clear-out of British politics. There is something dark at the heart of the modern system. The Liberal Democrats are one of the big three; that's no good. We need a hung parliament between the extremes and the radicals (not necessarily the same thing), so they can then sort out the major issues which they campaign about, but will not be able to enforce their will through violence.
  4. Fallen
    Hah. Cameron got egged. Pity they didn't bring the oil, fire and frying pan.

    Glad to see me and hubby weren't the only ones to think Brown came out on top in the televised debate. Clegg and Cameron were the gameshow hosts (how many times did Clegg repeat 'we're different from those two, we stand for serious change'; how many time did Cameron say 'I've spoken to Joe blogg on the street' (could just picture the peg on his nose and the ten foot pole he kept the public at bay with there) and how the hospital helped his disabled kid (that was nothing but an X-factor sympathy vote). Brown was the only serious politician there.

    Cameron's quoted as saying he doesn't think he could work with Brown if parlimament was hung: talk about a kid spitting his dummy out the playgroup circle.

    I'm old enough to remember the **** job the Tories did in the 80's. I'd never vote conversative.

    Lib Dems...? It's strange, I vote for them in the local elections because the lib' Dem councillor is the only one who's come up to me on the street and been brave enough to introduce himself. But the general... I'm going Labour. Brown's done huge things for my family.
  5. Banzai
    I personally don't think it would polarise the politics, but rather that it would offer a greater range of choice for the voter. For example, with the Lib Dems now as serious contenders, we have all stances on the EU available to us: complete withdrawal (nutty smaller parties like UKIP), limitation of the EU (Conservatives), the status quo (Labour), and greater EU integration (the Lib Dems). Personally, I relish the thought of having another facet of policy to consider, but I am only young, and am willing to defer that your judgement may be more accurate than mine.

    So they seem extremely polarised, whilst being essentially identical? I'm not really sure that's an improvement, if it is true. I don't want no choice, same as I don't want a choice only between relative extremes. The Lib Dems to me represent a middle ground, with some reasonably loopy policies that I disagree with and probably come from decades in the desert of political exile.

    I think that's niave. You don't diffuse radical and dangerous ideas fuelled by hatred by giving them power. A certain Mr Hindenburg tried that in the 1930s, and that didn't end too well.

    I agree entirely. Two snake-oil salesmen, and a serious politician. And Cameron's "I am one of you" stories made be nauseous and angry, for obvious reasons.

    I think you mean Clegg here... But yeah, I think that's just postulating. When Brown offers him a coalition, he's not going to turn it down. He's got the "style over substance" feel as Cameron, but he's not an idiot.
  6. Lemex
    Brown did appear to come out on top (I loved his shaking head as Cameron gave his closing speech) and what he said actually had substance.

    Now I've voted for the Lib Dems all my voting life, but there are some things I couldn't help but question with Clegg's finances, and his stance on Trident. I would wish to look at the Lib Dems manifesto in full before I make a final decision, and I wish he would reverse his stance on Trident; something I consider more a necessary evil.
  7. Lemex
    "I don’t have a clue when was the last time they were serious contenders in an election."

    It's not been in our life time, by which I mean a liberal party of any sort. The last time a liberal party was a really significant force in British politics the First World War was just over the horizon.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice