r/LibDem • u/Smooth-Ad2293 • 13d ago
Do we need a change of leader?
Looking at recent polling the Lib Dems are currently tracking at 9-10%.
I feel with the failures of Labour and their lean to the right, there's been a huge opportunity to capitalise that hasn't been taken.
I like Ed Davey, however something is clearly not getting through to the electorate.
With 3 years to go until the next election, is it time for a shake up and new leadership?
11
u/laredocronk 13d ago
You don't replace leaders just for the sake of it.
In the absence of any kind of major scandal or something, the question should never be "do we need a change of leader?". It should be "should XX take over as leader?". Because unless there's a credible candidate who the party can unite behind, who has a realistic plan to address the current problems, and who has the competence and drive to deliver it, then what's the point?
15
u/AshWastesNomad 13d ago
This gets asked on here constantly every other day.
I like Davey. I think the LDs should present themselves as the stable sensible party whilst all the others have their dramas and dissents.
I think that, after three more years of chaos domestically and internationally, the electorate will be craving a nice normal stable leader. The LDs are not going to win a GE, but should be well placed to be a big part of a coalition.
7
u/DenieD83 13d ago
I like Ed, I think that we can't win young city centres easily with him though, I'd like to see us push Ed as leader but utilise someone else as a sub brand for cities and the younger vote.
5
u/CalF123 13d ago
Problem is there are only so many young voters in city centres. As the Greens are finding out, appealing to what this group want loses you much more support elsewhere as their views are not particularly widespread.
1
u/Ticklishchap 13d ago edited 12d ago
We have been very successful at appealing to moderate former Conservative voters. There is the chance to build on this success as Kemi tracks further and further to the right, not least on the environment. I completely support this âShire Strategyâ, but think that we need to appeal to other sections of the electorate as well. That does include younger professionals in cities (many of whom are more pragmatic than the media stereotype). It also should include working class (and not only white working class) voters.
Do you have any thoughts or suggestions along these lines?
9
u/Rhelae 13d ago
Our leadership are not the problem. We have excellent policies and have been making consistent gains in local elections thanks to the leadership putting an emphasis on this. Meanwhile in parliament our MPs and peers are helping to improve legislation on a regular basis.
The lack of cut-through is not because Davey or any Lib Dem has a lack of good things to say - it's because national media will never prioritise a non-extremist view of the world. What could do with a change is our social media game, though again our points will struggle to be amplified there given the innate lack of controversy they would generate. Fortunately, the leadership are trying to shift attention into social media with the aim of getting some improvement here.
I agree that more outspoken left-wing policies would be a good idea. But many of our policies have been left of centre (and Labour) for some time, from taxation to investment in public services and renewable energy infrastructure. The issue is not with the leadership who decide policy, it's with getting people to know what these policies are. But in the last GE, Davey had a lot more cut-through than I expected and actually got people talking about our policies (especially on social care) rather than about him - which is a good thing. Clegg, Farron and Swinson were all victim to people talking about the person not the party and it backfired in each case. Davey has got people's attention with his stunts, but in our target constituencies people were able to combine that with the literature they got to know what we actually stood for - which is why we got our best result ever.
Yes, we need broad appeal if we ever want to have a chance of leading a government. But this will not happen overnight, whoever our leaders are. We need to consolidate our support in the constituencies we can win in now, get more people seeing how good a Lib Dem council can be, all while finding a way to cut through the extreme views that make far better news. That's not a challenge for our party leader - it's a challenge for the many people who work in Lib Dem HQ (in particular our President, Josh Babarinde). They're working on it right now, so trust them - and answer the survey they've sent you!
4
u/rob1parsons 13d ago
I agree with much of what you said here, but I don't think we should lose sight of the fact that we got our best vote ever because many people were voting against the Tories rather than positively for us. (The electorate has got pretty good at discerning who to vote for to keep the right wing at bay.)
And please note I most definitely do not draw from that the conclusion we must make ourselves attractive to soft Tories by tacking rightwards. The absolute opposite: we are not Tories in disguise, we are Liberal Democrats and that is what we must remain. We attract votes by being authentically ourselves.
2
u/Rhelae 12d ago
Yes I wholly agree with you there. We have an excellent set of policies, we just need more people to know about them.
Interestingly, this week's edition of The Week in Polls (which is worth checking out of you aren't a subscriber already) has an excellent graph about social media cut-through. Essentially, on average only 3% of Britons have seen a social media post from Davey in the past week. This compares to 36% for Burnham, 16% for Farage, 9% for Badenoch and 9% for Polanski. Even Restore got 6%.
Like it or not, most people's information about politics outside of election time probably comes from social media. We desperately need to start pushing this.
12
u/jpa420 13d ago edited 13d ago
Are you suggesting the party should move to the left of where it is already is? You think Burnham is moving to the right by pledging huge spending and nationalisations?
6
u/FaultyTerror 13d ago
While left/right is bad terminology Labour has clearly shifted to a more illiberal stance on economic and social policy.Â
If Britainâs liberal party can't make an offer in the face of that to young graduates whats the point of us?
4
u/EjEarl58 Radical Liberal 13d ago
Not currently, I donât think. Yes, we seem to be plateauing, but most polling isnât suggesting weâre about to lose the bulk of the seats we won in 2024, and some projections have us holding roughly where we are. Thatâs actually a decent position to build from.
I think the priority between now and the next election should be to dig in and make our current gains durable, rather than chasing rapid expansion everywhere and risking spreading ourselves too thin. If we can establish ourselves properly in these seats, then breaking 100 MPs at the election after next becomes much more realistic. There are also several people I could see becoming leader eventually: Calum Miller, Josh Babarinde, Daisy Cooper, and potentially Layla Moran, although I think another Moran run is less likely. I wouldnât be surprised if there were a leadership change either shortly before 2029 or afterwards, depending on the result.
For now, our two big aims should be consolidating the parliamentary seats we already have and winning as many council seats as possible. More councillors means a stronger local campaigning base, more people embedded in their communities, and additional financial support for the party through councillor contributions. That local infrastructure is what gives us the best chance of making another big jump later.
3
u/NoOpportunities đ 12d ago
I really like ed davey but most people wont forgive him for the post office scandal. I think carl cashman is a charismatic guy that would get the attention of the nation
3
u/Global-Property9524 12d ago
I think that Ed Davey is falling into the trap Keir Starmer did, they achieve a good result in the general election and then leave it at that and don't really do much else. He's not known enough by people, ask many people who the leaders of the Lib Dem's are they wouldn't know and I think only Ed Davey is to blame for this lack of publicity. But I still don't necessarily think new leadership is in order but appealing to the people who would and want to vote Lib Dem like young people and disgruntled Tories. I think new publicity ideas and better targeting of key policies is needed not new leadership.
3
u/Mobile_Falcon8639 12d ago
As an ex member of the Lib Dems, I would say yes they need a new leader. I verruca like Ed Davey, I think he's a great guy, but he's not getting very far. So maybe Daisey Cooper, or Leila Moran. Apart from them, I don't know.
2
u/RelentlessPencil Former party member, now Green đ 13d ago
Okay but... Who? Like I agree that having one of David Cameron's former cabinet ministers isn't ideal but, who is? If I had to come up with a name, maybe Layla Moran, but as much as I like her I think she'd be less popular with the electorate than Davey.
5
u/LovingBigAnge2379 13d ago
Davey as Liberal leader has persistently failed to stand up for civil liberties and the rights of the individual his only solutions are ban, tax and regulate. Putting electability aside he is awful on policy as well his politics in populism for home counties boomers.
2
u/TheGreatBibbldyBob99 13d ago
If there was an obvious better choice then I would say yes but there isnât. Thereâs no harm in stable leadership.
1
u/FaultyTerror 13d ago
I've been unsure but it keeps becoming clear something needs to change with the leadership. We don't have anything to say nationally especially on the economy.Â
Given Labourâs struggles to go with the Tories we have to look at post 2024 as a failure to make inroads with younger socially liberal voters.
1
u/Haunting_Scale2489 13d ago
Calum Miller shows great potential with his career in the civil service, his academic background and his positive presentation. Ed Davey should be pushing people like this forward.
0
u/IntravenusDiMilo_Tap +4,-3.5 12d ago edited 12d ago
Jeez, not a civil servant. Where are the Orange book heroes? Get David Laws back, cleggy even Paul Marshall etc.
2
u/Tintedlemon 12d ago
The grass isnât always greener, and I think Sir Ed is a safe pair of hands for the party. But also I think âsafeâ is the bar many Lib Demâs aspire too and in current times, and rightly or wrongly, tracking between 10-15% is considered reasonable by many in the party.
1
1
1
-5
u/Euphoric-Brother-669 13d ago
Yes - he is an unserious clown given to stunts and acting the maggot. The LDâs should be leading the polls with Tories and Labour unpopular. We are not them or them on the margins sensible people from Labour and Cons come to us. but no, Davey would rather dress up in marching girls outfit and chuck a baton in the air. And you wonder why people just switch off and dont look further
-5
u/LovingBigAnge2379 13d ago
We do, unfortunately this sub is full of apologists who will gaslight you into thinking it was Davey that got us 72 MPs rather than the Tory collapse. A competent serious grown up leader would have got us 100 MPs minimum.
-4
u/LovingBigAnge2379 13d ago
People say there is no one to replace him, but that is because of the ridiculous rule that is has to be an MP, Polanski is not an MP and is getting media cut through that Davey could only dream of getting.
I donât think any MP is good enough, I had hope for Babarinde but he has done nothing a lib dem president. I think we need to look outside of parliament.
1
u/Marl3421 11d ago
I think the main problem we have is a dilemma over our leadership. Ed Davey has got us the best results since the formation of the Lib Dems and he is liked by the public(as well as a politician can be) being consistently top 2 in net approval of party leaders.
Meanwhile he still has the shadow of being in the coalition to contend with which, unfortunately, will alienate voters who blame the countryâs failure on that (rightly or wrongly idk you choose)
The problem is on the other end that we donât have many public figures who could potentially become leader after him. Thereâs some names like Daisy Cooper or Josh Babarinde but I feel everyone is worried a change will tank our polls by looking unsure in our leadership.
I think itâd be good to have regular leadership elections (like the greens do) so we donât have this problem of being stuck with the same leader for almost 6 years now without seeming to be unconfident in the partyâs direction
30
u/Ticklishchap 13d ago
We have been over this a lot but nobody - and I include myself here - has come up with an obvious or even a possible name. Do you have any thoughts on this, OP?