Surrendering winnable seats so Labour can get useless second places is not a plan I'd personally go for. Basically every seat we want depends on tactical voting, the reason I think a small list of target seats is a good thing is that it makes it very clear where we're the tactical option and where we aren't, rather than taking the piss like we admittedly did in 2019.
Absolutely agreed that the Lib Dems shouldn't be surrendering their 2017-19 gains back to Labour. I get that they'll be competing more against the Tories than against Labour in the short- to medium-term; however, if they make no effort
whatsoever to hold onto their Labour/Lib Dem swing voters, then at that point they might as well just merge with Labour.
Sure, the voters they gained in 2017-19 aren't going to be as loyal, since they have no long-term history of voting Lib Dem. However, the Lib Dems are going to have to cater to these voters, and cultivate that loyalty over time. Otherwise, all they'll be left with is their 2017 playbook, i.e. "Run hyper-localised campaigns in a slowly-shrinking list of seats where we have residual historical strength, and/or popular incumbents with personal votes". That's not a viable long-term strategy at all.
To be honest, I think the 2019 Lib Dem campaign
had to be a national one, and not a targeted one. It was the only way they were going to put new targets on the board for future elections (which they did do - even if it was pretty much the
only thing they succeeded at doing). Now that they've put those targets on the board, I believe they need to invest in
every single one - at least, for the time being.
The other thing to consider is: the 2024 election is four years away. A heck of a lot can change in the space of four years (I mean, how much has changed in the
last four years?). We have no idea what the national environment will look like; we have no idea who the Lib Dem leader will be (and who they'll be popular with); and we don't even know which groups of swing voters Starmer will lock down (and which ones he'll turn off). All of these will impact the Lib Dems' list of viable targets - so it's
way too early to be deciding which targets to focus on, and which to write off. I wouldn't even begin to think about that until 2023 at the very earliest, probably even early 2024.
In my opinion, the Liberal Democrats should have three goals working forwards, in descending order of importance:
1) Invest heavily in every seat that they have even a slightly realistic chance of winning in 2024. It doesn't have to be all 102 seats where they finished in the top two (some of those second places are very distant); however, it should be a fairly broad range (maybe 50-60). Then, once the 2024 election campaign begins, they'll need to pay close attention to polling and MRP. Then, midway through the election campaign, they can pick about 20-30 seats to throw the kitchen sink at, and triage the rest.
2) Build up a base in safe Tory seats where Labour are never going to win. This will involve investment at the local level, over the course of the next five years and beyond. They won't win these seats in 2024; however, they might be able to put new targets on the board for future election campaigns (and, even if they don't, they could at least get more people on board, to donate and campaign in neighbouring constituencies!)
3) Build (or rebuild) their base in safe Labour seats where the Tories are never going to win. This is the most long-term of the three goals. These seats aren't even going to become remotely competitive until Labour are back in power - so, over the next five years, the Lib Dems should only invest minimally in them (if at all).
As for who is best placed to carry out this strategy? Ugh. I guess I'll pick Ed Davey - albeit with the level of 'enthusiasm' that's normally reserved for eating Brussels sprouts.
