Feltham & Heston by-election

[Leftbehind]

The battle will be for second place and the Libs will fall to atleast 4th.

Reckon you've swallowed too much UKIP hype if you think the Tories' 2nd place is in question.

[Leftbehind]

Fair enough - although I'd disagree - I think the Tories will inevitably be closer to Labour than they are the third party (at least going on historic and current electoral trends).

[Leftbehind]

Yeah it might be safe Labour - but nowhere near as much as people appear to making it out to be. The Mayoral and GLC figures show the Tories can be competitive here, in the right conditions.

[Leftbehind]

As you've posted elsewhere, the complete list:

David BISHOP (Bus-Pass Elvis)
Mark BOWEN (Conservative)
Andrew CHARALAMBOUS (UKIP)
Roger COOPER (English Democrats)
Roger CROUCH (Liberal Democrats)
David FURNESS (British National Party)
Daniel GOLDSMITH (Green)
George HALLAM (London People Before Profit)
Seema MALHOTRA (Labour)

[Leftbehind]

Yeah, the local F&H Lib Dem polling seems to be outstripping their national polling, but I suppose that's not surprising when the base started off so low in the first place - if the Lib Dems were to lose in F&H what they were losing nationally, they'd probably be in minus figures.

I noticed that unlike usual polls that offered Cameron & Osborne vs Miliband & Balls, this put Clegg with the Cameron & Osborne option, which would've probably gave them much of the loyalist Lib Dem 10% - well, more than they usually get anyway.

[Leftbehind]

A new poll by Survation in the Heil.

[Leftbehind]

I can't imagine anything less appealing than the prospect of a David Miliband-led Labour for frustrated lefties.

[Leftbehind]

Pretty funny to see Mary Macleod inadvertently call the coalition a "Conservative government".

[Leftbehind]

Yeah, people seem to be saying that Europe brought back a lot of Tory votes, in which case you'd have to ask how low was their vote to go, considering they were only 0.6% above what they got in 1997!

You say since 1955 - thought this constituency was created in 1974?

[Leftbehind]

I see! So essentially they've beat every result of theirs except 1997 and 2001 - against a toxic opposition and a platform which said "Conservatives: we've adopted the majority of your policies, vote for us; anti Conservatives: we're not the Conservatives, vote for us!"

Worst Liberal result in 56 years.

[Leftbehind]

[Leftbehind]

Exactly - it was a Freudian slip!

[Leftbehind]

You'd be surprised. The market-liberals never supported the likes of tuition fees so were happy to see that policy jettisoned and the prospect of going into the next election wedded to the Conservatives and their austerity platform is a pretty divisive matter - enough to see off those dispirited by their actions in the current parliament. Frankly, from what I've seen, the remaining Liberals - voters and activists - are those who could quite happily make up another National Liberal party - very much the German FDP type.

[Leftbehind]

Perhaps they should rebrand themselves in a Libertarian direction like the FDP then before 2015. It might help them regain some support as the left-wing voters who supported them are probably permanently lost to Labour.

The difficulty in that is unlike in Germany where the FDP has claimed itself the definitive neoliberal vote, and I've always assumed they were seen as a useful neoliberal arm/influence by rightists to the CDU*, the Liberals in this country can't really attract that vote in the same way, because the Thatcherite-led Tories well and truly cater for that, and you've also got UKIP for the Tea Party-type Libertarians. Not even going into how the electoral system of Britain would likely punish those Liberal voters, and not offer the consistent significance and inclusion in government that Germany offered the FDP on such a vote.

I think their vote is destined to be like their post-war rump of voters who are both socially and economically liberal - a small minority which would become even smaller if Labour weren't still seen as such a hopeless cause regarding social liberalism.

*Perhaps someone with a better knowledge of German politics might clear this up for me/confirm/correct it - I understand the party was a lot less neoliberal immediately post-war, but have remained firmly that way ever since then.

[Leftbehind]

You'd be surprised. The market-liberals never supported the likes of tuition fees so were happy to see that policy jettisoned and the prospect of going into the next election wedded to the Conservatives and their austerity platform is a pretty divisive matter - enough to see off those dispirited by their actions in the current parliament. Frankly, from what I've seen, the remaining Liberals - voters and activists - are those who could quite happily make up another National Liberal party - very much the German FDP type.

There's certainly an element who are like that, and they seem to be quite prominent online, but I think there is still a reasonable element in the party who are not.  Not that I'm voting Lib Dem again in a hurry, mind.

I suppose it will be interesting to see next year's membership figures and how those "don't knows" in polling play out. I just think stomaching this parliament's policies is already a big ask, but fighting the next election on a similar platform? I wonder how many of those members really appreciate their much touted first time in power in 70+ years when all's said and done in 2015.

[Leftbehind]

Indeed. Most people edging to get rid of Miliband would replace him with a far less attractive voter for the disillusioned Liberal. Let's not forget Ashcroft's polling a while back of ex-Liberals showing how they were the most hostile to the coalition and to the left of loyal Labour voters on the issues asked - which shouldn't be a surprise when recalling it was a choice between Kennedy and Blair up until the last election. Miliband's not great, but then that's true of the entire parliamentary party as well.