2020 Liberal Democrats Leadership Election

[LabourJersey]

I'm reading the "Fall Out" book of the Brexit negotiations and the 2017 election and the author said that Farron's team in his London HQ was "half gay, half Christian" (leading to the difficult situation during gaygate)...how representative is that Christian wing of the Lib Dem party membership and activists? Is there still a quite prominent Christian wing, inspired a bit by Christian Democratic parties across the EU?

I always assumed that there was a strong link between Methodism in the South West & the Liberal Democrats; political staffers do tend to be dispropotionately LGBT for some reason in my experience (even more so among the Tories)

There was a link between West Country Methodism and Liberal (and then LibDem) voting, yes, but Farron is a Happy Clappy Evangelical Anglican.

Maybe it's just cause I'm an American Episcopal, but "evangelical Anglican" seems like an oxymoron to me.

Also I'm guessing West Country Methodism is the origin of all the American Methodists, then? IIRC the West Country was the region that produced the most American colonists/early 1800s emigrants

[EastAnglianLefty]

You've got to remember that Anglicans in the UK have historically been a much larger and more socially variable group than Episcopalians in America. There's always been a significant evangelical wing to the Church of England, though what evangelical means in the UK isn't quite the same as what it means in the US.

[CumbrianLefty]

Davey had another good day yesterday and now leads by 1771 to 1266. Nominations close today.

[LabourJersey]

You've got to remember that Anglicans in the UK have historically been a much larger and more socially variable group than Episcopalians in America. There's always been a significant evangelical wing to the Church of England, though what evangelical means in the UK isn't quite the same as what it means in the US.

Good points here.

[CumbrianLefty]

Nominations now closed, and provisional final figures (though they may be subject to revision) are Davey 1870 and Moran 1329 - the latter's "surge" earlier this week did not last and Sir Ed finished strongly. If you think activists are less likely to back him than the wider membership, he did well.

[Alcibiades]

I'm reading the "Fall Out" book of the Brexit negotiations and the 2017 election and the author said that Farron's team in his London HQ was "half gay, half Christian" (leading to the difficult situation during gaygate)...how representative is that Christian wing of the Lib Dem party membership and activists? Is there still a quite prominent Christian wing, inspired a bit by Christian Democratic parties across the EU?

I always assumed that there was a strong link between Methodism in the South West & the Liberal Democrats; political staffers do tend to be dispropotionately LGBT for some reason in my experience (even more so among the Tories)

There was a link between West Country Methodism and Liberal (and then LibDem) voting, yes, but Farron is a Happy Clappy Evangelical Anglican.

Maybe it's just cause I'm an American Episcopal, but "evangelical Anglican" seems like an oxymoron to me.

Also I'm guessing West Country Methodism is the origin of all the American Methodists, then? IIRC the West Country was the region that produced the most American colonists/early 1800s emigrants

I think that Farron does not attend an Anglican church. But yes, certainly Anglicans in the UK run the gamut from more US Episcopalian-types to evangelical social conservatives. Of course traditionally the divide was between High Church Anglo-Catholics (generally paternalistic Tories) and Low Church members, more similar to nonconformists (traditionally Liberal/Labour). So in 19th/early 20th century Britain you had the opposite of what you have in modern America, with members of the established church leaning right, and evangelicals leaning left.

Actually, I think that most American Methodists probably converted when they were already in America, many as part of the various Great Awakenings. Remember, Methodism did not emerge until the mid-18th century, after which there was not really substantial immigration from England to America. Certainly many Scots-Irish abandoned their original Presbyterianism, as the church could not send enough ministers to the backcountry as they required them to be university-educated, and converted to Baptism and Methodism (much more egalitarian in their leadership), long the two dominant Protestant denominations in the South. In the US, Methodism does not seem to have had any particularly strong demographic connections (unlike most other Protestant denominations), whereas in the UK it was traditionally very strongly linked with the working class - “The Labour Party owes more to Methodism than to Marx”.

[LabourJersey]

I'm reading the "Fall Out" book of the Brexit negotiations and the 2017 election and the author said that Farron's team in his London HQ was "half gay, half Christian" (leading to the difficult situation during gaygate)...how representative is that Christian wing of the Lib Dem party membership and activists? Is there still a quite prominent Christian wing, inspired a bit by Christian Democratic parties across the EU?

I always assumed that there was a strong link between Methodism in the South West & the Liberal Democrats; political staffers do tend to be dispropotionately LGBT for some reason in my experience (even more so among the Tories)

There was a link between West Country Methodism and Liberal (and then LibDem) voting, yes, but Farron is a Happy Clappy Evangelical Anglican.

Maybe it's just cause I'm an American Episcopal, but "evangelical Anglican" seems like an oxymoron to me.

Also I'm guessing West Country Methodism is the origin of all the American Methodists, then? IIRC the West Country was the region that produced the most American colonists/early 1800s emigrants

I think that Farron does not attend an Anglican church. But yes, certainly Anglicans in the UK run the gamut from more US Episcopalian-types to evangelical social conservatives. Of course traditionally the divide was between High Church Anglo-Catholics (generally paternalistic Tories) and Low Church members, more similar to nonconformists (traditionally Liberal/Labour). So in 19th/early 20th century Britain you had the opposite of what you have in modern America, with members of the established church leaning right, and evangelicals leaning left.

Actually, I think that most American Methodists probably converted when they were already in America, many as part of the various Great Awakenings. Remember, Methodism did not emerge until the mid-18th century, after which there was not really substantial immigration from England to America. Certainly many Scots-Irish abandoned their original Presbyterianism, as the church could not send enough ministers to the backcountry as they required them to be university-educated, and converted to Baptism and Methodism (much more egalitarian in their leadership), long the two dominant Protestant denominations in the South. In the US, Methodism does not seem to have had any particularly strong demographic connections (unlike most other Protestant denominations), whereas in the UK it was traditionally very strongly linked with the working class - “The Labour Party owes more to Methodism than to Marx”.

Welcome to the forum.

And your point about Methodism and Baptism being spread thru missionaries and not necessarily by demographics is probably more accurate. I do believe both denominations had a footprint in Colonial America, but both of those really exploded in size after 1783 and after English immigration slowed down.

And Methodism is definitely pretty broad in the US, although I tend to think of them being a more Northern-based denomination compared to the Baptists, for instance. Of course there's plenty of Methodists in the South and Baptist in the North but that's my impression.

[Alcibiades]

I'm reading the "Fall Out" book of the Brexit negotiations and the 2017 election and the author said that Farron's team in his London HQ was "half gay, half Christian" (leading to the difficult situation during gaygate)...how representative is that Christian wing of the Lib Dem party membership and activists? Is there still a quite prominent Christian wing, inspired a bit by Christian Democratic parties across the EU?

I always assumed that there was a strong link between Methodism in the South West & the Liberal Democrats; political staffers do tend to be dispropotionately LGBT for some reason in my experience (even more so among the Tories)

There was a link between West Country Methodism and Liberal (and then LibDem) voting, yes, but Farron is a Happy Clappy Evangelical Anglican.

Maybe it's just cause I'm an American Episcopal, but "evangelical Anglican" seems like an oxymoron to me.

Also I'm guessing West Country Methodism is the origin of all the American Methodists, then? IIRC the West Country was the region that produced the most American colonists/early 1800s emigrants

I think that Farron does not attend an Anglican church. But yes, certainly Anglicans in the UK run the gamut from more US Episcopalian-types to evangelical social conservatives. Of course traditionally the divide was between High Church Anglo-Catholics (generally paternalistic Tories) and Low Church members, more similar to nonconformists (traditionally Liberal/Labour). So in 19th/early 20th century Britain you had the opposite of what you have in modern America, with members of the established church leaning right, and evangelicals leaning left.

Actually, I think that most American Methodists probably converted when they were already in America, many as part of the various Great Awakenings. Remember, Methodism did not emerge until the mid-18th century, after which there was not really substantial immigration from England to America. Certainly many Scots-Irish abandoned their original Presbyterianism, as the church could not send enough ministers to the backcountry as they required them to be university-educated, and converted to Baptism and Methodism (much more egalitarian in their leadership), long the two dominant Protestant denominations in the South. In the US, Methodism does not seem to have had any particularly strong demographic connections (unlike most other Protestant denominations), whereas in the UK it was traditionally very strongly linked with the working class - “The Labour Party owes more to Methodism than to Marx”.

Welcome to the forum.

And your point about Methodism and Baptism being spread thru missionaries and not necessarily by demographics is probably more accurate. I do believe both denominations had a footprint in Colonial America, but both of those really exploded in size after 1783 and after English immigration slowed down.

And Methodism is definitely pretty broad in the US, although I tend to think of them being a more Northern-based denomination compared to the Baptists, for instance. Of course there's plenty of Methodists in the South and Baptist in the North but that's my impression.

Thanks.

You’re right that about the relevant north-south balance of Baptists and Methodists, but Methodists have long been the second largest denomination in the South behind Baptists (now a distant second, 50 years ago it was much closer).

As far as this all pertains to the Lib Dems, the South West, particularly Cornwall, was a stronghold of Methodism, but further north I believe that Baptists and Congregationalists may have been even stronger for the Liberals. With nonconformists in there it seems to have been an urban-rural political divide, with the former more Labour and the latter more Liberal. 30 years ago, the nonconformist conscience was probably still somewhat salient in Liberal politics, but I’m not sure if it really matters anymore.

[DaWN]

Voting is now open. I have just voted for Davey. I expect he'll win but the other result wouldn't shock me. It would however disappoint me, but everything disappoints me these days, so whatever.

[CumbrianLefty]

Going just on who is making the most noise on Twitter, you would think Moran would steamroller it.

That *probably* isn't going to happen, however. Though another poll would be nice.

[DaWN]

Given voting ends in 4 days, I suppose some of an update is in order. Although I'm not the best person to be doing that given I voted early and haven't been paying attention since.

Generally, I understand Moran has been making a tit of herself in Twitter in ways that probably shouldn't work but might play to the slightly more deranged sections of the FBPE crowd so who knows. Overall though, I'm still expecting a moderately comfortable Davey victory as despite being boring as f!ck he doesn't come across as an utter dumpster fire like his opponent.

Also, a week or so ago I got an email telling me to renew my direct debit. Haven't go around to it yet.

[brucejoel99]

Given voting ends in 4 days

How long after voting ends do we get results?

[DaWN]

Given voting ends in 4 days

How long after voting ends do we get results?

Don't know the exact day but I suspect not long after it closes, as it's mostly being done online.

Incidentally, the day the results are released is the day whether I decide to renew my direct debit or not. Or, to put it in broader terms, to stay D-UK or to go back to I-UK.

[CumbrianLefty]

Given voting ends in 4 days

How long after voting ends do we get results?

Don't know the exact day but I suspect not long after it closes, as it's mostly being done online.

Incidentally, the day the results are released is the day whether I decide to renew my direct debit or not. Or, to put it in broader terms, to stay D-UK or to go back to I-UK.

Earlier this year the Labour result was announced a couple of days after the ballot closed. It will take a bit of time for independent scrutineers to count the votes so I expect similar here.

[jaymichaud]

I don’t mean to come off bitchy but... will it make any difference? Will a leadership change stop their decline or is the writing on the wall?

[Alcibiades]

I don’t mean to come off bitchy but... will it make any difference? Will a leadership change stop their decline?

You saw the importance of leadership at the last election. Had Davey been leader, the Lib Dems likely would have done better.

Honestly, though, the number one thing that needs to happen to revive their fortunes is out of their hands: have Labour do well.

[brucejoel99]

Given voting ends in 4 days

How long after voting ends do we get results?

Don't know the exact day but I suspect not long after it closes, as it's mostly being done online.

Incidentally, the day the results are released is the day whether I decide to renew my direct debit or not. Or, to put it in broader terms, to stay D-UK or to go back to I-UK.

Earlier this year the Labour result was announced a couple of days after the ballot closed. It will take a bit of time for independent scrutineers to count the votes so I expect similar here.

Just looked it up, the results will be announced on Thursday the 27th.

I don’t mean to come off bitchy but... will it make any difference? Will a leadership change stop their decline?

You saw the importance of leadership at the last election. Had Davey been leader, the Lib Dems likely would have done better.

Honestly, though, the number one thing that needs to happen to revive their fortunes is out of their hands: have Labour do well.

Idk about that. A lot of Swinson's interviews & media appearances were dominated by the coalition, & judging from the interviews & debates thus far, it's been the same for Davey. Perhaps the voters themselves don't care too much, but it's not good if half the time during media appearances, people see the Lib Dems having to defend the coalition. Based on her media performances & interviews thus far, at least Moran would get an easier ride without being tainted by any coalition baggage.

[Alcibiades]

Given voting ends in 4 days

How long after voting ends do we get results?

Don't know the exact day but I suspect not long after it closes, as it's mostly being done online.

Incidentally, the day the results are released is the day whether I decide to renew my direct debit or not. Or, to put it in broader terms, to stay D-UK or to go back to I-UK.

Earlier this year the Labour result was announced a couple of days after the ballot closed. It will take a bit of time for independent scrutineers to count the votes so I expect similar here.

Just looked it up, the results will be announced on Thursday the 27th.

I don’t mean to come off bitchy but... will it make any difference? Will a leadership change stop their decline?

You saw the importance of leadership at the last election. Had Davey been leader, the Lib Dems likely would have done better.

Honestly, though, the number one thing that needs to happen to revive their fortunes is out of their hands: have Labour do well.

Idk about that. A lot of Swinson's interviews & media appearances were dominated by the coalition, & judging from the interviews & debates thus far, it's been the same for Davey. Perhaps the voters themselves don't care too much, but it's not good if half the time during media appearances, people see the Lib Dems having to defend the coalition. Based on her media performances & interviews thus far, at least Moran would get an easier ride without being tainted by any coalition baggage.

It was not any attachment to the coalition which really hurt the party at the last election, but Swinson’s ridiculously overambitious strategy (I will be the next PM!), her personal unlikeablity (partly due to this hubris, partly due to misogyny), the pledge to revoke Article 50, and above all, fear of Corbyn among otherwise sympathetic centre-right Remainers.

Obviously Davey would not have been able to do anything about the latter, but he would have avoided all the others.

[Blair]

Ha its rather tragic that I had no idea that voting had started (I remember when it was the weird nomination stage) & equally had no idea it was ending.

God knows what the result will be; I expected a narrow victory for Swinson last time but she steamrolled it.

All the FBPE ex-labour members I know are backing Moran; I think the Lib Dems even more so than the Tories/Labour have seen the biggest change & churn in their membership over the last 5 years.

I still think Moran is very much like a cheap rocket; she's capable of giving them a big, she knows how to get her name in a story & she has a clear plan for lifting off- I just feel there's a chance it either explodes on launch or crashes at the General Election.

There's a danger that Moran will offer comfort for a lot of people (including funnily enough left winger critics of Starmer) who want the Lib Dems to become a party that even's less representative of the UK, even more focused in urban seats & even less willing to have a conversation about winning back places that now have Tory majorities of 10K.

[DaWN]

All the FBPE ex-labour members I know are backing Moran; I think the Lib Dems even more so than the Tories/Labour have seen the biggest change & churn in their membership over the last 5 years.

If it helps, my mother (a pretty devoted #FPBEr) voted for Davey as she, similarly to me, doesn't think Moran is up to it and thinks Davey is more likely to cooperate with Starmer, something she feels quite strongly about.

I still think Moran is very much like a cheap rocket; she's capable of giving them a big, she knows how to get her name in a story & she has a clear plan for lifting off- I just feel there's a chance it either explodes on launch or crashes at the General Election.

She just clearly isn't up to it, and the duration of the campaign (which has felt very quiet) has reinforced that notion for me, not challenged it. Her campaign material seems to be strongly promoting the idea of her as an election performer, which seems both dubious and probably not the right angle she should be going on.

There's a danger that Moran will offer comfort for a lot of people (including funnily enough left winger critics of Starmer) who want the Lib Dems to become a party that even's less representative of the UK

It's less of a danger and more of a guarantee

even more focused in urban seats & even less willing to have a conversation about winning back places that now have Tory majorities of 10K.

This really needs to be nipped in the bud right now - the future of the Liberal Democrats, if it exists, is in middle-class suburbia that will be increasingly hostile towards a Borisite Conservative party but will never vote Labour - our few positive results in December (St Albans, SW London) should be proof enough of that. The rural south western seats are gone and they are never coming back - they are not interested in anything we may want to sell anymore. That became the case in June 2016, if not May 2010. And strong personal votes and local campaigns is not as effective in the days of social media. Formulating a strategy based on these seats seems awfully like the Democrats in the US who want to chase after Trump+10000 rural seats because they are 'ancestrally Democratic'. Parties that need to grow their vote and seat share need to look at possible future coalitions, not pine for the past.

Having said that, I think Davey would be much better at appealing to middle class suburbia than Moran who would just put them off.

[Property Representative of the Harold Holt Swimming Centre]

A word of warning about the 2019 results. Those strong Lib Dem results in middle-class seats may have been a one-time thing to some extent, given the main issue of the election. This is why Labour shouldn't be complacent about Canterbury and Putney next time either.

As for the South West, well, they were happy to give a lot of seats to the Lib Dems in 2005 whilst the Lib Dems were focusing on students and urban lefties in general (hence the focus on Iraq and tuition fees). Blair was able to win back a lot of old seats that even in 1992 Labour were hammered in. The South West has long had a maverick streak and (especially if there is no return of a major Faragist electoral force) they may be tempted by the Lib Dems once again when Brexit is history. Which may, admittedly, rule out a major Lib Dem comeback there next time, given that issue looks set to be with us until then and beyond.

[EastAnglianLefty]

As a general rule, strategies which are based around cleaning up in one specific type of seat where you did well last time tend not to produce particularly impressive results.

[DaWN]

As a general rule, strategies which are based around cleaning up in one specific type of seat where you did well last time tend not to produce particularly impressive results.

True. But trying to replicate long dead electoral coalitions instead of trying to create new ones does also not generate impressive results.

[EastAnglianLefty]

There are a lot of seats in the south-west where the Lib Dems got about three times their national polling share in 2019. They aren't likely to win back all of those (and there are other seats they used to hold where they're in much worse positions and probably should give up) but focusing entirely on well-off FBPE London suburbia isn't going to be enough. You have to be able to do more than one thing if you want to be taken seriously.

[bore]

Bluntly, the lib dems performance was poor even in middle class suburbia. They didn't take winchester or cheltenham or cheadle or hazel grove, in the funniest result of the night they didn't even gain sheffield hallam. There were isolated actually good results also in those types of seats, but because they were exceptions, like with Labour, there is a real danger in interpreting them as a demographic responding positively to the parties programme, rather than a provisional, tactical, remain coalition.

The strategic issue for the Lib Dems going forward is that the more time that passes the more bizarre, contingent and unstable their 2010 coalition turns out to be. Because it made so little sense, except in the light of decades of political contingency, and because that has all been washed away, there is no way of recreating it. Pandering exclusively to any one of these demographics (students, very wealthy but liberal suburbia, the celtic fringe) will, even if it works, gives you a ceiling of 20 or so seats, trying to pander to all of them is incoherent and you'll get none of them. There is a clear path to becoming a sectional party for some tiny demographic, but there is no clear map to becoming a national party, and certainly no map that looks the same as the 2005 election.