Why did the Liberal Democrats collapse?

[White Trash]

What happened in 2010 that made the Liberals collapse so hard? How likely is a recovery?

[Hash]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Cameron_ministry

[Hnv1]

Coalition made their "radical" protest voters realize what they always were - quasi-tories.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Nick Clegg killed a dog

[Vosem]

Liberal Democrats had strong support from younger voters in Britain, and one of their key platform planks was, and had been for decades, opposition to university tuition hikes. As soon as they got into government, they immediately agreed to vote for Conservative legislation that hiked university tuition, pissing off not just younger voters but essentially their whole base. They have yet to recover from this, though making Tim Farron (who voted against the 2010 hike and loudly opposed the LibDem about-face) the leader is a decent start towards rebuilding.

[Cassius]

By entering government with the Tories, they in one stroke alienated two of their biggest voting blocs - dissatisfied centre-leftists who voted for them to protest against Iraq/New Labour/Corruption, and generic protest voters who didn't particularly like either of the two main parties and viewed the Lib Dems as a suitable means to express this dislike. Furthermore, once they were in government they compounded this alienation by, as Vosem said, doing a complete volte face on several key parts of their platform, most notably of course tuition fees, and more generally in acquiescing to many of Osborne's other 'austerity' measures. They then drove themselves further into the ground by cocking up the campaign for electoral reform (which was the only thing they really had to gain from participating in the coalition) and by being generally incompetent. The party was also dogged by scandals throughout its time in government (David Laws, Chris Huhne and Lord Rennard to name but a few), which perhaps had the effect of further reminding voters that the Lib Dems weren't really that different from the 'old parties' at all, at least when it came to scandals. Also Nick Clegg was the face of the party throughout this time, and he was about as popular as cancer (whilst, obviously, this came about largely as a result of his decision to take the Lib Dem into coalition and break several of their key election pledges, I do think there is also something to be said for the fact that his grating and sanctimonious personality wasn't exactly a help in this regard).

The Lib Dems have always had various (often overlapping) blocs of support - lifelong Liberals who had supported the old Liberal party, ex-SDPers, the aforementioned generic protest voters, anti-Blair centre-leftists, anti-Tory tactical voters, people who voted Lib Dem chiefly on the basis of the local candidate, gene pool supporters from the West Country and rural Wales and Scotland and, last but perhaps not least, people who were, perhaps, moderately centre-right and conservative who nonetheless didn't support the Tories due to the party's very negative image in the 1990's and 2000's. Going into government, with the Tories, utterly alienated several of these blocs, and the Tories were able to eat into the last group by proving themselves not completely heartless and incompetent in the 2010-15 government (at least, from the perspective of the voters in said bloc). The Lib Dems were basically reduced to a rump of their most traditional supporters, voters who strongly supported the local MP and perhaps a few of the centre-right types, and taken together this ultimately didn't amount to very much.

[Gary J]

The Liberal Party and then the Liberal Democrats, between the 1960s and the formation of the Coalition in 2010, prospered (to the extent they did) by refusing to make a choice between Labour and Conservative. Aligning one way or the other was always going to alienate about half their former support.

During the 1950s many of the few Liberal MPs were only elected because they benefited from local electoral pacts with the Conservatives (in the Bolton and Huddersfield areas of northern England) or in default of a candidate from one of the major parties in remote and atypical areas of rural Wales. When Jo Grimond (MP for Orkney and Shetland) became the party leader in 1956, one reason was that he was the only one of the MPs who could expect to be re-elected against both Labour and Conservative opposition.

Being the minor party in a coalition government was also disastrous. As has happened in the Republic of Ireland with a series of junior coalition partners in recent decades, the larger party gets the benefit and the smaller party is blamed for what the government does.

The Liberal Democrats were perceived as being prepared to agree with anything, for the sake of office. This destroyed, perhaps permanently, the anti-system element of the Lib Dem appeal and the image of being different from other politicians.

The party has held up, in a limited number of relatively strong areas but remains weak in much of the country. It is in a stronger electoral position, even now, than the Liberal Party in the 1950s.

[IceAgeComing]

Everyone has given the general reasons why they collapsed in 2010 (tuition fees, appearing spineless in government, messing up electoral reform and House of Lords reform; the latter now probably being something that the Tories are regretting that they blocked; Clegg eating a dog); I can't really add anything about that.

In terms of rebuilding I don't think the past is particularly relevant; the Liberals being were they were in the 1950s wasn't because they angered significant amounts of their base and basically every swing voter that voted for them: but because their support in the decades before was really quite old and died off (lots of people who first voted before Labour were a major political force; plus ) and were replaced by people who were a lot less likely to consider them as an option; plus also the fact that the vast majority of people couldn't vote for a Liberal even if they wanted to probably was a factor.  What we have now is a totally different situation: you have significant groups of people who are still rather angry about the Liberal Democrats and it'd take a great deal of work to change that; plus you have more options for third party voters rather than a single protest party of the middle that tries to appeal to everyone - UKIP is obviously the big one; the Greens do well in some areas as well; especially amongst students who were a big Lib Dem voting bloc.

What they've done well in the past is managing to build up success in local government elections, take control of councils and then convert that success to Westminster elections - a good example of that is actually Tim Farron's seat: that was never really a Lib Dem area until very recently and now its one of the safest Liberal Democrat seats in the country, if not the safest.  The issue is that they are effectively a dead party in lots of places and it'll take a great deal of effort to recover from that.  An example of the struggle that they have in areas that were once good for them is the Isle of Wight which was a place that the Liberals have done very well in the past (held the Westminster seat between 1997-2001, held the Council until 2005 and were the official opposition there until 2013 as well as before that for a long time) and the party has done horribly locally recently: they now only have 1 councillor behind UKIP and Labour (although lots of the Independent group that governs the council at the moment have history within the party, they quit to run as an independent for whatever reason); and in the General Election they went from second well ahead of anyone else to fifth, behind UKIP, the Greens (who oddly did rather well, got 13.4% of the vote and beat Labour: spoke to my Dad about it and apparently their candidate was someone prominent in the community and it was a bit of a personal vote) and Labour, and that was with the local MP restanding when lots of people thought he shouldn't because of a variety of local scandals.  There's still clearly a demand for a non-major party option; its just that no one saw the Lib Dems as that, plus the local base of the party has gone and I'm pretty sure that local party membership is through the floor as well.  Sure there you have a tradition of people voting Lib Dem and that would suggest that its easier for them to recover, but you've also got lots of people who'll struggle to trust them again so that balances a bit.  There are stories like that up and down the country as well: and I'm pretty sure that they lost councillors in the local elections this year and that only makes it harder for them to recover - the only reason that they gained a constituency seat in the Scottish Parliament elections was unionist tactical voting (and maybe a few Greens voting tactically as well, since we got their list seat) rather than any firm support of their policies.  They also get very little media attention anymore: when in opposition before they also got a few guaranteed questions since they were the third party and they've gone to the SNP now; and in terms of trying to get someone on Question Time or other similar programmes they're behind UKIP and the SNP on the pecking order.  Add in that parties of the centre are struggling across Europe and that suggests to me that its going to be a long time before they are a major political force in the UK again.

[vileplume]

The Lib Dems collapsed because they really had no 'core' base and they were a party that tried to be all things to all people which is possible to do in opposition but as soon as they had to actually govern their unwieldy coalition collapsed. Their strength in the constituencies they held were almost all due to sustained targeted local campaigns as opposed to any ideological loyalty, for example they held lefty/liberal seats like Cambridge, Hornsey and Wood Green, and Bristol West, deprived working class constituencies like Redcar, and Burnley, small c conservative farming seats like Somerton and Frome, and Wells and wealthy upper middle class places like Twickenham, and Kingston and Surbiton. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this is unsustainable.

Another big mistake people make is assuming that the Lib Dem vote in 2010 was overwhelmingly left leaning, it wasn't. Sure in urban 'trendy' inner city seats that the Lib Dems had done well in 2010 like Manchester Withington, Islington South and Finsbury, and Streatham it most certainly would have been hence Labour got very good performances when the Lib Dems collapsed. However in the rural/small town West Country where the Lib Dems also did well have never leant towards/liked Labour thus the Lib Dem collapse greatly benefitted the Tories. It's the same for wealthy suburban seats where the Lib Dems have been competitive in the past such as Richmond Park, and Warrington South when the Lib Dems collapsed their votes went to the Tories (note not all of Warrington South is wealthy but the bits where the Lib Dems got their votes from in the past like Appleton and Lymm are and people in those areas heavily prefer the Tories to Labour).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

All of the above really in whatever combination. Plus their senior figures made the critical error of looking smug. If we're looking at what turned a severe drop in support into outright collapse then that might even be the main thing. Voters are not always terribly rational and if you present a face that seems to almost beg for a metaphorical punch they seem to be more likely to deliver it.