Memo to the Lib Dems: DITCH CLEGG!

An interesting poll over at Political Betting – both the Tories and Labour are up in the nation’s hearts. Of course, the Tories are still way in the lead, with Labour desperately trying to claw back all the ground they have lost. But for me the interesting figure is the Lib Dem percentage. Because the only way in which the Tories AND Labour have managed to go back up in the polls is through the Liberal Democrats losing 5% of the vote.

Except, they’ve lost more than 5% of their support. They’ve actually lost 27% of their overall support between polls. That is so much a dip in popularity as bleeding support from a major artery. Unless it is a freak poll for the party, it is a catastrophe for the Liberal Democrats.

And if this trend continues, or if they don’t regain that support that has suddenly vanished, then the Liberal Democrats really do need to work out why there has been this nosedive in their support. The answer, as far as I can see, is obvious. Their leader.

There are popular and high profile Liberal Democrats (despite the alarming shite they spout) – both Chris Huhne and Vince Cable seem to be able to generate column inches and, in the case of the latter, actually seem to be quite popular with both the media and the general population. The problem is that neither one of those fellas is Liberal Democrat leader – although you just know that Huhne is plotting away somewhere right now for a new way to try to win that position. No, their leader is, of course, Nick Clegg.

Nick Clegg is one of the reasons why the Lib Dems struggle to get any support these days. The guy is perhaps the least spectacular politician since Iain Duncan-Smith mumbled something about being a quiet man. Somehow – and Lord alone knows quite how they managed it – the Liberal Democrats managed to find the one person in the country with less charisma that Ming Campbell. And made him their frickin’ leader.

Part of the problem is defining exactly who Nick Clegg is. Sure, if you put him next to Gordon Brown, then you would be able to tell the two apart Mainly because Brown resembles one of Dracula’s hunchbacked minions from an old Hammer Horror movie, where was Clegg just looks like a middle manager in an accountancy firm. Whereas if you put Clegg next to Cameron, then – amazingly – Clegg makes Cameron look charismatic. Sure, Cameron looks like an insurance salesman, but at least you get the impression that Cameron would bother to come up with some sort of accidentally patronising platitude for you. Whereas Clegg would just stand next to Cameron, looking faintly sad. Like a four year old who has lost his mother in the supermarket, and is on the point of tears as a result.

The simple truth is that Nick Clegg has been a disaster for the Lib Dems. Not the earthquake sort of disaster – not blatantly destructive like the ginger drunk, who left the party devastated in his wake. No, Clegg is more of a quiet, slow moving disaster. Like the gradual erosion of your house. You don’t really notice anything is happening until your house starts to vanish altogether.

The Lib Dems need to replace Clegg – and fast. Huhne or Cable would be good candidates. They can at least talk. But as well as giving us a bit of entertainment*, there is another reason why the Lib Dems should be working to make themselves more popular through having a leadership election. After the next General Election, the Labour party will be broken. And the country will need some sort of an opposition party. For all of his flaws, Charlie K did at least manage to offer some sort of Opposition to Nu Labour in the aftermath of the Tory meltdowns in 1997 and 2001. A continuation of the Clegg leadership will instead see a rump of a Liberal Democrat party, capable of nothing other than fighting for their survival.

*And man alive, that contest to replace Kennedy was fucking hilarious. We should so have another one of those.