Election 2010: The Lib Dem Performance

Nick Clegg:

This has obviously been a disappointing night for the Liberal Democrats. We simply haven't achieved what we had hoped.

Many will be asking why the Liberal Democrats haven't done as well as they hoped. Probable answers will be the relentlessly shrill campaigning by the other two main parties against the idea of a hung parliament, and that the recent bout of Cleggmania was mania for an individual, not his party.

But I'd like to question whether the Liberal Democrats have actually done that badly. Because, prior to the debates, I thought that the Liberal Democrats were heading for absolute disaster at this election. The fact that they haven't done as badly as they could have done is actually something to be celebrated. Because Nick Clegg has only come into his own over the past few weeks. Had he performed for the past few years as he had done recently, his party would have done far better. As it stands, the radical improvement in his performance is probably what stopped an electoral meltdown for his party.

And there is everything for the Liberal Democrats to play for. Clegg has found his voice; he needs to keep on using it. And the Liberal Democrats are now in a position, if they so wish, to play kingmaker. This is a massive opportunity, and a massive risk. Clegg needs to tread carefully. A deal with the Tories would be controversial; a deal with Labour would be an absolute disaster. If he wants to back a party, he should back the one with the strongest endorsement for the electorate. To back Labour would be a disaster, and it would undo all the good work Clegg has done recently.

Cleggmania hasn't given the Liberal Democrats the breakthrough they wanted, but it has prevented the massive step back that this election could have been for that party.