‘Who is Ed Davey?’ The Liberal Democrats and their image problem
Since their resurgence in last year’s General Election, the Liberal Democrats have come into a period of stagnation. They have reaped little benefit from the extraordinary unpopularity of the current Labour government, suggesting the party isn’t prepared to face Britain’s current political climate.
The Liberal Democrats have traditionally played the role of third party in modern British politics, acting as the main refuge for voters dissatisfied with Labour and the Conservatives. Despite a triumphant return to third-party status after a near wipe-out in 2015, the party has been left in the dust compared to Britain’s ascendant populist parties to the left and right in Zack Polanski’s Greens and Nigel Farage’s Reform UK.
As the political fault lines continue to shift, all metrics point towards the Liberal Democrats facing a popularity crisis.
On the surface, the party’s leader, Sir Ed Davey, maintains a relatively healthy average net approval of ~2.4%. However, this comes at the cost of just over 50% of respondents having no opinion of him whatsoever – a looming spectre which he has been unable to shake since becoming leader.
Remedying the struggle for attention has become a top priority for Liberal Democrat staffers and MPs. Ed Davey has repeatedly accused the BBC of bias in its media coverage of Reform UK, claiming the broadcaster is unfairly platforming a party with only five seats in the House of Commons compared to the Liberal Democrats’ 72.
The party’s latest attempt to generate major publicity was during the last election, when Ed Davey spent most of his time on the campaign trail (for lack of a better term) being silly. The Liberal Democrats were defined more by his increasingly elaborate stunts than by any meaningful policy. Whilst undeniably successful in its aim, this strategy failed to generate long-term voter retention. YouGov polling suggests that Ed Davey’s time as leader has done little to affect public apathy toward the party since 2020.
It would seem, then, that the Liberal Democrats’ malaise stems both from a lack of publicity and a lack of public confidence.
The party regularly faces accusations of NIMBYism, particularly at the local level. The regular opposition of Lib Dem councillors to housing developments especially, has left it vulnerable to such accusations. The party’s pro-housing agenda at the national level is often at odds with the actions of its local politicians, which, for many voters, has gained it an unserious reputation.
The slate of policies which the Liberal Democrats promote generally does little to capture the attention of the average voter, that is with the exception of their ardent opposition to Brexit. To a large extent, this has been the party’s defining quality since the 2016 referendum. And while Brexit is no longer the salient issue it once was, this stance grants the party clout among pro-EU voters to both the left and right of centre.
Consequently, the party has retained its role as a conduit for dissatisfied moderates even in spite of the Reform’s dominant performance at the 2025 local elections. Yet an overall lack of direction has left the party unable to convert this dissent into national momentum. With the exception of some regional strongholds, the Liberal Democrats are generally perceived as a catch-all protest vote and not as a party of government.
At the last election, the Liberal Democrats sought to achieve a maximally efficient distribution of votes in a select few constituencies. This strategy, while greatly beneficial in the short term, has likely put a long-term damper on the party’s electability. By limiting its electoral scope, the party has left itself little room to grow. A September 2025 YouGov survey found an overall consensus that the party has reached its electoral ceiling in the House of Commons, with four in ten likely Liberal Democrat voters not confident that the party could win in their constituency.
Despite a remarkable turnaround in electoral fortunes, the Liberal Democrats face an existential battle for relevancy as moderates in a populist’s world.
