WI: Continuity SDP does better?

[Uhura's Mazda]

IOTL, David Owen opposed the Liberal-SDP merger and continued the party with his loyalists until 1990, when they were defeated in the Bootle by-election by the Monster Raving Loonies. Owen gave up at this point, but the two other SDP MPs, Rosie Barnes and John Cartwright, were involved at arms length in a third iteration of the party. The third SDP presented 10 candidates in the 1992 general election, including Barnes and Cartwright - the Lib Dems stood aside for both and helped their campaigns, helping them both to come close to holding their seats.

As far as I can see, there are two potential routes to success for the continuity SDP:
1) Barnes and Cartwright hold on in 1992. However, they don't have the star power of Owen and they seem to have been essentially in an alliance with the Lib Dems anyway (Liberal Democratic Democrats in 1998?).
2) Winning the Richmond by-election in 1989. This is early enough that Owen would still be involved, and their failure in Bootle would matter less with the precedent of a by-election victory under their belt. The SDP candidate, Mike Potter, came within 5% of winning, and probably would have done if it weren't for those meddling kids in the Actual Lib Dems, who won 22% of the vote.

I think the second one is more promising - although the likelihood is that the SDP would continue to struggle to attract active members (as they had since 1981, really), having four incumbent MPs going into the 1992 general election looks like almost as strong a proposition as the ailing Lib Dems.

So what happens next? Is it plausible that a successful SDP could displace the Lib Dems as Britain's third party? Or will they just dwindle away in 1997?

 

[Oppo]

I don't think they'd be able to rise above the LibDems, but they would be able to split the vote. Perhaps if butterflies give a hung Parliament in 1992, they could partner with the Tories to get a majority. If they win the Richmond by-election, they'd also be able to delay William Hague's political career.

 

[Cevolian]

I agree with Oppo that displacing the Lib Dems is unlikely, but then the Lib Dems were doing so awfully in the late 80s early 90s that to possible, maybe even have Ashdown resign after not doing as well as hoped in 1992 (unlikely but I think possible, especially if the SDP steal a lot of LibDem votes from IOTL) and be replaced by someone less popular - Kennedy with an earlier alcoholism scandal perhaps? Or maybe it's too early for him. I agree that Richmond is the best POD for what you want to happen, and I could see the SDP (if it stays Owenite) keeping people like Liz Truss and Chris Grayling in their rank and file and become a centrist Eurosceptic Party and suddenly shooting up a la UKIP from the late 2000s onwards.

 

[Heat]

I don't think they can really win anything beyond the four seats they'd already hold, and might even lose one or two of those. They would probably split the Lib Dem vote - and if we're talking about the SDP polling at a level at which they can hold seats, the Lib Dems could actually go down to 1979 levels.

The SDP may or may not cling on a sort of rump, I could see them just collapsing at some point during the 92-97 parliament anyway, but I think the real main effect of this is stunting the Lib Dems, which obviously has massive implications. Probably a better performance for the Tories in 1997 if the Lib Dems are in a weaker position to challenge for Southern seats that even New Labour (assuming John Smith's death and Blair's rise still happen as IOTL) couldn't reach.

 

[Cevolian]

I don't think they can really win anything beyond the four seats they'd already hold, and might even lose one or two of those. They would probably split the Lib Dem vote - and if we're talking about the SDP polling at a level at which they can hold seats, the Lib Dems could actually go down to 1979 levels.

The SDP may or may not cling on a sort of rump, I could see them just collapsing at some point during the 92-97 parliament anyway, but I think the real main effect of this is stunting the Lib Dems, which obviously has massive implications. Probably a better performance for the Tories in 1997 if the Lib Dems are in a weaker position to challenge for Southern seats that even New Labour (assuming John Smith's death and Blair's rise still happen as IOTL) couldn't reach.

I agree this is probably the most likely scenario, to clarify mine was more a "Best Case Scenario for the SDP", this is more likely and could see the Tories not flag as far or as hard in 1997, and potentially see them fair better 1997-2001 and maybe even make a comeback in 2005 if things go well and we get Blair feeling more confident on winning over pro-European centrists from the collapsing Lib Dems which could lead to an abortive attempt to join the Euro? I'm not sure, just speculating really.

 

[Oppo]

I agree with Oppo that displacing the Lib Dems is unlikely, but then the Lib Dems were doing so awfully in the late 80s early 90s that to possible, maybe even have Ashdown resign after not doing as well as hoped in 1992 (unlikely but I think possible, especially if the SDP steal a lot of LibDem votes from IOTL) and be replaced by someone less popular - Kennedy with an earlier alcoholism scandal perhaps? Or maybe it's too early for him. I agree that Richmond is the best POD for what you want to happen, and I could see the SDP (if it stays Owenite) keeping people like Liz Truss and Chris Grayling in their rank and file and become a centrist Eurosceptic Party and suddenly shooting up a la UKIP from the late 2000s onwards.

There was an assassination attempt on Ashdown in 1994 or 1995 if we want to get rid of him.

 

[AlfieJ]

Some late 80s/early 90s polling gave the SDP about 6% of the vote. Add momentum from richmond into the mix and I can't see any problem with the plausibility of the four staying on. In a hung parliament I could definitely see David Owen again jumping and getting some job off Major and probably kills off the rest of the party as a result. I could never see the SDP replacing the Lib Dems this late in the game but it would be interesting to see what direction the party could go in. If New Labour is delayed they can still hold on to the centre left vote, which, if the Lib dems fuck it up somehow with a centre right leader, could win back former members. Alternatively they could go for some centrist euroscepticism and simply become a weird appendage of the Tories

 

[Gonzo]

I think its nigh impossible for them to displace the Liberal Democrats, but I think it is possible for the party to hold the three OTL seats at the 1992 general election, with perhaps Richmond (Yorks) being held against the nation picture. The issue I see is that three of the four seats are probably going to be swept away in the Labour landslide in 1997, and even then Richmond (Yorks) is likely to be close if the Tories get anything near their OTL showing they gave in 1997. It is important to note that both Barnes and Cartwright's constituencies are going to merge together at the 1997 GE - which means one is going to have to be sacrificed. Say hypothetically that somehow this second gang of four somehow hold on a la Simon Hughes in 1997, I can really only see them as placeholder MPs - the SDP vote in Devonport is probably going to wither away as it did when Owen stood down in 1992 IRL. The post-Barnes/Cartwright showing of the LDs in Greenwich and Woolwich is rather low, which suggests that it was more of a personal vote than anything else. The trouble I see is that: A.) the three OTL continuity SDP seats are going to probably be swept away in 1997 (especially if they support the Tories in a hung parliament situation), and B.) Richmond (Yorks) seems to have been similar to the other good showings for the descendent parties of the Alliance - Ribble Valley, Kincardine & Deeside, Eastbourne, Epping Forrest - all gave good showings for either the continuity SDP or the LDs, yet these by-elections gains/advances were mostly washed away by the next general election. Long story short, even if they win the four aforementioned seats, they're probably on borrowed time by 1997.

 

[Politibrit]

Maybe they could keep some, or all of there MPs in 1992, but in the long run, they'd probably fall apart if they went on as a standalone party, with there votes mainly swallowed up by a more centrist Labour. The best option to keep them somewhat relevant would be for them to form an alliance with the Tories, but if things go somewhat along the lines of OTL with the New Labour landslide, odds are that Owen, Barnes, and Cartwright would all lose their seats, even with Tory backing. If Potter had won the Richmond by election he'd probably survive, but all the others would have to switch to safer seats, which I'm not sure if they would be up for.

If New Labour is delayed they can still hold on to the centre left vote, which, if the Lib dems fuck it up somehow with a centre right leader, could win back former members. Alternatively they could go for some centrist euroscepticism and simply become a weird appendage of the Tories

Was Owen an outright Leaver by this point, and how far did the rest of what was left of the SDP agree with him on Europe? If they could come to some sort of arrangement with the Tories in the nineties, perhaps they could break away again at some point in the next century as the Tories turn to the right. Then there would be an opening for a moderate, centre-right option.

 

[Gonzo]

Was Owen an outright Leaver by this point, and how far did the rest of what was left of the SDP agree with him on Europe? If they could come to some sort of arrangement with the Tories in the nineties, perhaps they could break away again at some point in the next century as the Tories turn to the right. Then there would be an opening for a moderate, centre-right option.

Are the continuity SDP (or what is left of them) Eurosceptic? I know that the continuity Liberals are (didn't their leader contest the 2009 euro elections on the No2EU label?)

 

[Politibrit]

Are the continuity SDP (or what is left of them) Eurosceptic? I know that the continuity Liberals are (didn't their leader contest the 2009 euro elections on the No2EU label?)

Yes, but I'm not sure if there is too much to be read into that. Every party with less than a thousand members seems to be eurosceptic.