ok, that was too simplistic *but* this flood stuff will make no odds either way down here

The Lib Dems are very strong locally and very likely to retain (or bolster) their support in the hope that a Lib-Lab coalition will come out of it. The Lib Dem vote tends to be traditionally liberal, and the support base is not as reliant on (or susceptible to the loss of) protest voters like it might be elsewhere.

It's an easy argument to play the 'Tory cuts caused this', so the Lib Dem MPs won't take much flak and the Tories wouldn't be able to make any capital out of any swift response. The only way the Tories will gain in these seats at the next election is if the Lib Dem vote fractures and goes to Labour. There won't be any liberals voting Tory.

As such I don't see the Tories actually making inroads into any Lib Dem seat in Somerset/SW that's affected by the floods, and in terms of defending its own seats, the threat is more UKIP than floods.

(Plus we've been here before with flooding, albeit not quite on this scale, so it's hardly a new issue politically. If as a swing vioter you were going to vote against the government for poor flood planning/reaction, you probably decided to do that last year.)

However in Thames/Home Counties areas the Tories can make much more political capital out of getting the army involved etc - for one thing it's not as far for the media to travel to so it will get more.

Posted By: CWC, Feb 10, 14:03:59