I don’t like writing posts like this, as they feel lazy. That, and most that was said today was very predictable. Nonetheless, a few comments do stand out:

It (a 2003 newspaper article in which Nick Clegg said not holding a referendum would show “that we do not have the cojones” to take the argument to the people) may be an explanation of why the Liberal Democrat leadership protests over the course of these debates have become ever more shrill…. At some point in recent months they have become separated from their cojones. These unfortunate objects are to be found impaled on a distant fence. - William Hague

I don’t like to give Hague any real credit, as he irritates me. Here, though his much vaunted wit is at its best - it raised a laugh with me, at least. More importantly, I suspect it sums up perfectly what the public perception of the Lib Dems will become now. They’ll appear cowardly middle-roaders whose inability to chose sides has cost them their credibility.

The Tories will spin that for all its worth, certainly. They’ve no desire to lose any votes to Clegg’s declared economic liberalism, and will happily destroy them.  If they don’t do it themselves.

I’m likely to be voting with you [Mr Miliband] tonight but I’m not sure I’m going to be able to agree with any of the arguments you are using in favour of that proposition… Will you stop all this nonsense about it being different from the constitution, because it is plainly the same in substance, and explain why it is better not to have a referendum but have it decided in parliament. You are getting into trouble because of the deviousness and, at times, ridiculousness, of the arguments you are using. - Ken Clarke

This is one of the most dangerous attacks on Labour. Coming from one of the strongest Europhiles in the Tory party, it yet roundly condemns Labour for this. Even if what Clarke was saying was completely false, it would still do damage. A supporter says it’s the constitution, people see this and say, “Look, a supporter says it’s the constitution,” and from thence on opponents have carte blanche to call it the Constitution. Labour suffer.

I suspect Clarke had that all thought out fairly carefully.

 The Treaty of Lisbon is essentially a repackaging of the old Constitution. I don’t oppose the principle of a constitution. But I oppose this particular one (and the treaty which reproduces it) because EU citizens deserve better. While the Treaty of Lisbon includes some positive measures, in my view these are outweighed by negative ones - the further militarisation of the EU, for example, as well as measures to promote greater economic liberalisation and privatisation. - Caroline Lucas, Green Party Co-Principal Speaker

Not to mention the damage to accountability and the democratic structuresof the EU…

Nonetheless, isn’t it really very depressing that the Greens have the most accurate view of the Treaty (rather than the referendum) itself? None of the mainstream parties have openly picked up on the fact that, while an EU Constitution is possibly desirable, this one’s really a poor deal.

And finally, another example of where Clegg went wrong:

The prime minister once said that he would build a wider pro-European movement in Britain. How does he think he’s going to achieve that? By colluding with the anti-European Conservatives to block the in-out-referendum that the British people really want?

Let’s get this straight: the government is, in fact, colluding with the opposition to deny the public the opportunity of buying into Clegg’s currently niche policy. That’s quite the conspiracy theory he has there. Never mind the fact that they were at each others’ throats today - that’s clearly a disguise for their anti-democratic denial of the Lib Dems. Devious of them don’t you see?

Either he’s very deluded, or very bad at picking his scripts.  Possibly both.