Today's budget rather gives the lie to the Lib Dem 'Scooby Doo' message of 'look what the Tories would have done if it wasn't for the meddling Lib Dems'.
The budget contained two major public policy changes. Firstly switching the focus from the government subsidising low pay to the government forcing employers to pay a living wage. And secondly lengthening the period of fiscal consolidation to smooth the public spending cuts. These two changes would almost certainly (rightly) have been supported by the Lib Dems if they had remained in government (and the latter was basically the party's economic position two months ago).
The fact that both leadership candidates slammed the budget on the basis that the Tories were returning to right wing form without the Lib Dems was as predictable as it is wrong. And it is extremely worrying for the future of the party that both contenders simply basically rehashed the disasterous Coetzee/Clegg messaging - the messaging that was comprehensively rebuffed by the electorate a few weeks ago.
The Scooby Doo message was ineffective as it relied on people understanding a bunch of imponderables - it's impossible to judge the effects of things that didn't happen. And it was part of a wider failure of the Clegg leadership of failing to define a distinctive Lib Dem agenda for government meaning people could not tell what part of the coalition policy was down to which party.
But now that Osborne and the Conservatives have comandeered a fairly major part of both the Lib Dem and Labour economic policy and are likely to dominate the economic centrist space for the foreseeable future some rethinking is needed - and fast.
I don't expect Labour to come up with any credible rethink, but the Lib Dems must. If whoever wins the leadership can't find a new and better vision for the economy that understands the values being promoted by Osborne's budget today, then there is little hope for the party.
It was a pretty easy choice - Tim clearly understands a different direction is required. One that builds from the grassroots up.
In contrast Lamb is campaigning as if we narrowly lost out in the election and with a bit of refining our messages, government is again around the corner.
But strangely if the party had just narrowly lost out and some of the party's big guns had held on - Steve Webb, Ed Davey, Lynn Featherstone etc - a leadership contest would almost certainly have been held involving one of more of them, Tim Farron but probably not Norman Lamb. He's only in the race because of the lack of other credible candidates.
The Lib Dems are now a minor Westminster party - scrabbling around with the DUP and Plaid Cymru for time and traction. Its profile as a national political force has gone and the credibility it had in appearing to challenge to win parliamentary seats has been lost. A Westminster insider strategy won't magic that back and merely not being in government any more won't win back the lost voters - witness Labour gaining another Lib Dem council seat in a by-election in Cambridge last week.
The party needs to park its Westminster ambitions - use what's left of its troops to fight a guerilla war on the green benches and make as much nuisance as it can to the big parties. But all the party's resources need to be focussed on building a mass liberal movement - using the opportunity of the Euro referendum to make the liberal political case across the country - just like the SNP used the indyref for the nationalist cause.
But although I think Tim realises the scale of the challenge the party faces I remain unconvinced he knows how best to go forward - the pull of the Westminster establishment is strong - witness his recent appointment of those arch policy wonk insiders - Duncan Brack and Neil Stockley.
Changing policies is simply rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.
The party needs to reinvent politics itself - finding new ways to communicate and building the skills and expertise of its members and supporters to enable new political solutions, policies and organisational structures to emerge.
It's year zero for the Lib Dems and whoever wins the leadership needs to understand things will never be the same.
Simon Danczuk - Labour MP for Rochdale - is a typical northern Labour tribalist who can see no good in his political opponents. However he has worked tirelessly to uncover allegations of child sexual abuse in high places - even though the alleged perpetrators are dead in the case of Cyril Smith or demented in the case of Greville Janner.
But earlier this week he claimed that Janner had sexually assualted boys in the Palace of Westminster in the 1980s.
Now whether this timing is deliberate or not, it does mean that Lib Dem Leadership candidate Norman Lamb will be asked what he knew given he was, bizarrely, Janner's research assistant for a year at the time the abuse was alleged to have taken place in Westminster.
There is, of course, no suggestion Lamb was involved, but given David Steel is still quizzed about what he knew about Smith's alleged activities, Lamb if he wins won't be able to ignore similar probing..
Well you would have thought so from this pathetic article defending those responsible for the party's election disaster by using the excuse of legitimate concerns about staff welfare.
What Caron Lindsay and the Lib Dem Voice Team are failing to realise is that by letting Ryan Coetzee, Tim Gordon, Hillary Stephenson and other senior (and highly paid) exectutives avoid legitimate criticism of their decision making, they are doing the party a big disservice. Those at the top are not 'party staff' - they are executive management and it was their actions and decisions that determined the Lib Dem campaign. They were the people carrying out the 'comfort' polls, writing the messaging, and advising the leadership on what to say and when. In short they were responsible for the failure of the 2015 campaign. And they should take responsibility and resign (like the Leader of the Party).
One final thought - if Coetzee is such a shrinking violet and unable to take criticism why then would he write a superficial and frankly deluded article for the Guardian (and reproduced by LDV) basically saying he ran the best possible campaign and wouldn't even change it now knowing its result.
If you're foolish enough to try and polish a turd in public - then don't complain when several buckets of the stuff get thrown back in your direction.