Crashing the party
TWENTY FOUR hours into the Labour leadership race, and the opposition has had far more to say than anyone with an actual vote to cast. You can’t blame them; a leadership race can be a deliciously divisive spectacle, with party colleagues furiously briefing against one another, decrying past achievements and bemoaning future direction. The opportunities to score points are replete, and the urge to muscle into a period of heightened political coverage is almost irresistible.
And there is real, mischievous fun to be had. When an opposition politician uses a blog or a tweet to endorse a candidate in another party, it can cause problems for the endorsed. WalesHome.org contributor Jonathan Morgan AM’s endorsement of Edwina Hart as a Welsh Margaret Thatcher could hardly have been part of her battle plan. Likewise, the backing of an urbane north Wales Conservative MP is unlikely to feature in any of Huw Lewis’s campaign materials. Presumably all three candidates are now anxiously awaiting the “black spot” endorsement of Lembit Opik, who has an impressive track record in supporting losers .
But the law of unintended consequence also looms large. The key question most voting members want answered in any leadership race is “which candidate does my opponent most fear?” An opposition party can help answer this with the wrong sort of intervention. A splendidly misogynistic post by Plaid cyber attack puppy Guerrilla Welsh-Fare is a case in point. I’m not quite sure what the true intent was, but if I were a Welsh Labour member I’d take from it the message that Huw Lewis is the candidate Plaid want the least. True, the blogger also has a swipe at Edwina – but with hardly the same zeal.
The other tactic is to act as the caustic commentator. Adam Price tried this recently (with no little success judging by the furious reaction his intervention provoked). But it’s an approach that carries its own risks. In the first instance, it can make the commentator appear obsessed with, and driven by, his opponent (this post by Bethan Jenkins is a good example of that risk). Alternatively, a half-decent strike can help persuade a warring party to close ranks against external attack, shutting down the spat that is being played out so publicly.
As hard as it is, the best approach for the other parties is often to stay out of the way in the knowledge that doing so is more likely to help the contest turn agreeably ugly. Inevitably, this means slipping from the public eye for a few weeks, but even this can be mitigated by a couple of judicious policy-heavy announcements. Unless you are very skilful – and most aren’t – getting stuck into your opponents’ internal elections is more likely to backfire than to gain you position. Plaid, Conservative and Lib Dem spinners take note; you may do your best work from now until Christmas by saying very little.
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flickr
I made a none to disimilar point this week.
A point well made. Have been struck in recent days how unsubtle and potentially unhelpful external politically driven comment has been.
A notable example of a more sophisticated and balanced approach is taken by Glyn Davies
http://glyndaviesam.blogspot.com/2009/10/wales-next-first-minister.html
His comments certainly, in just a few short paragraphs, at least add something to the mix. Edwina’s emotional side is true indeed, and will come out in the campaign, though I don’t expect it to be the problem that Glyn forecasts. Nevertheless, I doubt a second comparison to Margaret Thatcher by a Conservative will endear Glyn to her campaign team.
Is it unfair of me to comment on the length of the hyperlinks in this post?
Why does BJ’s post online get a teenny-weeny one compared to JM’s half a line link?
” Adam is the former Head of Policy for the Welsh Labour Party and author of the party’s 2003 manifesto.”
Agenda? What agenda?
Alan – I have tweaked the length of the link in question, though am not really sure why I did so… Ascribe it to my sense of symmetry.
Simon – glad you remain cynical, even on your birthday
I haven’t commented purely on the grounds that I couldn’t care less.
Quite right Marcus, you did. I trust you also have a sinister agenda?
Oh come on ,Normal Mouth had a delight in interventionism. Bloggers can have fun ,do you really think anything we say will have an effect. Labourites are not known for their on line presence or blog reading.Its not going to be very exciting any way is it .The only one who may get things moving is Huw .Anyway Christmas is coming, the economy needs a big hand, health still needs TLC, education need resource.
So lets not take our eye of what really should be priority,and its not a leadership beauty pageant.
Some confusion here. I never said opposition parties – much less bloggers – shouldn’t discuss the Labour leadership and/or express their views about it. I DID suggest that Labour is probably more likely to indulge in fratricidal bloodletting without its opponents seeking to insert themselves into the contest.
Hi Adam,
I made a very similar point that largely sort the same point you were trying to make, quelle surprise it was seen as an attack on anybody.
Good post.
Marcus
Former Labour apologist demands other parties stay away from Labour leadership contests. Lol. I think I can assume it is not just the political agenda’s of other bloggers, more the political agenda’s of this one that are the focus here!
By the by Adam, the candidate Plaid want? I don’t know I think all three have enough gapping holes to be beneficial, I commented more on Huw in that post mainly as anyone who makes up their 6 nominations with themselves and their wife, not to mention Irene James and Joyce Watson deserve ridicule! I’ll take any of the three if I’m honest
Some confusion here. I never said opposition parties – much less bloggers – shouldn’t discuss the Labour leadership and/or express their views about it. I DID suggest that Labour is probably more likely to indulge in fratricidal bloodletting without its opponents seeking to insert themselves into the contest.