Diane Abbott and polls

One of the first opinion polls on the Labour leadership election has been topped by Diane Abbott prompting Silver Surfer Today (amongst others) to ask Could Diane Abbott be next Labour leader?

It's an interesting idea but it overlooks two key factors. The first is that the opinion poll is of the electorate as a whole, whereas the Labour leader will be elected by a combination of Labour Party and trade union members. Of course they may be swayed by the findings of such opinion polls but I doubt by ones at this stage. For the second key factor is that this leadership election has barely begun and the candidates have got little exposure. So the opinion polls are finding nothing more than name recognition. (See for instance UK Polling Report: New ComRes and ICM polls and, for the equivalent for the Conservatives in 2005, 2005 Tory Leadership.) And it has to be said that Abbott has quite a high level of name recognition, especially compared to the likes of Andy Burnham, who seems to be the Chris Whone of the Labour Party.

The key question about Diane Abbott at the moment is not whether she can win the leadership election but whether or not she can even get successfully nominated. So far according to Labour Party: Candidates Abbott has yet to receive a single formal nomination. Meanwhile both Milibands have crossed the threshold and, like Gordon Brown, are in the process of getting more than they need, presumably so they can try and carve other candidates out of the race altogether. The presence of John McDonnell also seeking nominations from the far left of the party isn't helping Abbott either.

More Labour leader photos they'd rather forget

David Miliband and Ed Balls must be thanking their lucky stars that in this country we don't choose politicians on the basis of who manages to evade awkward photos. Otherwise the leading contenders for the Labour leadership would, on the basis of a quick Google search, be Ed Miliband and Diane Abbott.

In the interests of balance, I did some further searches to see how the other leadership contenders have fared. And some have done much better than others. Unfortunately for Ed Balls he's the worst by a long distance.

Andy Burnham clearly did something to provoke this look on David Dimbleby's face but what was it? Whatever it was, it doesn't help his tough guy image. (Thanks to Daily Mail: Who's a pretty boy then? Labour minister Andy Burnham glams up for Question Time)

Burnham may have been seeking a joint ticket with Ed Balls. Or he may have been just getting down with the kids. Either way this is one photo they won't want next to analysis of their policies on law & order. (Thanks to Daily Mail: 25% of 10-year-olds are never allowed to play on their own... so Ed Balls swings into action)

John McDonnell has fared a lot better, generally avoiding the worst of stage photocalls. But last year he tried to do a Michael Heseltine moment in a furious moment in the Commons. (Thanks to Daily Mail: MP John McDonnell is suspended to the cheers of an admiring kingdom)

My thanks to an anonymous commenter for tipping me off to this one. Ed Balls really is photo accident prone isn't he? (Thanks to The Canadian Sentinel: Moonbat Spotlight: British Politician Ed Balls)

David Miliband has had his photo moments and not just that time with the banana. But compared to some of his rivals he hasn't come off the worst. (Thanks to Reuters Global News Journal: Ice cream and football on the road to Damascus)

As I said, I haven't yet found any photos of Diane Abbott or Ed Miliband that are on the same level. Maybe there simply aren't any, or maybe they've been better at keeping them out of the public eye. Either way they're currently winning this particular part of the leadership election.

Gordon Brown - cowardly bully

Deep down, most bullies are secretly cowards, trying to dominate others as a way for overcoming their own insecurities. They invariably seek their goals by the easiest route and always despise fair play and genuine competition.

And in many ways this sums up Gordon Brown's approach to the Labour Leadership "Contest", big clunking fists and all.

Today comes the worrying news that John McDonnell may not be successfully nominated after all. (BBC News: Brown rival needs more supporters) Now some of this can be attributed to bitterness by Michael Meacher fans (or Labour MPs who, like me, just wanted to see the laugh of Meacher going forward) but Brown has refused to encourage Labour MPs to help ensure there is a contest, unlike Nicolas Sarkozy who urged France's Mayors to help give the public as wide a choice as possible. And it can be no coincidence that so many others who have been talked of over the years have declined to put themselves forward.

Why is Brown so scared of a contest? The favourite invariably wins a Labour leadership election, but it is far, far better to win over some opposition.

Four years ago many Labour friends of mine were proclaiming how Michael Howard had been "selected" "undemocratically" as Conservative leader after being the only candidate in the 2003 election. Where are they now?

So it's Brown vs McDonnell

I've been out all day so only just seen the news that Michael Meacher and John McDonnell have reached agreement that the latter will be the left-wing flag bearer for the Labour leadership election. Sadly this removes the comedy of seeing Michael Meacher claiming he could be a good Prime Minister.

One minor thought - this means that whoever gets elected, we'll have to update the "number of PMs who went to a university but not to Oxbridge". And that is a very small number.

The Meacher-McDonnell indecision

The previous news that Michael Meacher and John McDonnell had come to an agreement to ensure that Gordon Brown faces some opposition had cheered many, and both men are to be credited for having something that so many others on the Labour benches lack - balls. (So *someone* will take on Brown ) But now comes the news that the two have failed to reach agreement on who has more support, delaying confirmation as to whom will go forward to challenge Brown. (BBC News: Brown rivals delay bid decision) Kerron Cross has more information (Kerron Cross: McDonnell to Stand Down?), suggesting that McDonnell appears to have fewer nominations but is doubting the veracity of some of Meacher's. Will they honour the agreement come Monday?

What is more worrying are reports that even combined the two lack enough support to get one nominated. It cannot be in the country's interest for Gordon Brown to be made Prime Minister unopposed. Are there no Brownite MPs who would be willing to help their own man by ensuring that he can face some opposition? Or are the Brownites scared that Brown can't win?

So *someone* will take on Brown

Labour left-wingers John McDonnell and Michael Meacher have announced that they will pool resources in the Labour leadership election to ensure one of them can be successfully nominated. (BBC News: Left rivals unite to target Brown) On the day Tony Blair does the most popular thing he can ever do, the two will meet and compare their levels of support amongst MPs with the less popular dropping out. From the tone of their recent statements about each other's levels of support (reaching a level of bitchiness normally associated with Judean People's Fronts and People's Fronts of Judea) it's more of a tactical admittance that individually neither can get the support needed for nomination rather than a great principled pooling of resources. It also opens up possibilities for the more Machiavellian Labour members to tactically support whichever they think it would be better to have in the contest, either to clip Gordon Brown's wings or to expose the left as hopeless. Given how effective Michael Meacher was as Environment Minister I do hope he's the one to stand, if only for the comedy value. (So there *is* an alternative to Gordon Brown)

Meanwhile the search for a serious challenger to take on Brown has still failed to yield results. As David Cameron asked at Prime Minister's Questions the other week:

Why is it that so many people who have worked so closely with the Chancellor think he would make a terrible Prime Minister, but they do not seem prepared to stop him?

(Hansard: 28 Feb 2007 28 Feb 2007 : Column 920)

Indeed anyone who wants to stop Brown has only one serious choice. And that choice is David Cameron.