On Warming Up the Loyal Base for a Change of Tack.

[danieldwilliam]

Political parties put a lot of effort in to making themselves the Good Guys in their supporters and activists minds. This involves making the other political parties look like the Bad Guys, and closely linking themselves to key ideological touchstones and policy platforms and creating some element of tribalism.

With this in mind I am viewing the public ruminations by the likes of Sturgeon and Swinson that a Government of National Unity, perhaps lead by Corbyn, perhaps not, not as the exercising in public of some internal dialogue and more as warming up their base over a two week period to accept a deal that they have already agreed with the Labour Party.

Not certain about this, but, I think the pronouncements are more internal party PR than public debate.

Comments

[notasupervillain]

I don't think "Corbyn as PM" is a realistic option. It gives political benefit to a caretaker leader, and much more benefit to one leader than the others in a "Unity" government. I see it like when you get a "caretaker" leader for a political party after one leader steps down before the next is chosen. In that case, you find someone minimally controversial, with no ambition to lead in the long term. Corbyn is ... not that.

[danieldwilliam]

Yeah.

Was chatting to a guy in the office about the GNU.

And we arrived at the view that a GNU put in power to do Brexit related X, Y & Z would have to stick pretty clearly to doing X, Y & Z. It was the additional stuff of doing A, B & C that we thought would be problematic. Especially if that A, B & C were in response to emergancies.

And Corbyn is probably most at risk at doing controversial A's, B's and C's because, as you say, he's got amibition to the fully elected, non-caretaker, PM immediately after the election.

[notasupervillain]

I like the idea that any caretaker PM would be someone who's not running next election.

Though Bercow would be a controversial choice :P