Leadership isn't everything

The current Lib Dem leadership election is undoubtedly important for the party. But it's not the only thing that matters.
| Categories:

This post at Stumbling and Mumbling (a blog I highly recommend) provides a timely reminder of the risks of leader-worship. It's important to remember that a leader is dependent upon many other individuals and many situational factors go into determining his achievements.

This can be added to my reasons for not declaring in favour of a candidate just yet. Candidates should be evaluated on their performance, not some intrinsic 'gift' for leadership that can inspire a following out of thin air.


Comments

On 28 October 2007 - 9:05pm, Anonymous (not verified) wrote:

Nice to see Liberal Review again active. :-)


On 29 October 2007 - 7:37pm, Rob Knight wrote:

Thanks! It's nice to be active again.


On 30 October 2007 - 10:55pm, Paul (not verified) wrote:

Seconded. It's nice to see you back.


On 31 October 2007 - 12:10am, Anonymous (not verified) wrote:

The Lib Dem leadership competition between Tweedle and Tweedledum?


On 1 November 2007 - 9:31am, Anonymous (not verified) wrote:

What a frightening choice with Huhne wanting one sided disaramament(did wonders for Michael Foot's electoral appeal) and Clegg not prepared to accept the will of the democratically elected House of Commons,I suppose it may help them hang onto some Old Labour voters but will frighten away moderate floating voters in their droves.


On 1 November 2007 - 6:39pm, Anonymous (not verified) wrote:

Clegg and Huhne = Dumb & Dumber.


On 1 November 2007 - 8:20pm, Anonymous (not verified) wrote:

The two candidates priority seems to be who can be the most anti establishment,really pathetic.


On 3 November 2007 - 9:44am, Rob Knight wrote:

As compared to who can be most pro-establishment? What's the point of a political party that isn't trying to shake things up a bit?