Sorry - was attempting to be funny.
Anyway, points in favour of Lisa Nandy:
She already has a grasp on why Labour isn't connecting outside big cities.
It seems like an absurdly small point but she is already talking about Labour's manifesto concentrating on railways rather than buses.
That sounds daft - but when the whole 'nationalise railways' thing was still at the kite-flying stage, some LSE boffin wrote a paper about how buses we're far more of an issue for most people in the UK than trains, and how this affected infrastructure, work, and so on in places outside large cities.
Since then, Mumsnet has had many discussions about this, drawing on various MNers actual experience of relying on poor bus provision.
I honestly think it matters that she is aware of this bus issue.
It points to the fact that she is connected to the concerns of her constituents, realises it's importance, and realises that those concerns were absent in Labour's vision.
It's a small point but it does chime with what people say about her: she's an MP who takes her responsibility to represent her constituents very seriously.
This is what was behind her taking a Leave position after the Referendum.
It's not some mad 'Lexit' position - it was from a sense of responsibility.
That position doesn't matter at all now - and will certainly translate into a determination to fight for the best outcome for ordinary people in upcoming negotiations (however hopeless that might be, given the Conservative majority).
She also has a safer seat than the 'appointed successor', Rebecca Long-Bailey. And she is popular with constituents.
That matters because some kind of ability to connect with the electorate - the real electorate, not just members - is pretty important.
Polling suggests that Rebecca Long-Bailey isn't that popular (at the moment) with people. She comes across as someone who tells people what to do. Apparently. Comparisons with Jo Swinson have been raised - and not in a good way.