The Milibandwagon: Ed or David? David or Ed?

[policywonk]

There's only one way to settle this, and that's with a hormonally-influenced barney on a mothers' talkboard.

I like a lot of what I've heard about Ed, but can't help thinking that he could do with more than one term in Parliament before people stuff him into the leadership (and from what I've read that's what he thinks too). David... I'm a bit, y'know, disappointed with all the torture and that

Is it definitely either / or? Just checking

There is a smattering of anti-intellectual stuff in the unravelling of David though. I think he suffers from being attractive and, as the piece says, abstract. Nothing wrong with that. I think he was over-confident in his veiled critique of Brown earlier in the year. He hadn't done enough of note. So he became seen as a dull poster-boy upstart.

Ed is now seen as having more substance - maybe that it true. But I worry that it is the voracious papers again, wishing for Tony's geniality again (for which read: the cult of personality) instead of policies and ideas. I dunno. I like Ed. And I also like Johnson (for some similar reasons about their ability to communicate). And David can be dull.

I will await the pre-election catfight with interest.

Anyhow, they could be DavWard? Edvid? Seemed to work quite well recently and keeps the subs happy?

I prefer Ed, he seems more 'human' and genuinely genuine... plus I think David looks a bit like Cherie

I find them both unbearable TBH.

100x - yes you must CHOOSE

Good points Wilf. Think you're right about the danger of it all becoming an amusing media bunfight without much substance. Ed's mannerisms can be very Blairish. I like to think he's not Blairish in outlook but I don't have a great deal to base that on (although I do like the fact that he has talked about the Marxist theory behind the crisis of capitalism).

Frankly they will both be a great deal more convincing with a few years under their belts. My instinct is that David may be first to the leadership, but that is going to be a poison chalice for the next 5 years. I see Ed as a more credible leader of the country, given a few years in opposition to mature him.

Giz - following on from your exchange with OBM on the webchat thread (in effort not to hijack) - isn't it the case that EM has been keen to come down quite hard on the energy companies? (God that sounds rude). I'd read that he's made a few enemies within the energy industry because of his intention to act on things like pre-payment meters.

scours brain with bucket of bleach to remove image of EM and Ian Marchant

Frankly the glacial speed of government action on smart metering has generally suited the utility industry just fine.

In fact, even in private, utilities are generally extraordinarily, er, tactful, about the government and the environmental agenda, PW. Partly I think this is that they see carbon action as a good market opportunity, potentially, and partly that they have lobbied rather skillfully to adjust the smart meter roll out to suit them.

There have been some points of friction for sure, but I'm just not sure that DECC is effective enough for people to develop real enmity.

Which one to shoot if you only have one bullet?

Easy, GYF, just line 'em up one behind the other!

That's interesting giz. (As bloody per.)

Following "mainstream" politics is so depressing I lose track of who is who, but David is the one who looks like a 14 year old nerd and represents South Shields right? And Ed is his brother.

I believe neither has done a proper days work in their lives, but were born into the Harman/Benn/Mandelson/Gould class of socialist who get to rule over us by hereditary right. Their first jobs were as policy wonks before the inevitable parachuting into safe seats.

And we are then meant to have a straight-faced discussion over which we would rather have lord it over us?

I'd have Ed, not David though.

I'm putting GYF down as a 'don't know'

Ralph

(mostly here to wave at gizmo - it's rek21 here under new nom de mum)

In an attempt to engage with the subject matter ... Frankly either Milliband would be a lunatic to want to be the next labour leader, do the words 'wilderness years' mean nothing? How about 'william Hague'? Johnson is the only one with anything approaching enough gravitas to lead in the headless chicken olympics that will inevitably follow a defeat, he makes clegg & cameron look like the callow young whippersnappers they are. (Note to self, use word whippersnappers more often in conversation).

Of course, on looks alone, david all the way

I'm not adding another bloody column to this spreadsheet

Is it so certain that Labour will be in opposition though? This week's theory is: hung parliament, LibDems holding balance of power, refuse to join Labour in a coalition unless they replace Brown.

Obviously there is a certain amount of wishful thinking in that (not least on my part) but there seem to have been some shifts in Labour's direction over the last couple of weeks, and the Tories need a 10 per cent lead in the polls just to get a working majority.

Ed and David would be just the right number of columns under in my spread sheet.

Hmmmm but hung parliaments are oft-touted but rarely actually turn up.(wikipedia says last one feb '74, followed by oct 74 victory for labour)

I have decided to be gloomily resigned to labour defeat in the hope that it will provide the kick up the backside needed to ensure that Tory interlude is brief. Even this may be wishful thinking though. (heavy sigh, returns to half empty glass).