Federal party elections

[miss_s_b]

So in only ONE of the committee elections did my first preference even get in (That would be lady Mark on ELDR, since I figured, correctly, that Ros probably wouldn't need my first pref). In most of them even my second pref didn't get a sniff. And I have looked with horror upon some of the people who DID get in, just because their names are well known. There are three people on the peers panel that just... gah. Anyway.

We really, really, REALLY need to get the campaign system changed so that the rules are the same for every election, and that committee elections can be fought in the same way that the presidential election is. It's ridiculous that we're not even allowed to blog about who we are voting for and why in committee elections. And yes, I know that it was brought up at a recent conference and nobody turned up to vote, but we have to keep trying.

The lack of Daddy Richard and Belinda Brooks-Gordon on FPC is very sad, and Elisabeth Wilson and Andy Strange would both have been awesome on FE. My first pref for the peers panel was FCC stalwart Ian Walton. And I wanted to tell you all to vote for them. And I couldn't.

Still, it's good to see Dinti and Evan and Gareth got in. And the gravelly-voiced sexpot.

I am surprised that the presidential election was as close as it was, although in the end the person I voted for won. I couldn't really summon up buckets of enthusiasm for either candidate, but in the end I voted for the person who has shown best ability to communicate with EVERYBODY throughout the campaign, because I think that communication between members and top brass is more vital than ever right now. I'll be keeping my beady eye on you, young Farron. Don't stop talking to us. You can be sure as shit we won't stop talking at to you.

---

Comments

[andrewducker]

I'd love to know what you think of the results here:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/ldv-survey-what-lib-dem-members-think-of-the-coalitions-comprehensive-spending-review-22040.html

[bagfish]

Despite Farron being my MP and me liking him a lot when I have met and communicated with him, I voted for SK on the (selfish) basis that I think TF should be concentrating on MP stuff instead of adding to it with Presidential work. I liked SK's previous involvement with environmental issues, plus the fact she came across well in election literature.

However, I am pleased that TF won, he is an absolutely excellent communicator and really gets people fired up, but is also very good on a one-to-one basis (I do feel lucky having him as my constituency MP as he's a fantastic local MP who takes our local issues very seriously).

I do get the feeling that he will probably end up standing in the next leadership election - Dave and I had a conversation about it this at lunchtime, TF is a man with ambition but also has that "common touch" which makes him very popular locally. I can see that playing well nationally too.....

Don't worry Jennie, I will be keeping a beady eye on him too!

*sad*

[po8crg]

I got five first preferences. Must. Try. Harder.

[lizw]

I'm mostly appalled by the poor BME representation in the results.

So it's Scylla rather than Charybdis.

[daweaver]

Two things swung my vote behind Farron. 1) He's lucky. Yes, people tend to make their own luck, but Farron just seems to get heads whenever he needs them. 2) He's prepared to stand up and risk a bit of ridicule, rather than take the safe option of an obvious position at the end of the bar.

As for the other positions elected, the lack of visible campaigning means I have two further questions. A) Who are these people? B) What the hell do they do? By denying people the opportunity to canvass openly, the Lib Dems also deny the opportunity to explain the party's internal structure, both to members and to outsiders, such as journalists. There are perpetual complaints that no-one understands how the party makes policy; by keeping the mechanism under cover, this isn't going to improve.