Lembit Opik had a piece in today’s Evening Standard ahead of the results declaration in the London Mayor selection. In it he said he expected to lose and went on to say:
Ever since I was first enticed into entering the fray as a potential candidate, I’ve experienced a remarkable degree of antagonism and aggression from certain Lib Dems.
Most of it has occurred in the strange and self-styled environment of the ‘blogosphere’ – a parallel universe where some people who’ve never been elected to public office feel qualified to pronounce on those who have.
When one meets these people for real, their courage on the internet seems to desert them, replaced by excuses and a quick exit at the first opportunity…
There’ll be a time when a left wing, libertarian narrative returns to the Lib Dems.
When it does, I’ll be there. People haven’t heard the last of Lembit Öpik just yet. As somebody else said once, I’ll be back.
So watch out for the sequel: ‘Lembit Öpik Strikes Back’ – coming to a political platform near you in the not too distant future.
Lembit also wrote of Brian Haley:
His recent conversion to Liberal Democracy means he is unlikely to win this time round. But watch for Haley in the future – he’ll rise like a comet through the ranks and has a good chance of getting onto the GLA in future.
You can read the full article here.
Meanwhile, after the result Lembit told the BBC:
I think like every great politician you have to have some wilderness years. Nelson Mandela had them. Many other people had them.
23 Comments
“People haven’t heard the last of Lembit Öpik just yet.” – Shame! Despite the fact I voted Lib Dem at the General Election, one of the highlights of the evening was hearing that Öpik had lost his seat. Has he ever been right about anything? What an arrogant and obnoxious prat he is – something I would dearly love to say directly to his face.
I agree with his view on Haley. The rest of it just looks like sour grapes and him being unable to accept that he’s no longer a significant figure in the party (if he ever was) – unlike Evan Harris or Susan Kramer I think that the party grassroots see his 2010 electoral defeat as largely being his own doing.
Just when I thought his petulant rant couldn’t get any worse, he compares himself with Mandela.
Tbh, I think even credible politicians should steer clear of comparing themselves to great historical leaders. However you word it, you invariably end up sounding like an arrogant tosser.
“Most of it has occurred in the strange and self-styled environment of the ‘blogosphere’ – a parallel universe where some people who’ve never been elected to public office feel qualified to pronounce on those who have.”
-It’s called scrutiny. Funny, that.
2) When one meets these people for real, their courage on the internet seems to desert them, replaced by excuses and a quick exit at the first opportunity…
-Sorry, we just can’t bear to be around arrogant, self-satisfied politicians. If we did, we’d join Labour.
I understand that Lembit came last with 8% of the vote.
I would imagine the result is a big disappointment to him. However I think many of us have been very confused by his “left wing libertarianism”. Who is the intellectual driving force behind this creed? I for one do not know. Most libertarians I know, including the small number in the Liberal Democrats hate the left.
The most basic question you have to ask about any politician is “What do you stand for?” With Lembit it has always been a confusing mix. I would recommend to Lembit, for what it is worth, that his first political priority before he launches himself again it to have a good long think about things.
“Wilderness years. Nelson Mandela had them.”
Might someone make Robben Island available for the next 27 years, please?
A longish period of silence from Lembit Opik would be welcome. Shall we say – at least until after the next General Election?
It’s funny that Lembit thinks it a successful strategy to attack potential voters, supporters and the intellectual traditions of the party he hoped to represent – not exactly the best reference for analytic or leadership abilities in any book I’ve ever read!
I’m sure he’ll be welcomed on whichever unstoppable bandwagon he now decides to fully commit to.
Kilroy-Silk, anyone?
Poor Lembit. What has he done wrong apart from making some silly public statements? He’s not abused his expenses, made pledges he had no intention of keeping nor has he wrecked Higher Education. Yet unlike Laws, Cable and Clegg his own party can’t stand him yet the voter views him with some affection.
He’ll never become Mayor of London, but then neither will Brian Paddick who has already been rejected by the voters of London once before. At least Ken and Boris are occasional winners. Is there a politician in the Lib Dems capable of winning a popularity contest?
“I’m sure he’ll be welcomed on whichever unstoppable bandwagon he now decides to fully commit to.
Kilroy-Silk, anyone?”
I’m as critical as anyone of Lembit but I don’t think that’s fair. He’s never shown any indication of doing anything outside the party or attempting (in his own view) to do things that help the party. He could after the 2010 election have wandered away from the party into C-list celeb land but has stayed to help fight our corner.
His decisions and judgement are certainly flawed – but at their core I can’t say I think his inentions are.
I think Lembit Opik is GREAT. He is a character and politics needs characters. When you are down and the only way is up, you have to start at the bottom again. Lembit should find a constituency NOW and ‘do the business’. He will get elected next time.
I was one of the 8% who put Lembit 1st but not because I am on The “Left” of The Party, in the rather odd sense that he means. I think we are making the same mistake as last time, sending a Chess player to a Rugby match. The Mayoral contest is a fight between ” Personalities”, Lembit & Simon both fit into that.
Lembit does need to reconsider his politics but I still maintain that The Party should find some way to use him & the other runners-up, The HoL/Senate for example.
I’m not sure why Lembit decided to stand, when he must have known he was never going to win. I didn’t vote for him, but when I met him during the campaign I thought he talked a lot of sense. I hope he stays active within the party and I think we should make much more use of him, especially on television.
I must have been out of the country when Mandela appeared on Big Brother and dated a Cheeky Girl….
I remember when LPs were falling over themselves to book Lembit as a guest speaker. He was passionate, funny and inspirational. In media interviews, he was often painfully but admirably honest, generous to his opponents but prepared to argue doggedly for some unpopular party policies that he believed were right. It is the recollection of those characteristics and his past service that prevents me being too critical of him now.
Surely someone cares enough about Lembit Opik to tell him that when you are in a hole you stop digging?
I like Lembit and am tired of the constant baiting of him, He’s smart and his politics is actually sound and vital for the party and I hope he’ll be back.
PS Geoffrey you’ve debated with “left wing libertarians” plenty on the forums. You know – they’re the ones you keep calling “neo-liberals” because you dont understand how a left-winger can think a small state is a good goal.
The first problem for a London mayoral candidate is getting the public to recognise them. So vigorous self-promotion is really part of the job. Ken Livingstone has a head start there, dating back to his former prominence as a controversial GLC leader (starting with the post-election putsch which displaced Andrew McIntosh).
A colourful personal life was no handicap to Stephen Norris or Boris Johnson. (Remember Jeffrey Archer was also Tory front runner for a while.)
What really did for Lembit was that the Brian and Mike were both very strong candidates with long local records in London.
I ‘look forward’ to Paddick’s elimination with 13% of the first preferences. Why he stood again, after undergoing the pain he shared in his whiney, catty and self-pitying Mail account after his last trouncing, only he can know.
I shan’t waste time leafletting etc for a bit-player in what is, like it or not, a contest for the charismatic.
@Hywel
I was thinking more along the lines of a day-time chat show.
It’s more than fair to question Lembit’s commitment and ask whether the abilities he demonstrates are a desirable asset for a serious political party. I think the result of this selection is more evidence that the LibDems are growing up.
@David
If politics is simply a matter of charisma and Lembit is more charismatic than the other two people who were on the ballot, why did he lose? Either it’s not or they are more charismatic.
@Ian Sanderson
“A colourful personal life was no handicap to Stephen Norris or Boris Johnson.”
That’s no recommendation, is it?
@Oranjepan
Many/most Lib Dem members bitterly resent the fact – fact – that the London mayoral election is as much about personality as policies. They desperately wish it was all about policy and touchingly think that if they put up some small-time player who talks about policy constantly then the electorate will have a Damascene conversion and vote for him/her. Hence Paddick/Tuffrey, not Lembit. The electorate haven’t voted and won’t vote for such a candidate. It’s hard enough for us to poll well in the London Mayoral without handicapping ourselves this way. We were foolish to pass over Lembit given his availability and willingness to stand.
@David
“We were foolish to pass over Lembit given his availability and willingness to stand.”
I have never (in the mainland of the UK) voted for any political party apart from the Lib Dems or one of its predecessors. I have never neglected to vote, even voting whilst resident abroad. I have from time to time wasted boot leather on good and/or indifferent LD candidates. I can guarantee that that would have changed the day Lembit were foisted on me as London Mayoralty candidate. When I first heard of the man, I was hopeful and pleased, but my respect for him has dropped ever since, with every desperate attention grabbing antic. Lembit has a mountain to climb if he wishes to regain credibility with me. I am sure my feelings on this subject are not unique.
This idea that a candidate has to be some sort of “personality” is fine in itself, but there has to be some semblance of self respect behind the media mask. There also has to be some sense of coherent policy.
I suspect Paddick will poll better than he did before, as he has a much higher media profile than previously. I know Labour, Conservative and Green voters who have actually heard his name this time, that certainly wasn’t the case during his previous attempt. With Boris and Ken there is a strong “Marmite” effect too; their tribal vote will still turn out for them, but the undecided, unpolitical and untribal are perhaps less likely to plump for one or the other of them this time purely on the basis of candidate recognition, as their faults are much more widely known to London voters. Paddick will have to persuade them to his cause, rather than to cast no vote.
Good luck, I say, to him.
David,
if then, as you say, the LibDem base is opposed to personality politics, how will it help increase votes for the party by alienating their core support?
Following on it would also beg questions about how the party actually differentiates itself from the tories and Labour by choosing to copy their strategy – as far as I’m concerned while (or if) Lembit is still considered a major player amongst LibDems then the LibDems will continued to be considered a minor player at elections.
And anyway, the conclusion you draw from your your analysis does not suggest any greater likelihood of success. It indicates a timidity that we’d be glad to settle for a respectable third-place – any improvement is good, right?
Well, no, frankly. LibDems must be contenders, if not challengers for victory.
So I’ll point out your analysis also suggests the alternative conclusion that whoever was to be selected can be promoted in a presidential-style campaign to emphasise their real personality developed over the long miles reaching this point.
And I’ll also put my point that there is a big difference between personality and celebrity – one is human, the other is a simulacrum of sanitised humanity in the media mind; one is the reality of getting on with the job, the other is the illusion caused by someone else doing the job for them. If I were offered that choice, I know how I’d vote.