Explaining why Michael Foot did so poorly in 1983

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

His TV appearances confused or outright scared the British electorate:

[CumbrianLefty]

Well, some of the media coverage at the time wasn't far off that tbf.

[Pulaski]

There's a wonderful documentary available in full on Youtube called "Michael Foot: Labour's Old Romantic" that I'd highly recommend for anyone interested. A wonderful, compassionate, fiercely intelligent man who was never leadership material, especially given his age at the time.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

There's a wonderful documentary available in full on Youtube called "Michael Foot: Labour's Old Romantic" that I'd highly recommend for anyone interested. A wonderful, compassionate, fiercely intelligent man who was never leadership material, especially given his age at the time.

Yes, I've watched that. Very good indeed.

As of Foot, I deeply respect the man, despite certain areas of disagreements (mostly Europe). He was actually an effective politician, something that's frequently getting overlooked, quite skilfully managing the impossible as the Leader of the House in the Callaghan's government. But yes, as far as being leader of the party he was clearly past his prime.

And of course he was a formidable intelectual, retaining a sharp mind until his death.

[CumbrianLefty]

In actual fact I looked up some of the extant press coverage of Foot during the 1983 campaign in particular, and its similarity to distinctly more recent stuff was.......striking.

Some centrist pundits were fond of loudly proclaiming Corbyn was nothing like Foot in recent years (in order to denigrate the former, of course) There *were* differences, but to the right the commonalities mattered rather more.

[Torrain]

I've never met anyone who had a bad thing to say about Foot. From all accounts, and in all the interview footage I've seen, he appears to be a truly decent man. Principled, and without the arrogance that seems to plague contemporaries like Tony Benn (maybe that's just me. Never could listen to that guy for too long).

But after the Falklands, when Thatcher was at her strongest, it was the worst possible moment for Foot to be leader.

If Harold Wilson had stepped down after losing to Heath in 1970, and Foot had replaced him, I think he could have been far more successful, and almost certainly have formed a decent majority over Heath in 1974, as Wilson did. But for the 80s, he was too far outside the Overton window.