Id has nothing to be happy about.
The process that the labor experienced in swordplay could happen in any party.
Many right-wingers argued that the "State Party" has become a niche movement, with Meretz appearing for a moment as a state party;
A party that any connection between it and the political ethos of the labor movement is strictly coincidental.
This is a fact that will probably lead the traditional electorate that it still had - most of it in its third year - to look for another political home.
But the reasons that led to this are not unique to it: interest groups that influence primaries and push surprising candidates (in this case, Shelly Yachimowitz's camp) are not a phenomenon limited to the Labor Party.
A party can "get up in the morning" and discover in its gallery representatives among them and those it would like to see in its "show window" a weak connection;
We will continue: a leader who enjoys seeing on her list those who resemble her but forgets that her electorate has a different DNA, one that continued to vote for her party despite, and not thanks to, her leadership. Who are interested in seeing on the list those who are different from her and more similar to those who were in the party in its original, state days. There were days when Netanyahu insisted , and rightly so,
that people like Benny Begin will be part of the Likud list, even when the Likud has already changed its skin.
Abandoning this insistence and the tendency to bring in those "like me" are a natural tendency of leaders - who are left in the end with a party that makes them feel "at home", but for many of their traditional voters to feel that it is no longer their home;
The selection method - Labor's research led to the amazing situation that most symbolizes the state of the party today: Abtisam Mera'ana is placed above Amr Bar-Lev.
Not that if things had been different, Barlev would have had a realistic chance of entering the next Knesset, but the changes seem to symbolize the new forced ethos of the former Haganah Party, the IDF, the settlement movement, and in fact the entire Zionist ethos. In other words: a leader of a party that desires life, Even if they are interested in a trendy list, an attractive method, candidates "in their head" - they cannot afford neglect of the kind experienced by the Labor Party, we will call it neglect of the management of the party ethos.
When the electorate goes to choose - beyond choosing the leader (who is still the main symbol of the party), what does it choose?
in ethos
And when the leader "exceeds" something from the ethos (to put it mildly, yes?) - those candidates on the list have real strategic weight.
They are the producers of the ethos, the ones who will make the traditional voters abstain or remain loyal.
When it was Merav Michaeli at the head of Labor - a feminist "New Left" leader who did not satisfy the historical sense of Mapai, it was Barlev and his ilk who gave the legitimacy to vote for the list. When Netanyahu stopped hammering what was expected of the leader of the "National Camp", it was figures like Sa'ar , Livnat, Steinitz, who made it possible to eat the frog of the "Mahal" note.
But the work syndrome is not limited to her.
In politics, there are identity changes that happen overnight, and some that last several years.
The syndrome of creating a list that suits only the primary voters and the party leader may occur in any movement.
And the traditional voters?
Just like in the Labor Party - they will look for their home in other districts.
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us