How about Harriet?

Listening to the Today Programme a thought struck me that had never entered my head before. Could Harriet Harman be the next leader of the Labour Party?

Yes, I know, but hear me out.

What makes Ms Harman seem an unlikely successor to media pundits is that media pundits wouldn''t pick her. I most certainly wouldn't. But we don't have a vote in any leadership election.

There are two reasons why Ms Harman stands a chance.

The choice of leader will be partly determined by the analysis party members have of the reason why Labour is doing badly. This analysis need not make any sense to outsiders. Labour turned to Foot and the Conservative Party to Hague and later to IDS partly because they saw things differently to everyone else.

The Tory Party after 1997 did not understand how it was seen. It believed it had lost because it was not robustly and consistently right wing enough. Hague appealed because he was young, lucid, and acceptable to the right. At the same time he represented the future because he hadn't a factional (wet v dry) past.

I think it quite likely that Labour members will be looking for a more left wing candidate as leader, not another straight moderniser. That makes it hard for Purnell and even for Miliband.

The second reason that Harman stands a chance is that she has personal appeal to Labour members. She is good on television (her answers aren't great but she presents well) and she has real politics (there are issues she cares about and she has made a difference on them).

We don't need to speculate whether this is the case. We know that it is because Ms Harman won the deputy leadership against what seemed to be the odds. The Blairite came last.

After Gordon Brown, a photogenic southern woman, on the left but not of it, with the unions but not in them, would be a very strong contender I would have thought.