Labour activists put party before country in endorsing Kamala

Party members enthusiastically volunteering for the Democrats will upset many Americans, even if it won’t influence much

The closer we get to the wire in the US presidential elections, the more certain we are that seemingly insignificant events will provoke incendiary reactions.
Take the scandal (because of course in the modern political climate me must call it either that or a “crisis” or an “emergency”, and at some point someone is going to place the suffix “gate” on it – just you wait) of Labour activists campaigning for the Democrat candidate, Kamala Harris.
The reaction to the news, particularly by individual GOP members and some local branches has been entertaining. Arlington GOP even offered a rematch to Britain of the Battle of Yorktown, the famous showdown that signalled the end of the Revolutionary War in the colonists’ favour. Other reactions have been less good-humoured, warning darkly about the breaking of federal election law and of “foreign interference” on the same scale and nature as that perpetrated by the Kremlin in previous years.
It all blew up after a social media post (since deleted) by Sofia Patel, Labour’s Head of Operations, who boasted: “I have nearly 100 Labour Party staff (current and former) going to the US in the next few weeks heading to North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Virginia. I have 10 spots available for anyone available to head to the battleground state of North Carolina – we will sort your housing.”
As the Prime Minister himself said when confronted with questions about the legal action that has now been taken by the GOP against the Democrats for accepting “illegal” foreign aid to win the election, what party staff do with their time off is no concern of his, but they’re not going over there on official party business and they will have to pay their own way.
And what impact will their participation in the election have?
Consider the reaction of a voter in North Carolina who is still uncertain about who to support on November 5. How likely is it that, having been unpersuaded by the bucketloads of TV and social media advertising promoting each of the candidates over a period of months, they will open their door to Ben, the vice chair for membership of CommuterBelt Central Constituency Labour Party, and suddenly be inspired to vote for Harris? Is it possible that the arrival of enthusiastic Home Counties accents in America’s rustbelt will shift any of those crucial numbers in the electoral college?
No, it’s not.
But that’s not really why these young comrades are heading over the Pond in the first place. Although they may well be blissfully unaware that their efforts will be entirely fruitless and that they will be viewed with quizzical scepticism and more as a burden than an asset even by Democrat organisers, such a revelation would do little to dampen their enthusiasm. 
For the whole point of playing even a pointless part in Harris’s campaign is to be able to say afterwards that they were there. Two weeks of sleeping on a local Democrat activist’s sofa and being asked twice a day by apathetic voters if they know Hugh Grant or the King will be totally worth it if they can put on their CVs: “October-November 2024 – worked for the Harris/Walz presidential campaign”. 
“Worked for” might be doing a hell of a lot of heavy lifting there, but there it will be, in black and white, crafted to impress future employers.
And not for the first time, I say that “The West Wing” has a lot to answer for. When it was first broadcast the US TV drama seduced British political staffers into believing that American politics was way more glamorous and exciting than its British variety. As a direct consequence of that show, in the noughties there was an epidemic of even back bench MPs appointing staff with laughably pretentious titles like “Chief of Staff” and at one point (please don’t laugh – the memory is still painful) of people in the office of the Leader of the Opposition, who really who ought to have known better, going round saying “Let Miliband be Miliband”.
And now the next generation who have caught up on the show via streaming services want to be part of the drama too. 
This new, reality TV version of the US political drama is all the more attractive because of the shadow of Donald Trump and the prospect of his becoming the next occupant of the White House. Imagine the prospect of being able to boast at dinner parties that you actually helped in the campaign to prevent the re-emergence of fascism in America! Or – even better, given the Left’s adoration of triumphant defeats – that fascism reasserted itself despite their heroic efforts and sacrifices.
I can’t escape the feeling that the GOP itself, despite its public pronouncements about the heinous nature of foreign interference in the republic’s democratic processes by a monarchical state, recognises this for the humorous sideshow it actually is, and has lodged its legal complaint only to score a few points of Harris by implying she can only win with the aid of non-Americans.
As such, it’s unlikely that the British Invasion Mark 2 will cause much of a problem for the special relationship if Trump wins next month. It will hardly be a surprise to him or his team that Labour Party members dislike him as much as Democrats do. 
For Keir Starmer himself, it’s merely another reminder that he leads a party of activists, not adults. Remember when London Mayor Sadiq Khan revelled in his childish criticism of Trump the first time round? Remember the inflatable Trump-shaped balloon that signalled his virtue to all the right people during a presidential visit?
The only thing that has changed since then has been Labour’s shift from opposition to government. All the more worrying, then, that its mindset remains the same.