I suppose it had to happen.It happens in every party and in every organisation at some point to a greater or lesser degree.You have a strong leader who pulls you in a direction away from your original one. And let's be honest Blair was strong and he changed the whole ethos of the party. Probably alright when the leader is strong. But then he gores and you get far less capab;le leaders...Your organisation looses its impetus, its raison d'etre. Some people remain faithful to the original; some people want to change, improve, modernise, move with the times.In a way the Tory Party has been like that for years since Mrs Thatcher made them a party of the money grubbing spivs instead of the toffs... and Cameron may have been a bit of a compromise, a money grubbing low life spivvy toff.The SNP has been through it. At one time they might have been called the Tartan Tories. Only the naive, or mendacious, would call them that now, but there have been serious rifts in the past over the direction of the party. To the right or the left. And that's not surprising given what the party stands for. There are rich and poor, posh and common who want independence.Sometimes you can pull it together. Sometimes you can't. It needs careful handling, and I'm not sure that Harriet is capable of that.The far right in the Labour Party threatening that if, in the most democratic election for leader they have ever had, Corbyn is elected they will immediately start a petition to get rid of him, is beyond belief.My way or the highway?