Is there something in common between the defeats of Foot, Kinnock and Miliband, a rejection of something messianic or over-driven or too emphatic which does not go down well in Britain?
If so, Blair (who was over-driven, an apparent rejecter of ideology, but later an embracer of a new one) should not have got in. But that was after 18 years of Conservatism, and he was a con-man and not Labour anyway.
No more in common than with Hague, Duncan Smith and Howard, except that those 3 were in a row.
The three Tories were rejected for being too vague and unfocussed. Rather the opposite thing.
But also for being a bit too right wing at the time, which plays into the ideological point.
There was something surreal in watching Clegg and Miliband lay wreaths for their own careers at the Cenotaph.