Will the real Audley Shaw please stand up?

And Jacob went near unto Isaac his father; and he felt him, and said, 'The voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau.

- Genesis 27:22

While I cannot say that it was with bated breath that I took time out of an otherwise busy schedule to view Audley Shaw's televised broadcast to the nation, I felt I had an obligation to listen intently to the case he was intent on making to delegates of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and, by extension, the people of Jamaica.

What jumped out at me most profoundly was that Mr Shaw didn't appear to be his usual self. He did not appear relaxed, comfortable nor assured of himself. For many, his countenance and overall delivery caused his broadcast to come across as phoney and insincere.

But perhaps it's best to put that observation aside for the time being and focus attention on more substantial matters.

The delegates of the JLP, like the rest of Jamaica, would by now have heard of the "concerns" cited by Mr Shaw as reasons that prompted him to take the decision to have his name entered into nomination in a bid to unseat incumbent party leader Andrew Holness come November. Among Shaw's concerns, as I understand them, are: the current state of the party, the rapidly deteriorating economic and social situation in the country, and most notably, Holness' ostensibly "laid-back" approach to his duties as opposition leader and party leader. This, if you will, constitutes the platform upon which Shaw's bid for office as party leader is predicated.

Among other things, Shaw declared: "We need to become a kinder and gentler nation, and our party must lead the way by becoming a kinder and gentler party. We must bring back the love and unity into the JLP, and from there bring back the love and unity to the Jamaica people."

I am with Shaw 100 per cent on that one.

But if you were to ask me, I would have no choice but to outline that this is the very vision Andrew Holness has been extolling over the years, certainly during his incumbency as party leader. It's a vision of a new kind of politics; a kind of politics that can only come by way of transformational leadership.

And since we know of Shaw's abiding penchant for a different kind of politics, a strong and compelling case may be made that he, all of a sudden, is trying desperately to come across and sound more like Holness - the very man whose approach and style he scoffs at.

Isn't this most ironic? How can you expect to make a credible and convincing sales pitch to JLP delegates when the 'product' you are criticising and seeking to compete against is the very product you are mimicking? How can you be taking issue with Andrew Holness' style when you yourself are now trying feverishly to copy his style?

Let us examine more closely why I proffer this observation. You see, both men have distinguished themselves over the years as prominent public figures, adroit politicians, and dedicated servants of the people. They are both diligent and intelligent men. Their idiosyncrasies and styles are diametrically opposed and, consequent on that, narratives pertaining to both gentlemen have emerged. It is these narratives that are at the vortex of the impending leadership showdown.

Shaw is typically a passionate and strident individual. He tends to be melodramatic and comes across as a more confrontational type of politician. He uses the parliamentary and political platform to good effect, delivering telling blows and, more often than not, humorous jabs at his political opponents in the People's National Party (PNP). While this general approach bodes well for grass-roots mobilisation, it sees him from time to time, having to contend with run-ins and bouts of controversy; not the least of which was his recent spat with Peter Bunting - a spat which saw him having to respond to a law suit and subsequently arranging for the settlement of damages awarded to Bunting.

It is in light of this knack for combat and fierce political engagement, that Shaw has accrued this profile of being a cantankerous, adversarial and entertaining politician. He is able to rile up a crowd by virtue of the 'ray-ray' he engages in, and the sensational rhetoric he purveys.

Holness, on the other hand, is a model of sobriety, endearment and political stealth. He is very methodical in thought and quite strategic in the execution of his duties. His organisational skills distinguish him among his contemporaries.

For Holness, a parliamentary Opposition, while being strident and assertive in addressing matters of national importance, must ensure that it doesn't manoeuvre in a manner that would cause the government of the day to use them as a convenient excuse to their own failures and mismanagement.

For those of us who are in touch with Jamaican popular culture and au fait with the reality of the grass roots, we know that we must never "watch di crowd in di dance, but pay attention to di sales at di bar". Another way of putting it is: "Don't pay attention to the noise in the market, but those who are actually purchasing."

It is clear for all to see that the dynamics of this JLP leadership contest are of such that they pit brains against brawn. Brawn will rile up the masses, energise the base, and fill dozens of buses with exuberant supporters en route to a mass meeting. It is brain work, however, that will strategically deploy resources, establish priorities and pull out the votes across polling divisions and constituencies.

Now the question is: Which is more important - filling up buses and riling up the crowd, or pulling out the votes on election day?

Let's cut to the chase. The kind of politics Mr Shaw typifies is not what the JLP, or Jamaica, for that matter, needs at this time. There is little doubt in my mind that he has come to realise this, and as such, is desperately seeking to 're-cast' himself. He is now intent on appearing like a paragon of virtue, sobriety and political nobility; attributes more closely associated with Holness than himself.

Against this backdrop, it has to be said that Mr Shaw and his team have no solid platform on which to stand in their bid for the reins of leadership of the party.

Shaw is no fool. In a world where brains count more than brawn, he is trying, profile-wise, to become something, or better yet, someone, he is not.

How then can Mr Shaw realistically expect the discerning and conscious delegates of the Labour Party to elect him as leader, especially when the very basis upon which he is seeking to unseat the incumbent - the charge that Holness is "too much of a nice guy" - is the exact mould in which he is now seeking to cast himself? Isn't Mr Shaw, in effect, seeking to put a square peg in a round hole?

As I leave you with those observations I urge you to consider for a moment, the many electoral successes of former Prime Minister P.J. Patterson. Patterson's political legacy bears out the importance and prudence of methodical action, sound organisation and effective strategising.

Lest we forget, his electoral success came at a time when the JLP grass roots had a leader who was never short on 'energising' the base and riling up the crowd, keen on taking it to the PNP whenever the opportunity presented itself. The decision of JLP delegates at conference must accord with the wisdom and palpable value of opting for brain rather than brawn.

Marlon Morgan is an aide in the Office of the Leader of the Opposition and a former vice-president of the JLP's young professional affiliate, G2K. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and marlonandremorgan@gmail.com.