For the non Parliment watcher like me Starmer seems like a complete non entity, never on the news and never saying much when he does manage to get on TV
Exactly. What I said before he was elected. He was the right choice for many reasons but he won't help them get elected. As I said a few months ago, the average voter won't even know who he is and if/when they do hear him they will just glaze over.
For the non Parliment watcher like me Starmer seems like a complete non entity, never on the news and never saying much when he does manage to get on TV
Interesting. It's always insightful to hear what people who are not hugely glued to politics think about events and people.
You could replace Starmer in your sentence with Corbyn at the time, it was a common criticism.
For those who don't watch parliament etc. Where would you most be likely to see news/updates from the opposition leader?
Surely the kicking he's giving Boris in PMQ is making the news so will increase public awareness.
If it's not, then we have a system ever more broken beyond repair than I first thought.
Surely the kicking he’s giving Boris in PMQ is making the news so will increase public awareness.
You'd hope, and assume. But is it really?
For those who don’t watch parliament etc. Where would you most be likely to see news/updates from the opposition leader?
That's a pretty key issue across all politics. How do you put political issues out there where more of the "I don't do politics" types will see it, understand it and start to engage with it.
You could replace Starmer in your sentence with Corbyn at the time, it was a common criticism.
Not really Corbyn was often featured but for the wrong reasons.
Surely the kicking he’s giving Boris in PMQ is making the news so will increase public awareness.
Nope, I only knew because I have been looking here regularly, I popped in a few weeks back thinking that Starmer seems shite and was surprised to read here the idea that he was doing so well.
Due to PMQs we have spoken about Starmer .
Whenever someone speaks to me about Dumbojo I say how refreshing it is to have Starmer , a man who knows what he is talking about.
We are spreading the word.
Even if you tell your soppy ,racist ,bigot mother what a nice man he is and how handsome he looks we can just make people aware of him.
Anyone who doesn't like him...compare him to Dumbojo not Corbyn.
You're right. Quick Google and one of the most obvious articles is a red top having a pop because he owns a £1m house and several acres of green belt that "could" be worth £10m. Clearly, he can't represent ordinary people with wealth like that, but the Tories can? If people really fall for that, we deserve every dry bumming we get FFS!
Surely, if he wanted to turn seven acres of green belt into £10m, he would be better off backing the Tories
I suspect he gets better coverage because he's their placeman. He'll be lionised in the media (whilst attacking like a kitten) as leader of the opposition (Piers Morgan does a better job) whilst delivering a moderate Tory agenda and not at all putting the wind up his backers, owners of supermarket chains, car distributors or indeed those middle eastern interests.
It's then the job of the press to persuade the poor men to go round shouting the case for the rich men's candidate, and don't they do it well. People are rightly getting concerned about easing off the lockdown but could they tell you what Labour's policy is? Not owning a tv is my excuse but having looked at Starmer's pronouncements they seem as terrifyingly socialist like 'the Welfare State is a nice thing to have' but then that's why he is where he is and Corbyn isn't.
Of the UK electorate, that bothers to vote on a regular basis.
How many would easily be categorised as “moderate Tory”?
Surely the kicking he’s giving Boris in PMQ is making the news so will increase public awareness.
Nope, I only knew because I have been looking here regularly, I popped in a few weeks back thinking that Starmer seems shite and was surprised to read here the idea that he was doing so well.
Unless you take a real interest in following the news and do it sensibly through some reliable sources, most people don't see this stuff on a day to day basis.
And if you were to form your opinion on content seen on Facebook, then you'll just see he's a pedophile sympathiser.
Piers Morgan does a better job
Piers Morgan is an angry bully.
Corbyn struggled because he spent most of his time angrily shouting down the opposition without displaying any real leadership qualities of his own.
Time will tell if Starmer has all the right ingredients, but his intelligence, temperament and comprehensive approach are exactly what we need. Enough of all this tribal bullshit and my dad's got bigger muscles than your dad. Time we acted like grown ups again and stopped shouting at each other.
but his intelligence, temperament and comprehensive approach are exactly what we need.
For what? What will this approach change? It'll increase his chances of winning an election, but what then will he do? The corrollary to this intelligent and polite approach is that nothing much will change, which is why the rightwing press and their backers are not too alarmed at the prospect of PM Starmer. It seems fairly obvious to me fairly that people in this country don't really want to change anything, they just want to be insulated and feel good about all the injustices that are perpetrated on them and others. Starmer's going to be a great candidate to do that.
Piers Morgan is an angry bully.
Piers Morgan uses manufactured anger to self publicise.
He supposedly 'traduced' that crook Bridgen the other day.
He really didn't he just shouted at him and Bridgen sat there with a "I'm just here to soak up some heat, I've already had the cheque, the money is in the bank" look on his face.
How many would easily be categorised as “moderate Tory”?
Probably a lot more than you'd think.
dahz as usual your own extreme views are blinding you, why us it important for Starmer to be electable? Here's some reasons:
1. Get Boris and his downright dangerous bunch of incompetent morons out.
2. Prevent next set of incompetent morons from getting in.
3. Stop a group of competent hard right people getting in.
4. Bringing politics back towards the centre.
5. Undo some of the madness that has been perpetrated on us and provide some stable governance to reduce the impact of what's coming.
Ok you may not get the left wing utopia you're after but the country will be a lot better off with Starmer in charge. The 5 points above do represent significant change from where we are today, it might not be free broadband for everyone and renationalise everything but they were never going to happen anyway.
dahz as usual your own extreme views
If you think my views are extreme then we truly are screwed as I reckon I'm fairly conservative these days 🙂
- Tackling the climate emergency
- A fair and transparent democratic system
- Progressive taxation and an end to avoidance/evasion by off-shoreing.
- State ownership (but necessarily operation) of strategic utilities and infrastructure.
That's it. That's all I'm bothered about. If that is extreme or a 'left wing utopia' then we might as well give up now and let the right wing nutters do what they want.
a moderate Tory agenda
There we are. We all knew it was coming. And most of us know it is nonsense.
It’ll increase his chances of winning an election, but what then will he do?
I’m not sure it will, but hope that it does. You’re not going to join in with the calls of “he’d just be a Tory PM with a red rose” brigade are you Dazh? If so, why did you vote for him?
You’re not going to join in with the calls of “he’d just be a Tory PM with a red rose” brigade are you Dazh?
Would you be pleased if I did? If you can find any instances of me saying Starmer is a tory go for it. I guarantee you won't find any, and never will. I don't vote for tories.
4. Bringing politics back towards the centre.
Leaving aside the implicit claim that the centre is the right place to be a cursory look at the recent political history shows this idea to be badly flawed.
We had this under Blair. He went for the "centre". The tories moved rightwards to distinguish themselves. Blair moved rightwards to keep the "centre".
End result being we now have hard right policies which are considered the norm. Not quite as bad as the USA but far worse than elsewhere in Europe.
Cameron then used the tactic of keeping hard right on some things and moving towards the "centre" on others to boost his support.
To use theotherjonv bus analogy. The problem is if you keep using the bus to the next door village then the original bus gets cancelled and you then end up with a choice of that bus or another one to the next village along.
I'm amazed that someone who has apparently said so little and has no media coverage has managed to convince some posters that he is a Tory or the second coming of Blair. Where's the manifesto they have read as I'd like to take a look?
For what? What will this approach change?
I would've thought that was obvious. It brings back sensibility and inspires constructive fact-driven debate.
Even if he were a hardcore Thacherite, it bodes better for all of our futures because it's the only way we can possibly progress on to something better.
Having two political parties shouting at each other, manipulating the public through emotional and divisive topics, is only ever going to result in a constant battle and the pendulum forever swinging back and forth.
You might get what you wish for momentarily, but it will be quickly gone without any solid foundations. And it's those foundations we need before absolutely anything else.
To be perfectly honest anything right now to get rid of ****s like Raab, Johnson, Patel et al.
Blair and his 'Tory Lite', anything.
Anything to stop my country pursuing a xenophobic alt right agenda which is making us the laughing stock of the world and turning us into even more of a global irrelevance than we already were.
Internationalist, cooperative, grown up.
I’m amazed that someone who has apparently said so little and has no media coverage has managed to convince some posters that he is a Tory or the second coming of Blair.
The problem that I and a lot of others had with Corbyn and those around him was not policy-based. Apart from some fruit-loop ideas, there was broad approval of a lot of the policies. The problem was one of competence. You looked at the team he'd assembled and I wouldn't personally have trusted them to run a bath, never mind the country.
I feel exactly the same when I look at the gang of lightweights, Brexiteer zealots, and rank incompetents that presently occupy the Tory front bench.
So there is a lot to be said about watching a man who looks serious, like he has thoroughly grasped his brief and is up to speed on all the details. Hardly an accusation you could level at Joris Bohnson. And just look how that's playing out. He's even lost the Torygraph. People talk about the press backing the Tory's under any circumstances, but the press like to back winners. Hence the support for Blair. They didn't want to be seen to be blindly following a Tory party mired in sleaze and corruption.
The mood at the moment of an anxious nation is to look for a feeling of security in a leader who could locate their own arse using both hands. Anyone seen our glorious leader of late? No. Because he's hiding under his desk again, dreading next Wednesday where he will be dismantled at PMQs again.
see the Daily Fail are now going after his "socialist" credentials.... as he owns some land in surrey behind his house (that could be worth 10 mil with planning permission that it doesn't have though the council is under pressure to provide planning permission.... yada-yada)
Won’t somebody think of the donkeys!!!
The next headline will be along the lines of “Kier boots out donkey sanctuary to profit from land sale”...
That’s it? After all the digging they’ve doubtlessly done, all the Daily Heil could could come up with is ‘man buys a field for his mum to keep some donkeys in’?
Not exactly Watergate, is it?
Well it is one of your Binbin Bingo top 5 slurs against Corbyn so...
Competency is everything for Labour. Labours recent policies of nationalising everything were not hated (in the main) because they were socialism but because they appeared to be reckless spending of money. Labour need to look competent and win over the voters who don't trust them with the countries finances.
@ctk - Magic Grandads problem wasn’t so much keeping donkeys in his mums field, it was that he’d appointed them all as shadow cabinet members.
Seriously, if that’s all they’ve got on Starmer and they still published it, that’s pretty desperate.
I can’t see it making much difference to Boris being comprehensively dismantled again on Wednesday. Unless he sends Patrick Bateman in his place again. But he seems to have disappeared too as another member of our absentee government
Competency is everything for Labour. Labours recent policies of nationalising everything were not hated (in the main) because they were socialism but because they appeared to be reckless spending of money.
100% this.
Was happy to see:
Which is similar to what was proposed in the 2019 manifesto, but it's now nicely framed in a way it applies to real people and real solutions.
Competency is everything for Labour. Labours recent policies of nationalising everything were not hated (in the main) because they were socialism but because they appeared to be reckless spending of money.
It wasn't reckless.
Like you say - appeared to be reckless. There's no money in the economy because of austerity.
Why do you think the Tories have pumped so much in recently? (Echo-ing some of Labour's spend.) 200 Billion using the ways and means facility. Basically - printed money - although I don't like that term. There will be no interest and it's a debt by the government that won't be paid back.
When we get used to the idea a red in the government's spending is black in the private sector. There is no balancing of the books. This causes so much hardship.
That said Labour didn't and won't continue with this argument - they also talk of balancing the books because they're terrified of the media reporting the finances as the household analogy.
Repeat after me the government's finances are not the same as a household. They are the issuer and we are the user.
As for Career Starmer's recent headline - I'm guessing this is the start. And who didn't expect it? For all his 'forensic' courtroom dramatics - it won't matter a jot in terms of Labour's popularity. (Maybe his own clearly.)
The war for government is fought on emotion not forensic analysis - this just satisfies the pedants. What we want is progressive policies - and Labour need to capitalise on this now.
Anyone seen our glorious leader of late? No. Because he’s hiding under his desk again, dreading next Wednesday where he will be dismantled at PMQs again.
He's been hiding since he was elected - clearly doesn't do well with pressure in my book. He's not going to last. Being dismantled by Starmer doesn't account for much at all. PMQ's have always been overrated as evidence of a parties' success.
– it won’t matter a jot in terms of Labour’s popularity.
With Starmer in charge me and Mrs zip will both vote labour for the first time in our lives. ( I’m a lib party member )
What more can the Labour Party want out of him?
Votes win prizes.
Lucy Powell on Sky aligning herself with government's attitude towards schools. And walking exactly the same line.
I love New New Labour (so far). They are just a polite version of the Tories.
Kier Starmer
tee hee
Lucy Powell on Sky aligning herself with government’s attitude towards schools. And walking exactly the same line.
Interesting - it seems at odds with what Rachel Reeves said yesterday, again on Sky. Can't find anything yet on Lucy Powell's comments - have you got a link?
@Rone, yes I think if Labour got into power and nationalised water or the railways and it was successful then they could talk about the rest. Trying to convince people before they were elected was a losing battle- especially when they "crashed the economy and sold all the gold" last time they were in power.
Labour have a job to change the language around economics and spending- at the moment they are trying to fight in the Tories back yard. eg They should talk about the NHS as a % of GDP. There basically is a magic money tree and
Repeat after me the government’s finances are not the same as a household. They are the issuer and we are the user.
Labour need to look competent and win over the voters who don’t trust them with the countries finances.
For competent read 'won't change anything'. I'm not interested in the sort of competence which results in the state subsidising rich corporations and defending shareholder income whilst imposing austerity and cutbacks on taxpayers. It's the same when people use the 'responsible management of the economy' argument. All this means is maintaining the system where money flows upwards to a tiny few whilst the general population are left to try and survive with shrinking incomes and rising prices. Even now with the pandemic you can see the message emerging of 'be thankful you have jobs at all'. Well that's not the sort of competence I'm looking for, and Starmer will be constantly reminded of that by those of us who voted for him every time he's tempted to side with the landlords, spivs and CEOs.
What more can the Labour Party want out of him?
Someone who will retain those people who voted Labour in the past possibly?
Appealing to Libdem voters means excluding quite a few Labour voters.
Someone who will retain those people who voted Labour in the past possibly?
Retain them? You mean getting those who used to vore labour to do so again after they deserted the party in droves last December to elect Tory MP's instead?
You mean getting those who used to vore labour to do so again after they deserted the party in droves last December?
Well the Tories are going to lose them soon. They are there to be snapped up. For a good % of them the non-appearance of deportation buses looking for anyone with a suntan will come as a shock.
It appears from around here that Starmer is upsetting the far to extreme left nearly as much as the hard to far to extreme right. As far as I am concerned that is a result in itself.
Starmer is upsetting the far to extreme left
He's upsetting the 20th century state socialists, which isn't hard because they'll be upset at anyone who doesn't use the word 'bourgeois' on a daily basis. Doesn't really matter though cos there's not many of them left.
You mean getting those who used to vore labour to do so again after they deserted the party in droves last December to elect Tory MP’s instead?
He's not going to win them back. If there's one thing I know about the heroic white working class northerner it's that they put pride before reason and aren't in the habit of admitting their mistakes.
Magic Grandads
(sic)
Corbyn gets it in the neck for his age but never Hodge who's 5 years older. Curious.
Corbyn gets it in the neck for his age but never Hodge who’s 5 years older. Curious.
Age discrimination is ok if it's someone you don't like.
Some of the really magic commentators on the current crisis have been of the great-grandad variety: David King, Michael Marmot, Richard Wilkinson, Paul Nurse.
Eh?
