Starmer Next Labour Leader

[Mark_w]

I've decided I'm in the Jess Phillips camp.

[Alf Bentley]

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-poll-labour-party_uk_5e0d2669e4b0b2520d1c8d3a

 

"Keir Starmer is comfortably leading the race to take over from Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party, a poll of party members has revealed.The shadow Brexit secretary is ahead of Rebecca Long-Bailey, the shadow business secretary who appears to be a favourite of the left-wing of the party.The YouGov survey of 1,059 members, who were polled between December 20 and 30. has Starmer out in front in each round under the party’s preferential voting system".

 

Keir Starmer 31%
Rebecca Long-Bailey 20%
Jess Phillips 11%
Yvette Cooper 7%
Clive Lewis 7%
Emily Thornberry 6%
Lisa Nandy 5%

[CosbehFox]

On 20/12/2019 at 10:37, Alf Bentley said:

 

Depends what he means exactly. Lewis isn't an unthinking, signed-up Hard Left Corbynista, more of a soft left maverick. He'll be an interesting candidate.

 

He may conceivably be expressing it this way to win members' votes - with the aim of loosening the Corbynista grip over the party decision-making machinery.

Not all party members/activists are in the pocket of the likes of Milne & Lansman or naive non-thinkers like some of the idiots exposed on Twitter or wherever.

 

Here's his Guardian article announcing his candidacy: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/19/im-standing-labour-leader-clive-lewis

He's hinting at alliances with other centre-left parties, is a strong advocate of electoral reform & is strong on environmental issues. He resigned from the shadow cabinet because he wanted a clear Remain stance......controversial now, maybe not in 2024.

 

He's also right to see the election result as a judgment not only on Corbyn but also on aspects of New Labour in govt. Labour's support in the north/midlands was falling in the Blair/Brown/Miliband era. It's just reached a disastrous peak under Corbyn.

If you hear ex-Labour voters in the North interviewed, they're not just saying Corbyn was bad. They're saying Labour's done nothing for them long-term. Unfair to the better aspects of New Labour, such as improved public services, but it is true that Labour in govt did very little to bring new investment or good jobs to areas deindustralised under Thatcher.

 

Whether he's the best candidate, I'm not sure. He's an excitable character, though quite charismatic. His candidacy should make for a better, more thought-provoking contest, though.

I think he'd be a very sensible choice in a period where the party needs a re-build. Someone to just tick it over and get some sense within it. 

[Guest MattP]

On 24/12/2019 at 22:12, Mark_w said:

I've decided I'm in the Jess Phillips camp.

Really? She's a professional victim whose main appeal appears to be she's a gobby chav. She strikes me as more of a glorified social worker than a politician.

 

Cant believe anyone would seriously want her as a leader.

[Voll Blau]

Just made the mistake of clicking "Starmer" on Twitter trends.

 

Christ, no wonder the party's in the state it's in. Some absolute loons knocking about. Corbyn could salvage his legacy now by forming his own party and taking these headcases with him.

[Facecloth]

10 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Just made the mistake of clicking "Starmer" on Twitter trends.

 

Christ, no wonder the party's in the state it's in. Some absolute loons knocking about. Corbyn could salvage his legacy now by forming his own party and taking these headcases with him.

He could just call it Corbyn and they'd be happy.

[Bilo]

The more I see of Starmer, the more impressed I am. Working class roots, ferociously intelligent, reached the pinnacle of his profession and articulate and forceful enough to make Johnson have sleepless nights before PMQs. 

 

He's also largely untainted by Corbynista lunacy as easily the most capable and logical head in the shadow cabinet and a unifying candidate for all but the most extreme of the headbangers who, for reasons I can't fathom, seem to think Lavery or Long-Bailey could beat Johnson in an election. 

 

I do wonder if some actively want Labour to lose elections as they prefer protesting to the responsibility of power.

[urban.spaceman]

 

[The Horse's Mouth]

Starmer is very uninspiring but tbh, I'd rather it be him as the next election is a write off anyway barring a scathing scandal 

[Lionator]

4 hours ago, Bilo said:

The more I see of Starmer, the more impressed I am. Working class roots, ferociously intelligent, reached the pinnacle of his profession and articulate and forceful enough to make Johnson have sleepless nights before PMQs. 

 

He's also largely untainted by Corbynista lunacy as easily the most capable and logical head in the shadow cabinet and a unifying candidate for all but the most extreme of the headbangers who, for reasons I can't fathom, seem to think Lavery or Long-Bailey could beat Johnson in an election. 

 

I do wonder if some actively want Labour to lose elections as they prefer protesting to the responsibility of power.

The reasons that people dislike Starmer seem to be based on him being a well-spoken London MP. My working class tory voting relatives don't give a monkeys whether a leader has a northern accent or not. They just want somebody competent. Like previously mentioned, it's a popularity contest and having somebody as articulate and well-polished as Starmer will be a breath of fresh air from the dishevelled Corbyn era. The Labour party does not need to be ready to win an election tomorrow, it needs to rebuild and rebrand and it has a few years to do that. Starmer, while uninspiring is the most capable out of those lot of doing that.  

 

 

[Heathrow fox]

6 hours ago, MattP said:

Really? She's a professional victim whose main appeal appears to be she's a gobby chav. She strikes me as more of a glorified social worker than a politician.

 

Cant believe anyone would seriously want her as a leader.

I must admit I found it hard to imagine Jeremy Corbyn locked in a room with the Trumps,Putins and Macrons of this world.Jess Phillips though?Really?What would she do with that lot?Crack jokes about farting in people’s faces?

[Guesty]

Biggest problem with Starmer is every time I ever saw him on TV he was talking about how bad Brexit would be. Seemed he was one of the most vocal remainers.

 

I think it would be hard for him to win over all the northern seats who left Labour mainly because of Brexit. He seems the most competent of the lot; but people vote more with their emotions nowadays.

 

On the other hand, if Brexit goes badly, he could be the ideal candidate for when the next election comes around.

Edited 2 January 2020 by Guesty

[bovril]

1 hour ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Starmer is very uninspiring but tbh, I'd rather it be him as the next election is a write off anyway barring a scathing scandal 

The last few years have proved that things change very quickly. 

[Fox1norfolk]

36 minutes ago, bovril said:

The last few years have proved that things change very quickly. 

The main problem is it’s a pretty uninspiring bunch of candidates to select from, surely there’s got to be someone else in the party who is better than this lot.

[Guest MattP]

15 minutes ago, Fox1norfolk said:

The main problem is it’s a pretty uninspiring bunch of candidates to select from, surely there’s got to be someone else in the party who is better than this lot.

It's a shit list but anyone with any credibility wasn't going go try and make Jeremy Corbyn PM so they have long gone.

 

If Starmer is that far ahead the NEC are going to do some serious rigging.

[Dr The Singh]

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

It's a shit list but anyone with any credibility wasn't going go try and make Jeremy Corbyn PM so they have long gone.

 

If Starmer is that far ahead the NEC are going to do some serious rimming

[Bilo]

My main worry about Starmer is that his strengths could turn into weaknesses.

 

He strikes me as a thoughtful politician who isn't overly fond of the soundbite and wants to make judgements based on facts. Fine if you want to win a debate, not so much if you want to win an election these days.

 

This is a world where a known liar just won a majority of 80 and a POTUS who is out of his depth, underqualified, beset by scandals and undergoing an alarming cognitive decline is favourite to win a second term. Facts and substance matter much less than style and charisma, and that's something Starmer's team may need to bear in mind. He would, however, exude strength and control as a leader, which would be helpful.

[Bilo]

4 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Starmer is very uninspiring but tbh, I'd rather it be him as the next election is a write off anyway barring a scathing scandal 

Johnson won for two reasons- inept opposition and painting himself as the face of Brexit, appealing to those who voted for it.

 

His problems going forward are twofold. Firstly, it's unlikely he'll face such an unpopular Labour leader in 2024 with some of the names in the running. Secondly, if Brexit goes tits up, he's still the face of Brexit. That's not a label he's in control of any more, and one that'll be used by his opponents at will if the dire economic projections pan out.

[bovril]

8 minutes ago, Bilo said:

My main worry about Starmer is that his strengths could turn into weaknesses.

 

He strikes me as a thoughtful politician who isn't overly fond of the soundbite and wants to make judgements based on facts. Fine if you want to win a debate, not so much if you want to win an election these days.

 

This is a world where a known liar just won a majority of 80 and a POTUS who is out of his depth, underqualified, beset by scandals and undergoing an alarming cognitive decline is favourite to win a second term. Facts and substance matter much less than style and charisma, and that's something Starmer's team may need to bear in mind. He would, however, exude strength and control as a leader, which would be helpful.

Labour aren't going to be able to put up anyone who can out-charisma Johnson, so they should go for someone who can beat him in debate. And if the next five years see a continuing decline in living standards, a rise in inequality and economic problems caused by Brexit, but people still won't vote for someone because he is thoughtful, pro-EU and part of the 'Islington elite', then frankly we are ****ed as a nation anyway. 

[Desabafar]

what does Starmer offer that appeals to people in Nuneaton, Mansfield, Blyth, Leigh? tbh i have no clue what he stands for, what his beliefs and principles are apart from remaining in the eu. 2017 was a bit of an anomaly really, the trend for labour has been downwards in their heartlands and in provincial towns for years and the way to changethat they think is by putting forward a bland man that in public has spoken about almost nothing but a second referendum. I predict he will lose votes if leader

 

Lisa Nandy is the pick of a rubbish bunch, she seems to at least grasp where much of the country outside london and student towns are at

[bovril]

1 minute ago, Desabafar said:

what does Starmer offer that appeals to people in Nuneaton, Mansfield, Blyth, Leigh? tbh i have no clue what he stands for, what his beliefs and principles are apart from remaining in the eu. 2017 was a bit of an anomaly really, the trend for labour has been downwards in their heartlands and in provincial towns for years and the way to changethat they think is by putting forward a bland man that in public has spoken about almost nothing but a second referendum. I predict he will lose votes if leader

 

Lisa Nandy is the pick of a rubbish bunch, she seems to at least grasp where much of the country outside london and student towns are at

Surely what's good for people in Nuneaton or Mansfield is what's good for people in Cambridge or Edinburgh. I imagine we all want variations of the same thing. If people believe a political party offer that, what does the leader's background matter? 

Edited 2 January 2020 by bovril

[Desabafar]

14 minutes ago, bovril said:

Surely what's good for people in Nuneaton or Mansfield is what's good for people in Cambridge or Edinburgh. I imagine we all want variations of the same thing. If people believe a political party offer that, what does the leader's background matter? 

i didnt say anything about whats good for them, I said that appeals to them and I didnt say anything about his background. Labour's struggles havent only just appeared theyve been leaking voters ever since 97 and not just because 97 was so emphatic. By 2010, they were lower in Mansfield than they were in 1983. Labour has a problem with provincial towns because of changing demographics and the fact they are representing the cultural views of their graduate voters rather than these towns. im sure you are aware that people in Nuneaton see things and have different priorities to those in Cambridge. The boundaries are likely to change for the next election to likely make it even harder for them. I dont see anything in Starmer, although i dont know much of what he stands for, that can change this or do the party good

Edited 2 January 2020 by Desabafar

[The Horse's Mouth]

53 minutes ago, Bilo said:

Johnson won for two reasons- inept opposition and painting himself as the face of Brexit, appealing to those who voted for it.

 

His problems going forward are twofold. Firstly, it's unlikely he'll face such an unpopular Labour leader in 2024 with some of the names in the running. Secondly, if Brexit goes tits up, he's still the face of Brexit. That's not a label he's in control of any more, and one that'll be used by his opponents at will if the dire economic projections pan out.

You think Starmer a centre left hard remainer could win back the red wall? Just isn't going to happen, you'll need a very special leader to flip this around, no chance Boris loses the next election with a stable government in place 

[Bilo]

10 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

You think Starmer a centre left hard remainer could win back the red wall? Just isn't going to happen, you'll need a very special leader to flip this around, no chance Boris loses the next election with a stable government in place 

The new Blue Wall is built on sand. 

 

The two reasons the Tories won - Brexit and Corbyn- won't be vote winners in 2024, and the government hasn't exactly exuded competence thus far.

[Guest MattP]

8 hours ago, Bilo said:

The new Blue Wall is built on sand. 

 

The two reasons the Tories won - Brexit and Corbyn- won't be vote winners in 2024, and the government hasn't exactly exuded competence thus far.

They might have been the main reasons given but it's far deeper than that - Labour has been moving away from its voting base for a decade and this was the election we finally saw it translate into seat losses.

 

Culturally the Labour party has been moving for some time, people like Paul Mason, Owen Jones and Ash Sarker etc have been on the airwaves weekly for a while calling their own voters everything from gammon to stupid and then they act surprised when they go elsewhere - Liddle did a good piece in the ST this Sunday about the Laboir council in Middlesborough banning Chubby Brown as his humour didn't meet their standards.

 

Until the people inside the party start to realise they can't keep telling people how to think and act this will continue - they've actually got many of these votes over the years despite many of the people being naturally quite right wing aside from fiscal policy.

 

It's going to be far easier for the Tories to move left on economics that it will be for Labour to move right on social issues and if they can't theyll lose more of red wall rather than win it back.

 

I don't think it has quite sunk in what has happened to Labour yet, with Scotland gone for them a Labour majority now means they have to win England outright and I just don't see that happening whatever occurs.

 

Starmer isn't the long term answer either, he's the best of a bad bunch here but he was one of the architects of the second referendum strategy and he was in the Corbyn cabinet. So all the issues of trust, antisemitism, not respecting the voters aren't going away.

 

Many of the seats they need now have 15,000/20,000 Tory majorities and the party is appealing to nobody outside the young, BAME and public sector demographics.

 

You need another untainted Tony Blair to turn this around.