Starmer Next Labour Leader

[Voll Blau]

Come on lads, I've genuinely enjoyed reading (most of) the debate on the last couple of pages. Don't drag it down to this level...

[Guest Markyblue]

Just now, Voll Blau said:

Come on lads, I've genuinely enjoyed reading (most of) the debate on the last couple of pages. Don't drag it down to this level...

True, hard day at work my apologies. 🙏

[sdb]

.

Edited 13 May 2020 by sdb

[Kopfkino]

10 minutes ago, Bilo said:

It's surreal that, in a country where an Old Etonian with de Pfeffel as a middle name just won a landslide majority driven by working-class votes, a barrister who grew up in a North London semi is declared to be unrelatable because he built a successful law career for himself. 

 

I think he'll struggle to connect not because of his background or being a successful lawyer but more because nothing he's done in politics so far suggests to me that he will. 

 

He was more than keen to blame Corbyn's leadership in the FT over the weekend, conveniently ignoring his own role in shaping a useless Brexit position over a number of years. I'm yet to see any evidence of good political instinct. When people get back to talking about visions and policy rather than crisis management, I don't see that he's going to be able to connect to the conservatism within people outside the 'metro hubs'.

[Bilo]

Just now, Kopfkino said:

 

I think he'll struggle to connect not because of his background or being a successful lawyer but more because nothing he's done in politics so far suggests to me that he will. 

 

He was more than keen to blame Corbyn's leadership in the FT over the weekend, conveniently ignoring his own role in shaping a useless Brexit position over a number of years. I'm yet to see any evidence of good political instinct. When people get back to talking about visions and policy rather than crisis management, I don't see that he's going to be able to connect to the conservatism within people outside the 'metro hubs'.

That's a fair comment regarding his role in Corbyn's shadow cabinet, but I would counter that the Brexit policy was formed by the members and voted on at conference. It's really not as simple as his critics make it out to be, although I take the point that he could have been more forceful in standing up against antisemitism. 

 

I think the headline was somewhat misleading as well; his argument was that the question of leadership was the one that arose most commonly on the doorstep, not that he endorsed those concerns.

 

The polling, and reports from Labour canvassers, does bear this out. It was certainly my experience in both 2017 and 2019, and I still maintain that a stronger leader in the former would've won it.

 

What's encouraging now though is his willingness to engage with the issue of patriotism positively, which will go down well in towns as well as cities. It killed Corbyn because he ran a mile from anything that could be interpreted as patriotism and Starmer is seemingly determined not to fall into the same trap. 

[Stadt]

Anneliese Dodds looks like a French man 

[Chocolate Teapot]

55 minutes ago, Bilo said:

It's surreal that, in a country where an Old Etonian with de Pfeffel as a middle name just won a landslide majority driven by working-class votes, a barrister who grew up in a North London semi is declared to be unrelatable because he built a successful law career for himself. 

I find the previous comment pretty astonishing and wonder what people actually think Johnson is. 

 

Starmer is Surrey grammar school educated from a relatively average background. Johnson is every bit the Etonian.....and Johnson is apparently the man of the people and a greater appeal to the working class?

 

"But Starmer is right to defend his background as it isn't what people say it is. His father worked in a factory as a toolmaker and his mother was a nurse. She was in and out of hospital with a rare illness which eventually forced her to stop working. Starmer was the first in his family to go to university. He is from a humble background."

 

 

Edited 13 May 2020 by Abrasive fox

[Kopfkino]

9 minutes ago, Bilo said:

That's a fair comment regarding his role in Corbyn's shadow cabinet, but I would counter that the Brexit policy was formed by the members and voted on at conference. It's really not as simple as his critics make it out to be, although I take the point that he could have been more forceful in standing up against antisemitism. 

 

I think the headline was somewhat misleading as well; his argument was that the question of leadership was the one that arose most commonly on the doorstep, not that he endorsed those concerns.

 

The polling, and reports from Labour canvassers, does bear this out. It was certainly my experience in both 2017 and 2019, and I still maintain that a stronger leader in the former would've won it.

 

What's encouraging now though is his willingness to engage with the issue of patriotism positively, which will go down well in towns as well as cities. It killed Corbyn because he ran a mile from anything that could be interpreted as patriotism and Starmer is seemingly determined not to fall into the same trap. 

 

But I'm talking all the way through really, not just what they produced at last year's conference and then presented to the public during the conference. It'd be a bit weak to absolve him of the huge chunk of responsibility he has to take for not grasping the biggest political issue of recent times and not being able to get the party to a coherent position that showed a willingness to listen to people they needed to listen to. 

 

I agree that a better leader would have won in 2017. It's impressive that May was bad enough to let Corbyn near and its equally impressive that Corbyn was bad enough that a disastrous campaign with taking your dead granny's money front and centre still managed to limp over the line. 

 

Yes he needs to embrace patriotism and The Telegraph(?) front page last week was a good pointer towards him doing that. But whilst it was bad for Corbyn, it won't make Starmer.

 

I feel he has the problem that he's a bit bland, his voice isn't particularly engaging or interesting, and he does come across a bit lawyery. He lacks natural charisma.

He's clearly a leader and he may well smash it in terms of looking like a PM and being competent. But if he doesn't then I worry for where he's really going to advance, I don't anticipate him being a strong campaigner and I'm skeptical whether policy will be where it needs to be. 

[Kopfkino]

16 minutes ago, Abrasive fox said:

I find the previous comment pretty astonishing and wonder what people actually think Johnson is. 

 

Starmer is Surrey grammar school educated from a relatively average background. Johnson is every bit the Etonian.....and Johnson is apparently the man of the people and a greater appeal to the working class?

 

Maybe because being able to connect with 'particular demographics' isn't just a function of background. 

 

During the 2005 Conservative leadership election, old-Etonian David Cameron was seen, by some margin, to be more in touch with everyday people than brought-up-on-a-council estate David Davis. 

[Lionator]

It is indeed a credit to Johnson's persona that he managed to persuade the majority that he is not everything that they perceive to detest. 

[BlueSi13]

1 hour ago, Bilo said:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/keir-starmer-approval-rating-boris-johnson-first-time-a4438786.html

 

Looks as though he's clicking with the public. 

Do you know what you've just posted?  Did you even read the article?

 

The survey states that 57% of the British public thinks the Prime Minister is doing "fairly well" or "very well".  This is in comparison to Keir Starmer on 40%.

 

Since when is 40% larger than 57%? 

 

What an absolute embarrassment of a click-bait headline... 

[hackneyfox]

9 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

Do you know what you've just posted?  Did you even read the article?

 

The survey states that 57% of the British public thinks the Prime Minister is doing "fairly well" or "very well".  This is in comparison to Keir Starmer on 40%.

 

Since when is 40% larger than 57%? 

 

What an absolute embarrassment of a click-bait headline... 

Oh dear how embarrassing.

Johnson 57% good 35% bad so a plus rating of 22%

Starmer 40% good 17% bad so a plus rating of 23%.

 

Grab a calculator and see if you can work why Starmer has a better rating than Johnson by 1%.

[BlueSi13]

2 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

Oh dear how embarrassing.

Johnson 57% good 35% bad so a plus rating of 22%

Starmer 40% good 17% bad so a plus rating of 23%.

 

Grab a calculator and see if you can work why Starmer has a better rating than Johnson by 1%.

Huh?

 

So nearly 60% of the country thinks Boris is doing a good job compared to Starmer on 40% so that of course puts Starmer ahead.

 

I suppose Labour are ahead in the polls as well despite being 20 points behind? 

 

Boris Johnson could make the whole country millionaires at midnight tonight.  Wouldn't stop a third of the country thinking he's satan reborn.

[Mike Oxlong]

1 minute ago, BlueSi13 said:

Huh?

 

So nearly 60% of the country thinks Boris is doing a good job compared to Starmer on 40% so that of course puts Starmer ahead.

 

I suppose Labour are ahead in the polls as well despite being 20 points behind? 

 

Boris Johnson could make the whole country millionaires at midnight tonight.  Wouldn't stop a third of the country thinking he's satan reborn.

Well, if he gave me a cool million I’d be prepared to forgive him for his misdemeanours 

[hackneyfox]

2 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

Huh?

 

So nearly 60% of the country thinks Boris is doing a good job compared to Starmer on 40% so that of course puts Starmer ahead.

 

I suppose Labour are ahead in the polls as well despite being 20 points behind? 

 

Boris Johnson could make the whole country millionaires at midnight tonight.  Wouldn't stop a third of the country thinking he's satan reborn.

Stop now you're making a Johnson of yourself.

 

You're failing on both statistics and economics.

 

Edited 13 May 2020 by hackneyfox

[Chocolate Teapot]

54 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Maybe because being able to connect with 'particular demographics' isn't just a function of background. 

 

During the 2005 Conservative leadership election, old-Etonian David Cameron was seen, by some margin, to be more in touch with everyday people than brought-up-on-a-council estate David Davis. 

Wouldn't class the average tory member as an everyday person but maybe thats just me.

[Izzy]

The old ‘Starmers Dad was a toolmaker and his Mum was a nurse’ line is getting more boring than ‘John Majors Dad worked in the circus’.

 

 

[Mike Oxlong]

Just now, Izzy said:

The old ‘Starmers Dad was a toolmaker and his Mum was a nurse’ line is getting more boring than ‘John Majors Dad worked in the circus’.

 

 

That’s a coincidence. So does Stanley Johnson’s son 

[Izzy]

1 minute ago, Mike Oxlong said:

That’s a coincidence. So does Stanley Johnson’s son 

[Strokes]

2 hours ago, Bilo said:

They could call an early election if they chose - like in 2017 and 2019 - but they won't. Because it would be suicide. 

And the fact that they have a massive majority but yeah suicide is the reason

 

[bovril]

5 minutes ago, Izzy said:

The old ‘Starmers Dad was a toolmaker and his Mum was a nurse’ line is getting more boring than ‘John Majors Dad worked in the circus’.

 

 

Yeah but this is Britain. So drawing attention to the last 10 years of Tory rule isn't enough, you have to connect with the working class or some shit.

[Kopfkino]

50 minutes ago, Abrasive fox said:

Wouldn't class the average tory member as an everyday person but maybe thats just me.

It was public polling that said he was more in touch, you know the thing that asks normal people, but never mind. 

[Stadt]

It is a bit weird that’s it’s perceived that the Labour leader has to jump through a load of hoops that just simply don’t apply to the Conservative leader.

 

Hardly a novel point but the idea that the Labour leader needs to be working class just doesn’t wash when places like Bolsover voted in Johnson. 
 

I just think fundamentally Labour are between a rock and a hard place, without Scotland they need a massive, almost unprecedented youth turnout which won’t happen. I can’t see current Tory voters ever being disaffected despite what happens

Edited 14 May 2020 by Stadt

[Strokes]

31 minutes ago, Stadt said:

It is a bit weird that’s it’s perceived that the Labour leader has to jump through a load of hoops that just simply don’t apply to the Conservative leader.

 

Hardly a novel point but the idea that the Labour leader needs to be working class just doesn’t wash when places like Bolsover voted in Johnson. 
 

I just think fundamentally Labour are in a rock and a hard place, without Scotland they need a massive, almost unprecedented youth turnout which won’t happen. I can’t see current Tory voters ever being disaffected despite what happens

He doesn’t need to be working class but a he needs to win the working class vote. How can he take back places like Bolsover? Places where it was unimaginable only 5 years ago, would ever support a Tory government. The political landscape has changed so much since brexit and I can’t see a few PMQs being enough to celebrate a return to power. Anyone who doesn’t think Starmer has a mammoth task on his hands, is completely delusional.

[StanSP]

Surely you have to take in to account a lot of people didn't vote Labour purely because of Corbyn? And they did it out of the principle of not liking him/wanting him so didn't want him in power. They used their vote to send a statement of not wanting him as a leader of Labour, let alone the country. I don't think it's that inconceivable their vote could swing back to Labour now there's a much more efficient person in charge of the party. The volume of people in that position I'm not sure...