Keir Starmer Labour Leader

Shamwow said:
Alright mate, not sure what your overall point is to be honest apart from clearly being obsessed with Momentum to an amusing level.
Click to expand...

My point is that Starmer has been a more effective opposition leader in a month than Corbyn was in years.

It’s funny seeing people irritated that he’s getting broader support. Heaven forbid he might appeal to a wider spectrum of the electorate.

Probably a conspiracy though, right?
 
Spark said:
My point is that Starmer has been a more effective opposition leader in a month than Corbyn was in years.

It’s funny seeing people irritated that he’s getting broader support. Heaven forbid he might appeal to a wider spectrum of the electorate.

Probably a conspiracy though, right?
Click to expand...

No other leader of the opposition has defeated a sitting government in the HoC more than Corbyn did, overtaking Thatcher’s record when she was in opposition. Corbyn led Labour to their biggest vote increase since Attlee, depriving the Tories of a majority and reversing a decline in votes in areas that began under Blair. Completely shifted the debate on austerity and economic policy, reflected in the Conservative platform Johnson ran on and Sunak’s budget announced in early March. Starmer himself ran his leadership campaign basically on the same policy platform introduced by Corbyn in 2017.

But please, do tell me why Starmer in one month has done more than Corbyn did in all his time as leader. Is it because Andrew Neil called him forensic in a tweet?
 
sun_tzu said:
Because he's managed to go a whole month without doing / saying something to get him on the front pages for being unelectable?
Click to expand...

What headlines did Corbyn produce in his first month due to something he did/said that made him unelectable?
 
BobbyManc said:
If Labour’s policy is to backdate any rises in HB, surely that has to be explicitly communicated. You can backdate HB for a month if you’re a worker (wouldn’t this time period also need extending?) making a new application but would that apply to someone already on the system who has run into arrears prior to a policy that increases the amount of HB made available?

Seems to me the housing benefit proposal lacked a call for it to be applied retrospectively as well as an additional policy to pause rent while the system was implemented.
Click to expand...

There's a lot it didn't mention. Like whether the taper should change, what the earnings threshold should move to, what level of Local Housing Allowance it should change to, whether eligible charges should expand and so on. All these would be important and in theory they should have all these specified.

But lets be careful not to move the goalposts. No-one is unhappy because, say, backdating over a month relies on discretionary housing payments when it should be automatic. They're unhappy because they think that the rent deferral is all Labour is proposing and that it represents a return to the policies of 2010.

Corbyn's policies frequently required his supporters to fill in the blanks, but they trusted him and assumed he would do the right thing. This shows that trust isn't there for Starmer right now, so I guess its on him to build it up.
 
BobbyManc said:
What headlines did Corbyn produce in his first month due to something he did/said that made him unelectable?
Click to expand...
First week (3 days to be precise) ... not singing national anthem at a service to remember 75th anniversary of the battle of Britain

Pretty obvious own goal... don't think starmer has done anything like that has he?

4439-ojaj8f.jpg
 
Last edited:
sun_tzu said:
First week (3 days to be precise) ... not singing national anthem at a service to remember 75th anniversary of the battle of Britain

Pretty obvious own goal... don't think starmer has done anything like that has he?

4439-ojaj8f.jpg
Click to expand...

The fact that dominated headlines is more a damning indictment of the state of our mainstream media than anything else. But yes, in hindsight I think he’d have just sung it to avoid the ridiculous reaction. Still waiting for any substance to the claim Starmer’s done more in a month than Corbyn did in all his time.
 
BobbyManc said:
The fact that dominated headlines is more a damning indictment of the state of our mainstream media than anything else. But yes, in hindsight I think he’d have just sung it to avoid the ridiculous reaction. Still waiting for any substance to the claim Starmer’s done more in a month than Corbyn did in all his time.
Click to expand...
I think your post there is an acknowledgement he has handled his image better which is a pretty important thing for the new leader of the opposition
 
sun_tzu said:
I think your post there is an acknowledgement he has handled his image better which is a pretty important thing for the new leader of the opposition
Click to expand...

Are we debating ‘handling his image better’ or are we debating tangible achievements by a leader of the opposition? I thought it was the latter, you appear to be shifting it to the former.
 
BobbyManc said:
Are we debating ‘handling his image better’ or are we debating tangible achievements by a leader of the opposition? I thought it was the latter, you appear to be shifting it to the former.
Click to expand...
A tangible achievement seems to me to be viewed as a credible alternative pm... something starmer seems to have achieved in his first month that corbyn never managed
 
sun_tzu said:
A tangible achievement seems to me to be viewed as a credible alternative pm... something starmer seems to have achieved in his first month that corbyn never managed
Click to expand...

The 2017 election clearly showed Corbyn was viewed as a credible alternative for PM. Hence the biggest vote rise since Attlee. But please do tell me how Labour polling at 28-33% at present shows Starmer has ‘achieved’ something Corbyn never did.
 
BobbyManc said:
The 2017 election clearly showed Corbyn was viewed as a credible alternative for PM. Hence the biggest vote rise since Attlee. But please do tell me how Labour polling at 28-33% at present shows Starmer has ‘achieved’ something Corbyn never did.
Click to expand...
If you think loosing to a malfunctioning maybot with probably the worst conservative campaign in living memory is a credible alternative then I'm guessing the fact that corbyn recorded the lowest ever opposition leader polls since polls began had nothing to do with his two election defeats ... it was probably Blair fault... or Israel lobbying against him... or perhaps the illuminati controlling the media or starmers brexit policy.
Corbyn was pathetic as a leader... its an incredibly low bar for starmer to do better than him and so far he is albeit he's hardly giving it the "weak weak weak" at pmqs he at least seems competent which is a massive improvement
 
sun_tzu said:
First week (3 days to be precise) ... not singing national anthem at a service to remember 75th anniversary of the battle of Britain

Pretty obvious own goal... don't think starmer has done anything like that has he?

4439-ojaj8f.jpg
Click to expand...

:lol: How fan you read the headlines and pin that on Corbyn rather than the media?
 
BobbyManc said:
No other leader of the opposition has defeated a sitting government in the HoC more than Corbyn did, overtaking Thatcher’s record when she was in opposition. Corbyn led Labour to their biggest vote increase since Attlee, depriving the Tories of a majority and reversing a decline in votes in areas that began under Blair. Completely shifted the debate on austerity and economic policy, reflected in the Conservative platform Johnson ran on and Sunak’s budget announced in early March. Starmer himself ran his leadership campaign basically on the same policy platform introduced by Corbyn in 2017.

But please, do tell me why Starmer in one month has done more than Corbyn did in all his time as leader. Is it because Andrew Neil called him forensic in a tweet?
Click to expand...

Defeating minority May and Johnson governments isn’t anything special. May never lost a single motion with a majority (the first two years of Corbyn’s leadership).

Corbyn also oversaw the worst Labour performance ever, undoing the great victory of 2017 and potentially undermining Labour for ever.

However, suppose that doesn’t matter because he shifted the narrative on austerity and was responsible for Sunak’s budget?

One thing is certain - Labour will perform better at the next election with Starmer in charge.
 
Flamingo Purple said:
:lol: How fan you read the headlines and pin that on Corbyn rather than the media?
Click to expand...

It’s the naivety and unpreparedness of Corbyn and his team that fuelled those headlines. His faction is largely perceived to be unpatriotic so it certainly was an own goal on his part and he delivered those headlines to them.

Starmer, in contrast, specifically made a play to patriotism in his Telegraph article for VE Day because like it or not, it’s important to a significant part of the electorate.
 
Last edited:
TheGame said:
Click to expand...


Why anyone takes any notice of what this Tory loving so called paper prints is beyond me.

But. I does show that they are worried about Starmer and they will continue to attack him, hoping that their idiot readers will believe the complete propaganda rubbish they read.
 
Buster15 said:
Why anyone takes any notice of what this Tory loving so called paper prints is beyond me.

But. I does show that they are worried about Starmer and they will continue to attack him, hoping that their idiot readers will believe the complete propaganda rubbish they read.
Click to expand...


People were probably saying this days after Corbyn was made leader.
 
Buster15 said:
Why anyone takes any notice of what this Tory loving so called paper prints is beyond me.

But. I does show that they are worried about Starmer and they will continue to attack him, hoping that their idiot readers will believe the complete propaganda rubbish they read.
Click to expand...
Exactly, this can hardly be taken seriously coming from a dirty Tory rag. I just wonder how many more smear campaigns there's going to be against Labour/opposition leaders until these washed up Tory propaganda machines are held to account for it.

I think you're right, they're worried about Starmer and that's why they're doing it. They know this government are on borrowed time and they're getting panicky about it.
 
esmufc07 said:
Took slightly longer than I thought tbf

Click to expand...


There's a really weird subtext that you can infer from that article.

If Starmer is Labour leader he is assumed to be man of the people.
However, if Starmer is rich, he cannot be assumed to be man of the people.

Therefore you can infer that the article is implying that rich people do not care about the people.
Therefore you can assume transitively that they must also believe that Tories (who are by majority well off) do not care about the people as a default position.
 
Acole9 said:
Exactly, this can hardly be taken seriously coming from a dirty Tory rag. I just wonder how many more smear campaigns there's going to be against Labour/opposition leaders until these washed up Tory propaganda machines are held to account for it.

I think you're right, they're worried about Starmer and that's why they're doing it. They know this government are on borrowed time and they're getting panicky about it.
Click to expand...

And hopefully that piece of Tory propaganda is on borrowed time as well.

I wouldn't even use it to wipe my axx with.
 
I find it very hypocritical of how some people accuse Labour and Keir Starmer of playing politics with this crisis and yet instead of the newspapers drawing attention to the ineptitude of the government, they devote their headline to the legitimacy of Keir Starmer as a credible leader of the Labour Party because he is rich.

Even if you look deeper into that article and see the land isn't for sale and he actually got it for his disabled mother as a donkey sanctuary, most readers will only be reading the headline whilst eating their cornflakes, shaking their heads in disgust.
 
Compton22 said:
I find it very hypocritical of how some people accuse Labour and Keir Starmer of playing politics with this crisis and yet instead of the newspapers drawing attention to the ineptitude of the government, they devote their headline to the legitimacy of Keir Starmer as a credible leader of the Labour Party because he is rich.

Even if you look deeper into that article and see the land isn't for sale and he actually got it for his disabled mother as a donkey sanctuary, most readers will only be reading the headline whilst eating their cornflakes, shaking their heads in disgust.
Click to expand...

By what metric is he rich?

He has money that he earned, but I doubt he could jack it all in tomorrow and never work again.

If your takeaway from that story is your opening paragraph, I can see why they ran it.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
By what metric is he rich?

He has money that he earned, but I doubt he could jack it all in tomorrow and never work again.

If your takeaway from that story is your opening paragraph, I can see why they ran it.
Click to expand...
I believe hes estimated to have £3M-£4M net worth - hes 57 and I suspect with his civil service and MP pensions he actually could survive perfectly adequately without working till they kick in - I think corbyn had a net worth of about £3m so not much between them in that

that said if he was a top barrister (and he was named QC of the year) plus he ran public prosecutions for the UK then a £4m net worth seems actually a little low and I suspect if he was simply driven by money could have made quite a bit more (I think some barristers earn around a million a year)
 
esmufc07 said:
Took slightly longer than I thought tbf

Click to expand...

And this is exactly what is wrong with journalism in this country. An article filled with speculation designed to divide opinion. Clickbait with no substance.
Unfortunately truth and public interest seem to be not relevant in the press nowadays.
Im no fan of starmer but if hes worked hard and is worth however much has no relevance as to his suitability for the labour party. Im struggling to think of any mainstream news publisher in this country without an agenda.
 
BobbyManc said:
No other leader of the opposition has defeated a sitting government in the HoC more than Corbyn did, overtaking Thatcher’s record when she was in opposition. Corbyn led Labour to their biggest vote increase since Attlee, depriving the Tories of a majority and reversing a decline in votes in areas that began under Blair. Completely shifted the debate on austerity and economic policy, reflected in the Conservative platform Johnson ran on and Sunak’s budget announced in early March. Starmer himself ran his leadership campaign basically on the same policy platform introduced by Corbyn in 2017.

But please, do tell me why Starmer in one month has done more than Corbyn did in all his time as leader. Is it because Andrew Neil called him forensic in a tweet?
Click to expand...

Remind me. How many general elections did he win.
 
Buster15 said:
Remind me. How many general elections did he win.
Click to expand...

Ooh you got him there (even though it's the same number as Starmer which completely supports Bobbymanc's argument that people are being a wee bit premature with some of the comparisons).
 
Shamwow said:
Ooh you got him there (even though it's the same number as Starmer which completely supports Bobbymanc's argument that people are being a wee bit premature with some of the comparisons).
Click to expand...

Indeed.
I was highly critical of Corbyn as a leader. Simply because he lacked leadership qualities.

Starmer clearly lacks charisma which is unfortunate and of course we have yet to determine his leadership qualities.

But he is clearly intelligent enough to be able to take the fight to the Tories on his own terms.
And most importantly he looks to be credible.

So, for Labour, there is everything to fight for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.