Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
JagLover said:
Lotobear said:
It's really quite amusing how Keir seems to have gone full on hard bats
t right in the last few days, make the Cons look like lib dums
Eh?t right in the last few days, make the Cons look like lib dumsTalked big, but nothing he was proposing was likely to reduce the channel crossings.
MC Bodge said:
Garvin said:
I cannot think of a more short sighted, inept decision of any party leader, ever.
Hyperbole, anyone?When ever he has/chooses to do things that aren't "Nothing, while the Conservatives destroy themselves" and "Be publicly s
tty to the Left" then he, more often than not, has fallen flat on his face. The word after the slash in the last sentence is especially key, because one constant trend is that, after months of weird inaction and not shooting at yawning open goals, he'll suddenly decide to do something that lands him in a PR problem entirely of his own making. The poll and electoral results Labour have been getting rather mask this and have led certain people to breathlessly insist that Starmer is a master political operator. There is certainly validity in not interrupting your enemy when he is making a mistake, but it's not really a strategy, and certainly not one that holds up when, for whatever reason, the spotlight turns on you.
2xChevrons said:
MC Bodge said:
Garvin said:
I cannot think of a more short sighted, inept decision of any party leader, ever.
Hyperbole, anyone?When ever he has/chooses to do things that aren't "Nothing, while the Conservatives destroy themselves" and "Be publicly s
tty to the Left" then he, more often than not, has fallen flat on his face. The word after the slash in the last sentence is especially key, because one constant trend is that, after months of weird inaction and not shooting at yawning open goals, he'll suddenly decide to do something that lands him in a PR problem entirely of his own making. The poll and electoral results Labour have been getting rather mask this and have led certain people to breathlessly insist that Starmer is a master political operator. There is certainly validity in not interrupting your enemy when he is making a mistake, but it's not really a strategy, and certainly not one that holds up when, for whatever reason, the spotlight turns on you.
MC Bodge said:
From conversations with people (interested sorts, admittedly, of centre left or centre right leaning) about this, most seem to think that Labour should have politely turned her down, rather than appearing to abandon their principles.
I'm not sure how it will play with Joe Average or the few remaining Tory supporters (if they are still Tory supporting at this point, there is unlikely to be much that could persuade them otherwise)
Whether or not it will provide a net positive impact to Labour's support at the GE, who knows?
Completely understand why she wanted to get away from the Cons asap, but Sir Kier could perhaps of suggested that she sit as an independent for a period before coming over to Labour. I'm not sure how it will play with Joe Average or the few remaining Tory supporters (if they are still Tory supporting at this point, there is unlikely to be much that could persuade them otherwise)
Whether or not it will provide a net positive impact to Labour's support at the GE, who knows?
2xChevrons said:
It is hyperbolic, but the nub of truth under all the hyperbole is that Starmer has a track record, going right back to 2020, of being a pretty awful and especially short-term political strategist.
When ever he has/chooses to do things that aren't "Nothing, while the Conservatives destroy themselves" and "Be publicly stty to the Left" then he, more often than not, has fallen flat on his face. The word after the slash in the last sentence is especially key, because one constant trend is that, after months of weird inaction and not shooting at yawning open goals, he'll suddenly decide to do something that lands him in a PR problem entirely of his own making.
The poll and electoral results Labour have been getting rather mask this and have led certain people to breathlessly insist that Starmer is a master political operator. There is certainly validity in not interrupting your enemy when he is making a mistake, but it's not really a strategy, and certainly not one that holds up when, for whatever reason, the spotlight turns on you.
That's pretty fair IMO.When ever he has/chooses to do things that aren't "Nothing, while the Conservatives destroy themselves" and "Be publicly s
tty to the Left" then he, more often than not, has fallen flat on his face. The word after the slash in the last sentence is especially key, because one constant trend is that, after months of weird inaction and not shooting at yawning open goals, he'll suddenly decide to do something that lands him in a PR problem entirely of his own making. The poll and electoral results Labour have been getting rather mask this and have led certain people to breathlessly insist that Starmer is a master political operator. There is certainly validity in not interrupting your enemy when he is making a mistake, but it's not really a strategy, and certainly not one that holds up when, for whatever reason, the spotlight turns on you.
As you say there's a difference between choosing to do something or the old "never interrupt your enemy" thing which is pretty much all he's needed to do the past couple of years.
No idea how much of this stuff is even noticed by the public but I can't for the life of me work out how some little voice in his head or a lot of voices in his ears weren't saying "It's Natalie Elphicke" when this was all being arranged.
I was listening to Ashworth on LBC this morning and I don't think he believed a single word he was saying.
It just seems a very easily avoided unforced error.
Anyone who thinks Starmer and Labour is going to lead the UK into sunlit uplands is going to be bitterly disappointed.
It'll be more or less same st, different coloured tie.
The issue is that current crop of Tories have and are rendering themselves unelectable so ushering SKS in through the back door with a fanfare.
As I have said many, many times I don't buy into Labour Project Fear being trumpeted on here, mainly due to the thought that another Sunak led government would be no better.
So the hope is that the Tories are capable of regrouping on the backbenches and presenting an electable alternative next time round. If the membership decide to oust Sunak and elect the 'Blue Corbyn' (Braverman) as leader than god help us all.
Having said all that there is still plenty of time for Labour to cock all this up, it's only a poll lead at the moment, but I see nothing on the Conservative benches to persuade me to vote for them again or that they have any idea how they can pull themselves around.
It'll be more or less same s
t, different coloured tie.The issue is that current crop of Tories have and are rendering themselves unelectable so ushering SKS in through the back door with a fanfare.
As I have said many, many times I don't buy into Labour Project Fear being trumpeted on here, mainly due to the thought that another Sunak led government would be no better.
So the hope is that the Tories are capable of regrouping on the backbenches and presenting an electable alternative next time round. If the membership decide to oust Sunak and elect the 'Blue Corbyn' (Braverman) as leader than god help us all.
Having said all that there is still plenty of time for Labour to cock all this up, it's only a poll lead at the moment, but I see nothing on the Conservative benches to persuade me to vote for them again or that they have any idea how they can pull themselves around.
BigMon said:
Anyone who thinks Starmer and Labour is going to lead the UK into sunlit uplands is going to be bitterly disappointed.
It'll be more or less same st, different coloured tie.
The issue is that current crop of Tories have and are rendering themselves unelectable so ushering SKS in through the back door with a fanfare.
As I have said many, many times I don't buy into Labour Project Fear being trumpeted on here, mainly due to the thought that another Sunak led government would be no better.
So the hope is that the Tories are capable of regrouping on the backbenches and presenting an electable alternative next time round. If the membership decide to oust Sunak and elect the 'Blue Corbyn' (Braverman) as leader than god help us all.
Having said all that there is still plenty of time for Labour to cock all this up, it's only a poll lead at the moment, but I see nothing on the Conservative benches to persuade me to vote for them again or that they have any idea how they can pull themselves around.
Agree, Nothing to fear from SKS other than mediocrity and whipsawing u turns.It'll be more or less same s
t, different coloured tie.The issue is that current crop of Tories have and are rendering themselves unelectable so ushering SKS in through the back door with a fanfare.
As I have said many, many times I don't buy into Labour Project Fear being trumpeted on here, mainly due to the thought that another Sunak led government would be no better.
So the hope is that the Tories are capable of regrouping on the backbenches and presenting an electable alternative next time round. If the membership decide to oust Sunak and elect the 'Blue Corbyn' (Braverman) as leader than god help us all.
Having said all that there is still plenty of time for Labour to cock all this up, it's only a poll lead at the moment, but I see nothing on the Conservative benches to persuade me to vote for them again or that they have any idea how they can pull themselves around.
Whilst this is the SKS thread, the Tories are hamstrung by the leadership election rules. Their members love a demagogue on the right wing of the party. How they could have thought Truss was a good idea, I have no clue. They will make a similar mistake next time, if given a chance.
AstonZagato said:
the Tories are hamstrung by the leadership election rules. Their members love a demagogue on the right wing of the party. How they could have thought Truss was a good idea, I have no clue. They will make a similar mistake next time, if given a chance.
I wouldn't like to use the term "batst crazy", but....MC Bodge said:
AstonZagato said:
the Tories are hamstrung by the leadership election rules. Their members love a demagogue on the right wing of the party. How they could have thought Truss was a good idea, I have no clue. They will make a similar mistake next time, if given a chance.
I wouldn't like to use the term "batst crazy", but....Gecko1978 said:
MC Bodge said:
AstonZagato said:
the Tories are hamstrung by the leadership election rules. Their members love a demagogue on the right wing of the party. How they could have thought Truss was a good idea, I have no clue. They will make a similar mistake next time, if given a chance.
I wouldn't like to use the term "batst crazy", but....S600BSB said:
MC Bodge said:
From conversations with people (interested sorts, admittedly, of centre left or centre right leaning) about this, most seem to think that Labour should have politely turned her down, rather than appearing to abandon their principles.
I'm not sure how it will play with Joe Average or the few remaining Tory supporters (if they are still Tory supporting at this point, there is unlikely to be much that could persuade them otherwise)
Whether or not it will provide a net positive impact to Labour's support at the GE, who knows?
Completely understand why she wanted to get away from the Cons asap, but Sir Kier could perhaps of suggested that she sit as an independent for a period before coming over to Labour. I'm not sure how it will play with Joe Average or the few remaining Tory supporters (if they are still Tory supporting at this point, there is unlikely to be much that could persuade them otherwise)
Whether or not it will provide a net positive impact to Labour's support at the GE, who knows?
I'm sure Starmer could probably rationalise it though. Afterall, he's gone from supporting Corbyn & his Manifesto all the way to welcoming Elpicke in to his party!)
[Anonymoususer] We are truly going to be blessed to have such a steadfast man of firm convictions and unwavering principles to be Prime Minister of our country and represent us on the world stage! [/Anonymoususer]
Edited by Wombat3 on Sunday 12th May 23:46
2xChevrons said:
It is hyperbolic, but the nub of truth under all the hyperbole is that Starmer has a track record, going right back to 2020, of being a pretty awful and especially short-term political strategist.
When ever he has/chooses to do things that aren't "Nothing, while the Conservatives destroy themselves" and "Be publicly stty to the Left" then he, more often than not, has fallen flat on his face. The word after the slash in the last sentence is especially key, because one constant trend is that, after months of weird inaction and not shooting at yawning open goals, he'll suddenly decide to do something that lands him in a PR problem entirely of his own making.
The poll and electoral results Labour have been getting rather mask this and have led certain people to breathlessly insist that Starmer is a master political operator. There is certainly validity in not interrupting your enemy when he is making a mistake, but it's not really a strategy, and certainly not one that holds up when, for whatever reason, the spotlight turns on you.
Starmer is doing what he needs to do to win power. The old adage that the right looks for recruits & the left looks for traiitors as true as it ever was. While Labour under Keef is morphing into a Lab/Con combo, the Tories have turned into UKIP. The downside is it pisses off the left but on the other hand, 45% of the country votes for you. Something like 800 polls now since the Tories held a lead, hard to argue he's pursuing a losing strategy.When ever he has/chooses to do things that aren't "Nothing, while the Conservatives destroy themselves" and "Be publicly s
tty to the Left" then he, more often than not, has fallen flat on his face. The word after the slash in the last sentence is especially key, because one constant trend is that, after months of weird inaction and not shooting at yawning open goals, he'll suddenly decide to do something that lands him in a PR problem entirely of his own making. The poll and electoral results Labour have been getting rather mask this and have led certain people to breathlessly insist that Starmer is a master political operator. There is certainly validity in not interrupting your enemy when he is making a mistake, but it's not really a strategy, and certainly not one that holds up when, for whatever reason, the spotlight turns on you.
Meanwhile, the Elphicke thing in the real world won't penetrate into the average Sun reader inspite of Harry Coles' best efforts & the howling in here but I am surprised that she lobbied Buckland to shift her husbands sex nonce trial, fairly clear evidence of a criminal act & he sat on it for four years until it became politically convenient to leak it. Hard to see how Buckland remains an MP im the circumstances, or at least it would be in a normal country.
President Merkin said:
Starmer is doing what he needs to do to win power. The old adage that the right looks for recruits & the left looks for traiitors as true as it ever was. While Labour under Keef is morphing into a Lab/Con combo, the Tories have turned into UKIP. The downside is it pisses off the left but on the other hand, 45% of the country votes for you. Something like 800 polls now since the Tories held a lead, hard to argue he's pursuing a losing strategy.
Meanwhile, the Elphicke thing in the real world won't penetrate into the average Sun reader inspite of Harry Coles' best efforts & the howling in here but I am surprised that she lobbied Buckland to shift her husbands sex nonce trial, fairly clear evidence of a criminal act & he sat on it for four years until it became politically convenient to leak it. Hard to see how Buckland remains an MP im the circumstances, or at least it would be in a normal country.
I know. That's my entire problem with him and the direction he's taken Labour.Meanwhile, the Elphicke thing in the real world won't penetrate into the average Sun reader inspite of Harry Coles' best efforts & the howling in here but I am surprised that she lobbied Buckland to shift her husbands sex nonce trial, fairly clear evidence of a criminal act & he sat on it for four years until it became politically convenient to leak it. Hard to see how Buckland remains an MP im the circumstances, or at least it would be in a normal country.
The obvious riposte to that is "You mean, 'into power after 14 years in opposition and so forming only the second Labour government in much of the electorate's lifetimes?'"
If you see the primary purpose of politicians and political parties is to 'gain power' then Starmer is being highly successful (although you have to wonder how successful it would appear if he did exactly the same actions and the Conservatives weren't in a four-year long death spiral).
If you think politics should be about principled government delivering meaningful change and improvement, then you'll forgive me for being stingy with the credit for Project Starmer, because it seems that his winning strategy has been to explicitly say "we won't change anything, but we'll just manage it better." As if the basic ideologies, assumptions and policies of the status quo are fine, but the only problems being the competence and tie colour of the people in charge.
Elphick's crossing-over is part of that problem, demonstrating that either Labour's party values are so close to the Conservatives' that she can cross the floor without, apparently, changing her politics, or they're so craven in their pursuit of power that they don't really care who they let carry their name so long as it makes the government look bad and might possibly reassure Mike from Mansfield and Sharon from Stevenage that they can hold (small-t)ory values and vote Labour. See also Christian Wakeford, who somehow managed to get away with crossing the floor while literally saying that his values and beliefs hadn't changed - therefore begging the conclusion that it's Labour that has changed to meet him.
It could be said that principles are nothing without power, and power has to be gained before any change can be enacted. I don't believe that's remotely true.
I don't necessarily disagree with much of that, save to say you're coming from a principled position, which isn't given anywhere near enough credit in public discourse whereas my view is obviously more prosaic, and could be boiled down to the principles without power aren't much use that you elucidate. I would like to spend more time in your position than mine, believe it or not however, I am nothing if not a pragmatist & an adherent of campaign in poetry, govern in prose.
Starmer has all the vibes of a classic technocrat, arguably that is no bad thing in the context of nine years of accelerating ideological government & will still be subject to the pressue of his PLP & in any event hamstrung by the mess he inherits. For me, it will look like a Blair tribute act and I used to think it's wasn't sufficient for Labour simply to not be the Tories, I'm not so sure of that now.
Starmer has all the vibes of a classic technocrat, arguably that is no bad thing in the context of nine years of accelerating ideological government & will still be subject to the pressue of his PLP & in any event hamstrung by the mess he inherits. For me, it will look like a Blair tribute act and I used to think it's wasn't sufficient for Labour simply to not be the Tories, I'm not so sure of that now.
Merkin and Chev, I salute you both. Sensible words. I'll go one further and suggest that Starmer could be the man who puts the fin nail in the coffin of the Labour Party as we have known it, and christ, few have missed an opportunity to get the hammer out for that job over the years. His Labour will be a pale, insipid Vanilla version of 'new' Labour, which although ot was a copy of the more middle lane Tories at least had a bit of vibrancy about it...and some real talent, and because the opposition are so weak, those pale, insipid Labour members and members of the public who value power over, well, everything, will ensure that this kind of vacuous, shuffling, tribute to a tribute will become the norm for both parties as they bat the ball back to each other in an interminable rally of mediocrity. I'll take principles over power, if your principles are strong enough and you are a strong enough 'leader' you can convince others of their merit, and power will come. Sell out your principles for power and everything you subsequently say is tainted. I like a poem me....
There's a reason it's been something like Conservative Conservative Conservative Blair Blair Blair Conservative Conservative Conservative though.
Don't get me wrong I want to live in a principled world.
But there's also a degree of reality that you don't get to do anything you want if you're in opposition because the public won't and don't vote for your principles in great enough numbers.
Don't get me wrong I want to live in a principled world.
But there's also a degree of reality that you don't get to do anything you want if you're in opposition because the public won't and don't vote for your principles in great enough numbers.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff