Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)

Well, yes, clearly I am judging by the complete lack of coherent and mature counters to the points I’ve posited. Most negative responses so far would make a sixth form politics debate look positively statesman like!

SKS will be constrained by the current situation, that is just a reality. Nobody is going to like it - the lefties will want to do more, the centrists will realise they can't do much and therefore hated by all sides, the righties will argue that its still all immigrants fault.

Comparisons back to Blair n Brown aren't overly helpful, the 00s were the most benign economic conditions the world had seen for a fair old period of time. And what happened? The western world damn nr managed to bankrupt itself by the end of the decade. I would hesitate to suggest that anybody uses this as a "good" example.

Climbing out of the '08 mess and plunging straight into Brexit can also be filed in the "not a good idea" drawer, but then hubris was CMD's big weakness in the same way that arrogance was Bojo's biggest weakness. One could argue that for 2 such vehement enemies, they were both rather alike in that respect.

Anyway, back to SKS and 2024. He should inherit a fairly optimistic outlook going forwards (in theory), but he will be constrained for his first 18months. The question initially will be how he manages that and then once things open up for him, what he will then do with that opportunity. I think that is where Chevron's view of SKS as a man utterly lacking in vision and convictions will start to get interesting. I wouldn't be surprised to see an internal Labour fight at that point.

I think all the posters on here doom mongering about Labour should reflect that really the only reason Labour are where they are is due to the terrible last few Conservative administrations and their abject failure.

I see no reason why I should vote Conservative again after the last three elections and I am obviously not alone.

Is anyone here really rubbing their hands about Labour getting in? It very much is a case of least worst.

There are a fair few rubbing their hands...

I can't bring myself to vote for 'least worst' anymore. I've now decided that unless a candidate has actually earnt my vote, then I'm spoiling ballot.

By success I meant ever more treatments being developed to keep sick people alive longer. Actually delivering all these additional tools is unaffordable for any government. We've lost sight of what the NHS should be for - primary & emergency care plus health education. Anything over and above should be self-insured.

IMO Stewart is most definitely not an idiot. A few more like in Westminster over the last decade would have led to a closer contest that the one that is over now.

… and nor is he a Conservative. Don’t mind his books, though.

I broadly agree with your post. SKS will probably have a thumping majority at his disposal - likely exceeding the Tories' majority in 2019. But he will have no idea what to do with it. Initially I expect to see some fringe things enacted like free school meals, VAT on private education and cancelling the Rwanda scheme.

18 months in, however, and the demands for substantial change big public spending will become louder. I agree that at this point the internal divisions will become obvious, especially if Rachel Reeves maintains tight control over public spending. The unions will be grumbling because they haven't had sufficient pay increases, NHS waiting lists will remain stubbornly high, and illegal immigration will have got worse and worse.

At this point, a Labour challenger with charisma might decide that the dithering SKS has to go. Wes Streeting, perhaps, or (shudder) Angela Rayner?

I'm not sure how to distinguish "keeping sick people alive longer" from "primary and emergency care".

So why are outcomes better under pretty much every other healthcare system?

You’re a Labour stooge - tell us what Keith is going to do to improve the NHS? Aside from tip in even more insane amounts of money?