TailWindHome
Active Member
Here we go
Starmer's vision quest
- Thread starter mjr
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
First Aspect
Guru
I tend to agree. Starmer is the prime ministerial equivalent of a football manager who waits far too long to make substitutions, and the repeated caving in to back bench pressure suggests either political weakness or ill thoight through policies. Howeverz the economy is doing not terribly given the geopolitical situation and he is navigating foreign policy better than pretty much any other world leader.
If inflation does finally drop and then economy continues to limp forward, Reeves should be able to make some tax concessions, which would make a difference to polling quite quickly I think.
I am somewhat hopeful that the public fixation on immigration will wane, as the headline numbers of immigration normalises and they become bored of that particular news cycle.
briantrumpet
Pharaoh
And? If I were a reporter, and he takes questions, I'd ask him who he'd like to see as PM in Starmer's place, and how they would both hold the party together and improve their electoral chances.
At the moment, it just feels like a lot of people who never really liked Starmer and are (understandably) unhappy with his performance so far are all jumping on the "Resign!" bandwagon.
CXRAndy
Epic Member
Labour are not unpopular enough yet.
Mass strikes, protests outside Downing Street would be just about the correct level of unpopularity
briantrumpet
Pharaoh
Some amusing comments under that journo's post (including one noting how apt that a dentist schedules something for 2.30)
Psamathe
Guru
For me they have made several big failures:
- Taxing business when wanting the economy to grow. Guaranteed way to discourage business from investing is increase their costs eg Employer NI increases.
- Planning changes and the worst aspects are their rejection of environmental protections despite Government's own investigations and reports identifying that existing protections are not constraining development. eg Ministers they still repeating the fallacy of the £100m Bat Tunnel despite Government's own web site saying that it's just untrue (ie HS2 were never required to build a £100m bat tunnel, they just chose to). eg Government Environmental Audit Committee (chaired by Labour) have found "Nature not a blocker to housing growth, inquiry finds"
- Listening to (vested interests) lobbyists rather than doing the best for people.
First Aspect
Guru
Good bit of local politicing.
Sarwar has been fairly ineffective tbh, and needs to do something. If he is hammered in May he will be gone, so he has nothing to lose and the successor has a clean slate to take whatever side they want.
Alternatively, if he is beaten less badly (as compared to current predictions) than in the rest of the UK it will be seen as a sign that the national Labour party would get a similar boost by changing leader.
briantrumpet
Pharaoh
TailWindHome
Active Member
Psamathe
Guru
Thinking more on this aspect I wonder if some of those calling for Starmer to quit are as much unhappy with how far Starmer has moved the party to the right and maybe their main aims are moving back to more traditional Labour stance ie just want somebody running things more oriented to traditional Labour positioning.
briantrumpet
Pharaoh
The press bear quite a bit of blame for turning politics into a soap opera that sells papers & clicks. We're seeing how that turns out around the globe, but particularly in the US.
briantrumpet
Pharaoh
I suspect it's a mixture of that (especially the Corbyn crowd who still feel betrayed that the Messiah, who only lost two elections, and should have had a chance to lose a third), and an opportunistic RW press who attack anything that is a whisker to the left of their worldview. An unholy alliance, as was Brexit (of the rich right wingers, and the poor left-behinders who unwisely thought that Brexit would solve their problems). And as with that example, the 'magic solution' would probably be just as shït, if not shïtter.
Psamathe
Guru
(Whilst no supporter of Corbyn) in fairness in the 2017 General Election Labour under Corbyn won 40% of the votes whereras in 2024 Labour under Starmer actieved only 38% of the votes.
Personally I don't think this is down to Corbyn but does maybe highlight the earlier discussions that rather than McSweeney being some electoral miracle worker Starmer/Labour's 2024 success was far more down to the Conservatives failing/alienating the electorate than Labour achieving anything.
C R
Legendary Member
Several members of this forum, including me, have been making this very point, in this very thread, pretty much since election day. Why the labour leadership are unable to come to this conclusion is anyone's guess.
Psamathe
Guru
MAybe ego. To admit it was none of their doing and rather the Conservatives that did it for them means admitting they were no more than "none of the above". Easier for ego to claim the credit.
Which also maybe highlights why they are making mistakes in that they fail to analyse a situation, fail to see it from different perspectives so their conclusions (and thus actions) are flawed and so often need U-turning.
