What sort of Prime Minister would Starmer make?

Why do you think he's wrong to think only centrists could win an election? It's blatantly obvious that Labour needs to win over voters in about 100 seats. It won't do that by frightening off voters who have rejected allegedly pure socialist principles.

When did the far left win an election?

Andy Burnham would appeal to the younger voter. University chums of my AC are very disenchanted with Keir Starmer. He has nothing that grabs them.

An awful lot of people aren't hugely involved with politics. To get them to vote we need someone people can relate to/ listen to. Not sure that Keir ticks that box.

Starmer is dishonest lacks integrity can't be trusted.

He promised unity has relentlessly attacked the left even Jews who support the Palestine people in their struggle with apartheid which Starmer says does not exist in Israel. How can he say that about Isreal? Is he funded by the Isreal lobby?
He pledged thats promised the 10 pledges which this country desperately needs right now. And abandoned every one.
Most people think nationalisation works. Instead of foreign countries taking the profits from this country.
As for moving from helping people when he first got into law to completely backing the establishment against people as DPP shows where his priorities lie. He is an Establishment man there be no meaningful change from him for this country.

Starmer is a liar

It's funny how Starmer has managed to establish himself as someone of principle when little of what he has done to the LP shows that. He has broken promises so he isn't honest or reliable. He does seem to have put what he considers making the party electable over every other policy, no matter who was harmed by this. In other words he thinks the end justifies the means which I don't regard as ideal in a PM. He has refused to stand with the strikers which shows a distinct lack of care for working people. In fact it is difficult to understand how any of the words in the OP apply to him.
Most especially the trusted because either he has behaved as he has towards left wing members of the LP because he had no intention of ever uniting the party, which makes him a fraud and a liar. Or he has been convinced, by the right wingers still employed by LP, that only the right of the party could win an election, in which case he is too easily influenced.

Long-Bailey would definitely give us another tory government.

Brown has charisma and a great sense of humour but doesn’t
come across on tv.

Blair , the only Labour leader to win three consecutive general
elections.

Milliband no charisma.

Corbyn worse defeat since 1935

Kinnock a good man

Andy Burnham too left wing and the Stafford hospital would be on the front pages agin.

I saw Long-Bailey, Nandy and Starmer at the Manchester hustings. L-B was poor, Nandy good to not yet ready for leadership. It was an audience of party members and activists in a Manchester where Long-Bailey expected more support than she got. Starmer was good and it was clear he won the audience.

I believe he is a man of integrity, committed to the ideals Of the LP. I’m sure he wants to unite the party but that needs the party members seeking to undermine him, to play their part. His family and employment history is solid. I believe he’d be be a good pm.

Andy Burnham stood twice and was rejected. He’s a good mayor but I’m not convinced he’d be a better pm or leader than Starmer

We can’t tell yet because it all depends on the circumstances of his leadership, most thought Blair was going to be good but it didn’t work out that way.
However, unless he is appealing enough to all voters and wins the next GE it doesn’t matter

Callistemon21

I will never forget, MerylStreep

Many have, sad to say ?

It has to be Clement Attlee Anniebach, surely?

“Few thought he was even a starter. There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH, and OM, an Earl and a Knight of the Garter”.

Blair obviously, but I know a number of people who have met Gordon Brown and they all say he was incredibly charismatic in person, I dont think that translated to his public presence though.

Who was a Labour leader with charisma?

Starmer strikes me as a pretty dependable sort.

I was quite struck by his insistence that he had never broken the lockdown rules, and that he said he would resign if it was found that he had.

Zoejory

MayBee70

I don’t get this adoration of Burnham. I think he has an agenda and is plotting to be leader of the Labour Party. He undermines Keir a lot: it’s easy to stand on picket lines when you’re not actually leader of the party. And I think he blows with the wind.

I've admired Andy for a long time now. Long before Keir was on the scene. He fought long and hard for the Hillsborough families. I remember when he got a round of applause after an impassioned speech in the HoC.

He has far more charisma than Keir as well. Some may say charisma shouldn't matter and maybe it shouldn't. But it does in today's society.

I think voters would prefer Andy to Keir. Especially floating ones. He's just more personable.

I’m not sure you’re right, I do like Andy Burnham, but he is much too ‘left’ for most floating voters I think, they will see him as a loose cannon, which isn’t what most middle ground voters will think is needed at the moment - and personal charisma is overrated, as has been amply demonstrated by our current PM.

I will never forget, MerylStreep

Some people haven’t forgotten Andy Burnhams role in the North Staffs hospital scandal.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/chris-skidmore/mid-staffordshire-andy-burnham_b_2970110.html

MayBee70

I don’t get this adoration of Burnham. I think he has an agenda and is plotting to be leader of the Labour Party. He undermines Keir a lot: it’s easy to stand on picket lines when you’re not actually leader of the party. And I think he blows with the wind.

I've admired Andy for a long time now. Long before Keir was on the scene. He fought long and hard for the Hillsborough families. I remember when he got a round of applause after an impassioned speech in the HoC.

He has far more charisma than Keir as well. Some may say charisma shouldn't matter and maybe it shouldn't. But it does in today's society.

I think voters would prefer Andy to Keir. Especially floating ones. He's just more personable.

Me too. Hes had image/branding advice without a doubt. This is a good thing. He wants to win which is often a novelty in the labour party.

I just want this appalling lot gone. My local Tory MP is in our local paper saying the Environment Agency have plenty of staff and are putting people at risk by not posting notices at our local beach warning of sewage in the water.

Truss cut millions from the environment agency and my devious inept MP didn't even vote when he had the chance to stop sewage going into the water. Please please let Starmer win the next election.

There's be no fireworks, no shambling speeches, no lies.
A steady hand on the tiller to steer the ship away from the rocks.

I like that photo of him (sorry if that's shallow ?)

I don’t get this adoration of Burnham. I think he has an agenda and is plotting to be leader of the Labour Party. He undermines Keir a lot: it’s easy to stand on picket lines when you’re not actually leader of the party. And I think he blows with the wind.

I generally support Starmer, but I think that's a reasonable criticism. It's also worth remembering that the perfect politician does not exist. I am not interested in waiting for the 'perfect' politician to defeat the Tories.

I think he’s risk averse, sometimes a measured, calculated risk is worthwhile, with proper mitigation and contingency.

Lucca

TwiceAsNice

A poor one!

Sorry to be rude but…this kind of comment is annoying. No explanation given so what is the point of it ?

I tend to ignore those one-liners.

The other day, I read a thoughtful and reasoned comment on another social media site. The poster was attempting to be as impartial and balanced as is possible when you hold an opposing view.

The first response to his post was, "rubbish!". Other posters tried to get whoever it was to enlarge, or give some context for the observation.

He (I think it was a 'he') did finally respond - to a further comment politely saying that without any such context, the comment didn't really hold any validity - with a row of laughing emojis and a couple of 'poop' ones for good measure.

And I've seen this pattern so many times, that I just scroll past - even if I agree with them. It's pointless if they won't engage like an adult. But maybe TAN will explain, you never know...

Government is not just within our borders, a good leader needs to be able to make an impression in international matters.

I think Starmer for all his good qualities, is too consensus minded and I am not sure how decisive he could be, in situations when he has to go against the grain and stand up for what he believes, even though, his party, or most of it oppose him.

As much as I dislike BJ, and think him, a total disaster, on Ukraine he got it right, and I cannot but wonder what Starmer would have done, had he been PM. Would he have been so fast at vocally and practically supporting Ukraine and getting all the weapons to Ukraine that we have with the speed that we have, or would he have wanted to consult to talk to others, to try and reach a consensus, before committig us.