I never thought I would see it, even The Observer, (and therefore, presumably, the Guardian) have given up on Starmer

Luckygirl3

We have had it with pazzaz ... shallow thinking and a disregard for parliament and the rule of law.

Give me Starmer any day.

I just mean in terms of communicating the positive things, the comms need to make an impact.

I agree, I think Starmer is a very safe pair of hands, but the media constantly showing him in a negative way doesn’t help him or our country

Yes, PM's are always criticised - and long may that be so, it is a sign of a healthy democracy The problem is what they are being criticised for. Starmer has flipflopped on so many policies. and never gives the impression of having any authority, in his party or in Parliament. He gives the impression of a man at the mercy of circumstances when he should be in command of them.

I read an interesting article last week, I cannot remember where, but it was by a political correspondent with many years of experience in and around Parliament.

He commented that most potential Prime Ministers do an enormous amount of home work in the year/months leading up to an election to make sure that they are up and running on every aspect of taking power, not just roughing out who their shadow ministers will be but doing intensive work on all the problems in every ministry, testing every policy.

This commentator said that Starmer was the first leader he had come across who, despite being 99% sure of being the next Prime minister, had done no homework at all. This is why we had policies being announced and then withdrawn and changed. No one had thought them out, road tested them and looked for all the unintended conseuences.

I think it's time Starmer went but I also think he's in his own little bubble and does not realise how he is viewed by a high number of the general public. This was obvious when he made the comments in the house about people thinking it was incredulous that the PM didn't know about the advanced security vetting. MP's burst into loud laughter and he looked stunned and even hurt that he was being laughed at and/or disbelieved.
The problem is who would take over and who would even want his job right now?

Starmer is not a safe pair of hands; he flip-flops, changes and has little political foresight. I have read a similar article which said he has no political antennae, makes statements and expected things to happen and did little preparation. He relies on his underlings to get things done, with recent disastrous consequences.

We did not blindly follow Trump into his illegal war.
Badenoch and Farage would have.
Kudos to Starmer for that. 👏

I gather there is to be a debate about a vote of no confidence tomorrow and Starmer is using the whip to compel his MPs to vote for him. Terribly bad form.
Should be a Free vote.

I'm no fan of Starmer but anyone who can show trust in Mandelson must be a bit of a clown. However, there is so much wrong in this country, I would prefer it if our MP's actually focused on that rather than this constant attack on Starmer.

nanna8

I think and hope the Labour Party in Britain will move on and revive when Starmer finally calls it quits or gets ousted. He hasn’t helped them one little bit. Arrogant man totally out of touch.

Starmer is a lawyer at heart. He is unsuitable as a PM. He does not understand that there are many ordinary people working, paying taxes and only just getting by. People object to being invaded by illegals who "take" too much from the British tax payer, hotels, meals, health and dental care, pocket money, the list is endless. Starmer had a ready made deterrent already in place with Rwanda but cancelled it, now look where we are. Illegals are safe in Europe but it is not safety they want, it is the freebies and comfortable life provided by the British government. Whoever is the next PM is I hope they sort the immigration problem; maybe divert the money to our veterans.

You are right! Starmer is selectively deaf .

“RVK1CR

nanna8
I think and hope the Labour Party in Britain will move on and revive when Starmer finally calls it quits or gets ousted. He hasn’t helped them one little bit. Arrogant man totally out of touch.
Starmer is a lawyer at heart. He is unsuitable as a PM. He does not understand that there are many ordinary people working, paying taxes and only just getting by. People object to being invaded by illegals who "take" too much from the British tax payer, hotels, meals, health and dental care, pocket money, the list is endless. Starmer had a ready made deterrent already in place with Rwanda but cancelled it, now look where we are. Illegals are safe in Europe but it is not safety they want, it is the freebies and comfortable life provided by the British government. Whoever is the next PM is I hope they sort the immigration problem; maybe divert the money to our veterans.“

I think Starmer understands normal average people much better than some previous MPs, he had a pretty normal upbringing.

eazybee

I gather there is to be a debate about a vote of no confidence tomorrow and Starmer is using the whip to compel his MPs to vote for him. Terribly bad form.
Should be a Free vote.

Perhaps research a little deeper:-

“Yes, it is entirely normal, and a core tenet of the British parliamentary system, for a Prime Minister to instruct their cabinet and party MPs to vote for them in a motion of no confidence. This is mandated by the doctrine of Cabinet Collective Responsibility, where the government acts as a unified body; if the government loses a confidence vote, the entire ministry falls.”

eazybee FYI:

“Tomorrow’s vote is not a formal vote of confidence in Keir Starmer.

What the vote actually is:

MPs are voting on whether to launch a parliamentary inquiry into him — specifically, whether to refer him to the Commons Privileges Committee over allegations he may have misled Parliament about the appointment of Peter Mandelson.

* If MPs vote for the motion → it triggers an investigation
* If MPs vote against → no inquiry happens

Why it’s not a confidence vote:

A true vote of confidence / no confidence is a specific constitutional mechanism that decides whether the government can stay in power. If the government loses one, it must resign or call an election.

This vote is different:

* It’s about standards and conduct, not directly about whether the government commands a majority
* Losing it would be politically damaging, but doesn’t automatically remove Starmer from office.”

Thank you lizziedrip for clearing that up 🙂

The media always make things look ten times worse.

eazybee

I am a voter of long standing and I understand perfectly what Starmer thinks he is about. He is also a laughing stock, a very difficult position from which to recover. In common with many other people I thought he would be a safe if dull pair of hands to replace Corbyn as leader, and later as PM. He has proved to be a disaster.
I also understand that at present there appears to be no obvious successor in the Labour party, certainly not Angela Rayner who fatally believes her own publicity. In 404 MPs there are definitely some candidates but perhaps they don't want the responsibility.

Really good summation of the Starmer and Labour Party situation.
I think they are finished.

I hope the Labour Party can continue. I think it will, I think this is just a glitch and in a way it will be stronger for the experience when it re-emerges. Hopefully under different management ! Time will tell.

WithNobsOnIt

eazybee

I am a voter of long standing and I understand perfectly what Starmer thinks he is about. He is also a laughing stock, a very difficult position from which to recover. In common with many other people I thought he would be a safe if dull pair of hands to replace Corbyn as leader, and later as PM. He has proved to be a disaster.
I also understand that at present there appears to be no obvious successor in the Labour party, certainly not Angela Rayner who fatally believes her own publicity. In 404 MPs there are definitely some candidates but perhaps they don't want the responsibility.

Really good summation of the Starmer and Labour Party situation.
I think they are finished.

I agree eazybee

I love the way that some people on here are mind-readers or even fortune tellers.

To claim you know what Starmer (or anyone else), thinks or believes, unless you know him personally, you don’t know!

Also, please put in your comments, imo, you and others might believe Starmer is a laughing stock, but many of us do not, that’s my opinion, it doesn’t make me right and you wrong, but I’d say on GN there are still Starmer supporters, so clearly he isn’t a laughing stock among everyone.

Just exactly how has he been a disaster?

You call his changes of direction flip-flopping, (meant to be insulting), others consider this to be listening to the electorate and reversing things.

In my humble opinion it is utterly ridiculous to state the Labour Party is finished, the LP managed to stay in existence under Corbyn, (who in my opinion was a good man, properly left wing, but a poor leader), through two totally disastrous elections.

I would also remind you so quick to thoroughly slate him, we tolerated and challenged and criticised the many PMs in our last Tory government, one of whom completely tanked our economy in a few short weeks.

Anyone in power, leading a country, should be challenged, that’s our role and the governments, to hold our PM is right, to constantly and consistently criticise everything he does and says, when he’s held strong and fast against Trump and the Iran war is simply unfair.

Out of interest, what would you have done in the last almost two years so differently?

Starmer is human, he makes errors, and his lack of judgement of Mandelson was a huge mistake and he should be challenged over this.

Sorry, typos again, should read”…should hold our PM to account .. )

Oops sorry, I truly need an edit button AND not to press post so quickly!

M0nica

Yes, PM's are always criticised - and long may that be so, it is a sign of a healthy democracy The problem is what they are being criticised for. Starmer has flipflopped on so many policies. and never gives the impression of having any authority, in his party or in Parliament. He gives the impression of a man at the mercy of circumstances when he should be in command of them.

I read an interesting article last week, I cannot remember where, but it was by a political correspondent with many years of experience in and around Parliament.

He commented that most potential Prime Ministers do an enormous amount of home work in the year/months leading up to an election to make sure that they are up and running on every aspect of taking power, not just roughing out who their shadow ministers will be but doing intensive work on all the problems in every ministry, testing every policy.

This commentator said that Starmer was the first leader he had come across who, despite being 99% sure of being the next Prime minister, had done no homework at all. This is why we had policies being announced and then withdrawn and changed. No one had thought them out, road tested them and looked for all the unintended conseuences.

Sounds about right.

Starmer just makes too many errors, and did so from the get go.

I’m not in every way disputing this article, but have some salient (in my opinion) points to make re this homework for future PMs

Starmer was an MP since 2015, in opposition, and leader of the opposition since April 2020. He’s a well educated, intelligent man, so I find it hard to believe he didn’t do any research (which some are calling homework), during that time.

I finding equally difficult to believe that his predecessors did their homework, in particular Johnson and Truss!

I just think it’s another example of Starmer basing, just my opinion of course

He wouldn’t get bashed if he did things well.

Grrrrr bashing!