Can Starmer survive? The wolves are circling in the Labour Party.

Agree with OP that I'm not sure anyone else would do better than KS.

We seem to be working up group hysteria here on GN like an ancient Greek chorus. Making the most of every set back, harping on about the same controversies, talking up every disadvantage. But soon be time for the Halloe'en threads...

I think the idea of pushing Starmer out is ridiculous. No one is going to be all things to all people. They have every chance of being able to show they have turned at least some of the last 14 years round by the time of the next election, hitting their goals in the process - and any new goverment will be as tried and untested as this lot is now - more so if it's Retreat.

They have been working on the communications between the Treasury abd No. 10 which should help, but they're human just as anyone else would be human.

This doesn't mean I would vote for them when we do get there, but that depends more on the various Labour factions than anything else. If they are undermining their own party why would anyone vote for it?

M0nica

I do not think Mandelson is a despot, but I do think that he is as devious and nasty as Trump, putin and Xi and probably a darn sight cleverer.

And for a world power, whose power has wained, the economic success of the country does actually depend more on how we stand internationally than it does for other countries.

Who would want to be a citizen like a chinese or a Russian?
And plenty of people on this forum it seems, wouldnt want to be a citizen of the USA either.

Whether their Country was "big on the world stage" or not.

Well said DaisyAnne. KS may not have "charisma" but nor did Clement Attlee. KS and Rachel Reeves made the big mistake of failing to present their actually sensible reforms in a way that the would have been acceptable to the majority
And M0nica, when you're in a hole, stop digging! The idea of PM as PM is pretty sick.

Lots of interesting posts and theories so far, but doodledog has hit the nail on the head.
Comunication, shaping the narrative, getting your story across.
Farage is a master of this art.

Crossstitchfan

Wouldn’t it be good if, for once, we could have a leader who not only leads, but actually knows how to? Since Mrs Thatcher, (she wasn’t popular, but did the job) we have had only wimps.

True!

Thatcher didn’t have to contend with social media. And she made many people’s lives hell…

Romola

Well said DaisyAnne. KS may not have "charisma" but nor did Clement Attlee. KS and Rachel Reeves made the big mistake of failing to present their actually sensible reforms in a way that the would have been acceptable to the majority
And M0nica, when you're in a hole, stop digging! The idea of PM as PM is pretty sick.

What 'reforms' has Reeves presented and what makes them 'sensible', please?

May we never again have a PM like poll tax, destroy the miners, privatise our public services, Margaret Thatcher.

M0nica

MaizieD

My goodness, MOnica. That's an even more 'interesting' suggestion than that of Angela Rayner!

We've already had to endure one corrupt PM,heaven save us from another one...

Actually I would sooner have a 'corrupt' PM who really is good at the job and improves the conditions of the people in the UK and our standing in the world to having a sea green incoruutible in charge of the government who cannot govern and is a laughing stock overseas.

I thought when he first got into number ten that Starmer was different….but all too soon came the story of freebies, designer suits and designer glasses, designer dresses for his wife, designer outfits for Reeves and Rayner, and hope plummeted.

Maremia

Lots of interesting posts and theories so far, but doodledog has hit the nail on the head.
Comunication, shaping the narrative, getting your story across.
Farage is a master of this art.

It doesnt help that Sir Kier, with his lawyer credentials, doesnt come across as being at ease with people who do not earn a high wage.
Whereas Farage and Tommy do.

fancythat

Maremia

Lots of interesting posts and theories so far, but doodledog has hit the nail on the head.
Comunication, shaping the narrative, getting your story across.
Farage is a master of this art.

It doesnt help that Sir Kier, with his lawyer credentials, doesnt come across as being at ease with people who do not earn a high wage.
Whereas Farage and Tommy do.

You mean he doesn’t pose in pubs holding a pint of beer and a cigarette? Is that where he’s going wrong?? And what makes you think that Farage and Yaxley Lennon actually mix with the people that they supposedly represent?

!st question yes.
2nd, as I say it doesnt help.
3rd, maybe just an image but I dont think so. And Sir Kier cant manage that image.

Do you mean like the people in Clacton who don't earn a high wage?
Farage is an experienced performer. He will perform for rightwing neo nazi audiences, for Putin, for Trump, for anyone when the money or 'gains' are enough. That's why he is always on TV. He knows how to captivate an audience. It does not mean that he is thinking of you, or that he will do his best for your concerns.

Of these, I would say that Sir Kier Starmer comes across[and he could be as well] the least likely to drink in a pub, or whatever "image" may be "needed" for right now for the Uk.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Leaders_of_the_Labour_Party_(UK)

fancythat

!st question yes.
2nd, as I say it doesnt help.
3rd, maybe just an image but I dont think so. And Sir Kier cant manage that image.

I don’t have a problem with Starmers image but it seems his MPs certainly do

David49

fancythat

!st question yes.
2nd, as I say it doesnt help.
3rd, maybe just an image but I dont think so. And Sir Kier cant manage that image.

I don’t have a problem with Starmers image but it seems his MPs certainly do

What. All of his MP’s?

Romola

Well said DaisyAnne. KS may not have "charisma" but nor did Clement Attlee. KS and Rachel Reeves made the big mistake of failing to present their actually sensible reforms in a way that the would have been acceptable to the majority
And M0nica, when you're in a hole, stop digging! The idea of PM as PM is pretty sick.

Oh, for heavens sake, does no one recognise tongue in cheek comments when they are made. The fact that an idea just borders on the bounds of possibility, is the point.

Clement Attlee lacked charisma, but he was up to the job. Starmer isn't. That is the difference.

He is a classic example of the Peter Principle where you continue promoting someone capable until they reach the job which is beyond their capabilities and then they are left where they are and promoted no more.

KS was a successful and able Director of Public Prosecutions. So it was assumed he could lead a political party in government. He cannot, but having reached the level where he has been given the job too far where he ceases to be competent and has become incompetent, no one wants to admit that the promotion was a mistake and sack him

Oh, for heavens sake, does no one recognise tongue in cheek comments when they are made. The fact that an idea just borders on the bounds of possibility, is the point.

I got it, M0nica 😁

I'll lend you a spade! ⛏
Actually, it looks like a pick-axe, but should do the job.

Allira

Doodledog

Sorry, that was badly worded. I meant that I wouldn't have a clue about paying SDLT on a house when I didn't own another one (as it was in trust), In other words I understand AR's confusion.

Ms Rayner was advised to take further advice on the issue which she did not do.
She did resign which was the right thing to do and it is too soon for her to make a comeback although I'm sure she will in the future.

Starmer did sack Mandelson and quite rightly but he should never have said he was standing by him.

It's one mistake and U turn after another, unfortunately.

I'm not disagreeing with any of that.

I just happen to believe that it was a mistake, rather than deliberate fraud.

But I said all that (and was shouted down) on the relevant thread. This one is about KS, and my comment on AR was made in that context. She wasn't sacked, she resigned, yet he is being blamed. I think he should have stuck by her more firmly, but I recognise that whatever he does will be criticised, so he's in a difficult position.

OTOH, if I felt that I couldn't do right for doing wrong, I might think 'stuff it, I'll do what I like, as the result will be the same, reputation-wise'. As I said upthread, he needs to sort his comms out as a matter of urgency.

I just happen to believe that it was a mistake, rather than deliberate fraud

An avoidable mistake; if she had followed advice she would have been fine.

Politicians do need to know when to follow the advice of experts, both in their careers and private life too.

Allira

^I just happen to believe that it was a mistake, rather than deliberate fraud^

An avoidable mistake; if she had followed advice she would have been fine.

Politicians do need to know when to follow the advice of experts, both in their careers and private life too.

It was a case of being casual and offhand and not bothering to check or confirm information and below the level of competence that one expects from a minister.

This same fault was part of the reason for the downfall of Boris Johnson.

As I say, this was done to death on the relevant thread, and I mentioned it in the context of KS and his reputation management. I'm not going to repeat myself yet again. I am as entitled to an opinion as anyone else, and the reality is that all we have is opinion when it comes to other people's motives.

^It was a case of being casual and offhand and not bothering to check or confirm information and below the level of competence that one expects from a minister.
^

Yes. Not good enough.

Most get away with evading Stamp duty on second homes Rayner would have done too but someone checked up and she got caught