Channel 4 9pm Keir Starmer. where did it all go wrong?

valdavi

Perhaps Andy shouldn't have put SKS in the position of having to block him - yes it didn't look good but Labour do want to avoid the Tory penchant for having a succession of unelected different (pretty dire in the Tories' case) Prime Ministers.

I would like to see Andy Burnham as frontbench Minister, he's very effective at badgering things through.

Don't think C4 news is as left-leaning now as it admittedly used to be.

I really don’t know what’s happened to Ch4. It used to be the only news that we watched. Not sure if it’s been really left leaning, just not so obviously right wing as some other channels.

spabbygirl

Cossy

I disagree, I believed he was PM and even after a very shaky start I still believe it.

Reasons, he’s bright and well educated, measured and calm.

He’s not the issue, I’m not keen on RR, and I am a fan of both Andy Burnham and Angela Rayner.

The issue is the Labour Party itself, some still very angry about Corbyn, the communications/media side of the LP is utterly abysmal and I also cannot think of anyone, on any side of the house, I’d prefer to have “steering” us through the mess of our world.

Starmer never actually stood a chance, the media hated him from the get-go.

I completely agree Cossy, Keir is doing fine, you should see the amount of support he has on threads, this dislike of him is manufactured cos he doesn't have the communication skills of Boris. But I feel perfectly safe with Keir in charge at the moment, no-one would have done a better job

I'm with you on that!

Perhaps Andy shouldn't have put SKS in the position of having to block him - yes it didn't look good but Labour do want to avoid the Tory penchant for having a succession of unelected different (pretty dire in the Tories' case) Prime Ministers.

I would like to see Andy Burnham as frontbench Minister, he's very effective at badgering things through.

Don't think C4 news is as left-leaning now as it admittedly used to be.

MayBee I don’t disagree with your points. I still feel KS would have gained from not blocking Andy

For those defending SKS, I suggest you 1) find someone familiar with his stint at the CPS, where he was criticised from all sides (yes, I KNOW he got that 'Sir', you get that in such a position for just turning up to work most days).
2) When Corbyn was still leading the party, at the 2019 election, SKS (Brexit man) maintained that he had "six Brexit strategies". Yes, quite.
3) Since winning that last election with a massive majority, folk seem to have forgotten that their principle campaign strategy was to show pics of BoJo and Liz Truss and say "want some more of THAT"?!
4) And since gaining power, folk also seem to be forgetting U-Turn after embarrassing U-Turn, Chancellor Reeves clearly having no clue of how a calculator works, and Labour 'sweetie' Angela Rayner showing that she couldn't wait to get her snout in the trough (no insult intended - not to pigs anyway) with her individual take on tax matters, and that Hove property fiasco?
PS -- yet again, after many decades of evidence, I have no especial faith in politicos, any badge, but though I always vote (trying to find the least worst option) I can quite understand all those who say they're all as bad as each other. Oh, and for anyone who thinks that Reform/Farrago might be the answer, DO check the mess that Kent County Council is now in, and whether you REALLY want to trust someone who thinks the sun shines out of the Orange Conman's permanently lying yapper?!

cc

Iam64 I believe he shouldn’t have blocked Andy Burnham.

Yes, I agree, blocking Andy Burnham was a big mistake, Starmer saw him as competition whereas in reality he is probably the only solution for Labour at the moment as Starmer himself is toast.

Burnham made a commitment to the people of Manchester that he tried to renege on because he could sniff the top job; something he’d tried and failed to get twice. It would have caused a leadership crisis within the party which, at this moment in time would not be a good idea. Burnham didn’t have to stop being an MP but he saw an opening for something which, at the time, he thought would be better. I don’t think he was a shoe in to win that by election anyway because the Greens ran a very clever campaign not helped by the Burnham situation. I thought the Labour candidate looked pretty good.

For Silvergirl, and that "Right wing media started their campaign from day one. Ridiculous but predicted." - your last sentence!
This show was C4, apparently [I didn't see it. NB -- I maintain healthy doubts about ALL politicos, all badges . . . .how much evidence do folk need?!].
1) As you've been told by someone already, though the bulk of Fleet Street has historically been right-wing, or at least, not on the left, that didn't stop those publications castigating BoJo and Tories generally (a wide and easy target), AND the general newspaper readership has fallen off a cliff in the last 20 years, they have far less influence these days.
2) If you include BBC in that "right wing media" - they happily joined in the shellacking dished out to BoJo and cronies, and, for a supposedly "right wing" broadcaster, they get castigated on all forums for being far too LEFTIE!!
3) You may be absolutely alone in recent history if you were indeed suggesting that C4 is in any way "right wing"?!!

His obfuscation around answering questions at PMQs and in interviews is off the scale. A thing he consistently accused the opposition of when they were in power. It reached the point where even the speaker has to keep pointing out he has no power to make him answer. It makes him look weak and hypocritical.

Cossy

I disagree, I believed he was PM and even after a very shaky start I still believe it.

Reasons, he’s bright and well educated, measured and calm.

He’s not the issue, I’m not keen on RR, and I am a fan of both Andy Burnham and Angela Rayner.

The issue is the Labour Party itself, some still very angry about Corbyn, the communications/media side of the LP is utterly abysmal and I also cannot think of anyone, on any side of the house, I’d prefer to have “steering” us through the mess of our world.

Starmer never actually stood a chance, the media hated him from the get-go.

I completely agree Cossy, Keir is doing fine, you should see the amount of support he has on threads, this dislike of him is manufactured cos he doesn't have the communication skills of Boris. But I feel perfectly safe with Keir in charge at the moment, no-one would have done a better job

Who is suggesting Andy Burnham is god? He’s a good mayor and we don’t want to lose him but Westminster would benefit from his presence

Andy Burnham is just one man. Not God. After this lot that were voted in by ???? I think it needs to be a government with only women in it! But not Angela Rayner!

Iam64 I believe he shouldn’t have blocked Andy Burnham.

Yes, I agree, blocking Andy Burnham was a big mistake, Starmer saw him as competition whereas in reality he is probably the only solution for Labour at the moment as Starmer himself is toast.

Sometimes toast is just more delicious than plain bread.

Luckygirl3

What a loaded programme title ... balanced journalism? ... I think not.

Have Ch4 forgotten that the previous government tried to privatise it?

Maremia

I understand that you want clarity Doodledog, but for headlines, then clickbait clichés can be more effective.

If someone says ‘Starmer is toast’ it isn’t that he’s been turned into a heated bread slice😁

Doodledog

Oreo

Yes, but it was your point not mine, which you’re at liberty to hold.

I'm not sure of your point now.

You (as usual) questioned my post, and I replied with full explanation of the point I was making. You replied to say that you fully understood the point (so were.presumably questioning for the 'fun' of it) but in a subsequent post have shown that no, you really didn't understand as you have missed the point of my post entirely.

Never mind. It is clear that others know what I meant, so I am reassured that the point was made. Of course you re at liberty to disagree, but please do so honestly? If you don't understand, I am happy to reword, but if you just disagree, then why not make a point of your own to show why?

I did do so honestly, I don’t believe in all the passive aggression that goes on here sometimes.I say things clearly.
I see your point as I have already said, your point being you think common expressions that people use are confusing as you think they mean different things to different people and dislike the use of them.
I didn’t question for the fun of it ( never do) neither did I miss the point you were making.
Those expressions are very clear to most people and they know exactly what they mean, so I can’t agree with you on that point.
Which is fine.
You say ( as usual) which implies you’re bothered that I question your post/posts…it’s nothing personal as I question lots of comments on this forum.

I understand that you want clarity Doodledog, but for headlines, then clickbait clichés can be more effective.

Doodledog

'In crisis', 'is toast', 'fallen off a cliff', 'on its knees', 'rabbit in the headlights' - as long as people talk like that nobody will say anything meaningful, so discussion will become impossible.

Those words are being drip-fed to us, the general public. By the media, on social media, ? by Reform's chatbots.

The crisis that I'm chronically worried about is climate change. But that is one "crisis" that this campaign to get everyone well-worried, never mentions.

I just watched the programme on catch up. Well I am no fan of Starmer but I must agree with those who have said it was very unbalanced journalism.

Jennerdysphoria

Agree there does seem to be a campaign orchestrating hate for Starmer.

I agree - by the media. Probably the best option right now and certainly better than the “Reformed” Tories led by Nigel Farage who would have us in a war by now as well as us all paying for very expensive medical insurance

MayBee70

Channel 4 seem to have taken on a rather right wing perspective recently.

I think media tends to jump on bandwagons! Starmer is clearly not popular nor liked by many people, so using a title as they did will draw in viewers.

I neither like nor dislike Starmer, I don’t know him, unlike many politicians he plays his cards close to his chest in particular around his private life.

However, currently I am happy to happy him as our PM and I think he’s shown himself to be a calm, safe pair of hands.

He’s not right wing, he’s a centralist, which was what the LP thought they needed after disastrous GEs fought by Corbyn.

I’m still awaiting a response to the “lies” he’s told.

What will happen in the future? We can speculate, but I don’t wish to see the in/out PM’s and cabinet members of our last govt,. It is very unsettling and destabilising to our economy and points to party in-fighting, which no party should desire.

Channel 4 seem to have taken on a rather right wing perspective recently.

Oreo

Yes, but it was your point not mine, which you’re at liberty to hold.

I'm not sure of your point now.

You (as usual) questioned my post, and I replied with full explanation of the point I was making. You replied to say that you fully understood the point (so were.presumably questioning for the 'fun' of it) but in a subsequent post have shown that no, you really didn't understand as you have missed the point of my post entirely.

Never mind. It is clear that others know what I meant, so I am reassured that the point was made. Of course you re at liberty to disagree, but please do so honestly? If you don't understand, I am happy to reword, but if you just disagree, then why not make a point of your own to show why?

Chardy

He has totally changed the Labour Party, moving it to the right.
He lied to become Labour leader
He lied to become PM
He said if you don't like what the Labour Party is now, leave
He has allowed US bombers to use RAF Fairford without discussing it in Parliament
"Starmer’s interview on LBC a few days earlier, in which he said Israel “has the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza"
www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/oct/20/labour-deeply-divided-over-starmers-line-on-israel-hamas-war

I agree with Oreo that if Labour want to win the next election (not just Tories lose it as in 2024), he will be replaced

Starmer’s view, as you’ve put it, was over two years ago, I think you’ll find his views have changed dramatically given the events between Israel and Gaza, also he wasn’t PM at that time either. Honestly, if it wasn’t so tragic it would be funny, Starmer has been accused of both alienating Muslims and supporting Muslims, which is it? It cannot be both!

In terms of what’s happening in Iran, Starmer only needs to consult parliament if we attack, the UK’s stance still is defence, not attack.

What and how did Starmer lie? About both the leadership and the GE? We vote for the party in the UK not the person!

Yes, but it was your point not mine, which you’re at liberty to hold.