Keir Starmer

[john eden]

To give Starmer his due, he allegedly likes a takeaway curry, I’ll give him that.

 

[sufi]

To give Starmer his due, he allegedly likes a takeaway curry, I’ll give him that.

so there is at least one aspect where he is dissimilar to a showroom dummy

 

[sufi]

I don't buy the "unelectable" tag. It feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy made by the press.

I dunno, not all opposition leaders have the same mission. i always assumed JC was a placeholder, perhaps with the benefit of dispelling some blairite /new lab phantoms, resetting the party's path somewhat, maybe, broadening the appeal, and that he would be moved gently but deftly aside for an young and electable woman at the correct strategic moment.

That this did not happen makes me think that labour may be a democratic failure rather than a shadowy conspiracy with a hidden agenda, unfortunately.

 

[hucks]

Thanks Hucks, I am both being deliberately irritating about this and not.

ha, thanks 😊

Basically this isn't an exciting victory for Starmer. Thus far, he does not seem to have ignited the electorate in the way that some people assured us he would.

I agree. He’s been disappointing on almost every level

So my current analaysis is that Labour remain screwed.

I think they’re less screwed than they were in 2019 but largely that’s not down to them

 

[DannyL]

I inadvertently lent the Labour candidates in my ward a phone charger. So in spite of myself I am supporting Sir Kieier’s efforts by dint of being neighbourly and community minded.

Class traitor!

 

[DannyL]

The results seem too mixed for me to argue about at the moment so your Centrist baiting will have to wait. I'm glad they've taken Wandsworth and Westminster. Have felt for a long time that a hung Parliament is more likely than a Labour majority/landslide - coming back from the 80 seats down is hard - so that kinda scans.

Dominic Cummigs keeps on saying they should have replaced him with a Northern women (I presume he means Lisa Nandy) - I kind of agree but that's obvs not going to happen now.

 

[subvert47]

Have felt for a long time that a hung Parliament is more likely than a Labour majority/landslide

I hope it is. And that the other parties insist on PR as a prerequisite for cooperation.

 

[version]

But is precisely Starmer’s “electability” which was his selling point. So there must be something in it surely?

Either there is a scale of electability or there isn’t?

I think it's mostly manufactured and that Starmer's "electability" was talked up precisely because of the decision to brand Corbyn "unelectable".

 

[wild greens]

Corbyn didnt win an election. You don't have to brand him as anything, thats how it goes

 

[wild greens]

Anyway lets enjoy the backlash from all these Tory council losses for now

 

[Mr. Tea]

I hope it is. And that the other parties insist on PR as a prerequisite for cooperation.

I'd always assumed the SNP would be dead against PR since they're by far the biggest beneficiaries of FPTP, but I found out recently they actually support PR, which is quite admirable, I think.

 

[version]

Corbyn didnt win an election. You don't have to brand him as anything, thats how it goes

The claims of unelectability were already being made beforehand though. This is my point. The establishment declare someone unelectable, do their best to make sure they lose and then claim they were right all along if they do.

 

[version]

You have to look at the criteria for so-called "electability", who's setting it and how consistently it's applied.

 

[IdleRich]

Dominic Cummigs keeps on saying they should have replaced him with a Northern women

Shoulda got a northman, woulda sorted things out a bit.

 

[john eden]

The results seem too mixed for me to argue about at the moment so your Centrist baiting will have to wait.

Well where's the fun in that? Honestly!

 

[john eden]

Stamford Hill and Springfield wards stay Tory, so my phone charger did not unlock a secret pathway to the left.

 

[wild greens]

The claims of unelectability were already being made beforehand though. This is my point. The establishment declare someone unelectable, do their best to make sure they lose and then claim they were right all along if they do.

If you think the reason Corbyn didnt get in was the media establishment then you are quite naive to the realities of this country i think. Not trying to get personal, apologies, but no

 

[version]

If you think the reason Corbyn didnt get in was the media establishment then you are quite naive to the realities of this country i think. Not trying to get personal, apologies, but no

I don't think they're the only reason, but I think they're a major factor. The media are most people's primary window into national politics and play a big part in shaping all sorts of narratives and attitudes.

 

[john eden]

I agree with @version that "electability" as a concept is largely chucked about by the media. But it is also the preserve of our noble and wise centrists when trying to delegitimise conversations about socialism.

That said, I think @wild greens is also correct in that the media is not the primary or even major factor in how people vote.

 

[Mr. Tea]

I don't think they're the only reason, but I think they're a major factor. The media are most people's primary window into national politics and play a big part in shaping all sorts of narratives and attitudes.

Right, and the Tory rags have been hammering this garbage "beergate/currygate" non-story for weeks, haven't they? With the exception of the Murdoch papers' dalliance with Blair, none of those papers has ever been anything but hostile to any Labour leaders.

(On top of that there's the fringe left media that sprang up around the time Corbyn became LOTO, who'd start an "Ian Huntley for PM" campaign if it came down to him and Starmer. And they don't sell papers, but they're very popular among the terminally online.)