Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Starmer is the most popular leader of the opposition since Bla

SystemSystem Posts: 8,258
edited June 19 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Starmer is the most popular leader of the opposition since Blair – so why isn’t LAB ahead?

It is fair to say that Keir Starmer has made a positive start to life as Labour leader. Our latest figures from the Ipsos MORI political monitor show that 51% of the British public are satisfied with the job Starmer is doing, 20% are dissatisfied and 29% don’t know. 

Read the full story here


«1345678

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 2,538
    Dithers too much
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 3,643
    edited June 19
    Francis FPT

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/11/uk-secularism-on-rise-as-more-than-half-say-they-have-no-religion

    Religion was going out of fashion long before Covid.

    Fifty-two percent of the public say they do not belong to any religion, compared with 31% in 1983 when the BSA survey began tracking religious belief. The number of people identifying as Christian has fallen from 66% to 38% over the same period.




  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 19,537

    Fishing said:

    NHS England numbers out. Massively down.

    Total : 46
    Last seven days : 38
    Spanish : 2

    image
    image
    image
    image

    A Spanish zero might be just days away...

    Were the BLM protests another gigantic mute hound?
    Can anybody see the Dominic Cummings spike either?

    Amazing how little any of the events everybody obsessed over at the time has changed things at all.
    Indeed.

    An entire pack of silent canines stretching back to the warm Easter weekend around 9 April.

    I'm still waiting for the rise in cases and deaths caused by the "idiots" who took part in the VE day celebrations.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 3,643
    MaxPB said:

    Fishing said:

    NHS England numbers out. Massively down.

    Total : 46
    Last seven days : 38
    Spanish : 2

    image
    image
    image
    image

    A Spanish zero might be just days away...

    Were the BLM protests another gigantic mute hound?
    Can anybody see the Dominic Cummings spike either?

    Amazing how little any of the events everybody obsessed over at the time has changed things at all.
    Indeed.

    An entire pack of silent canines stretching back to the warm Easter weekend around 9 April.

    I'm still waiting for the rise in cases and deaths caused by the "idiots" who took part in the VE day celebrations.
    And the 'London dickheads' who had picnics in April.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,179
    Point of order: He's narrowly not more popular than David Cameron. He's got fewer against him than David Cameron but Cameron had 52% approving him while Starmer has 51% approving.

    I think its important to look at the approvals rather than the nets somewhat given the propensity to vote for third parties in this country. People who are against any potential leader of a party aren't switching, people who are indifferent likely aren't either unless they really dislike the other one.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 46,935
    edited June 19
    BBC News - Swing Low, Sweet Chariot: Boris Johnson says song should not be banned
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/53096584

    Boris can't help himself. He gives a reasonable response i.e. focus on actual discrimination in society today, but can't help then making a joke about people not knowing the words.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 2,538
    edited June 19
    He is weak. Johnson looked like he was giving him a real kicking at pmqs this week, and he had no defence to it. His take on the now traditional riff of "PM's got it wrong, he doesn't realise I ask the questions" was very half hearted. What Johnson was doing was frankly bullying, but effective (and lotos don't get to play the bullying card).

    Plus he has been very IDS over Iraq about obsequious support of the government. If he had gone out on a limb about apps or tracing or earlier lockdown or virtually anything they have done, he'd now look like a genius.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,892
    edited June 19
    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 25,985
    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 14,157
    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,179
    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
  • eekeek Posts: 8,141

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 21,517

    MaxPB said:

    Fishing said:

    NHS England numbers out. Massively down.

    Total : 46
    Last seven days : 38
    Spanish : 2

    image
    image
    image
    image

    A Spanish zero might be just days away...

    Were the BLM protests another gigantic mute hound?
    Can anybody see the Dominic Cummings spike either?

    Amazing how little any of the events everybody obsessed over at the time has changed things at all.
    Indeed.

    An entire pack of silent canines stretching back to the warm Easter weekend around 9 April.

    I'm still waiting for the rise in cases and deaths caused by the "idiots" who took part in the VE day celebrations.
    And the 'London dickheads' who had picnics in April.
    It is interesting that we are not seeing any uptick as a result of all these different examples. And yet in the US there seem to be definite and quite severe peaks as a result of the demonstrations over the last couple of weeks.
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,029
    I'm not being disingenuous, but how does this work? Leaving aside Starmer and going back to Corbyn, how many Tories would have been entirely satisfied with Corbyn's performance? 99%?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,177

    MaxPB said:

    Fishing said:

    NHS England numbers out. Massively down.

    Total : 46
    Last seven days : 38
    Spanish : 2

    image
    image
    image
    image

    A Spanish zero might be just days away...

    Were the BLM protests another gigantic mute hound?
    Can anybody see the Dominic Cummings spike either?

    Amazing how little any of the events everybody obsessed over at the time has changed things at all.
    Indeed.

    An entire pack of silent canines stretching back to the warm Easter weekend around 9 April.

    I'm still waiting for the rise in cases and deaths caused by the "idiots" who took part in the VE day celebrations.
    And the 'London dickheads' who had picnics in April.
    It is interesting that we are not seeing any uptick as a result of all these different examples. And yet in the US there seem to be definite and quite severe peaks as a result of the demonstrations over the last couple of weeks.
    I think that's more to do with their restrictions being eased.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 25,985
    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 25,985


    It is interesting that we are not seeing any uptick as a result of all these different examples. And yet in the US there seem to be definite and quite severe peaks as a result of the demonstrations over the last couple of weeks.

    Their demonstrations have been on a much larger scale, surely.
  • tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    Remember that the government majority in 1987 was 102, in 1992 this fell to 21. So that's a fall of 81...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,177
    alterego said:

    I'm not being disingenuous, but how does this work? Leaving aside Starmer and going back to Corbyn, how many Tories would have been entirely satisfied with Corbyn's performance? 99%?

    Surprised he hasn't got his GCMG from CCHQ yet. ;)
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,029

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    He might want to but can he do it yet? She still has powerful friends in the Labour Party
  • novanova Posts: 190
    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    And not forgetting that Blair took over with Labour already 20%+ ahead in the polls. Starmer was starting with the party 20%+ down.

    I think Labour will be perfectly happy with the polling so far, it was always going to be Starmer making the leadership a positive, then pulling the party along after. Definitely not a 6 month project.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 2,782
    On topic - I made this point yesterday but I`ll make it again - BF`s "Overall Majority" market has Labour as narrow favourites over the Tories at 3.2 (can be layed at 3.25). A smidgeon over 2/1 to win a clear majority!

    I find that astonishing and a lay at 3.25 is great value.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 25,985
    alterego said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    He might want to but can he do it yet? She still has powerful friends in the Labour Party
    Yes, and in any case there's no great hurry. His immediate priorities are probably much more about internal reorganisation, getting through the EHRC investigation, and purging the anti-semites and other loons.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 35,920
    Labour should be delighted with Keir Starmer's figures: he's doing much better than expected.

    Nevertheless, the public don't really know him yet so it remains to be seen whether they will decide to stick or twist.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    Time will tell if you are right.

    Starmer is an intellectual collossus compared to Kinnock. Neil didn't have the spectre of the post-Covid and post Brexit economy in his corner either.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 35,920
    Having said that, if I was going to stick my neck out, I'd say this is a leading indicator of a desire for a change of Government by 2024.

    IF LABOUR DON'T SCREW IT UP.

    (which means they have to be pragmatic, moderate and mainstream)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,892

    MaxPB said:

    Fishing said:

    NHS England numbers out. Massively down.

    Total : 46
    Last seven days : 38
    Spanish : 2

    image
    image
    image
    image

    A Spanish zero might be just days away...

    Were the BLM protests another gigantic mute hound?
    Can anybody see the Dominic Cummings spike either?

    Amazing how little any of the events everybody obsessed over at the time has changed things at all.
    Indeed.

    An entire pack of silent canines stretching back to the warm Easter weekend around 9 April.

    I'm still waiting for the rise in cases and deaths caused by the "idiots" who took part in the VE day celebrations.
    And the 'London dickheads' who had picnics in April.
    It is interesting that we are not seeing any uptick as a result of all these different examples. And yet in the US there seem to be definite and quite severe peaks as a result of the demonstrations over the last couple of weeks.
    Most of the picnics and people on trains etc etc in the UK still had people widely separated. Long lenses and people looking for panic stories....
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,029
    edited June 19
    nova said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    And not forgetting that Blair took over with Labour already 20%+ ahead in the polls. Starmer was starting with the party 20%+ down.

    I think Labour will be perfectly happy with the polling so far, it was always going to be Starmer making the leadership a positive, then pulling the party along after. Definitely not a 6 month project.
    He's doing well by doing little. Nothing wrong with that politically in today's circumstances. But, as I've posted before, he has a criminal law background in prosecution, he's even often described as forensic - his strength is looking backwards. He's not said anything that I can recall which is remotely imaginative or foresightful. Any suggestions?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 31,379


    It is interesting that we are not seeing any uptick as a result of all these different examples. And yet in the US there seem to be definite and quite severe peaks as a result of the demonstrations over the last couple of weeks.

    Their demonstrations have been on a much larger scale, surely.
    The upticks are not happening in places which had demonstrations, but in places which have relaxed (or even completely removed) restrictions.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,177
    They don't have the documents because they didn't make the order, yet the accusation is of a cover up? Jesus.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 2,633

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,100

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 46,935
    edited June 19
    RobD said:

    They don't have the documents because they didn't make the order, yet the accusation is of a cover up? Jesus.
    Another one who has been driven mad by Brexit. The original tweet will be all over social media.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,757
    FPT - @Carnyx pointed out they're coming after the eugenicists:

    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/jun/ucl-denames-buildings-named-after-eugenicists

    So I suppose that's Shaw, the Webbs & JM Keynes next then?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 47,177

    RobD said:

    They don't have the documents because they didn't make the order, yet the accusation is of a cover up? Jesus.
    Another one who has been driven mad by Brexit. The original tweet will be all over social media.
    You can see in the like ratio between the claim and the rebuttal.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 2,782

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    I`d agree with that. Though I think Truss, Raab and Lewis are a tad better than given credit for but I know others won`t agree.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,675
    An entertaining Hancock “back room” video:

    https://m.facebook.com/100000405926140/posts/3216789225011243/?d=w
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,687

    Labour should be delighted with Keir Starmer's figures: he's doing much better than expected.

    Nevertheless, the public don't really know him yet so it remains to be seen whether they will decide to stick or twist.

    And not blow questioning along the lines of "But what's your policy on XXX" which every opposition gets and, rightly or wrongly, electorally probably rightly, every opposition bats away.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,579

    Francis FPT

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/11/uk-secularism-on-rise-as-more-than-half-say-they-have-no-religion

    Religion was going out of fashion long before Covid.

    Fifty-two percent of the public say they do not belong to any religion, compared with 31% in 1983 when the BSA survey began tracking religious belief. The number of people identifying as Christian has fallen from 66% to 38% over the same period.

    It is playing to packed houses online though. Churches are seeing record numbers tuning in, far more than they ever get bums on pews.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 10,566
    edited June 19
    Another poll.

    Duplication. deleted.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 29,155

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    Remember that the government majority in 1987 was 102, in 1992 this fell to 21. So that's a fall of 81...
    That’s an interesting achievement that cuts both ways. On a UNS, the Tory majority would have been 77, not 21.

    So there are two ways of looking at this. One is that Kinnock, having inherited a demoralised, divided, bankrupt and intellectually exhausted party that had just polled its lowest share of the vote in the age of universal suffrage, fought a pragmatic, intelligent eight year campaign that added 63 seats to its parliamentary strength and through intelligent targeting and highly efficient tactical voting brought off a very near miss;

    OR

    Ultimately, for all his success in seats he still had little success in broadening his party’s appeal in terms of votes, which limited his options and ultimately left him unable to form a government.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,548

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 29,155
    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    It is perhaps worth remembering that no party led by a Welshman has ever won a general election. (LLoyd George not having been a party leader in 1918.)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,628
    RobD said:

    They don't have the documents because they didn't make the order, yet the accusation is of a cover up? Jesus.
    Welcome to modern 'journalism'. 2,500 likes in an afternoon from the FBPE crowd, so job done.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 2,633
    Stocky said:

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    I`d agree with that. Though I think Truss, Raab and Lewis are a tad better than given credit for but I know others won`t agree.
    I don't even know who this Lewis person is so they are clearly not managing to achieve cut through. Truss maybe. Raab no, he is the Platonic ideal of everything that's wrong with our current political class. Shallow, thick, incurious and with an absurdly inflated idea of his own abilities.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 139

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    I think that's fair comment. But I also think that with exposure the front bench team will be seen to be stronger than their Tory counterparts within a couple of years. Interestingly one who has had exposure recently, David Lammy, has in my opinion surpassed expectations, being very sensible on BLM issues including statues - a voice of reason.

    R L-B had to be given a job as runner-up for the leadership, really. Given that she is up against the nonentity Gavin Williamson, if she doesn't outperform him I would expect Starmer to dispense with her services after a year or so.
  • novanova Posts: 190
    alterego said:

    nova said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    And not forgetting that Blair took over with Labour already 20%+ ahead in the polls. Starmer was starting with the party 20%+ down.

    I think Labour will be perfectly happy with the polling so far, it was always going to be Starmer making the leadership a positive, then pulling the party along after. Definitely not a 6 month project.
    He's doing well by doing little. Nothing wrong with that politically in today's circumstances. But, as I've posted before, he has a criminal law background, he's even often described as forensic - his strength is looking backwards. He's not said anything that I can recall which is remotely imaginative or foresightful. Any suggestions?
    To be fair, it's not like there is much "future" around at the moment.

    I don't think he needs to do anything like that yet - The Tories have already talked about levelling up, major infrastructure spending, and even a green revolution. We've got a recession coming up and Brexit to go through, and then hopefully forget. I'd suggest any big idea right now, might just get lost in the noise.

    Labour's vision needs to come later - and in four years time they may not even need one.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,579
    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,029

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    Gove's keeping a low profile. He can't afford to be seen as disloyal again so someone else is gonna have to do for Boris before he makes any move. I can't imagine that he's lost his ambition.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 11,764

    Stocky said:

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    I`d agree with that. Though I think Truss, Raab and Lewis are a tad better than given credit for but I know others won`t agree.
    I don't even know who this Lewis person is so they are clearly not managing to achieve cut through. Truss maybe. Raab no, he is the Platonic ideal of everything that's wrong with our current political class. Shallow, thick, incurious and with an absurdly inflated idea of his own abilities.
    But he kneels to no-one.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,548
    alterego said:

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    Gove's keeping a low profile. He can't afford to be seen as disloyal again so someone else is gonna have to do for Boris before he makes any move. I can't imagine that he's lost his ambition.
    Or rather, Lady Macbeth hasn't lost hers....
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 25,985

    FPT - @Carnyx pointed out they're coming after the eugenicists:

    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/jun/ucl-denames-buildings-named-after-eugenicists

    So I suppose that's Shaw, the Webbs & JM Keynes next then?

    And William Beveridge of course. Awkward for the LSE, University College Oxford, the LibDems and the DHSS.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 9,922
    nova said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    And not forgetting that Blair took over with Labour already 20%+ ahead in the polls. Starmer was starting with the party 20%+ down.

    I think Labour will be perfectly happy with the polling so far, it was always going to be Starmer making the leadership a positive, then pulling the party along after. Definitely not a 6 month project.
    I agree with that. Recently re-elected Governments with big majorities tend to perform less well at the following election than implied by polls a mere six months post election.
  • SurreySurrey Posts: 190
    edited June 19
    Is an Irangate coming? "John Bolton urged to elaborate on Trump-Erdoğan claims".

    "Bolton claimed that during a 2018 phone call Erdoğan sent Trump a memo insisting that the scandal-hit Halkbank was innocent. 'Trump then told Erdoğan he would take care of things, explaining that the [New York] southern district prosecutors were not his people but were Obama people, a problem that would be fixed when they were replaced by his people,' Bolton wrote.

    Bloomberg has reported that in April 2019, Trump instructed Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin and Attorney General William Barr to address Erdoğan’s request that Halkbank avoid charges.

    Halkbank, one of Turkey’s largest banks, has been under investigation by US prosecutors since a Turkish inquiry in 2013 found it was used to launder up to $20bn in a scheme to evade US sanctions on Iran. High-ranking Turkish officials allegedly exported gold to Tehran via the UAE in return for Iranian oil and gas.

    (...) Two men with close ties to Erdoğan’s inner circle – Reza Zarrab, a flamboyant Turkish-Iranian businessman, and Mehmet Atilla, Halkbank’s deputy chief executive – have been sentenced to jail time in the US.

    (...) The case has shed light on the strong ties between Turkey and the Trump administration: Zarrab, who led a tabloid lifestyle of pop stars, yachts and cars and worked out of Istanbul’s Trump Tower, asked the former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani to represent him in 2016, shortly before Giuliani became the president’s attorney.
    "
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,628
    alterego said:

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    Gove's keeping a low profile. He can't afford to be seen as disloyal again so someone else is gonna have to do for Boris before he makes any move. I can't imagine that he's lost his ambition.
    I suspect that Gove has been buried deep inside the Cabinet Office in recent weeks, trying to put out the fires and working through the Brexit negotiations.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,100

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    To early to say , spending money that would have made John Mcdonnel blush is the easy part.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,579

    alterego said:

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    Gove's keeping a low profile. He can't afford to be seen as disloyal again so someone else is gonna have to do for Boris before he makes any move. I can't imagine that he's lost his ambition.
    Or rather, Lady Macbeth hasn't lost hers....
    Then she should stand - Gove has lost it. Someone said he's been keeping a low profile - not low enough.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 2,538
    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    eek said:

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    The current government is hardly made up of heavyweights, heck a lot would be hard pushed to make the third team..
    True enough, although it's at least got a very good Chancellor.
    Sunak and Patel are the government's most effective operators in my opinion. Gove seems to have gone off the boil recently. The rest of them are worse than useless.
    I`d agree with that. Though I think Truss, Raab and Lewis are a tad better than given credit for but I know others won`t agree.
    I don't even know who this Lewis person is so they are clearly not managing to achieve cut through. Truss maybe. Raab no, he is the Platonic ideal of everything that's wrong with our current political class. Shallow, thick, incurious and with an absurdly inflated idea of his own abilities.
    But he kneels to no-one.
    Except Mrs Wallace.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289
    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    Remember that the government majority in 1987 was 102, in 1992 this fell to 21. So that's a fall of 81...
    That’s an interesting achievement that cuts both ways. On a UNS, the Tory majority would have been 77, not 21.

    So there are two ways of looking at this. One is that Kinnock, having inherited a demoralised, divided, bankrupt and intellectually exhausted party that had just polled its lowest share of the vote in the age of universal suffrage, fought a pragmatic, intelligent eight year campaign that added 63 seats to its parliamentary strength and through intelligent targeting and highly efficient tactical voting brought off a very near miss;

    OR

    Ultimately, for all his success in seats he still had little success in broadening his party’s appeal in terms of votes, which limited his options and ultimately left him unable to form a government.
    Depending upon the day of the week, either apply.

    I am probably alone in thinking one of the main differences between now and Kinnock's era, is we have a Prime Minister who could quite possibly toxify the Conservative brand beyond Corbyn Labour levels.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 2,179

    MaxPB said:

    Fishing said:

    NHS England numbers out. Massively down.

    Total : 46
    Last seven days : 38
    Spanish : 2

    image
    image
    image
    image

    A Spanish zero might be just days away...

    Were the BLM protests another gigantic mute hound?
    Can anybody see the Dominic Cummings spike either?

    Amazing how little any of the events everybody obsessed over at the time has changed things at all.
    Indeed.

    An entire pack of silent canines stretching back to the warm Easter weekend around 9 April.

    I'm still waiting for the rise in cases and deaths caused by the "idiots" who took part in the VE day celebrations.
    And the 'London dickheads' who had picnics in April.
    It is interesting that we are not seeing any uptick as a result of all these different examples. And yet in the US there seem to be definite and quite severe peaks as a result of the demonstrations over the last couple of weeks.
    I'm wondering if this - coupled with the indications that it was around for a longer period prior to the explosion in cases in February and March - might point to the superspreader thing being completely crucial.

    We know it can infect most of a population from outbreaks in limited environments infecting most of their population, so it's highly unlikely to be that it can only infect a small proportion of us (and that wouldn't explain a long lying-in-wait period, anyway).

    So - what if R encompasses a variability from low (flu-like 1.2-1.4, or even lower) for most people, but spiked with superspreaders getting Rs of 20+ and bringing the average up to around 3? That is - the virus finds it hard to spread under normal conditions, but when all the holes in the cheese line up, it can go full-tilt? Someone who has a lengthy presymptomatic-but-infectious period, meets lots of people for prolonged times, lots of indoor stuff with lots of talking, and happens to have a very high virus load can infect a load of people, but "normally", with outdoor interactions and/or short interactions, meeting fewer people, shorter infectious periods and so on all adding up to push things down.

    It would imply that you probably need multiple reinforcing superspreader events to cause it to explode, but when you do, it can burn steadily with the lower-R people and have far more opportunities to find more superspreaders to get the exponential boost.

    But, thanks to limiting opportunities and with few enough people being infectious at any one time, if you have the level low enough, the probabilities of getting multiple superspreaders lined up at the right time in the right place are low enough that you'll usually avoid them.

    Of course, this appeals to me because it implies that having got infections low enough, we merely need enough restrictions to limit possibilities of superspreaders reinforcing each other (I'm not remotely suggesting that abandoning all restrictions would be a good idea; just targeting them carefully to avoid what we know of superspreader events and conditions). I don't know how to confirm that thought, though.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 11,764
    Sleazy broken Trump continues to slide - 2.54.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,579
    Surrey said:

    Is an Irangate coming? "John Bolton urged to elaborate on Trump-Erdoğan claims".

    "Bolton claimed that during a 2018 phone call Erdoğan sent Trump a memo insisting that the scandal-hit Halkbank was innocent. 'Trump then told Erdoğan he would take care of things, explaining that the [New York] southern district prosecutors were not his people but were Obama people, a problem that would be fixed when they were replaced by his people,' Bolton wrote.

    Bloomberg has reported that in April 2019, Trump instructed Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin and Attorney General William Barr to address Erdoğan’s request that Halkbank avoid charges.

    Halkbank, one of Turkey’s largest banks, has been under investigation by US prosecutors since a Turkish inquiry in 2013 found it was used to launder up to $20bn in a scheme to evade US sanctions on Iran. High-ranking Turkish officials allegedly exported gold to Tehran via the UAE in return for Iranian oil and gas.

    (...) Two men with close ties to Erdoğan’s inner circle – Reza Zarrab, a flamboyant Turkish-Iranian businessman, and Mehmet Atilla, Halkbank’s deputy chief executive – have been sentenced to jail time in the US.

    (...) The case has shed light on the strong ties between Turkey and the Trump administration: Zarrab, who led a tabloid lifestyle of pop stars, yachts and cars and worked out of Istanbul’s Trump Tower, asked the former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani to represent him in 2016, shortly before Giuliani became the president’s attorney.
    "

    Same story as when the thieving gits went after Standard Chartered. I don't see that it's any of America's business if another country wants to do business with Iran.
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,029

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    I think that's fair comment. But I also think that with exposure the front bench team will be seen to be stronger than their Tory counterparts within a couple of years. Interestingly one who has had exposure recently, David Lammy, has in my opinion surpassed expectations, being very sensible on BLM issues including statues - a voice of reason.

    R L-B had to be given a job as runner-up for the leadership, really. Given that she is up against the nonentity Gavin Williamson, if she doesn't outperform him I would expect Starmer to dispense with her services after a year or so.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 29,155

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    This actually got me thinking. How many Scottish PMs have won elections?

    Well, it depends of course on what you mean by Scottish. You could include Macmillan and Baldwin in that list if you wanted to stretch the criteria a bit. Blair, certainly. But I don’t think a Scottish PM sitting for a Scottish seat has won a general election since World War Two. In that time Home and Brown are the only two Scots I can think of anyway who meet that criteria. Smith of course almost certainly would have won an election had he not died.

    Even before World War Two the picture isn’t rosy. MacDonald was Scottish of course, bat sat for Seaham in the only general election he won. Asquith by contrast sat for North East Fife, but was a Yorkshireman. Campbell-Bannerman meets the criteria, and Rosebery was a Scottish peer. Balfour was Scottish, but as PM sat for a seat in Manchester and as Leader of the Opposition for the City of London.

    I’ve got to give this to Yorkcity, he seems to be right.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289
    edited June 19
    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    It is perhaps worth remembering that no party led by a Welshman has ever won a general election. (LLoyd George not having been a party leader in 1918.)
    Kinnock's particular brand of 'boyo' Welshman could particularly grate on a certain type of English voter too.

    TBH, Kinnock grated irrespective of one's nationality.
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,029
    nova said:

    alterego said:

    nova said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    And not forgetting that Blair took over with Labour already 20%+ ahead in the polls. Starmer was starting with the party 20%+ down.

    I think Labour will be perfectly happy with the polling so far, it was always going to be Starmer making the leadership a positive, then pulling the party along after. Definitely not a 6 month project.
    He's doing well by doing little. Nothing wrong with that politically in today's circumstances. But, as I've posted before, he has a criminal law background, he's even often described as forensic - his strength is looking backwards. He's not said anything that I can recall which is remotely imaginative or foresightful. Any suggestions?
    To be fair, it's not like there is much "future" around at the moment.

    I don't think he needs to do anything like that yet - The Tories have already talked about levelling up, major infrastructure spending, and even a green revolution. We've got a recession coming up and Brexit to go through, and then hopefully forget. I'd suggest any big idea right now, might just get lost in the noise.

    Labour's vision needs to come later - and in four years time they may not even need one.
    There's always a "future" unless you're a doom and gloom sandwich board man.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 5,557

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    As a matter of interest, did enough Southrons know about the Broon Family comic strip for that to be a possible reference, if only out of ignorance? Every Scot knows about that product of D. C. Thomson, but none of the characters in it gybe at all well with Mr Brown's character.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,100

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    Yes I think that is a fair point.
    In many ways I preferred his dour image in helping the less well of in society.Even by trying to hide tax increases from the mainstream view, to the Blair brashness.
  • ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    Remember that the government majority in 1987 was 102, in 1992 this fell to 21. So that's a fall of 81...
    That’s an interesting achievement that cuts both ways. On a UNS, the Tory majority would have been 77, not 21.

    So there are two ways of looking at this. One is that Kinnock, having inherited a demoralised, divided, bankrupt and intellectually exhausted party that had just polled its lowest share of the vote in the age of universal suffrage, fought a pragmatic, intelligent eight year campaign that added 63 seats to its parliamentary strength and through intelligent targeting and highly efficient tactical voting brought off a very near miss;

    OR

    Ultimately, for all his success in seats he still had little success in broadening his party’s appeal in terms of votes, which limited his options and ultimately left him unable to form a government.
    1992 was the year that UNS seriously stopped working wasn't it? What it couldn't pick up was the willingness of Labour and Lib Dem voters to do what was necessary to vote effectively against the Conservatives.

    Fast forward to 2019. Corbyn was so ghastly that many people couldn't bring themselves to vote for him, even if it was the best/only way to Stop Boris. So a small increase in Conservative votes became a big increase in seats. Who knows how and when, indeed if, that will unwind.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,892

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.
    Cases in the last 10 days in the SW -

    4 9 8 4 4 4 7 6 2 0
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 5,557
    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    This actually got me thinking. How many Scottish PMs have won elections?

    Well, it depends of course on what you mean by Scottish. You could include Macmillan and Baldwin in that list if you wanted to stretch the criteria a bit. Blair, certainly. But I don’t think a Scottish PM sitting for a Scottish seat has won a general election since World War Two. In that time Home and Brown are the only two Scots I can think of anyway who meet that criteria. Smith of course almost certainly would have won an election had he not died.

    Even before World War Two the picture isn’t rosy. MacDonald was Scottish of course, bat sat for Seaham in the only general election he won. Asquith by contrast sat for North East Fife, but was a Yorkshireman. Campbell-Bannerman meets the criteria, and Rosebery was a Scottish peer. Balfour was Scottish, but as PM sat for a seat in Manchester and as Leader of the Opposition for the City of London.

    I’ve got to give this to Yorkcity, he seems to be right.
    Even more right. Blair was about as Scottish as the Duke of Wellington was Irish, and in much the same way.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,579
    Carnyx said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    As a matter of interest, did enough Southrons know about the Broon Family comic strip for that to be a possible reference, if only out of ignorance? Every Scot knows about that product of D. C. Thomson, but none of the characters in it gybe at all well with Mr Brown's character.
    When I saw him called Broon (comments on Guido Fawkes), I just took it to be a parody Scottish version of his name. I didn't become aware of the comic strip until I came to Scotland, though I believe it has a niche following down south. I was of course very much aware of Dandy...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 82,437
    edited June 19
    Carnyx said:


    Even more right. Blair was about as Scottish as the Duke of Wellington was Irish, and in much the same way.

    Blair was born and educated in Scotland, take responsibility for your fellow countrymen.

    Blair's formative years were in Scotland, no matter how hard you try and deny it.
  • isamisam Posts: 32,714
    Disappointed Kieran didn't address my "Personality" theory.

    No LotO has become PM since IPSOS-MORI started their leader image ratings in 1978 without leading on personality, and Boris leads Starmer 64-30
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289
    The seminal moment in heralding a Starmer government?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 5,557

    Carnyx said:


    Even more right. Blair was about as Scottish as the Duke of Wellington was Irish, and in much the same way.

    Blair was born and educated in Scotland, take responsibility for your fellow countrymen.

    Blair's formative years were in Scotland, no matter how hard you try and deny it.
    Not denying it. But the key thing was, was he ever thought of, or heard, as being Scottish? In contrast to Mr Brown.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,579
    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    This actually got me thinking. How many Scottish PMs have won elections?

    Well, it depends of course on what you mean by Scottish. You could include Macmillan and Baldwin in that list if you wanted to stretch the criteria a bit. Blair, certainly. But I don’t think a Scottish PM sitting for a Scottish seat has won a general election since World War Two. In that time Home and Brown are the only two Scots I can think of anyway who meet that criteria. Smith of course almost certainly would have won an election had he not died.

    Even before World War Two the picture isn’t rosy. MacDonald was Scottish of course, bat sat for Seaham in the only general election he won. Asquith by contrast sat for North East Fife, but was a Yorkshireman. Campbell-Bannerman meets the criteria, and Rosebery was a Scottish peer. Balfour was Scottish, but as PM sat for a seat in Manchester and as Leader of the Opposition for the City of London.

    I’ve got to give this to Yorkcity, he seems to be right.
    Cameron is a Scottish name is it not? I've no idea of David Cameron's precise family history.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,179

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.
    Cases in the last 10 days in the SW -

    4 9 8 4 4 4 7 6 2 0
    Cases or deaths?

    If cases that is truly miniscule.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 5,557

    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    This actually got me thinking. How many Scottish PMs have won elections?

    Well, it depends of course on what you mean by Scottish. You could include Macmillan and Baldwin in that list if you wanted to stretch the criteria a bit. Blair, certainly. But I don’t think a Scottish PM sitting for a Scottish seat has won a general election since World War Two. In that time Home and Brown are the only two Scots I can think of anyway who meet that criteria. Smith of course almost certainly would have won an election had he not died.

    Even before World War Two the picture isn’t rosy. MacDonald was Scottish of course, bat sat for Seaham in the only general election he won. Asquith by contrast sat for North East Fife, but was a Yorkshireman. Campbell-Bannerman meets the criteria, and Rosebery was a Scottish peer. Balfour was Scottish, but as PM sat for a seat in Manchester and as Leader of the Opposition for the City of London.

    I’ve got to give this to Yorkcity, he seems to be right.
    Cameron is a Scottish name is it not? I've no idea of David Cameron's precise family history.
    It is indeed. This came up in the referendum campaign now you remind me

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26082372
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 4,289
    isam said:

    Disappointed Kieran didn't address my "Personality" theory.

    No LotO has become PM since IPSOS-MORI started their leader image ratings in 1978 without leading on personality, and Boris leads Starmer 64-30

    As has been stated several times on here, when 2024 arrives, the last thing we might feel we need is a "character" running the show.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 29,155

    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    This actually got me thinking. How many Scottish PMs have won elections?

    Well, it depends of course on what you mean by Scottish. You could include Macmillan and Baldwin in that list if you wanted to stretch the criteria a bit. Blair, certainly. But I don’t think a Scottish PM sitting for a Scottish seat has won a general election since World War Two. In that time Home and Brown are the only two Scots I can think of anyway who meet that criteria. Smith of course almost certainly would have won an election had he not died.

    Even before World War Two the picture isn’t rosy. MacDonald was Scottish of course, bat sat for Seaham in the only general election he won. Asquith by contrast sat for North East Fife, but was a Yorkshireman. Campbell-Bannerman meets the criteria, and Rosebery was a Scottish peer. Balfour was Scottish, but as PM sat for a seat in Manchester and as Leader of the Opposition for the City of London.

    I’ve got to give this to Yorkcity, he seems to be right.
    Cameron is a Scottish name is it not? I've no idea of David Cameron's precise family history.
    IIRC, his grandfather was Scottish.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,179
    Considering Labour gains first time voters (18, 19 year olds) at a greatly disproportionate rate that is truly remarkable.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 18,829

    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    This actually got me thinking. How many Scottish PMs have won elections?

    Well, it depends of course on what you mean by Scottish. You could include Macmillan and Baldwin in that list if you wanted to stretch the criteria a bit. Blair, certainly. But I don’t think a Scottish PM sitting for a Scottish seat has won a general election since World War Two. In that time Home and Brown are the only two Scots I can think of anyway who meet that criteria. Smith of course almost certainly would have won an election had he not died.

    Even before World War Two the picture isn’t rosy. MacDonald was Scottish of course, bat sat for Seaham in the only general election he won. Asquith by contrast sat for North East Fife, but was a Yorkshireman. Campbell-Bannerman meets the criteria, and Rosebery was a Scottish peer. Balfour was Scottish, but as PM sat for a seat in Manchester and as Leader of the Opposition for the City of London.

    I’ve got to give this to Yorkcity, he seems to be right.
    Cameron is a Scottish name is it not? I've no idea of David Cameron's precise family history.
    AIUI Cameron's forebears left Scotland three or four generations ago.
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 339
    Nothing surprising there. Cummings proved in 2016 that he's exceptionally good at getting non-voters out and did so again in 2019.
  • alteregoalterego Posts: 1,029
    isam said:

    Disappointed Kieran didn't address my "Personality" theory.

    No LotO has become PM since IPSOS-MORI started their leader image ratings in 1978 without leading on personality, and Boris leads Starmer 64-30

    Thanks for the reminder that Starmer has a personality, just.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 21,517

    RobD said:

    They don't have the documents because they didn't make the order, yet the accusation is of a cover up? Jesus.
    Another one who has been driven mad by Brexit. The original tweet will be all over social media.
    James O'Brien has been mad - and an obnoxious twat - since long before Brexit. He matches Morgan for his offensive ignorance.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 10,566
    Carnyx said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    As a matter of interest, did enough Southrons know about the Broon Family comic strip for that to be a possible reference, if only out of ignorance? Every Scot knows about that product of D. C. Thomson, but none of the characters in it gybe at all well with Mr Brown's character.
    Private Eye had The Broonites cartoon strip.

  • UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.
    Cases in the last 10 days in the SW -

    4 9 8 4 4 4 7 6 2 0
    Cases or deaths?

    If cases that is truly miniscule.
    Yet the r rate is well over 1 down there, apparently,.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,687

    RobD said:

    They don't have the documents because they didn't make the order, yet the accusation is of a cover up? Jesus.
    Another one who has been driven mad by Brexit. The original tweet will be all over social media.
    James O'Brien has been mad - and an obnoxious twat - since long before Brexit. He matches Morgan for his offensive ignorance.
    And part of what makes Britain great.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 4,892

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.

    UK data out - 173

    England Regional case data by specimen day

    For interest - 79 of 316 Lower Tier Local Authorities have reported 0 cases in the last 7 days.

    image
    image

    SW doesn't register at all in recent days.
    Cases in the last 10 days in the SW -

    4 9 8 4 4 4 7 6 2 0
    Cases or deaths?

    If cases that is truly miniscule.
    Yet the r rate is well over 1 down there, apparently,.
    Cases.

    Last 10 days of deaths for SW

    0 0 2 2 2 0 1 1 0 0
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 28,030

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    Like going from Hague to Cameron
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 20,581
    edited June 19
    Another corroded and aesthetically unpleasing monument of the right taken down.

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 21,517

    Also worth mentioning the Shadow Cabinet, which, although vastly improved since the dismal Corbyn rag-bag, still looks lightweight and doesn't look like a government-in-waiting. The interview with Ed Balls on WATO today was a stark reminder that Labour used to have some serious Shad Cab figures.

    To be fair, with experience and more exposure the frontbench team will no doubt improve. Nonetheless, Starmer could do with making a few forensic cuts. I'd suggest ditching RL-B would be a good start.

    I think that's fair comment. But I also think that with exposure the front bench team will be seen to be stronger than their Tory counterparts within a couple of years. Interestingly one who has had exposure recently, David Lammy, has in my opinion surpassed expectations, being very sensible on BLM issues including statues - a voice of reason.

    R L-B had to be given a job as runner-up for the leadership, really. Given that she is up against the nonentity Gavin Williamson, if she doesn't outperform him I would expect Starmer to dispense with her services after a year or so.
    Lammy is an out and out racist. He doesn't even deserve to be in Parliament let alone in the Shadow Cabinet.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 11,579
    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    tlg86 said:

    An excellent piece, thank you Keiran.

    I think Starmer is to some extent benefitting from not being Corbyn. I'm tempted to say that Labour have jumped straight from Foot to Blair, but actually I think Starmer is quite left-wing. Alastair Campbell was correct to say that we need to wait and see what Starmer presents to the country. Plenty of time for that, but it will be interesting to see what sorts of things Starmer proposes.

    I'd suggest Starmer slots in rather nicely as Kinnock.
    I think your suggestion does not hold water.
    For whatever reason English voters prefer an English leader.
    Both Kinnock and Brown were derided in many instances because of this.
    John Smith less so and Blair was seen as English.

    Also to become leader of the opposition in 5 years is impressive as is his backstory.
    We are also told that politicians who have never done anything else are out of touch.
    SKS has had an an impressive career outside of politics.
    He is a breath of fresh air in comparison to our current leader and the leader of the USA.
    I think Brown it was a two way thing - there were people calling him 'Broon' and there were a lot of other people for whom his Scottishness was part of the 'prudence' 'dour' 'clunking fist' image for austere economic competence that he had in the early years.
    This actually got me thinking. How many Scottish PMs have won elections?

    Well, it depends of course on what you mean by Scottish. You could include Macmillan and Baldwin in that list if you wanted to stretch the criteria a bit. Blair, certainly. But I don’t think a Scottish PM sitting for a Scottish seat has won a general election since World War Two. In that time Home and Brown are the only two Scots I can think of anyway who meet that criteria. Smith of course almost certainly would have won an election had he not died.

    Even before World War Two the picture isn’t rosy. MacDonald was Scottish of course, bat sat for Seaham in the only general election he won. Asquith by contrast sat for North East Fife, but was a Yorkshireman. Campbell-Bannerman meets the criteria, and Rosebery was a Scottish peer. Balfour was Scottish, but as PM sat for a seat in Manchester and as Leader of the Opposition for the City of London.

    I’ve got to give this to Yorkcity, he seems to be right.
    Cameron is a Scottish name is it not? I've no idea of David Cameron's precise family history.
    It is indeed. This came up in the referendum campaign now you remind me

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26082372
    Thanks for that - just Googled the Camerons' former ancestral pile, Blairmore House.

    Now normally, there are very few Victorian baronial mansions you could ever get me to say a bad word about, but this one: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/1404022253 is properly hideous. :lol:
Sign In or Register to comment.