Im no fan of Starmer but …

[BettyWhittaker]

I am very anti - Labour government, have never voted Labour in my life and never would and I hope an early GE is called …

BUT - AIBU to think he really couldn’t have handled Trump any better than he had? Christ the man is completely unhinged, his behaviour is getting worse and worse - AIBU to think Starmer really couldn’t have done more to handle this?

I thought his statement yesterday was pretty good. Let’s just hope the mad man gets taken out of office before he kicks off another bloody war

It is a very good speech.

Would have pissed off Trump no doubt.

I wish I shared your optimism.

Not prepared to risk me agreeing with something they’ve said/done? Or can’t find something that is good?

I’ve just read a report of Trump’s Davos speech in which he apparently ruled out the use of force. I know he’s about as reliable as Baron Munchausen but I think even he can see the ludicrousness of launching an armed invasion of Greenland.

Unless countries stand in his way.

He didn't permanently rule out force, he just said he wasn't planning on it now and thus left it open as a threat

Yes. If he doesn't get his way "we will remember".

Expecting Trump to be consistent and stick to his word is the epitome of triumph of hope over experience.

TBH, when it comes to the really big stuff - like confronting Europe with a military takeover of Greenland, rather than a limited operation against Venezuela - I think Trump’s full of shit.

He does politics like he does New York real estate. Threats, bluster, nice words, more threats, deal. And no doubt plenty of times, no deal, in which case he moves on.

And if the deal doesn’t happen because Greenland isn’t for sale? What do you think hell do then? He started by saying ‘I don’t want’ to use force. Saying he’s not going to after that isn’t convincing to me. It gives ‘do as you’re told or there’ll be consequences’ or ‘don’t make me hit you’ vibes.

He’ll move on, like I said. He has the attention span of a goldfish and the self-awareness of an infant.

Trump’s erratic. For example, he may well soon decide that the Chagos deal should be talked up. (Which would say nothing about the merits of the agreement, which are frankly utter crap.)

That’s why I don’t believe Starmer has achieved anything with Trump that couldn’t have been done by anyone. Warm words from Trump one day are illusory. You get a tirade the next day. It would happen to anyone in Starmer’s position. We could have sent Larry the cat to visit Trump and the outcomes would have been the same.

It’s also why I doubt that Farage has Trump’s ear. The only people he’ll listen to (for ten minutes) are people who can make him personally richer. And possibly Melania.

Well, according to Badenoch, had she been PM, none of this would ever have happened.
So presumably you think she is talking rubbish.

You do seem very keen to dismiss anything Starmer has done on this issue.

I think the UK/EU and NATO saying a firm NO to Trump is why he and those around him backed down.

Farage would have said "Yes Sir, i back you taking Greenland....."

I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. What has Starmer done? If you don’t believe Trump was ever going to invade Greenland, as I don’t, what has any leader done?

I can’t find details of the deal. But it feels like the aftermath of another example of Trump’s wild negotiating style.

The point with Trump is you don't know what he would or wouldn't do.

Starmer, unlike Farage or Badenoch, stood firmly against Trump, be it on Greenland or Chagos, disgraceful Badenoch sought to undermine the UK by taking the very new Trump position on Chagos... there is a time and a place but she couldn't wait.

Starmer's position was not without risk, tariffs damage the UK and we don't really have any real means to counter them.

There isn't a "deal" ... Mark Rutte said ownership of Greenland never came up in their talks, its all in Trumps head.

Look, i don't particularly rate Starmer domestically but on this, he has done exactly the right thing, which i don't believe some other politicians would have done... Badenoch would have unnecessarily antagonised the situation, as would Davey, Farage would have bowed down.

There seems to be a lot of supposition in that.

But whatever the truth turns out to be, I can’t see why Chagos wasn’t a perfectly good subject to raise with Starmer. I haven’t seen any row back from Trump on that, though as I’ve said it’s perfectly possible to come in time, since he’s so erratic. And, as I’ve also said, Trump changing his public position again wouldn’t make the terrible Chagos agreement any better.

I simply don’t believe that Starmer has achieved anything with Trump. That’s not a criticism of him. It’s a criticism of his starry-eyed supporters.

If Starmer hasn't achieved anything with Trump, the why did Trump attack him and the UK?

Have you actually read @Alexandra2001 's posts @DenizenOfAisleOfShame ? She is hardly a "starry-eyed supporter".

I usually quite respect your views as you are pretty reasonable a lot of the time even if I don't agree with you, but "starry-eyed supporters" can get in the bin.

I didn’t have Alexandra in mind. Or you.

I don't think anyone on this thread has been "starry-eyed" about Starmer. A lot of posters have been critical of him, OP included, but acknowledge he has done the right thing re: Trump.

Who did you have in mind? It sure as hell isn’t me. Perhaps you should give those “starry eyed supporters” the opportunity to defend themselves.

It gives me no pleasure to say this, because I think they're wrong, but according to a big YouGov survey today, the public does not think Starmer's done a good job on this specifically. Only 27% say 'very' or 'fairly' well: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2026/01/21/0021f/1

I'm beginning to think people just hate him so much they'd say 'he's piss poor' if he scored the winning goal for England at the World Cup. Poor guy.

People are so used to drama in politics that diplomacy is now too boring.

Maybe if Starmer had literally said 'fuck you' to Trump he would have had a bit more support.

It's politics, not a tv show.

Tbf it was the same for the conference speech which got high praise on here but polling didn’t support the majority mn take.

TBF as you re replying to me, perhaps make that clear... i was somewhat hurt at that accusation! ruined my rather late breakfast.

On the survey, i think, considering the very low standing Starmer has, getting close to 30% is quite good.

He is still the public's no1 choice for PM when polled against all other party leaders.

Let's be realistic as to the set of political leaders we can choose from, we have:
Starmer at the helm currently - cautious, sometimes infuriatingly so, plodding, and not particularly effective but lives on planet Earth and tries to lead the country with some semblance of stability
Badenoch -consistently barking up the wrong MAGA inspired tree and still hasn't understood that the racist misogynists in her party will never back her up; she has a real opportunity now to pull the party back to the centre but it looks like she can't be trusted with any kind of strategic decision.
Farage - the man responsible for the single worst decision the country has made in decades if not centuries, the pile of hot excrement that is Brexshit, can never be trusted to make the right decisions for the country ever, I will stop myself from writing more but with Reform we can be sure that the country will be sold for parts - not exactly what you'd want as a loyal patriot.

I had in mind posters who will defend Starmer uncritically. You know as well as I do there are posters like that on MN. I’m not going to name posters.

I’ve been willing to give Starmer credit for things that some right-wingers oppose. (Though there are only are a few of those things, Starmer and his government having been so very poor, not to mention so very dishonest and hypocritical. And, curiously, the few good things are all domestic: I sense that Labour supporters are stressing foreign matters because the domestic scene is a car crash for Labour. I just don’t see the foreign policy achievements.) And I don’t join in SM generated outrage like ‘two tier’ policies.

Why Starmer should be thought praiseworthy over Trump/Greenland is genuinely beyond me. If the measure is “Farage would have backed Trump” that’s hardly a strong argument.