To not get the visceral levels of hatred people have for Keir Starmer

[LastChristmasigaveyousomesocks]

I’m not suggesting he’s the greatest prime minister ever. I’m not even suggesting he’s good at all. But some people really, really passionately hate him.

He is a bit insipid and doesn’t have much charisma but overall he seems like a decent enough bloke who perhaps lacks the political skill and acumen he needs. He’s out of his depth basically.

But that’s not a reason to actually despise someone is it?

When did we get to a point where we can’t just disagree without painting the other person as the devil incarnate?

Well it is rather an important point when choosing a PM surely? Grip on reality etc?

Wasn’t thar Lammy?

Starmer said that 99.9% of women don’t have a penis. What he meant, of course, was that there are few TW compared to women, but they’re all women. In other words, he was saying that TWAW. Wanker.

@Ncforthis2244responding like this and below with the trolls accusation is trying to enforce an echo chamber. Try not to get so angered at seeing any views that are not your own.

As someone who expects a Labour government to be a non racist, centre left, and with redistributive polices I'm mostly disappointed in Starmer.

Yes, I'm familiar with the story. But he didn't say 'men can have a cervix', he said 'that is a thing that should not be said', which was clunky, daft, and disappointing, but not what you're saying. He knew perfectly well the trap that was being laid for him and tried to avoid it in a rather fumbling way: he did not say 'men can have a cervix'

I don't like the tax and welfare ethos of labour. The whole reliance on the state and not yourself.

Yes I suppose if you squint extremely hard you could interpret it that way.

TBF he did u-turn on it later on.

What online papers do you read? What news?

Absolutely this. People are so childish and pathetic, stamping their feet because not everything got sorted in five minutes flat after the Tories trashed the place for nearly twenty years.

Not as hard as you'd have to squint to read him as saying 'men can have a cervix'

Unfortunately he did which is regrettable but I assume he said that as a vote chasing tactic rather than he genuinely believes in nonsense.

I try not to hold it against him. He's still a better option that the alternatives IMO.

Yep. I watch it on occasion just to see the viewpoint. So obviously biased its incredible

He is a technocratic who can analyse both sides of an argument and that is good in that we need someone boring, non flashy, and sensible. But it comes across badly in these days of 30 second news clips and politics-without-nuance.

As others have said he is up against the right wing press.

And there is hardly any money in the coffers so he can’t actually initiate many strategies.

He has shown huge resilience as shadow PM hanging on in there through all those years of bonkers Tory rule!

I think he is a decent, intelligent, competent man.

He doesn’t understand the countryside.

He is a terrible speaker.

I’d rather have him than many, many others.

.

I don’t blame people impacted by Labour’s policies for opposing them. Not all will be immune. To their credit they have succeeded in changing some.

I actually really like him , he's better than I thought. He's just getting the job done without a show. I want a calm methiduc leader I didn't want a personality. He's already delivered on 3/4 of the manifesto promises and still had a long term left in front of him.
He's so well respected on the works stage and at this volatile period we need a steady hand and a diplomat.

The issue is he is up against the British press. If for example you read the British translations of foreign press he's revered. Shocking really

It isn't that, it because we wibbles and changes his mind all the time. We need a leader who at least appears confident and looks in control. Politics is about policies yes but it about the optics. He just looks so out of place.

Because its exhausting arguing with someone so overwhelmed by misinformation

Sunak was soooo good with the economy, he got the UK into recession for the last 6 months of 2023.

The Tories lost it with Austerity and Brexit, 2 things that have wrecked our country.

As a Tory, can you tell me what public services improved, over the 10 years between 2010 and 2020? and why debt to GDP when from 65% to over 85% by 2020?

Starmer has been handed a poor economic situation, which is, as you correctly say "He knew what would happen" he called an early General Election.

He also said, pre GE, that its a 10 year project, we are 18months in, yet people expect miracles.

I wonder how long they'll give Farage?

I don't hate him, but I don't like him at all. Leaving aside the fact that he is a Socialist, I find him weedy, weak and colourless, with no charisma whatsoever. I concede that he is still miles better than the awful Rayner and Lammy.

He is not a socialist. You don't seem to have a clue what the word means!

I'm not a KS fan but unless you've an agenda, its hard to get away from the fact he & Labour, get awful press.

So look at his China visit, he has made travel easier, lowered some tariffs but has not got anywhere, yet, with Jimmy Lai, so the press turn on him over this issue... the same press that never mentioned Jimmy Lai for the 4 years he was jailed under the Tories....
Same with the Embassy, Cons sold the building to China and gave outline planning for an embassy.... yet it's ALL Starmers fault....

In what way is he a Socialist???

The Tories (actually coalition) took over a bankrupt nation in 2010. Nobody could have sprayed money around after that. Blair and Brown had spent so much that when the CDO crisis hit we had no way out. It’s a myth that ‘austerity’ was an avoidable choice. Debt rose because we had to print billions and billions to keep the economy working.

The graph that Labour supporters love so much shows debt rising after Brown because of the state he left the finances in.

Why do you think Reeves is taxing so much rather than just spending? It’s because she knows what we all know: countries can and do go bankrupt if they can’t service their debt.

Blame Labour’s profligacy not the necessary corrective.

Brexit was a political decision taken by the country. I voted to remain, but more voters had a different view to me.

I think it's worth debating serious points around policy or leadership style etc.

I don't think it's worth drawing attention to disinformation by getting into a discussion about it, because that just invites the disingenuous posters to keep repeating the disinformation.

I note that the post in question has been removed now, and rightly so. Had some of us allowed ourselves to be goaded into a debate, then it's likely that some repetition of the original disinformation might have been left to stand. Much better not to engage with this kind of nonsense.

Seriously? You think the press is responsible for people’s disdain for Starmer?

And what are the Guardian, Mirror, Independent and Standard up to? Are they secretly right-wingers working to bring down Starmer and Labour?