Why is Keir Starmer so disliked (before the Mandelson scandal?)

[JacquesHarlow]

AIBU to ask this? Why was he so vehemently, fundamentally disliked by the British public, even before the Mandelson saga and the (admittedly awful) lack of judgement?

I have seen worse PMs in the last decade alone. I have seen venal, self-serving, arrogant liars hold the office in that time. I have seen hapless, posh types. We’ve all seen the one who couldn’t outlast a lettuce.

So why does Keir Starmer get so much vitriolic hate in comments sections, despite having only held the office for such a short time?

Is it his perceived lack of communication skills? I’ve seen some people criticise him for not being strident, positive, energised, chummy or any of the things we often see in modern politics.

Is it his lack of identifiable policies or political strategy, where people find they can’t get behind him because they don’t know what he (personally) believes in?

Is it ageism (yep I said it!) in that he comes across as formal and correct, in a time where we’re used to seeing other personalities on the world stage?

Or is it that thing I long suspected, that the country is by default Tory in nature, and that despite a heavy frustration at the last five years of Tory incompetence, they can’t bring themselves to accept this party, and are keen to take him down any which way?

The recent saga of the last week is awful. As a woman I can’t stand to see people like the former US ambassador be enabled.

However the hate for Keir long pre dates this.

so why?? Why do people “hate” him?!

P.S I do not work for Ipsos MORI, or Labour HQ, I am not a bot or a troll or whatever people accuse others of when they don’t like the question.

And his gravitas on the Middle East conflict runs as far as wanting the sausages returned.

I don't agree with you that the way he talks makes him a worse PM and I think anyone who does think this is thick or very shallow. But we'll have to agree to disagree.

Speech-making and communicating with the public matter.

But so does substance!!

Maybe this is a regional thing as I literally don't know anybody that initially thought that. I still don't hear anyone talking in work or domestically about him in such extremes.

Yes, it does. My view of Starmer is that he has no substance. But the pp’s aggressive argument was that a person who thinks Starmer talks like an adenoidal Dalek is “thick”. Which I’d say is plainly wrong.

But everyone said that about John Major, and Jimmy Carter 20 years before that: honest, decent people hamstrung by the hand they were dealt.

Sir Keir is like them - he will be a leader regarded better by history than by the present.

Nailed it with the word “miracles”. People got used to Boris Johnson promising miracles all the time.
”I can get brexit done.”
”I can send the virus packing.”
”I can build back better.”
”I can become the undisputed master of the universe.”
”I am God.”
And similarly, Farage keeps promising miracles.
”I can stop the boats.”
”England and all its prosperity can be yours, if you will kneel and worship me.”

Starmer doesn’t bother with the above; people only see the boring side of his government.

Well he’s not got any of that

That last line couldn’t be less true.

I actually don’t think he’s done that badly. He’s made decisions people don’t like for sure (including some I really disagree with) but we have found ourselves along way up shit creek without many paddles as the legacy of the shit show of tories.
But he has also got a lot right. And I think people forget the things that have gone well. Primarily because the media and the far right are waging a relentless campaign against him.

What I find completely ludicrous is the way posters on here say things like “he’s the worst politician in history”. And whilst Starmer isn’t perfect he isn’t Trump! Comparing the two Starmer id had Starmer every day of the week!

He really lacks charisma.

Of course he does - 'smash the gangs'.....complete bullshit. He's exactly the same as everyone else.

Who would you like to see as PM?

Because he's a sinister, duplicitous little fabian davos monkey and he hates the British people.

Someone with at least a degree of competence

Someone on here posted once that his face always looks as if his hand is stuck in a drawer and I can’t un-see that now.

(it doesn’t make me dislike him btw - he’s no better or worse than the last few PMs IMO)

Really interested to know who you think is a charismatic honest, altruistic person who should lead the country.

i suspect I know who you’re thinking of!

I just saw this:

After careful reflection, I have decided to resign from the government.

The decision to appoint Peter Mandelson was wrong. He has damaged our party, our country and trust in politics itself.

When asked, I advised the prime minister to make that appointment and I take full responsibility for that advice. In public life responsibility must be owned when it matters most, not just when it is most convenient. In the circumstances, the only honourable course is to step aside.

This has not been an easy decision. Much has been written and said about me over the years but my motivations have always been simple: I have worked every day to elect and support a government that puts the lives of ordinary people first and leads us to a better future for our great country. Only a Labour government will do that. I leave with pride in all we have achieved mixed with regret at the circumstances of my departure. But I have always believed there are moments when you must accept your responsibility and step aside for the bigger cause.

As I leave I have two further reflections: Firstly, and most importantly, we must remember the women and girls whose lives were ruined by Jeffrey Epstein and whose voices went unheard for far too long.

Secondly, while I did not oversee the due diligence and vetting process, I believe that process must now be fundamentally overhauled. This cannot simply be a gesture but a safeguard for the future.

I remain fully supportive of the prime minister. He is working every day to rebuild trust, restore standards and serve the country. I will continue to back that mission in whatever way I can. It has been the honour of my life to serve.

Morgan McSweeney.

He seems to be getting blamed for some deep structural issues with the British economy. Two decades of wage stagnation, huge disparity between earnings and house prices which is bad for anyone under 40ish. There isn’t that sense that my life improving incrementally in the way it was say in the early noughties.

I doubt McSweeney going will help Starmer’s position much. In fact he’ll be more exposed.

I don’t think he is actively disliked nearly as much as eg Johnson or Truss. I certainly don’t know anyone who hates him. People feel very let down because they had very high hopes of a Labour government but it hasn’t lived up to expectations

He appears to be boring and uncharismatic. People knew that, but voted for him because they thought he would be competent and there would be no sleaze/scandals like those that were associated with the last Tory government.

All the policy u-turns and the various scandals involving ministers and others, suggest that he is weak, has poor political judgement and little control over his party.

I don't know. If Starmer could get a decent advisor who understands comms and doesn't seen intent on destroying the Labour Party, his position might improve.

I agree. McSweeney was just an advisor - Starmer remains fully accountable for the decision and should now resign. Allowing someone else to take the blame is a weak and cowardly act.

McSweeney did understand comms, even Starmer gushed over him at the last PMQs, he knew it’s why he’s in power.

He gave us the delights of the toolmaker and change which many bought in to after all.

It’s not a comms issue, it’s a Starmer one.