Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

307 replies

JacquesHarlow · 08/02/2026 10:36

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.

OP posts:
Churchyard · 08/02/2026 17:58

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 17:32

Good. But my question was whether you jumped to the defence of the constitutional position when Labour called for a GE under the Tories. Did you?

I would always defend the right of any party who had been given a mandate to govern

I can't remember a specific situation where I was personally required to do so whilst the Tories were in power.

HesseWeisseSchokolade · 08/02/2026 18:00

MunicipalDarwinism · 08/02/2026 17:33

Why didn't Johnson take action against Starmer about Savile? He could have brought him down easily if the accusation was true.

The gullible people are those who buy into conspiracy theories.

Edited

Ah yes, world history has been totally devoid of conspiracies apparently... Such as well connected paedophiles with links to foreign intelligence services and high-positioned clients?

EasternStandard · 08/02/2026 18:00

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 17:56

Sue Gray sends her deepest sympathies to Mr McSweeney, I’m sure.

Oh yes she took the political hit for Starmer over freebies right? And now McSweeney for the Mandelson affair. Perhaps it’s not them that’s the problem it’s Starmer.

Churchyard · 08/02/2026 18:00

Georgiepud · 08/02/2026 17:36

Because he is never to blame.
Has he ever said, "Sorry I got it wrong"

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp37v4kyv3eo

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 18:03

Churchyard · 08/02/2026 17:58

I would always defend the right of any party who had been given a mandate to govern

I can't remember a specific situation where I was personally required to do so whilst the Tories were in power.

Fair enough. I’m jumping to defend Labour’s natural and proper right to change leaders after 18 months without a GE.

I doubt you could never have volunteered the same view on MN when the Tories were in. But you may have been glued to the chicken keepers or prepper boards for all those years. 🤷‍♀️

Churchyard · 08/02/2026 18:12

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 18:03

Fair enough. I’m jumping to defend Labour’s natural and proper right to change leaders after 18 months without a GE.

I doubt you could never have volunteered the same view on MN when the Tories were in. But you may have been glued to the chicken keepers or prepper boards for all those years. 🤷‍♀️

Your last paragraph doesn't really make any sense dear. Did you mean would rather than could?

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 18:16

Churchyard · 08/02/2026 18:12

Your last paragraph doesn't really make any sense dear. Did you mean would rather than could?

It’s obvious what I said, and it’s very clear.

You just don’t want to answer.

Churchyard · 08/02/2026 18:27

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 18:16

It’s obvious what I said, and it’s very clear.

You just don’t want to answer.

It would be much clearer if you used the correct words rather than leaving people guessing. Perhaps concentrate on your point rather than feeble chicken/prepper jokes.

I have already answered. The answer was no for the reason given.

FizzySnap · 08/02/2026 18:40

NotDavidTennant · 08/02/2026 11:22

No charisma. No deeply held convictions. No ability to articulate a vision for the country.

No convictions? He demanded the release of tje sausages.

Bikergran · 08/02/2026 18:57

Before he came into office, I knew very little about him other than that he was a top QC. I assumed from this that he would have some charisma and a good speaking style. Instead he turned out to be someone who looks like a worried guinea pig and has a silly voice like Peter Cook's E L Wisty. (Younger mumsnetters, you may have to consult YouTube to see the comparison). Not a good look for an international leader.

Personally, I was utterly disgusted when it came out he was accepting gifts of clothes and designer glasses (which don't do anything for him!) from a shady billionaire party donor, who was then given access to Government buildings, and free concert tickets. Perfectly happy for the PM to get free tickets to national events like the FA Cup or Wimbledon Final, but Taylor Swift? Buy your own bloody tickets, or offer them to a disabled child and family.

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 19:34

Bikergran · 08/02/2026 18:57

Before he came into office, I knew very little about him other than that he was a top QC. I assumed from this that he would have some charisma and a good speaking style. Instead he turned out to be someone who looks like a worried guinea pig and has a silly voice like Peter Cook's E L Wisty. (Younger mumsnetters, you may have to consult YouTube to see the comparison). Not a good look for an international leader.

Personally, I was utterly disgusted when it came out he was accepting gifts of clothes and designer glasses (which don't do anything for him!) from a shady billionaire party donor, who was then given access to Government buildings, and free concert tickets. Perfectly happy for the PM to get free tickets to national events like the FA Cup or Wimbledon Final, but Taylor Swift? Buy your own bloody tickets, or offer them to a disabled child and family.

E.L. Wisty is a fantastic characterisation of Starmer. 👍

But I still think the pp’s voice comparison of Zippy from Rainbow is the best: nasal, wheedling, critical and always churlish.

1dayatatime · 08/02/2026 20:00

Georgiepud · 08/02/2026 17:36

Because he is never to blame.
Has he ever said, "Sorry I got it wrong"

So was Starmer in correspondence with Epstein- no. Did he accept any cash from Epstein- no. Did he go to any dodgy Epstein parties - no.

What he did do was appoint Mandelson based on a shite briefing, shit advice and lies from PM. Sorry but that really doesn't justify a resignation.

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 20:04

1dayatatime · 08/02/2026 20:00

So was Starmer in correspondence with Epstein- no. Did he accept any cash from Epstein- no. Did he go to any dodgy Epstein parties - no.

What he did do was appoint Mandelson based on a shite briefing, shit advice and lies from PM. Sorry but that really doesn't justify a resignation.

You are having a laugh! He’s the prime minister appointing the biggest diplomatic post there is.

Jeez.

EasternStandard · 08/02/2026 20:08

1dayatatime · 08/02/2026 20:00

So was Starmer in correspondence with Epstein- no. Did he accept any cash from Epstein- no. Did he go to any dodgy Epstein parties - no.

What he did do was appoint Mandelson based on a shite briefing, shit advice and lies from PM. Sorry but that really doesn't justify a resignation.

Yes it does. McSweeney has tried to take the fall for Starmer but it’s a cop out. Starmer needs to stop passing the buck and blaming others.

Katypp · 08/02/2026 20:13

1dayatatime · 08/02/2026 20:00

So was Starmer in correspondence with Epstein- no. Did he accept any cash from Epstein- no. Did he go to any dodgy Epstein parties - no.

What he did do was appoint Mandelson based on a shite briefing, shit advice and lies from PM. Sorry but that really doesn't justify a resignation.

Of course the poster would think exactly the same is Boris Johnson had committed a similar faux pas. Of course she would 🙄
Not his fault because others did it gov even though he is in ultimate charge is a bit of a recurring theme for Starmer (see CPS above)
Bellowing for resignations was a weekly event when Starmer, Rayner, Cooper et al were in opposition but when it's on their watch it's a different story.
Stands by for 'They're not as bad as the Tories' comments which will inevitably come

1dayatatime · 08/02/2026 20:15

EasternStandard · 08/02/2026 20:08

Yes it does. McSweeney has tried to take the fall for Starmer but it’s a cop out. Starmer needs to stop passing the buck and blaming others.

Based on what?

What exactly has Starmer done wrong here other than make a decision to appoint PM based on a shite brief, shite advice and lies from PM.

At the time I thought it was the wrong decision based on the fact that PM negative public comments on Trump. But I was unaware of PM's links to JE and it wasn't publicised in the press either.

EasternStandard · 08/02/2026 20:42

1dayatatime · 08/02/2026 20:15

Based on what?

What exactly has Starmer done wrong here other than make a decision to appoint PM based on a shite brief, shite advice and lies from PM.

At the time I thought it was the wrong decision based on the fact that PM negative public comments on Trump. But I was unaware of PM's links to JE and it wasn't publicised in the press either.

Jim Pickard FT directly asked Starmer about the Epstein links before he was appointed. Starmer was warned by many in his own party.

He advised them to shut up pretty much and went ahead anyway.

1dayatatime · 08/02/2026 21:07

EasternStandard · 08/02/2026 20:08

Yes it does. McSweeney has tried to take the fall for Starmer but it’s a cop out. Starmer needs to stop passing the buck and blaming others.

And who would you suggest replaces Starmer?

Every other Labour politician would do a worse job and whilst that would help the electoral chances of all the other parties, it will come at the price of further economic decline.

As much as I have never and would never vote Labour I would rather not economically cut my nose off to spite my political face.

PeacePilgrim · 08/02/2026 21:25

The right wing media and BBC hate him

Everyone else follows like sheep or they secretly want Reform MAGA right wing fascist ICE life here too

PeacePilgrim · 08/02/2026 21:26

He needs to ignore the haters and carry on carrying on

Piglet89 · 08/02/2026 21:38

Because he’s a boring charisma vacuum, a cowardly lawyer’s lawyer bureaucrat, who seemingly can’t take a fucking decision. And (and yes, I know lawyers are shit at STEM) he also apparently doesn’t know what a woman is.

Jesus wept.

Salamandy · 08/02/2026 21:40

Just consider yourself very lucky you're one of the people that him and his government aren't trying to destroy in favour of people who don't deserve to be here.

NorthXNorthWest · 08/02/2026 21:45

InveterateWineDrinker · 08/02/2026 11:33

I think people saw an honest and decent man and thought that after the chaos of the last few Tory administrations he might make things better.

Unfortunately, the structural problems in the UK's economy allied to years and years of weapons-grade national self-delusion about what life should be like in a country of this size and wealth make it ungovernable, and that's before the rest of the Labour Party started holding him to ransom.

As I said on another thread the other day, there is a theory that the soul of the Labour party never really wanted Sir Keir to become PM. What they wanted was someone respectable enough to detoxify Labour after the Corbyn years, who would narrowly lose an election then quit before the right sort of proper socialist then took Labour back to power. The machinations going on in the party now were supposed to happen after Sir Keir lost in 2024, not after he won. The media are only too happy to help destabilise him, but they're not really the problem. His own party is.

This.

NorthXNorthWest · 08/02/2026 21:48

PeacePilgrim · 08/02/2026 21:26

He needs to ignore the haters and carry on carrying on

Carry on blaming and screwing the productive?

Goldenbear · 09/02/2026 01:26

DenizenOfAisleOfShame · 08/02/2026 19:34

E.L. Wisty is a fantastic characterisation of Starmer. 👍

But I still think the pp’s voice comparison of Zippy from Rainbow is the best: nasal, wheedling, critical and always churlish.

What's his voice tone got to do with his effectiveness as PM? That's like arguing that someone has a northern accent and they can't be taken seriously.

Swipe left for the next trending thread