AIBU - Keir Starmer's ok - getting rid of him wouldn't help Labour

[Twiglets1]

As a result of the disastrous results for Labour in the recent elections, many people - even within his own party - are now calling for Keir Starmer to stand down.

Would that really help Labour though? It seems to me that a lot of the reasons people are fed up - like the cost of living & housing crisis for example, are not his fault personally but more a result of years of underinvestment, mainly by previous Conservative governments.

Yes he does lack charisma and personally I think the Conservatives have a better leader in Kemi Badenoch. But I wouldn't vote for a political party purely based on how charismatic their leader is.

When you look at the alternatives - I like Wes Streeting but would he be able to turn around the fortunes of the Labour party before the next General Election - I doubt it. And the same goes for Andy Burnham, even if they did find a way to make him eligible for party leadership in time.

The Tories caused turmoil with their constant leadership challenges and it didn't help their brand. Starmer hasn't done anything too awful that I'm aware of - wouldn't it be better just to keep him in post?

That’s not his main problem. If it was just that he’d not have the results he did.

Burnham can't move in now though can he, as he isn't even an MP.

I think he should carry on doing the great job he is doing as mayor of Manchester until he is closer to the end of his current term (2028?) and move back to being an MP at that point if becoming a future PM still appeals to him.

Might work out better politically for him to wait a couple of years as tbh it seems pretty clear that Labour can't win the next GE, no matter who is in charge.

What is his main problem then?

Exactly this. Whoever was drafted in to replace him would face exactly the same deep-rooted problems, would have the same lack of wriggle room to sort them out, and would also be hung drawn and quartered by the media when they failed to sort everything out in a couple of years. The idea that Andy Burnham or whoever is going to dramatically revive Labour's fortunes just because he's got a twinkle in his eye is for the birds.

Completely agree with this

So what is?
So far, one person has said he’s a grifter, qualified by agreeing that so are Johnson and Farage.
We understand why some/a lot of people don’t agree with Labour policies but what is the problem with Starmer in particular?
I agree with OP, I would really like to understand.

Labour’s has much bigger problems than its leader!

It’s a party that got caught between the conflicting lives, experiences. priorities and values of its working class base and the university educated progressives. Labour chose to listen to the progressives. However, their beliefs are deeply out of step with most of the country, especially the working classes. The working classes now have a long memory of being ignored and insulted by the left who are more obsessed with correcting pronoun usage and micro aggressions than working people’s concerns. Furthermore, it’s hard for a mainstream party to be progressive enough for progressives, so defection to a frankly increasingly insane party like the Greens was always on the cards

So yes the cost of living etc won’t have helped, but Labour has a deep rooted issue of not really knowing who it is or who it’s for, and it’s the fact it never resolved that which has birthed its current problems.

It's not what we want but it's probably the best we will realistically get.

Personally I think all the current party leaders are just ok or worse.

Kemi is the only current one that I think she's impressive with the way she speaks (but I have deep reservations about her party based on how they performed last time they were in power).

TBH I was aghast when ‘Prince of Darkness’, sleazy Mandelson was appointed US ambassador, and still think Starmer’s judgement - regardless of what he was or wasn’t told - was woeful.

And he comes across, I’m afraid to say, as weak and totally uninspiring.

Farage was gifted the £5million before he became an mp. Gifts to a private citizen are no-one else's business.

I think they should’ve allowed the enquiry into what actually happened there to go through, blocking it was a bad look.

He also blames (and sacks) everyone else for his own stupid misjudgements.

One of the problems with trying to get Burnham into parliament is that there is no longer any such thing as a Labour safe seat.

For example, Clive Lewis offered Burnham Norwich but Norwich now has a Green council. Up North, the safe seats are going to Reform and down south, they are going Green.

Why are there no Labour safe seats? Because they mean nothing to anyone.

Agree they have an identity crisis.

Labour probably would have done better to have stuck with focusing on their traditional core voter base especially working class people rather than getting bogged down with all these other minority issues which the Green party seem to be making their core issues, along with Gaza.

It’s not as simple as that, if someone takes office within 12 months of receiving a monetary gift they’re supposed to declare it under parliamentary rules, the electoral commission is still deciding whether to investigate further.

‘Up north’ where exactly? Labour lost a lot of seats in Manchester but they’ve held the majority in most councils.

But he’s not conviction led. Thats his big problem. He flails changing his position depending on what he thinks is most popular. He says women have penises ( which no one will have thought he truly believes), until he thinks that’s not popular now when he trumpets in parliament that labour protects single sex spaces, before going quiet again when there is more backlash than he expected. He’s managed to piss off both sides of opinion on the ME by his contrary positioning. he cuts welfare, then doesn’t. He is weak and without conviction. Who knows what he actually believes on anything.

People actually respect clear ,strong leaders who take positions they genuinely believe are in the best interests of the country, even when those positions will cause them to be unpopular with some major groups. KS is not that conviction politician.

I think charisma is overrated where politicians are concerned. Tony Blair had charisma and we ended up in an unnecessary war. Also Hitler had massive charisma!

I like Andy Burnham too but the idea he did well was because of his own talent isn’t the full story - Manchester had a ton of money thrown at it by the EU - and has. It benefited from comfortably off professionals moving to cheaper areas and plenty of developers following suit . Some of the success was luck in timing -

He should stay on while the newly elected Greens and Reform use the time before the next GE to fuck up royally, as they almost certainly will.

Then, shortly before the next GE, Labour should roll out a shiny new leader who will energise the backbenchers, promise to put past mistakes behind them and generally get the party back on track.

At least that's what I'm hoping for

@OnceUponATimed Trump has a lot of charisma - still is an arse - Johnson did too, corrupt and couldn’t cope with reading more than a 2 sheet summary and lead by the public clapometer - it’s not the apprentice! However it’s clear the public are more than happy with a charismatic tosser even if their policies make them worse off - so hey ho those voting for that will get what they deserve.

I am so disillusioned by politics these days. Every day there is another scandal, another member of a party trying to oust their leader, another billionaire donor with an ulterior motive sponsoring a political party, politicians branding rhetoric that bares no relation to the actual numbers / problems and totally ignores lots of real issues. And it feels like we are in a slow motion car crash. I don't know what the solution is and I certainly don't feel that any of our politicians have a handle on the bigger picture, they are all too busy squabling over who's the leader. It's like Lord of the Flies.

True but at least he hasn't fucked up too badly over his years as Mayor of Manchester.

Realise I am sounding disillusioned with all these leaders when I judge someone positively just for not fucking up too badly or being "ok" at their job.

It has always been like that - we just hear about it through so many channels. And all day, every day, the media clambering to put out a scoop or dig up some dirt. There were huge scandals in the Major government, for instance.

Which "shiny new leader" would that be though? The Labour ranks just don't look that impressive. As Starmer has found out, actually being in charge is a lot more difficult than offering advice from the Opposition benches.
They will need to find someone with financial as well as political nous, and a lot more brains than the current incumbent.