@thecatfromjapan
And, yes,
FrankieStein*, I agree with you.
There is a real problem with how messages reach the public. Starmer has far less access to major platforms than people realise - even as LOTO - and then there is a major problem with how messages that are delivered are filtered through to the public.
Many people will only have an idea of what Starmer actually said by way of social media accounts, which have been both abbreviated and filtered by agenda.
I really don't know what you do about that.
Sarah Ditum has an excellent article about why the death of local newspapers was so devastating for our politics: a really material/first-person perspective on this modern dilemma, that offered a really grounded way at looking at the problem.
And I know RedToothBrush has also offered analysis of this.
What the solutions are, though, I just don't know.
Thats not really cutting it for me tbh.
Its not a problem that local leaders in Manchester or Liverpool are having. They are getting plenty of coverage in the local press. Given our local press are 'rent a quote from a councillor or MP' when it comes to the controversial opening of an envelope, they don't see to be having too much trouble getting their voices out there. There are opportunities to be created there and opportunities that were missed.
Indeed i do think there is something of an internal turf war on this front within Labour.
Burnham and Starmer don't want to be associated with each other. For Burnham, Starmer looks like a posh southerner. For Starmer he doesn't want to get caught up with Burnham's outspokeness.
Its not just for Manchester either though. Starmer has an issue generally with the North. He's not cutting through and I do think there's a perception of him as an outsider. Ironically Johnson doesn't suffer from this (think about the way Trump appeals) though other Tory MPs definitely have a problem with this.
The government were accused for months for not taking the problems in the north seriously. It was a golden opportunity for Starmer to take the lead in 'uniting the country'. He was notable in this absence and seemed happy for others to take the lead. Problem is he is the Leader of the Party. Starmer has got to stop be being a distant figure in a suit from London. Yes avoiding unnecessary travel has been a barrier but not one which cannot be overcome.
I do think the Tory party have definitely noticed this issue too.
It does come back to the fracture in Labour which was highlighted by Brexit - but not caused by it. Its about how Labour isn't doing as well with Northern working class communities as it should be. It is part of this flip where the Tories are resonating with blue collar workers.
Theres also an issue with post covid economics. Those swing voters in many marginals are the middle class who fear they will be stiffed with new taxes most. These are the voters who previously voted for austerity remember. They probably fancy their chances more with the Tories because what is Starmer offering them? This is the 40 - 55 ish age group. He has just ditched a pro-European approach which might have resonanted with them.
We've got a huge target about tax evasion and cronyism and how that needs much more attention. Thats a big arc that needs to be rammed home (to offset this ingrained idea that the public sector wastes money) over time. I'm not entirely convinced Starmer has got a grip on this. There is some financial stuff in there for the offering.
Theres other things going on too.
It does not feel like Labour has even started to get its head around why Brexit happened. Remember Brexit was a symptom of the problem not the cause.
And yes this 'no one could have handled the crisis better than Johnson' thing is definitely a problem. Starmer only has strongly stated a position on things at the point where its stating the bleeding obvious that the government position is untenable. Hes not taken the lead and been more proactive, earlier on, because hes more concerned about avoiding controversy.
I think thats Starmers problem overall tbh. A desperate desire to avoid all controversy. The playing it safe thing means he looks like he doesn't really believe in things or have an opinion of his own. He isn't 'fighting' for anything. He's looking more optimistic to put the boot into Johnson when he's fucked up rather than having a distinct covid policy of his own. That can come across as using victims as a political football rather than defending them from the front. I found it strange how much clear water there was between Starmer and the Teaching Unions because he knows that closing schools is deeply unpopular with a lot of parents - that really removed from Labour ideals. Ive also heard precious little about how to best protect people who are in factories, delivery centres and other such working environments. If the Labour Party isn't about fighting for safe and good working conditions what does it stand for? More has been said about the arts closing (a subject which tends to reflect living in London rather than say Hartlepool)
It comes back to the fact you end up back at identity politics which right now are far from the top of peoples priorities. Its difficult to get past that and what Labour are focused on.
Is Starmer really finding a new direction for the party or floundering somewhat even when he has a seemingly perfect political storm in his favour?