The thing is - Rosie alludes to this in the interview - Starmer doesn't engage with backbenchers. He never has. That's dangerous for a leader. I know the PM has a busy schedule, but if Mrs Thatcher used to visit the tearooms to take the temperature, so can he.
I think it's widely known at this point that there's a charmed circle at the top of the party, and he has minimal contact with anyone outside that circle. That's what's undermining him. If he had a few backbenchers around for lunch once a week, they could tell him that the PM having a sugar daddy is a bad look.
But I don't think he wants to. I don't exactly blame him for being arrogant, because I think most people at the top of politics are to some extent, but he doesn't seem to have any soft skills.
It's true that there are a bunch of Labour MPs who've lost the whip and are currently sitting as independents, but they're all Corbyn people. They've been painted as marginal, and in many ways they are. Starmer's people could try to paint Rosie as marginal, but on most issues she's dead centre in the party, and on women's rights and safeguarding she's in touch with public opinion and they're not.
I don't think there are many people in the PLP specifically loyal to Starmer. The right supported him as a hammer against the hard left. The soft left supported him because they thought he was a winner. Rayner, God help us, doesn't even bother to hide her view that she'd be a much better leader.
I suppose a lot depends on how the new intake break. We know very little about them, except for the nepo babies who were given jobs on day one.