The problem nobody wants to engage with is that Starmer is a leader who appears to be disliked in a pretty visceral and irrational way. I’m not sure there is anything he can do, save writing households a cheque or mandating a three day weekend.
The problem nobody wants to engage with is that Starmer is a leader who appears to be disliked in a pretty visceral and irrational way. I’m not sure there is anything he can do, save writing households a cheque or mandating a three day weekend.
Starmer has, however, done things which have put people off - eg WFA and welfare cuts - that appear needless and have not been sold to the electorate in an acceptable way (let alone at all). Not to mention the „it will get worse before it gets better“ speech last year.
Starmer is distilled viscerally, but it’s not irrational. Hell, I simply cannot stand the man because I think he’s a rank hypocrite *because* of his actions.
Starmer‘s anti-politics politics and reactionary approach doesn’t help, either. Why would the electorate approve of a government that appears rudderless and being forced into policy changes (Chagos, WFA, welfare, and soon tax)?
Starmer isn’t liked because, well, he’s not a likeable politician. No-one can coherently describe what he stands for besides the status quo but better … which, when the public are absolutely fed up with the status quo … isn’t great.
This is all fair. I still don’t see who in the Labour party is prepared to have this conversation (i.e we have a serious problem with the principal).
I’m not sure who is prepared to, but anyone other than Starmer and Reeves would be better. Rayner stands out as someone who could imho.
But there's plenty rational reason to hate him, too. For instance, people don't like their elderly and disabled to be treated like shit by a supposedly "left wing" government. Or for the rich to not be taxed.
Or the identity verification shit you're dealing with. In general, Labour betrayed its core voters. And they'll never recover, hopefully.