He had a chance to support May's exit deal when she was prepared to concede retaining EU employment rights. That would likely have got through with Labour support. He'd have been honouring the referendum verdict, have preserved a better deal for workers and likely have had another crack at May instead of having to face Johnson. But he didn't have sufficient leadership skills to see it.
I agree with this. Anyone in charge of the Labour Party will be subject to attack by the right-wing media. The attacks on Starmer (and his Labour Party in general) from the right-wing press are far more relentless now than they were under Corbyn, as Starmer's Labour is a genuine threat to remove the Tories from government, which Corbyn's party never was. I think the Daily Mail ran 14 consecutive days of front page headlines trying to get the 'Beergate' investigation re-opened (which it subsequently was, and then dismissed). They've done something similar with Angela Raynor recently with the same ultimate outcome. By comparison, Corbyn got off lightly, and the press coverage against him could frequently be pointed back to genuinely questionable actions he'd taken in the past. I always laugh at the "couldn't be bought" line about him, given that he'd previously been paid for appearances on Iranian state TV.
I really disagree with this, it hugely brushes over all the errors Corbyn made and ammunition he gave the MSM. I was very excited when Corbyn was appointed leader, but he lost me along the way. I still really admire his principles and the way he stuck to them. He is the most honest and principled politician of our time which is to be admired. He lost me and thousands of other voters however with his complete lack of political nous. His economic policies were frankly mad and he just didn't seem to understand international relations, like the purpose of trident, or the globalised economy, like bringing in a maximum wage etc. What really undid him however was his inflexibility. In politics everyone has to play the game and try to be all things to all people. Corbyn just wouldn't change his principles and the role became too big for him. Little things like not singing the national anthem. How much ammunition did that give the right wing press and how many hundreds of thousands of white working class votes did that lose him? He was destroyed by Boris, and couldn't even feign interest on Brexit, which sadly was the hot topic of his time.
The media have given a starmer the easiest of easy rides which is lucky given he crumbles under pressure. There’s some great evidence from the Oxford Media Group around media bias which I will dig out. Basically negative mentions are around 500% more for Corbyn than any other political figure.
With respect to you, you can dig out whatever you wish but it will not controvert the evidence I see and hear myself on a daily basis from the media with which I engage. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the biased Tory media have been gunning for Starmer every bit as much as they were with Corbyn. The bias hit home with Corbyn because he was a very easy target.
Well I’ve had a Tory foisted on me for the last few years. Hopefully coming to an end soon. Good luck with your independent. I’m sure he or she will have a major say in the future running of our ship of state.
Probably not but i'll know i've voted based on my own values and not just voted for a man with zero honesty and zero integrity' voting for him really would be wasting my vote.
Ah so we are at the we don’t trust experts part of the discussion. How very Nigel Farage of you. Still what would media research groups with 50 years worth of experience know when put at the side of a bloke on the internets ‘feels’.
I'd disagree with you on that. Corbyn was absolutely hammered all the time on mainstream media for the slightest things. There was even an article in one rag (I think it was the Sun) where the angle of his bow at the cenotaph was measured so his disrespect for remembrance Sunday could be evaluated. It was stuff like that ALL the time with Corbyn. Even Newsnight did a piece on him where they had a Stalinist red backdrop in the studio... Starmer does not get the same level of intrusive, misrepresentative nastiness that Corbyn got. No way.
As you will know - with your experience of working in politics - you can usually find a research group (or an economist, for that matter) to support any given point of view. I know what I see and hear.
As I read your post I am listening to a recoding of Kate McCann telling Keir Starmer that his own character was put into question because he didn't challenge Sunak's lying quickly enough. Soft ride? I think not!
There's no way Kier Starmer has had it as rough as Corbyn did. The poor bugger was literally called a terrorist every single day. Now I don't think Starmer has had it easy either, there's been a very long campaign of trying to show him as weak, no different than the Tories and with no idea. But to say he's had it as bad as the man called a terrorist and accused of being racist on a daily basis is just plain wrong.
The same angle of attack has been used against Starmer because he fulfilled his professional obligation to represent persons associated with Hizb ut-Tahrir.
There's also the campaign that asserted Kier is a paedophile sympathiser because the police covered up saville and that he was a terrorist sympathiser for his work in NI. The latest round of smears are claiming his racist towards Muslims and women of colour because of the Abbott none story and Faiza Shaheen. Equivalence is important in many cases but we all know that the right wing Tory client journalists don't need quantity with today's social media usage especially on twitter under musk, 1 bad fabrication today has become exponentially worse than it was 12 months ago let alone 5 years ago.
I remember a journalist for the times, David Aaronovitch writing a full article about how disrespectful Corbyn was because he wore a raincoat that was ‘only’ worth £79 to remembrance Sunday. It was a crazy period