Some of the policies were popular with people individually but all put together it was too much.
Really? Just look at the news headlines. Nandy's speech got hundreds of thousands of views. Saying something over and over again doesn't mean it's true. And all the electorate will need to do is draw upon their own circumstances.
On hot issues where they stand should be very clear, whether one agrees with their stance or not. We know what their stance has been around covid measures, and on the cost of living they've pushed for a VAT cut and oil and gas firm windfall tax. They are coming up with policies elsewhere, but with the media landscape largely against them it's not always easy to hear about it, and there's only so much time Starmer and his ministers can dedicate to writing in subject newspapers.
'Levelling Up' is nothing new, and I think most voters are sensible enough to realise that. The last attempt was called 'Northern Powerhouse' if I recall correctly. I think most will realise that the Conservatives have been in power for over a decade now; the need to Level Up is a product of that party's making.
It'll cut it if the party members know them. And that goes for either party. From there, winning a party leadership contest would bring them into the public spotlight.
Doesn't matter, most of the media will still treat them as. Not fair but thats reality.
Somewhat akin to Michael Foot in 1983 with a similar outcome
Really? Margaret Thatcher (and Theresa May) had sound moral values, unlike David Cameron or Bojo. John Major was exposed as a hypocrite when his affair with Edwina Currie came to light.
Really? That's just on one platform - views of 1million plus over all platforms after having a gander. Similar to Peter Stevanovic's video which has been seen over 40 million time debunking Boris Johnson - it has cut through.
It was a copy and paste from the first line of the article about her in Wikipedia, which I looked up to check the spelling of her married surname. I have edited my post.
Fair enough and thanks for doing that.
Ah the video which has started to be watched '40 million times'. I wonder how many of those 40 million views got to the end and how many were autoplays where they were stopped after a few seconds when people posted it on social media.
Except most who voted Tory after being Labour, used to be blue collar workers.
Should Starmer be leading the Labour party into the next general election, the press/media are likely to focus on his Trotskyite past (he was formerly the editor of the radical magazine Socialist Alternatives), and that he would be in the pocket of Nicola Sturgeon (the most prominent internal enemy of the UK).
What he is too left-wing now? I thought he was a blue Labour B-LIAR-ite? All gets very confusing.
Starmer is left wing, not as much as Corbyn, but more than Blair. However, he is also pragmatic, thus adopts more centrist policies as he knows his own views entirely would not garner enough support to win.
Starmer also has the advantage of not looking left wing. The likes of Corbyn, Benn and Foot could be passed off as 'loony left' on appearance. Starmer looks what he is - a dull lawyer; rather like John Smith in his time (but without the accent). I don't think attributing the label 'Leftie' to Starmer will influence many more than the Rees Mogg Fan Club.
As a student I also had some exposure to those of similar age and background to Johnson. The sense of entitlement and lack of consideration displayed by some of them was eye-opening. I remember a colleague of mine from the north-east commenting that when the lads from a mining community smashed up a pub the police came down hard on them, but when it was students from Durham they escaped with a ticking off.
He's pink Labour, so everyone hates him
