Quite telling that many Corbyn supporters think criticism of Starmer is a gotcha moment. It was their inability to exercise critical distance from their own leader which saw the project descend into hero-worshipping lunacy.
That was one of the most powerful moral instructions of the Corbyn period: A reminder of what happens if you let your critical faculties degrade in the name of tribal identity.
So yes, you can be sympathetic to Starmer, think he's a damned sight better than what came before and most existing alternatives, and yet still believe he's under-performing. It isn't difficult. You just need a little independence of mind.
Is that how you write 'damned sight'? I think so. It's such an incredibly weird phrase.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's still the case that Starmer should be much, much better at day to day attack, especially on the fuel crisis.
But today he dragged Labour into a position that could potentially win an election. He got them cheering for a vision which is palatable to the voters they need to attract without betraying their values. And that's a triumph, whichever way you look at it.
There's a very short bit on the fuel crisis. Vague, lacking in detail, passion, or solutions. I hope that wasn't all he has to say about it, but I suspect it was.
Much better and tougher now. "To the voters who thought we were unpatriotic or irresponsible or that we looked down on them, I say these simple but powerful words. We will never under my leadership go into an election with a manifesto that is not a serious plan for government."
Right, don't shit yourself, but I've got some good news about the Labour party. Nick Thomas-Symonds just did a very good speech on crime, which contained the kind of consensual politics the party needs to succeed inews.co.uk/opinion/labour…
I mean you look at the main news agenda and the party is an absolute state - mute on a national crisis, beset by internal warfare, hit by front bench resignations, losing unions, the lot.
But when you take a peek at the speeches from front benchers - particularly Thomas-Symonds and Rachel Reeves - you can see the outline of an smart, effective and confident policy programme for the next election.
Stronger Future Together really is the worst kind of vacuous management-speak gibberish. Means nothing, has no resonance, doesn't penetrate the brain. Half a decade on from Take Back Control and progressives still struggle to learn from their opponents.
Blimey. "Cleaning up the Tories' Brexit mess". She said the bad word.
Honestly it took my brain a moment to compute that. By far the toughest I've heard any Labour frontbencher on Brexit since it happened.
Fascinating to watch Shapps, IDS and the rest attempt their little post-truth 'it's all the RHA's fault' gambit over fuel shortages. Like a replay of 2016, except this time against reality rather than a warning of reality.
Thing is though: it's not working. Despite muted media explanation of the causes, silence from Labour and outright denial from the Tories, the public seem fully aware of why this is happening
And that makes sense. The Tory position is internally contradictory. If it's nothing to do with Brexit, why are you responding by opening up to foreign workers?