I’m afraid that Starmer and Labour won’t get past the next election in 2029 without a big reset. He’s a manager, and a capable one, not a leader. When it comes to details, Starmer is your man. Everything he does is almost certainly legally watertight and above board. In that respect, he is the opposite of Boris Johnson. Labour didn’t win last year because of Starmer but in spite of him. Johnson dragged the Tories to victory in 2019 when the party was probably unelectable under anyone else. Farage is Reform’s single asset. Without him, they are just a bunch of swivel-eyed loons who can’t be taken seriously. Tony Blair has been the only Labour leader in history whose personal popularity was consistently above the party's.
Labour just don't do charismatic leaders. On the right, they do little else. Labour's policies are supposed to be popular among working-class voters and shouldn't take a lot of selling. On the right, they often need a leader who can 'sell' policies that aren't necessarily good for the mass of the electorate.
Labour could do better under someone else with a bit of charisma with Starmer as deputy, although I'm not sure who that would be. The party would certainly survive a change at the top because they have depth and a long history.
Reform on the other hand would be nothing without Farage. He is a one-man band playing a discordant tune. Reform UK Ltd isn't even a political party in the traditional sense.
Yet, YouGov polling suggests 22% think Farage will fairly likely be the next prime minister. I quote: "Opinion on Nigel Farage has grown more positive among voters for all major parties." In contrast, Starmer's popularity has fallen among voters of all major parties.
.png)
.png)
Labour’s political strategy is being driven by Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff. His Wikipedia entry says he is an Irish-born political strategist credited with defeating the far-right British National Party in Barking and Dagenham in the 2010 general election. I assume Starmer’s speeches and public comments are vetted by McSweeney and contain the messages he wants to send.
However, Adam Bienkov of the Byline Times has been looking into what happened in Dagenham in 2010 and it turns out that although Labour won, the BNP's vote share actually went UP. Labour's went up even more but less than in neighbouring constituencies:
"Now it’s also true to say that Labour’s vote went up by more than the BNP’s in 2010 (a six point rise, compared to a 0.6 point rise for Nick Griffin’s party). However, it’s unclear what, if anything, this had to do with McSweeney’s activities given that this rise was actually significantly less than the rise seen for Labour in other neighbouring boroughs."
Bienkov points out that in neighbouring Redbridge, Labour’s vote went up by eight points while the BNP’s vote actually went down by two points at the same election, "without any help from Starmer’s campaigning maestro."
As for the 2024 election, I think even I could have been the chief strategist for Labour and won. The Tories were exhausted, Truss had done her best to destroy what was left of their reputation for financial management and Reform UK was splitting the Tory vote in about 600 constituencies. It was a slam dunk. Nothing to do with McSweeney.
Now, less than a year later, under McSweeney's guidance just 23% of UK voters have a favourable opinion of Kier Starmer, with 69% having an unfavourable view. That -46%. Among Labour voters, it's +5%. Note that Ed Davey has a +17% favourability - among Labour voters!
Unless Starmer reads the writing on the wall, especially if there is an electoral pact between the Tories and Farage, his 174-seat majority will disappear in 2028-9 as quickly as it came.
