Reply to: He's lost his libel case

[SueEllen]

So your evidence is The Telegraph, Ipsos and Daily Mail?

The Telegraph and Daily Mail can be relied upon to put as negative a spin as possible on any story about Labour.

Ipsos are general slightly left of centre so is more interesting. Your link says:

• Starmer's ratings compare unfavourably to previous Prime Ministers at similar points in their first terms. His -34 net satisfaction score brings him into the same league as Gordon Brown (-23), Rishi Sunak (-22), Boris Johnson (-20), and Margaret Thatcher (-3) as Prime Ministers whose net satisfaction scores have gone into the negatives after just five months.
• Similarly, the government's -49 rating puts it on a par with Boris Johnson’s Government 5 months in (-49), but ahead of Rishi Sunak’s Government (-61).

So his Starmer's personal ratings are lower than others at a similar stage (obviously Truss didn't last this long so isn't listed) but the government ratings are in line with what one would expect.

"There are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

[northernladuk]

Maybe things would have been different if the Tories had got back in but who knows..

I very much doubt it. There are some tough decisions and a new direction that needs taking and I don't think any of the mainstream parties have the gaul to do it. It will be just more of the same until something radical happens. I think that tipping point is coming fast but the fix to that won't be good either. I've no idea what way to turn anymore.

[woody1]

Well it is clear the direction of growth has changed to negative under labour. Maybe it will improve but admitting we have a problem and telling the truth helps.

There is actually an alternative to your choices. Recession tested and likely to work.

The new deal:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guide...kty/revision/4

Building our way out 0of recession is pretty obvious. We need green energy, decent housing, better transport and technology industries it seems obvious.It can pay for itself if we are careful.

The hard choices I gave were if the economy doesn't grow at a decent rate.

I agree something a bit radical is needed to lift this country out of the slow lane.

[vetran]

Maybe things would have been different if the Tories had got back in but who knows.

Trouble is, the anaemic growth we've had for years is just not enough to sustain ever growing public spending. The hard choices are cut (austerity), raise taxes, or borrow.

Really growing the economy (eg. 3% YoY) is the only way out of this malaise.

Well it is clear the direction of growth has changed to negative under labour. Maybe it will improve but admitting we have a problem and telling the truth helps.

There is actually an alternative to your choices. Recession tested and likely to work.

The new deal:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guide...kty/revision/4

Building our way out 0of recession is pretty obvious. We need green energy, decent housing, better transport and technology industries it seems obvious.It can pay for itself if we are careful.

[DoctorStrangelove]

oh I thought it was Starmer's nickname "special K" had forgotten Musk was medicated.

There's a long history of various "Doctor Feelgoods". . Kennedy & Nixon both had history of such.

Goodness knows what the Moronic Orange Fuhrer is on. .

[woody1]

No that Labour were in fact given a growing if fragile economy in May, since the budget indications are that it is now shrinking that may be why public support is dropping.

Maybe things would have been different if the Tories had got back in but who knows.

Trouble is, the anaemic growth we've had for years is just not enough to sustain ever growing public spending. The hard choices are cut (austerity), raise taxes, or borrow.

Really growing the economy (eg. 3% YoY) is the only way out of this malaise.

[vetran]

So what you're saying is that Labour are doing a great job?

No that Labour were in fact given a growing if fragile economy in May, since the budget indications are that it is now shrinking that may be why public support is dropping.

[Uncle Albert]

hmm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68989270

So what you're saying is that Labour are doing a great job?

[Uncle Albert]

I'm not poorly informed like you.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...n-forty-years/



https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/dissatis...-labour-leader



and just for Gigs

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tory-poll.html

So your evidence is The Telegraph, Ipsos and Daily Mail?

The Telegraph and Daily Mail can be relied upon to put as negative a spin as possible on any story about Labour.

Ipsos are general slightly left of centre so is more interesting. Your link says:

• Starmer's ratings compare unfavourably to previous Prime Ministers at similar points in their first terms. His -34 net satisfaction score brings him into the same league as Gordon Brown (-23), Rishi Sunak (-22), Boris Johnson (-20), and Margaret Thatcher (-3) as Prime Ministers whose net satisfaction scores have gone into the negatives after just five months.
• Similarly, the government's -49 rating puts it on a par with Boris Johnson’s Government 5 months in (-49), but ahead of Rishi Sunak’s Government (-61).

So his Starmer's personal ratings are lower than others at a similar stage (obviously Truss didn't last this long so isn't listed) but the government ratings are in line with what one would expect.

[vetran]

Assuming Starmer lasts the distance, they've still got over 4 years to turn things round. Not sure they will be able to though because the problems with the UK economy are deep rooted. It's never really got back to decent sustained growth since the 2008 financial crisis.

hmm

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68989270

If sustained they show an economy returning to a normal rate of growth. The UK is now growing joint fastest in the G7, equal with Canada and outpacing France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States.

But because growth has been so sluggish for several years, what was normal growth before the financial crisis of the late 2000s is also very robust by recent standards.

[vetran]

Oh Betty I did a whoopsie in my beret

FTFY

sorry were the facts too complex for you?

[woody1]

Assuming Starmer lasts the distance, they've still got over 4 years to turn things round. Not sure they will be able to though because the problems with the UK economy are deep rooted. It's never really got back to decent sustained growth since the 2008 financial crisis.

[sadkingbilly]

I'm not poorly informed like you.

says the daily mail's resident moronic mouthpiece.

[sadkingbilly]

Perhaps you'd like to provide evidence to support your accusation of racism?

to whom?

[vetran]

Are you very young? Every prime minister in history has had worse ratings after having come to office than when elected. It's entirely normal. Indeed it would be a cause for concern if it wasn't the case.

I'm not poorly informed like you.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...n-forty-years/

Starmer more unpopular after five months than any other PM in over 40 years


Plummeting satisfaction rating reflects rocky first five months in Downing Street

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/dissatis...-labour-leader

• 61% of Britons say they’re dissatisfied with Keir Starmer, his worst performance as Labour leader
• Overall dissatisfaction with the Government remains high at 70%

and just for Gigs

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tory-poll.html

It gives Sir Keir a 'net satisfaction' rating of -34 in the survey by Ipsos, which has been tracking the popularity of new PMs since Margaret Thatcher's tenure.

The second most unpopular premier after five months was Gordon Brown (-23) in 2007, followed by Rishi Sunak (-22) in 2023.The most popular was Sir Tony Blair (+57) in 1997, followed by Sir John Major (+33) in 1991.