They could do a lot worse than replay that speech at the Conference, much of what was said then is as true now as it was then. Such as:Preaching to the choir. Not sure Starmer's got the fire Kinnock had in calling out the militant left though.
Note well, Mr McDonald.It is essential that we don't make false promises.
No probably about it, I can't name that many and I'm actually interested in politics. I think it is a safe bet that if you showed members of the general public a picture of the shadow cabinet and asked them who was in it (not even putting names to faces) I reckon that the number who could recognise a quarter would be in single figures percentage-wise. Even Ashworth seems to have gone to ground. They might get Rayner and Milliband.Yep. I don’t think many of the general public could give a monkeys about Labour at the moment and probably couldn’t name many of the opposition front bench.
It is a difficult balancing act, As Kinnock found out, voters don't take to the campaigning leader in the same way that they did in, say, the sixties when Wilson could draw a crowd, but it can whip up and enthuse a conference, they prefer the cosy chat approach. Some people can do both, usually by adapting their approach; Blair didn't really rant, he seemed reasoned on the podium; Wilson was able to use a 'pipe-and-slippers' approach when talking on the TV; Johnson and Heseltine are naturals in that they fairly (or very) unorthodox.Starmer does actually come out pretty well when you hear him interviewed in a relaxed setting, but he just can’t get that side of himself across and unfortunately I think that’s what will do for him in the end - He’s just a bit wooden… That shouldn’t matter of course but we live in a world where it actually does.
You are right, Starmer does not see to be able to relax. Unfortunately he does not seem to do humour. He comes across as what he is, a lawyer.