I rarely dip into the politics threads as I don't tend to enjoy the vitriol that often accompanies the discussion.
But I think it's very hard to judge the current Labour leadership objectively. Jeremy Corbyn was very, very clear on what he stood for, and what Labour as a party stood for under his leadership. It was a return to a more left-wing, socialist Labour party. One of the reasons everyone knew what Corbyn stood for was because the media amplified into to the nth degree, either positively (to some extent, in the Guardian) or negatively (pretty much everyone else). It presented a stark political choice between the Tory right and the Labour left. This energised the young, left leaning vote in a way I've never seen in my lifetime, which was wonderful to see.
But they were always fighting an uphill battle against a right-wing media and a nation who are, ultimately, conservative leaning. Broadly speaking. The loss of Scotland to the SNP is a big blow to Labour - a party with left-wing political views of course, but still a load of seats Labour can't win, which will be exacerbated if they leave the union. Then you add Brexit to the bonfire, a one-off political issue which was so ruthlessly divisive. And you never quite felt that you knew where Corbyn's Labour stood on the issue, or by the time he'd made his position clearer it was all over bar the shouting. Boris had "delivered Brexit"; he was perceived as a success to that end, whether you agree with that or not.
The difficulty lies in splitting the politics from the politician in Corbyn. He was vilified by the right wing press to the extent he was never going to be seen by the middle ground as a credible prime-minister. But the resurgent left-wing politics he has left behind are still associated with him, to their detriment. And so Labour elect a "safe pair of hands", someone far more palatable to those whose votes Labour need to sway to actually win an election. But with him comes a policy shift, also presumably to set about winning back some of that middle ground, or those lost northern stronghold.
And now Labour are left horribly split as a party between the left and the centre-left, between those who want to pick up and run with what Corbyn left behind, and those who fear his legacy could taint Labour's electoral chances for years. It's an absolute fucking nightmare and the perception of Boris as a "success" for the government's delivery of a vaccine roll out at pace, whilst other countries struggle to catch-up, is another bitter pill to swallow.
So I have no idea what to think of Starmer. The last 18 months has presented a political landscape unlike any other. This has presented some opportunities in opposition but also created a thin-ice of not wanting to overly politicise a health crisis, and has ended up with the Government somehow in credit with the population despite many miss-steps in the response to the pandemic which have cost many lives. Things that would have brought a government down 15-20 years ago are just run roughshod over now; the legacy of Trump politics.
I just don't think that the general public are very interested in what Labour are putting out there at the moment. If he tried to do something eye-catching and dramatic, the conservative, reactionary public would be suspicious. If he tries to do something solid and competent, it's not sufficiently newsworthy to be interesting. As it is Labour are muddling along, trying to maintain the kind of delicate balance in their politics which the Tories struggled for years with as regards Europe.
For me the only kind of leader who could potentially deliver a Labour government at this time would be someone who could pursue something closer to the policy approach of the last Labour election programme with the broad appeal of being likeable, fairly young, competent and trustworthy. I have no idea who that is and would welcome their appearance on the political stage right now.