Main Edition
US
FR
Cleopatra to America's Caesar. (Carl Court/Getty Images)
The conventional wisdom is that Donald Trump’s election victory is a nightmare for Keir Starmer. Trump not only embodies much that Starmer holds in obvious contempt, but his very presence in the White House captures much of Britain’s essential weakness in 2024. Whatever Labour MPs think of him, the incoming US President has more power to undermine British prosperity — and therefore their own chances of reelection — than anyone else on the planet, including, perhaps, their own leader. Like Cleopatra trying to survive the great imperial power struggles of the late Roman republic, Starmer has little choice but to submit to the new American Caesar and hope for the best.
Despite the inevitable hand wringing in Westminster, however, Trump’s election provides a political opportunity for Starmer that, intriguingly, has not gone unnoticed inside No.10. From a purely partisan perspective, those close to Starmer see Kamala Harris’s crushing defeat not only as a personal rejection, but also as an ideological repudiation of the kind of progressivism she came to represent. In their view, Harris’s brand of “be more woke” liberalism is just as antithetical to the voters Labour needs here as it was to the voters the Democrats needed across the Atlantic.
To understand the tensions at the heart of the Starmer government over its response to Trump’s victory, it is important to distinguish between the historical, organisational and emotional ties between Labour and the Democrats, which sparked Trump’s ire during the presidential campaign, and the divergent political projects taking shape in London and Washington. Those close to Morgan McSweeney, Keir Starmer’s influential chief of staff, simply do not look to San Francisco, Washington or Ottawa for inspiration as Tony Blair might have done in the Nineties. Instead, they look to the solid and rather staid social democracies of northern Europe. To understand Starmerism, in other words, look to Copenhagen not California.
The interesting question at the heart of this Labour government, however, is not so much what McSweeney’s vision of a successful Labour strategy looks like — for that much is clear — but how widely it is shared within the wider Labour movement. Beyond a few figures in No.10, who else shares McSweeney’s instinctive eye-rolling alienation with the obsessions and prejudices of North American liberalism and, somewhere in their soul, saw Harris’s defeat as deserved?
Fundamentally, many in Starmer’s No.10 believe that their “project” to remake the Labour Party, which started in opposition, is only half finished. To complete it, the party needs to develop far less instinctive sympathy with the kind of progressivism Harris represented — and far more sympathy with the ordinary concerns of Middle England. If the Labour Party is to be more than a Biden-style interregnum between periods of conservative rule, they believe, the party needs to be shaken out of its comfort zone on many of the issues which cost Harris in the election, from immigration to the wider “woke” wars dominating the post-mortems now being written about why her campaign failed.
Harris’s defeat, in short, is both a portent of what could happen to the Labour Party at the next election and a tool Starmer can use to stop that from happening, though only if he has the political skill to do so. Put bluntly, while President Trump will test Starmer’s diplomatic skills to the limit, his victory could help persuade a reluctant Labour Party that it needs to do far more to reassure voters that it shares their instincts. That, at least, is the theory.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe American irritation at having Labour aparatchiks actively working for Kamala in the US is not inconsiderable. It might even remind people of the role British intelligence played in fabricating the Russiagate scam. As far as the economy goes, British weakness is caused by green delusions about energy and climate. And the open immigration shoved down the throats of the British people.
I’m pretty sure trump doesn’t care about “international brigade” labour sent to defeat him. I wouldn’t be surprised if it helped him win.
He will extract the pound of flesh though.
And I agree, it’s all about making the economy strong again.
“I’m pretty sure trump doesn’t care about “international brigade” labour sent to defeat him.”
I’m pretty sure he does. He did file a formal complaint with the Federal Electoral Commission, after all.
That’s like cashing in your chips after you you won at the one armed bandit.
If Trump had time, I would love to see him troll Starmer and post on X, “I’d like to see Nigel Farage as the UK ambassador,” and watch Starmer twist in the wind with that.
“the role British intelligence played in fabricating the Russiagate scam”
What role? One renegade former officer was involved. British intelligence was not.
Think of the oxymoronic idea of a “rogue” agent operating an international company in the open out of Washington DC, and receiving his psy via the DNC’s pet lawfare firm.
Know a lot about British Intelligence do you?
Nothing can save Starmer from his own blundering incompetence and arrogance. The man is a “hole in the air”, and having risen without trace, will also sink into oblivion.
Starmer will go into a sulk when he is asked whether he intends to fulfil manifesto promises, made to get him elected but never intended for implementation.
“Manifesto ‘promises’ , the word “promises” is a term of art for Starmer, in his mind it is simply a useful all purpose noun to be used along with other similar phrases such as ‘ 14 years of chaos’ , “fixing the foundations etc ” which all devotees had to memorise, these are the passwords for advancement in the Labour cause. The Dutch have a great expression for the likes of Starmer ‘ He floated up for lack of downward pressure’ like sewage!!
Disagree. One thing can save nonentities like Starmer: rejoining Europe. I won’t happen in his first term but it would in his second. Then he wouldn’t have to do anything but follow the orders of Queen Ursula.
You think there will be a second term !
Well, unless Conservative reach some sort of accommodation with Reform or Reform replaces Conservatives completely as opposition party, 2nd Labour term might happen by default regardless of how incompetent Labour is.
But nothing can save Europe itself now except a complete volte face on the energy question. Without that Trump’s cheap energy economy, de-regulated and turbo-charged by AI will suck every last penny of investment capital out of the EU – and Britain too, if we can’t get rid of Miliband etc.
Spot on!
Stammer is already dead he just doesn’t know it
Beyond a few figures in No.10, who else shares McSweeney’s instinctive eye-rolling alienation with the obsessions and prejudices of North American liberalism and, somewhere in their soul, saw Harris’s defeat as deserved?
ME!
And I didn’t see Harris’s defeat as deserved “somewhere in my soul” but with my own eyes and felt it with an absolute conviction for several reasons.
Schadenfreude is a rather unbecoming thing but I have allowed myself to ride the wave of it for a week and watch the Democrats stew in their own mess. I’ll stop soon and return to more civilised behaviour, but gosh I’ve enjoyed it.
Don’t stop – keep enjoying. Civilized behaviour is overrated in some circumstances.
Me too and I live here.
Starmer is no different than Harris, Biden and the dozen or so incompetent leaders pulling down the west. I think they are incapable of identifying their own weaknesses. They are trapped in ideological nonsense that dooms them to failure.
Of all the Democrats, Biden seems to be enjoying the Trump win.
“To understand Starmerism, in other words, look to Copenhagen not California.” Hmmm. That’ll be Denmark that refused to join the Euro, ignores its Schengen agreement and has ended free movement at its border with Germany, has just clamped down hard on youth gender transitioning, now has a lower effective marginal personal tax rate than the UK and is cutting taxes next year, and is ranked higher than the USA (and a lot higher than the UK) for economic and market freedom. If Starmer is definitely looking toward Copenhagen, he needs to ask his *very close friend* Lord Ali for another pair of new glasses…
As an aside, it typifies the numbing deadhand of statist bureaucrats that a key change they think is needed is new offices. Magically, government becomes smarter and more effective when they have offices with £500 coffee makers. Then again, Starmer did win an election after his *very supportive chum* Lord Ali gave him a new apartment with a very snazzy coffee maker…
Denmark also has far stricter immigration and asylum laws, and is tough on forcing immigrants to integrate into Danish society. Would that we did the same……
Or maybe Norway with its booming oil and gas industry in the wake of the Ukraine invasion , fully encouraged by government and even the Norwegian royal family.
Stavanger and Aberdeen, a Tale of Two Cities, one experiencing the best of times and the other the worst of times.
Nothing about pissing your money down a green hole? Everything else is meaningless unless you can fix the economy.
To be fair, there’s plenty of scope for that discussion elsewhere; this article is focused on the Trump-Starmer relationship, both personal and political. As per usual, the author pinpoints the pinch points with precision.
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. When the us starts providing their industry with cheap power how competitive will the uk be? And no it won’t be fair.
The writer is a political journalist, not an economic one. It’s that simple.
The economy and net zero can be the subject of plenty of other articles. What’s not to understand?
You also misinterpret the UK expression “To be fair”.
You mean it doesn’t mean slightly condescending? And yes politics is all about the economy.
The something broken is the economy.
Bret, just show the comments state trooper your ID so you can get on your way.
An entire economy’s worth of money is to be spent on these nonsense ideas; they very much are central to the discussion.
Ideologically Starmer cannot and will not be influenced by anything the Trump government does. The appointment of Lammy showed obvious contempt for the Republican side of the US. Add to that the ridiculous sending of advisers to join the Harris campaign further entrenches that contempt.
Starmer is a creature of the state. They are his people. The talk of a 4 day week is just another way of strengthening that bond. The idea that he would attempt any Elon ‘fix’ of a broken system is laughable. The civil service, NHS etc can carry on happy in the knowledge that nothing will change. McSweeney might want to do it. But Starmer. Really?!
No. Starmer will do nothing but make things worse. Tough talk on easy targets (the rioters). Misdirection on the tricky stuff (the perpetrator).
He is a lawyer. If there’s a law he can use then he’s all in. Big vision. Bold thinking. Best look elsewhere.
Indeed. I came to say similar but you said it well already. The problem though is that Trump will force Starmer to make a decision and, without a procedure in place that’s been widely agreed by various stakeholders, he will flounder.
Couldn’t agree more. It’s absurd to imagine Starmer secretly wanting to take Britain in a Trumpian direction.
All in on mass immigration.
All in on imprisonment for spicy tweets.
All in on the Green insanity.
All in on Ukraine.
All in on tax rises.
All in on huge pay rises for client groups working for the state.
All in on promoting minister who publicly call Trump a Nazi.
Very well said!
The fun will start with tariffs and defence spending. They’re linked. Trump is much more likely to look benignly on trade with Britain, if we start to make serious headway with pulling our weight in NATO.
Reeves didn’t plan for spending on serious rearmament. Either taxes for ordinary people go up, or the NHS can whistle for the promised cash.
For Starmer, there are no good options.
We already face huge tariffs when trading with the USA. Self-imposed green taxes, net zero transition taxes, employment taxes, investment taxes, and more.
Industrial electricity is now four times more expensive in the UK than the USA. Natural gas is five times more expensive. The non-wage cost of employing someone is twice as expensive. From finance to data management to engineering, like for like services and products created in the UK now have far higher non-wage input costs than those created in the USA, directly attributable to UK government policies.
Only far higher US wages (on average about £17k according to the ONS) ensure the UK doesn’t face a complete economic rout in trade with the USA. But this only serves to accelerate another “tariff” UK businesses face: loss of the most highly skilled workers and business creators. For over a decade there’s been an accelerating trend of highly skilled Brits leaving for the USA, hidden by the vast tide of immigration to the UK from poorer parts of the world. This has not been an equivalent exchange.
Still UK and European citizens keep voting for more government and more taxes and more luxury beliefs. But the very thing that pays for all the largesse is shrinking under the burden and we hurtle towards de-industrialisation without any new technology unicorns to save us from backwardness.
Net Zero looks more like Year Zero.
Still UK and European citizens keep voting for more government and more taxes and more luxury beliefs.
Well, 20% of the electorate did. You can blame the voters for being apathetic, but I suspect the main reason for that is the perception that ‘they’re all the same’, it’s all one big uniparty. I wonder how bad things will have to get before we’re shaken out of somnolescence? We’re about to find out ……
“…Imagine the moment it is discovered that a dual British citizen has been rounded up and separated from his children…”
Then, I have no doubt at all that in that situation the dual British citizen and the children would be deported to, er, Britain – because they are, ‘documented’. But the whole point about ‘undocumented migrants’ is that they are clumping ‘undocumented’ – invariably deliberately so to take advantage of human rights laws. The dual citizen and family, having been made the responsibility of the Labour government, would then be duly processed in the standard way – 4* hotel, private medical care, the usual, assuming they managed to divest themselves of their British citizenship documentation enroute, otherwise they would have to join the rest of us in the queue for a six week wait for a doctor’s appointment.
“Mandelson is a commercially-minded politician-cum-businessman — a mould well understood in Washington — with an expertise in global trade rules from his time as European Commissioner.”
That would be funny if it were not tragic. Tom Mctague is spending too much time in the serpent’s nest – the rest of us know what Peter Mandelson is -an oleaginous, self-serving hypocrite whose business expertise is self-promotion.
If “Britain’s choice for the next ambassador to Washington is vitally important,” then the choice should certainly not be Mandelson.
Yes nor should he be the next Chancellor of the University of Oxford.
“Starmer cannot run too far from the core instincts of the Labour Party”
I don’t think how Starmer and Labour react to the Trump win is a matter of ‘political skill’, it’s a matter of individual and collective ideology. The point the author made about the circumstances of Blair’s ousting proves the point – and that was Blair in his pomp.
“And yet, who knows what ramifications there will be for Starmer should he go to war against Trump on any particular issue”
You have a template for this from Trump’s first presidency and Merkel – public humiliation and the country would pay the price as Germany did.
Starmer showed quite a bit of skill, and ruthlessness, to move Labour away from Corbynism. McSweeney v much the same. In their view Corbynism moved too far away from core instincts of Labour supporters.
I sense you struggle to have it both ways.
Yes, so Corbyn was even further far left than Starmer but mostly on foreign policy by supporting all terrorists he could find.
It does not make Starmer any less far left in other woke policy areas.
As Trump calls out the climate scam and Musk takes a chainsaw to the US civil institutions, maintaining a commitment to Net Zero and taxation at approaching 50% of GDP is going to feel like a very lonely place.
In fact, it will be career ending.
The parts of the system most urgently in need of ‘fixing’ are those Labour created, implanted, nourished and now rely on for jobs, influence and prestige. Basically, the leftish administrative state would need to commit a collective act of seppuku.
Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas.
Elite opinion is keen to emphasise that Kamala pulled back from wokery and campaigned on a centrist ticket, but the damage was done a long time ago and not so quickly escapable.
Labour has two issues that they will struggle with despite McSweeney and Starmer’s best efforts: wokery and migration. Their troubles here will come from all sides, not least their backbenchers. Badenoch will ruthlessly attack on the former and Farage on the latter. As it stands today, it is tempting to say that Starmer’s only hope is that the Right splits between the Tories and Reform and offers him a path through in 2029.
However, a financial crash is coming, perhaps one so large that it eclipses 2008, perhaps one so large that it ends fiat altogether.
The factors behind that crash have been decades in the making, but Trump will be blamed for it by his opponents at home and globally. How Trump negotiates that crisis will determine whether his style of government becomes dominant and even whether a return of the world to the Westphalian model is still possible.
I agree, a global crash is in the pipeline. I have long thought it would be around about now, but that hasn’t happened, but I honestly think sooner rather than later from here. I also agree, it’s gonna be a biggie.
Interesting times for sure.
“The central irony of Starmer’s project, then, is not simply that it is trying to address many of the same concerns as Trump — from immigration to gender and globalisation — but that it is also beginning to share the same instinct that something has fundamentally broken in “the system” which needs fixing, or, perhaps, “draining”.”
Wrong ! Starmer’s trying not to address them. He’s just talking about doing so.
Of course, none of this attempt to rationalise what Starmer may or may not be trying to do matters one iota if the man and his top team are – and all the evidence points this way – totally incompetent.
Starmer is incapable of the intellectual flexibility this article proposes. He has no interest in discerning, never mind delivering, what the British people want. His plan is to batter the public into submission, of which Alison Pearson’s recent run-in with the Law is a bit one example.
Labour more than any other party are inclined towards an ever more bloated and controlling bureaucracy. It is in their DNA. Net Zero, Anti racism and gender ideologies exist solely to justify the bureaucracy. They have no other function. They are not ends in themselves but self justifying means put on moral steroids to justify endless state/elite intervention
Irrelevant article. “It’s all about the economy….” For a start cutting government waste but what has the chancellor done but increase public sector pay. Meloni in Italy has made safe countries part of primary legislation and therefore stopped the left wing judges from preventing her deporting illegal migrants. Will stammer have the balls to do the same here?
Well, even assuming that Starmer wants to do it, which is unlikely, Labour Party would never vote for such policy.
Err Starmer? political skill? diplomatic skill. Some oxymorons floating around in that article methinks.
Interesting…I am trying to imagine any circumstance whereby a person with a dual UK passport would be in the USA illegally and be deported to another country?
‘To understand Starmerism, in other words, look to Copenhagen not California.’
Denmark, which has a much stricter immigration system , is what we need to understand Starmerism?
The essay fails right there.
Hopefully Trump will plunge a wooden stake, through the hearts of the walking corpses governing Europe, including Starmer.
A wipe out of Brussels would not go amiss.
This is, sorry to say, an absurd take.
There is literally no evidence that Starmer is anything else than he claims to be. A hopelessly woke human rights lawyer technocrat who hates the white working class and is frankly embarrassed by the British flag.
He despises Trump and everything he stands for. Trump in fact, seems to love Britain more than he does.
I like the idea of having 10 Downing St as a museum. No doubt, like Westminster Abbey and the Tower of London, it will cost £30 to get in and be mainly visited by the affluent Chinese tourists who are more able to afford it than the locals.
this piece is long on politics and totally devoid of any mention of leadership or governance. It’s not a game show, Mr. Writer Guy; it’s people whose actions impact the lives of the people who pay the bills. That Starmer might have to posture in appeasement to some part of his following over Trump’s deportation plans misses the point – immigration is an issue there, too, and it’s out of hand.
Here’s an idea – stop trying to “distance from Trump” and start addressing the things that made him possible in the first place. We in the US have a dysfunctional republic; you have your own version of dysfunction. Trump did not create those conditions, the professionals like Starmer, Harris, Walz, Scholz, and to be fair, a sizable number of Republicans who lost touch with their role as public servants.
Trump, by the contrast between them, reveals exactly who Starmer is and what he stands for. It becomes more obvious day by day to the British people just exactly what type of government they have chosen.
There can be no UK Trump, because there is no UK right wing party. Starmer is all you have got and he is not going anywhere. That is the disaster. Being on a far left train running at high speed that is heading for an almighty crash. And there is no other train to board.
Ideologues, people who are convinced they are right, don’t care what other people think of them. Why should Starmer care for what Trump says and does? Trump will hardly even register with him.
Utter tosh. Hyper liberal progressivism is one of three deranged ideologies that Starmer is pursuing. The gender confused knee bender to BLM has betrayed nasty divisive instincts in the Southport debacle and all his policies so far. Their neo socialist spite will trigger not just recession in the private sector they despise. It will alienate whole armies of outraged voters from low paid women, charity and care workers to farmers and landlords. Then there is Milliband’s anti growth Pol Potist Anti Growth Eco crusade and the promise of blackout Britain. And the reshackling to the stinky corpse of the EU. The idea that Trump is good news for such a self destructive utterly immature band of juvenile students is for the birds. Trump has just given a glimpse of what their sub Bidenesque madness will lead to – total defeat of party and ideology in 2029.
The entire article is predicated on the following which is untrue.
“As Starmer put it in his conference speech earlier this year: “It is — as point of fact — the policy of this Government to reduce both net migration and our economic dependency upon it.” The difference between Starmer and Trump, then, is not one of ambition, but delivery.”
Whilst i agree with the many comments below that Starmer is Harris Lite and as much of a woke dope as its possible to be, i did enjoy and agree with the article’s thrust in one sense. There is definitely room for a mixed economy Keynesian biased social democratic political movement – not least to balance the worst intincts of a Trump or BoJo. What there is not room for is a bunch of women hating, hamas and FGM fans who also happen to be anti-semites and see “black” people as some homogenous blob rather than humans like all the others. That is what UK labour is and that is why it is dangerous to civil society.
You think he’d let us send the US Navy over? We’ll stop the “migrant” boats. What happened to y’all and your Navy??!! You don’t have one anymore? What would Winston think??!!
Starmer doesn’t even live in the world of real people so how can he react to it. Deregulation, cheap energy, lower taxes, protecting borders, economic growth.These are not and never will be labour policies
This assumes that Starmer has a hand to show. Right now, it looks like a pair of twos at best. Keeping with the poker analogy, I doubt if he even knows the rules.
A “British Trump” is an unlikely figure. The unpredictable, bombastic businessman with undeniable charisma and deal-making savvy is a statistical outlier and does not translate to our culture.
Starmer’s Labour is already dead in the water, it will just take another 4 plus years to sink. Those voters who, having forgotten what Labour does with power, thought that any party would be better than the Tories, are being reminded of the facts; unaffordable wage rises and power given to client groups and paymasters, eye-watering amounts of cash thrown in the general direction of the NHS, business and job killing taxes and red tape, an energy policy guaranteed to result in massive power cuts and higher bills, driven by a net zero ideology which, even if 100% successful, would make absolutely no measurable difference to the factors affecting climate change, lip service paid to controlling immigration, the indulgence of identity politics. And more. Badenoch doesn’t need to do much more than put together a team which will operate as a government in waiting, rather than an opposition. A team which can develop a coherent package of centre right policies and a selection process to recruit the talent to implement them. Labour will sink itself.
A lot of words to say very little. If they want to avoid the same fate as the Democrats then they haven’t started well and show no signs of doing any better. I’m wondering what issue will reveal that Starker has no power on the international stage. Chagos chaos anyone?
Is this early Christmas cheer?
With all due respect: there is little hope for Labour’s new “enlightened” agenda while Sir Keir is at the reins.
Despite all longing for a Labour Party that actually defends the working class before they prioritise race, asylum status, or trans wants & desires, no amount of hand-wringing shared with us from inside No.10 can magically dispel the highly visible daily efforts of Starmer to drag feet on meaningful immigration reform, destroy farms, or forcibly Progress the masses into eating nutrient-rich insects while avoiding leaving the islands by air.
As Tom McTague concludes, Starmer will have to choose, visibly, between Trump & Vance or Ursula & Klaus. All the more so because Starmer was caught red-handed trying to undermine American patriots despite overwhelming popular support – questionable judgement, to say the least.
Anyone capable of, intentionally, taking on this degree of unwise risk to win approval from the Leftist globalist project is very unlikely to be able to pivot towards socialist populism with the subtlety needed to keep all aggressive opponents at bay.
three things:
…Twotier-Freegear can keep his Party onboard, OR give himself (and his tiny faction of ostensibly “Labour” politicians willing to make the necessary compromises with the electorate), a slim chance of remaining in Office beyond a single and possibly truncated term…doing both is impossible…
…Britain could find some alternative to cleaving to the US in Foreign and Defence Matters IF and ONLY IF it re-arms to the same extent as Great Britain did in the 1930s…from 2.2% of GDP in 1933 to 6.9% in 1938. Which could be achieved if he increased real-terms defence spending by 25% a year every year in office.
…Europe is a busted flush. But fortunately we have a Moat…and with enough committment MIGHT save some of it’s West Atlantic Coast from the oncoming storm. If we are well armed and ready to fight…
Not seeing it, frankly…but the Moat might give us some chance if we get a decent Government when this one disintegrates…
There is no Starmerism, just the washed up remanants of Labour’s last lot, plus newbies, still confused by 2016 and wondering how to square the circle of now and then – when they set the stage for policies now rejected in the US. JD Vance and Musk look like mountain prophets next to the prosecutor-general.
Before the end of this parliament Labour will have largely deindustrialised and bankrupted the country with their Net Zero/climate delusions. Their progressive and totalitarian rule will have crushed the voters unless there is an uprising. Food and energy will be imported and scarce. Defence will be inadequate, as will be the other institutions. Dark, very bleak times lie ahead.
Starmer is much more likely to turn down the opportunity of a US trade deal to ally himself more closely with a failing EU
King Johnson the Honest’s nickname for Starmer is ‘the Human Bollard’. Johnson was an awful Prime Minister but his jokes are still good.
America has rejected wokery, itself a creation of late feminism. US men reject their assigned role in the longhouse, soon that rejection will manifest here. Can’t wait.
It doesn’t matter if it is or isn’t. The majority in this country will never forgive labour for what they have done. Ever.
Good discussion, even for McT. There is more that could be said on what Trump II can offer re regeneration that’s relevant to Britain. If people see an alternative to the tired old ‘small state’ stuff (or its reverse) they will go for it like a shot.
Shroedinger’s cats of opportunism. No ideas of their own. Cat on hot tin fence etc
Trumpism in the UK? Prime Minister Farage anyone?
It will begin to dawn on Western countries fairly quickly (helped by Trump’s emphatic win) that the system that emerged in 1945 is fundamentally broken and needs surgery of a broadly similar kind. One change that is required in Britain and the US is the need for weekly Cabinet meetings with Britain retreating from a Presidential system and the US embracing Cabinet Government albeit with the President still having the final say.
The defenestration of Harris is indeed a message to Starmer – watch out or this could be you! But the chances of him being able to do anything about it are vanishingly small. Can you see the Labour Party as currently constituted voting for a) harsher immigration and asylum controls, b) less Net Zero and c) less wokery, ie a Reform-lite manifesto?
Starmer may or may not see what direction of travel is required, but his position is like a man who has got on the wrong train – seeing where you want to be does not mean you have any chance of getting there.
Good starting point in repairing relationship with Trump administration would be sacking of fat moron Lammy as Foreign Secretary.
Trump’s economics will unravel. Too many contradictions and he’s not really fussed about the ‘left behinds’ and the ‘little guy’ now he no longer needs their votes. So great disappointment there coming. There is thus a decent chance the comparison with Starmer looks less attractive in 4years (and Starmer will still have 6mths of power after Trump left White House for last time). The pendulum may well have tilted back.
Immigration though is a bigger challenge in UK. Firstly our demographics more challenging than the US, albeit thanks to recent migration less so than in many parts of Europe or Japan/S Korea. (Slight aside – but we have less 60yrs+ working population than we did in the 70s, so something in how many Boomers have become economically inactive when we really can’t afford it perhaps). US has advantage it can repatriate to all bar Venezuela with relative ease. Whereas we lack diplomatic ties for some of the key home states for illegal migrants. But if the Boats can be stopped that’ll be a big electoral advantage come 2029.
Trump’s anti-woke can be used to Starmer’s advantage to constrain the loony left and he and MsSweeney already welcome that.
Foreign Policy more likely to create harsh winds for Starmer, but we’ve an adult now at the helm not a buffoon so one suspects we’ll do as well as any. The Republican Right much more aligned on Foreign Policy with UK now than perhaps 2 years ago.
We have a “bollard” at the helm.
You’re being too polite!
I’m no fan of Starmer, but I fear some Unherd readers seem to be forgetting what a complete POS Trump is. This is the convicted felon who tried to prevent the orderly transfer of power of the US government.
The other side has literally tried to murder him. I find that a lot worse but what do I know!