At each turn Starmer’s position can be explained by one thing: career advancement.

Or possibly who he spoke to last and might advance his career. Remember him ‘taking the knee’?

I’m uncertain Starmer has ever had a policy he has stuck to, and is utterly devoid of ideology. Expect more of the same if he comes to power. I didn’t agree with Corbyn’s ideas, but at least he had principles.

Having just watched his interview with Peter Hitchens I am starting to rather like this author. Well done Unherd for getring him on board.

Starmer “a talented politician” ? Only if Aaron Bastani’s a talented journalist and political analyst.
Do these people think voters have no memory of Starmer’s myriad and conflicting positions on Brexit (amongst other policies) ?
It wouldn’t be quite so bad if Starmer wasn’t quite so sanctimonious. If he presented himself as a Wilson or Johnson style opportunist, he might get away with some of it. But he isn’t.
The only hope for the Tories is the stupidity and incompetence of the Left. Of which the supply seems greater than ever. But I suspect that’s still not enough to save them.

In a sense, Starmer’s unwavering eye on the main chance makes him something useful: he’s predictable.
As a political issue, Brexit is dead. The LibDems will keep harping on about it, but then, they are the political equivalent of Oxford University when it comes to lost causes.
Starmer in power will have his hands full, as he tries to make his ‘net zero’ extremism work, and attempts to keep the Diane Abbotts of his party from opening their big mouths.
If he’s predictable, then he will be cautious. He won’t want to rock the re-election boat.

I am curious about your definition of a talented politician. I can see through him as easily as you. Blair was the (monstrous) talent.
I will not be voting for or against Starmer: Success for me would be the destruction of the Tory Party. Starmer can be left for later.

I think Author knows full well that Starmer’s statement about not going back is clear realpolitik about where we are now and not because he has changed his view on what would have been better for the Country. All PMs inherit some things they just have to accept at least in the short/medium term. For example the Tories accepted the NHS having battled hard against it as just one example.
I think he also knows the public attitude has changed and an increasing majority favours sensible realignment and negotiation with EU but not a re-opening of the full debate. (I mean even today papers have headlines with public blaming Brexit for rising food prices – whether that’s solely a Brexit issue in some regards doesn’t matter if the impression is forming. Of course it is a factor but that’s a separate debate).
Starmer has certainly shown a ruthless streak – to eject the Corbynista’s and re-centre the Labour party in such a short timespan he’s had to be, and the more impressive for it. There are v few politicians, if any, who get to the top without some of this attribute.
As regards the criticism of ‘careerism’, there is of course no better modern day example than Bojo. The EU supporter when Mayor of London switching to secure the PMship, leaving a trail of porkies in his wake and a right shambles for the rest of us. Now I wonder if Author would write such an Article about that mendacity?

Sadly most of the voting public have very short memories. If they take much notice of politicians at all. He’ll be running the country in 18 months.

Hold on…it was Starmer’s fault that Labour was unable to agree on a Brexit deal with Theresa May? Where was Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Leader at the time, when this was happening?
Surely, as the Leader, Corbyn was responsible for the Labour approach when talking to Theresa May. If Starmer was manipulating the discussions, Corbyn, in my view, should have stepped in.
That’s what Leaders are supposed to do. Lead.

Starmer is trying to keep the Labour traditional voters, who aren’t opposed to Brexit, on side. Sadly no politician dares to be honest in this debate, but I suspect it’s a few years too soon to be pushing for a second referendum.

Although, if he were to find himself in coalition with the liberals then who knows?

Has David Lammy resigned as Shadow Foreign Secretary? If not, why not? He described Leave voters as Nazis and white supremacists, before apologising for having used language that was “not strong enough”. How can he continue to serve under Keir Starmer after this? If anyone believed Starmer, then they would be reconstituting Change UK.

British elite influence within the EU institutions prior to formal Brexit makes it not quite true that we were now obeying the rules while having no say over them. Unless everyone in the place has deleted all of those people’s numbers, then, while there is less British involvement than there used to be, there is not none.

Britain remains one of the largest economies that adhered to EU legislation, so of course there are channels across the Channel. That is not your influence or mine, but it never was. That was why we voted Leave, just as that was why they voted Remain, although the result made very little difference to them, as voting rarely or never does. They have other powers at their disposal.

Still, formal Brexit has embarrassed them, so they are going to reverse it. They know their trump card. “You have no one in the room,” they can say to us, although they can never say that of themselves. On immigration, they have two arguments, depending on the audience. One is, “It has gone up, anyway.” The other is, “The Stay Outers are still fighting a battle from 2016. Take out Don’t Knows, and of those who express an opinion, the majority now thinks, either that immigration is at the right level, or that it is too low.” Oh, and Nigel Farage has said on television that, “Brexit has failed.” How do we get out of that one?

Even if the pension age had gone up to a mere 68, the age at which my father died, then in a dozen years’ time come September, I would still be 10 years away from retirement. But Britain will already be back in the EU. Not just Margaret Thatcher’s Single Market and the Customs Union, but the eurozone and the Schengen Area. No referendum. A handful of votes against in the Commons. No division in the Lords. Royal Assent with one of those occasional Buckingham Palace statements which explicitly welcomed a political development. Thoroughly celebratory television coverage, largely of primary schools.

And then we are going to have to get on with trying to make it work. We should already be preparing for that. “There is no final victory, as there is no final defeat,” said Tony Benn. “There is just the same battle. To be fought, over and over again. So toughen up, bloody toughen up.”

Yes, I know – he is quite revolting and no more trustworthy than Boris Johnson. But it’s still not enough to make me vote for the Conservatives again.

Sorry. The betrayal has been too great. If we’re going to have Blairism whoever we elect, then let’s at least have the correct label on the tin, eh?

Starmer’s various positions can be explained perfectly sensibly as a consistent remainer. He campaigned for remain. Then he tried for a re-run, given that nobody had the faintest idea when they voted what Brexit was supposed to mean, and the mandate the Brexiteers had was for delivering the impossible – “having your cake and eating it”, “the easiest trade deal ever”, and such. This might bave been bad tactics – going for a soft Brexit and making a deal with Theresa May might have delivered a better result. But he hoped for better – and anyway, Corbyn and co. would never have made any kind of compromise. Their line was always to leave the Tories with all the responsibility and use it as an argument to get Corbyn in to do, well, whatever he might eventually decide to do. After the Boris was elected and the UK left the EU, the question is closed. No matter how much you think that Britain would be better off inside the EU, you can no longer argue that people might reconsider. They had the chance and did not take it. Anyway, the EU would only offer a much worse deal than last time – and even that will not be on the table for another decade or two, when there might be a UK consensus for coming back. Starmer may well think that leaving the EU was a tragic mistake – I do – but since the sh*t has long hit the fan and been spread all over us, there is no point trying to re-fight a long lost battle, and no shame in firmly promising not to try to reverse what cannot be reversed.

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake” – Napoleon Bonaparte. Starmer knows that the right wing media, the Murdoch papers, the Mail, GB News, owned by the elite who support the Tories regardless, because they know they will run the country to further their interests, not to benefit the general public, are ready to lie, mischaracterise and generally stir the s*it to prevent a Labour government that might threaten those interests. So he says nothing that can be used, and lets the Tories continue to fight like rats in a sack.

As a result I have formed no opinion about him, but know if the people who cheerleadered for austerity, Brexit, Johnson, Truss and Austerity 2.0 don’t like him he can’t be all bad.