-
would amount to a change in strategy.
I mean this is key right? They have a strategy and are sticking to it.
For all the chat from political pundits and the sort of people in this thread about "needing" to know what he stands for rather than what he's against, what is the actual evidence that this has a negative outcome in his opinion amongst the public?
I also dare say that jornos have got so used to a fastfood like diet from Johnson et al, that they just want content. Regardless of what the public think.
hugo7-
For all the chat from political pundits and the sort of people in this thread about "needing" to know what he stands for rather than what he's against
I guess this is the challenge and to bleekrefs point about starmer not needing to commit to things now, yesterday he was happy to commit to maintaining the cap on child benefit, a policy shown not to bring more people in to the work force as intended but effective at harming disadvantaged children, gives space for pundits and people in this thread space to extrapolate from what he stands for
greentricky
I didn't say I found it inspiring - though I do think he's getting more comfortable in front of the camera - I just said that he didn't reject the public pay review body recommendation of 6.5%. His strategy is to make no commitments either way so as not to make himself a hostage to fortune, so it would've been odd for him to reject or accept anything at the moment, and would amount to a change in strategy.
I don't especially like it - I think some of these issues should have a solid yes or no either way - but he's clearly learned from the whole 'Keir Starmer Pledge Breaker' attack line and is now providing a much more nebulous front. It's less to attack, but less for us to get our teeth into.