"Starmer therefore seemed like the right man at the right time. Sure, he wasn't charismatic. Sure, he had no story to tell. But Brits were tired of charisma and suspicious of stories. They wanted serious, sober, adult government. They wanted competence and policy delivery. Someone dutiful and ethical, who would improve health services and transport networks and generally not cause too much trouble. In fact, they got neither."
Keir Starmer’s support rested on pragmatism rather than charisma or storytelling. He was portrayed as a barrister-like figure without sweeping rhetoric. After years of charismatic leadership, including Boris Johnson’s appealing but ultimately fictional Brexit narrative, voters became tired of grand stories and sought sober competence. Brexit was described as leaving Britain poorer, lonelier, and unstable, with frequent prime minister turnover. Liz Truss was cited as an example of disastrous right-wing economic claims leading to financial calamity. Starmer was seen as the right leader for the moment, promising dutiful, ethical governance and improvements to health services and transport. However, he was said to combine low charisma with a lack of serious policy delivery, leaving governance ineffective.
Read at english.elpais.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]