A little more than a month before his election as leader of Labour, a headline in the Financial Times still referred to him as "Boring Starmer", an epithet repeated even by his best friends. Three months after his victory in April 2020, Jim Pickard, head of the newspaper's political department, praised the swiftness with which this dull character had already made his mark on the party; the weekly paper The New European, close to Tony Blair's New Labour, described him as "The Coming Starm" - that is, the storm capable of repositioning the party back to the center.
So, is Keir Starmer really dull and boring? He is not exactly a very charismatic person. His wise speeches don't thrill the crowds and none of them are particularly memorable. He is adorned with a strange hairstyle, with thick, slicked hair separated by a clean side parting, like an American actor in a sixties soap-opera. His eyelash-less eyes and unnatural smile give him a false air of Dick York, who played Darrin, Samantha's husband in Bewitched – and who never struck anyone as a very smart character. Keir Starmer has the same dazed look on his face as Darrin, that same painful wrinkle of worry on his forehead, when, sitting at the centre table of the House of Commons, facing the two despatch boxes separating the Prime Minister from the Leader of the Opposition, he seems to be making a superhuman effort of concentration to find meaning in Boris Johnson's answers, as flamboyant as they are entangled and imprecise. Keir Starmer, therefore, does not look good. And yet... "For someone who has only been an MP for a few years, he really succeeded very, very quickly. I don't know how far he'll go, but in any case, that means he has something," admits Tony Blair's former strategic advisor, Alastair Campbell.
For it is precisely in the House of Commons that Keir Starmer’s blossoming started. His luck, so to speak, was to land there in the midst of the Covid-19 crisis, which was being disastrously handled by the government. In the context of a complex pandemic leading to catastrophic human, economic and social aftermath, being a leader more than ever requires work, precision, rigor, empathy, ethics, political vision and strategic coherence; in other words, all the qualities that Boris Johnson lacks, being too busy parading as the formidable winning machine, better at making enthusiastic campaign promises than performing his duties as Prime Minister. This was quickly reflected in the opinion polls. To the question "Who would you think would be the best Prime Minister?" asked by YouGov during the month of August, Starmer came out on top for the first time (34%), ahead of Johnson (32%).
Keir Starmer knew that he was disadvantaged: the dashing Boris Johnson is more charismatic, more political, more cynical, more cunning, more instinctive and a better orator than he is. He understood that there was no point in attacking him, as Corbyn did, with an ideological or moral straitjacket - which Johnson does not have and could not care less about. Modestly, Starmer simply took aim at Johnson’s three weak spots: his arrogance, his laziness, and his ignorance.
Add new comment