Only if he can ostracize momentum. Get his core centre left base back on side. Far left will drag him in the same direction as corbyn went. Down.

In a way principles is what it's all about but only if a majority have the same ones where politics are involved.

That’s one take on it. It’s not particularly mine.

I like Starmer though and think he comes across 100 times better than Corbyn, but then that’s not difficult.

"It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit

What was your take then Tom? From my perspective BoJo get totally kebabbed by Starmer.

Vive le Roy!

PMQ's are up there with Question Time in terms of being meaningless frivolity. A version of boxing for nerds with each side trying to claim victories that mean nothing in the wider electoral context where it truly matters.

How or what Starmer is and represents will not be apparent until at least the Labour conference and maybe even beyond. I would guess that this current Covid-19 crisis offers him both a blessing and a curse.

And so far no polling shows any kind of significant bounce. To be fair to him, he is showing at least some political nous in that there are no points to be scored, as things stand, for constant slagging off. The public mood is more about national unity rather than the usual slings and arrows. Many of the Corbynites seem to struggle with that but such is life.

However, as it becomes more and more apparent what a complete stab in the back the entire Peoples Vote campaign was given that it condemned Labour, and therefore Corbyn, to defeat in December 2019 then those little Corbies aint going to just sit back.

We do not live in normal times. And until Starmer has been through a year of the usual s***, he cannot be judged.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Starmer's shadow Health secretary is good, Jon Ashworth, but he had his 'health and social care' shadow on C4 last night , Liz Kendall - I thought it wud be revealing that someone given that responsibility at this time must be someone Starmer either rates really highly or trusts completely - she was very disappointing though, just parroting the party line and answering specific questions with meaningless generalizations - disappointing, thought she might be one of those engaging bright sparks, she was more like a New Labour robot - all compliance and f*ck all else, I suppose you need a few of those but she was clearly under orders and it showed, too much of that cud well turn voters off - too much control and propaganda, other posters pointed out some bizarre looking Starmer appointments, though I thought those posters were too selective with their evidence, this is the first thing I'd call a negative re Starmer's leadership.