‘Jellyfish’ and ‘doormat’: why is Keir Starmer so deeply unpopular? | Keir Starmer

In another confusing and chaotic period of British politics, there’s one thing almost everyone can agree on: Keir Starmer is unpopular. It’s not very, very popular.

The net favorability ratio among those with an overall positive or negative view of the Prime Minister was between -50 and -57, depending on the pollster; this is the lowest level surpassed only by Liz Truss. Starmer’s recent focus group descriptions include a “jellyfish” and a “doormat”.

Perhaps most strikingly, the slightly wistful chant of “Keir Starmer’s a wanker”, accompanied by the inescapable tune of the Seven Nation Army, was heard not only in football stadiums but also at the world darts championship in January.

In a political world that has become increasingly atomized and feral, and fueled by social media algorithms, open discontent is perhaps more common than in the past. But even in this context, Starmer seems like an outlier.

The slightly more complicated question is why. Yes, Labor is weakening in party polls, but the party is generally scoring better than the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Greens; Unlike the leaders of these parties, they are not very popular.

While those who have worked with Starmer generally portray him as well-mannered and caring, but also very tough and focused, it may seem a bit anomalous to have such national disdain for a leader who even critical voters might see as quite soft.

At least there is an explanation for the raw disapproval figures. While the leaders are viewed favorably by their own party’s supporters, Starmer is not.

He came into 10th place with understandably strong support from 2024 Labor voters, but this has seemingly evaporated as a result of government mistakes and a policy framework aimed at chasing Reform rather than engaging the grassroots. The same goes for Liberal Democrat and Green voters.

However, Anthony Wells, YouGov’s head of politics and elections, says the shift from poll numbers to direct, visceral discontent can be difficult to explain. “People thought Rishi Sunak was doing a terrible job but there wasn’t that deeply personal element that you sometimes get with Starmer,” he said.

“He is very unpopular. The polls consistently show that. But the reasons for this – disappointment in the scale of the delivery and the feeling that he has little clear purpose – are not things you would expect to generate great antipathy.”

Lawmakers who routinely listen to local residents’ political views have various theories. Someone from the opposition party believes this may be partly due to herd mentality. “Nobody wants to be the one defending him. Once you’re deemed useless, there’s no going back,” they said.

One Labor MP, who has not always been a fan of the prime minister, says such harsh criticism is, to some extent, part of being in No 10: “I’ve knocked on the doors of every leader since Blair who said they would vote Labor if he wasn’t the leader of the party.”

But there are some recurring themes; firstly, the idea that voters are upset that Labour’s bold promises of change have not been delivered. “Some of my constituents feel betrayed, there is a belief that you have ruined things for them,” said one Labor candidate. One opposition MP explained: “The main theme from my constituents is that the public was sold a cub by him at the election.”

Luke Tryl, of pollster More in Common and who regularly appears in voter focus groups, says the anger at Starmer is partly structural, in that he has “become a vehicle for conveying people’s frustration with the system”, but also personal, as he has failed to deliver on the promise of national renewal and oversee a drama-light, shoddy policy that is less intrusive into people’s lives.

Quick mistakes helped change the public mood. “I think there were two things that made him clear early on in voters’ minds as not only a little disappointing but also a fundamentally evil character, which were the freebies and the winter fuel,” Tryl said.

“Where the real anger comes from is the sense that ‘this is a change, this is something different’ is a lie. You have a combination of people who feel actively connected to the fact that they think everything is shit and that politics has failed to improve them for a long time.”

Then there is the man himself. Although Starmer originally came from a relatively modest background, Tryl says the knighthood he earned as director of public prosecutions meant many votes assumed he was privileged and disconnected.

“Someone said in a focus group before the election: ‘At least Tony Benn has given up his title.’ “It’s as if they see Keir’s chivalry as hereditary,” he said.

Add to that the attitude and demeanor that even Starmer’s closest allies would agree with, and it can be deflating. Tryl says that in recent focus groups, particularly around people singled out as Starmer supporters, there was a view that he did not have enough passion.

One person who works very closely with Starmer says he can be engaging and funny in private but finds it difficult to show his emotions in a professional setting.

“I guess he’s the classic bright high school student and because of his professional background, he really thinks it’s about working hard and getting things done,” they said. “He was never very comfortable with the idea that a lot of it was about being looser and baring your soul.

“But he’s also one of the toughest people I’ve ever met. It’s not that he’s unaware of what people say or that he’s insensitive to them. It’s not that it doesn’t bother him. It’s that he has an incredible ability to move forward in an incredible way.”

Sometimes people can be rewarded for continuing. In an update on Friday, YouGov’s latest favorability poll for Starmer showed a ten-point increase on the previous month, showing Starmer at just -47.

With Labor MPs polling in the wake of Monday’s near-riot, it’s possible some voters now feel he should be given a chance.

But it could also just be a blip, and Starmer’s public persona could prove his downfall. As Tryl puts it: “One of my big macro theories about politics is that people relate better to politicians who appear to be enjoying the job, and respond quite badly to politicians who suffer from it.”