In 2019 Labour suffered a catastrophic defeat to an authoritarian, populist party, sailing the waves of Brexit into number 10.
Understandably, many in the Labour Party thought it was time for change, toward electability and winning. It was thought at the time that a more establishment figure, but with the same or similar radical politics would be the answer to Labour’s woes. I myself toyed with this idea, but on balance realised that Sir Keir was being supported by some very shady people and could not be trusted with the party.
In the 2020 leadership campaign, Keir Starmer presented himself as an electable version of former leader Jeremy Corbyn. He promised to keep the radical elements of the Corbyn leadership and assured the members that he was a friend of Corbyn’s, not an enemy. He promised that he would not do interviews with The Sun, he would nationalise utility companies, he would promote party unity and would end factionalism.
Following his convincing win, he has done the exact opposite of all of these promises. It is worth remembering that Sir Keir won the leadership with 40% of the votes from people who voted for Jeremy Corbyn for a second time, following the coup.
There are some who would never have accepted Sir Keir after he won, but I was open to it despite not wanting him to win. The things he promised were objectively good things, such as party unity, nationalisation, higher taxes on the rich, I just knew that he would not deliver it, because ultimately he is a dishonest man.
Sir Keir has clearly moved the party to the right, he has categorically ruled out nationalising private companies, he has gone against tax rises on top income earners, he has categorically said that party unity is not important to him. He has also brought on board previous right wing advisors to shape the direction and strategy of the party.
Changing direction is what leaders do when they win on a mandate of changing direction. However, Sir Keir won on a mandate of keeping the direction broadly the same. One can argue that perhaps the direction should change, but that is not how Sir Keir won, therefore his leadership is now illegitimate because it was won on mistruths.
Trust and honesty matters for politicians on the left in a way that it doesn’t for politicians on the right. Take Nick Clegg for example, he won on a platform of centre left politics; abolishing tuition fees, being the key pledge.
When he changed direction and voted to triple them, his career was rightly ended and he will be considered a villain for the rest of his days.
Whereas, Boris Johnson’s personality is built on being a liar- people know he lies it’s all part of the brand. In my view Sir Keir is no different to Nick Clegg, or Boris Johnson, they are united in a un-holy trinity of lying to get elected and then doing the opposite of what they were elected to do.
Some might argue that the left of the Labour Party are a ‘far left cult of cranks’ and should be lied to and disregarded. However, if Sir Keir lied to the left to get elected, then how can he be trusted to not lie to the country to get elected. It’s also worth remembering that Sir Keir has promised to abolish tuition fees… can we really believe it this time? I certainly don’t. 
Overall, I think it is bizarre for a man to build his brand on honesty and integrity, which Sir Keir has done, only to lie and cheat people. In politics you need a unique selling point. Boris clearly has politically incorrect ‘humour’ and being a bit of a joker regardless of wether you like him or not. If Sir Keir wants to claim honesty and integrity, then why is step one lying and cheating the members to win, only to then break most of his promises?
Things that are going on 