Long-standing readers will know that this newsletter takes a dim view of knee-jerk comparisons between UK and US politics. Yes, America is a big, powerful and frankly weird place and we should absolutely not be strangers. But as liberal democracies go, our two nations could scarcely be more different.
It is a particularly jarring habit when you consider that, on a clear day and with a decent pair of binoculars, Britons can see other real-life constitutional monarchies from the Kent coast. But on the day after a former US president and presumptive Republican nominee was convicted of 34 counts relating to hush money payments to a porn star, I am prepared to suspend the rules.
Not least because, ever since reading this typically incisive column by The Times' Patrick Maguire at silly o'clock last night, all I've been able to think about is the US Supreme Court in general and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in particular. Now, I have instinctive affection for small-statured but big-hearted Jewish women from New York. But Ginsburg, who passed away at the age of 87, just days before the 2020 US presidential election, made a republic-defining miscalculation.
Had Ginsburg stood down during the Obama administration, which for six of its eight years enjoyed a majority in the Senate that confirms judicial nominees, she would have been replaced by a fellow liberally-minded justice. Instead, she took her chances and got Neil Gorsuch. And two years later, following the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Americans lost their constitutional right to abortion.
While the stakes may be lower on this side of the Atlantic, try telling that to Corbynsceptic MPs, a decent chunk of whom could have retired at the 2019 election but chose not to, because they did not want to risk bequeathing their seats to a Corbynite successor. That is because while Labour selections are customarily subject to low skullduggery, when an election is called, the leader and National Executive Committee gain the power to impose candidates on local parties.
That is one reason why so many MPs (125 at the time of counting) are retiring at this election. On the Tory side, it is a result of many having taken one look at the polls and concluded they have no chance of keeping their seats. For Labour, it is because a fair number already stayed on for an additional parliament. And in contrast to Ginsburg, their decision has paid dividends.
These retirements – alongside the many seats Labour is expected to pick up – have granted Starmer the opportunity to remake the Labour Party in his own image. Consequently, whether or not a political philosophy called Starmer-ism emerges over the next few years, British politics is guaranteed something new: a cohort of Starmer-ites. That is, people who owe their political advancement to the man.
The vast majority of whom just happen to be ideological bedfellows. Out are Lloyd Russell-Moyle and Faiza Shaheen (though as of 2pm today, not Diane Abbott). Replaced by the likes of Mark Ferguson (who ran Liz Kendall's 2015 leadership campaign). James Asser (NEC member) and Chris Ward (a former Starmer deputy chief of staff). The website LabourList has a useful tally here.
From renationalising the railways to taxing private schools, Starmer is avowedly un-Third Way when it comes to policy. But over the last few days, the Labour leader has enthusiastically endorsed a classic Blairite maxim: that he's at his best when at his boldest.
