If Starmer gets in he'll be watched like a hawk by the right wing press, the labour voters expecting more and half his own party waiting for him to slip. The Tories get more leeway from the electorate so if he's as unproductive as them he'll be out after one term and back in the doldrums. Given this - and perhaps this is a skewed logic borne out of hopefulness - a Starmer administration might actually get stuff done given the chance.

I can understand his reticence because he'll be lambasted by the usual Tory election policy of "They'll be dressing your kids in donkey jackets next" which is enough for some people to vote for the more of the same.

I'm 52 and can't remember Wilson in 74 so the only Labour leader, to my memory, who's won an election is a centrist, and he went and got the backing of Murdoch, an option I don't think is open to Starmer. In 97 people were completely bored of the Tories and wanted change. Now they change every five minutes in order to look like it's all refreshed. We can't assume it won't work again.

That article in the link, by the way, was embittered, ad hominem bollocks.