My language there's NO need to parse;
Starmer's talents are meager and sparse.
Not modest, like Attlee,*
I say, outright flatly,
Old Starmer's a full-fledgéd arse.

* who had "much to be modest about."

Both male.

Not even close. Churchill would have told Trump what he thought of him without blinking an eye.

Nothing. He's never changed political parties, never ordered soldiers to shoot at strikers, never lived in a palace, didn't go to public school, never fought in the army, not a heavy drinker (as far as I know), isn't a great orator, has kept his distance from other people's wars (so far), etc etc

Churchill was the right man at the time. History will judge Starmer more objectively than is possible now.

Well both of them have destroy Britain. Does that count? Yes I know Winnie is still held as a hero who destroyed Nazism and the Yanks feel the same about FDR who they think defeated Japan. Both Winnie and FDR were the reason they got into a war. Sadly Britain came out much worse the wear.

Did Starmer also commit genocide in India?