Categories
Why Burnham shouldn’t be the favourite to succeed Starmer – politicalbetting.com
Why Burnham shouldn’t be the favourite to succeed Starmer – politicalbetting.com
Last year I opined on Twitter that there were several markets at once with odds which I’d usually call ‘Bet of the Year’. I’ve previously written about all but one of these: Andy Burnham to be next Labour Leader. He’s currently 7/2 or so at the bookies and a tad longer at exchanges, but he should be far far longer.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Drakeford and Sturgeon are politicians exploiting this sad human tendency to shore up their own popularity.
It has very little to do with public health and everything to do with politics.
I think there are now too many steps in the way for him. Not least is that should Starmer go down in 2023 to a decent but clear loss the clamour for this time it to be a woman will be deafening. Especially as there are clearly now at least three or four strong woman challengers.
I'd make Rayner favourite right now (but not a huge fave). She is there, she shows talent, she has confidence, she is different
But I think that Starmer will be around for a while yet. He hasn't got this far to just flake out.
Who was this towering female figure in the Labour Party so cruelly denied the leadership, despite her obvious suitability and superiority?
I don't get Quincel's logic here. Labour doing better has surely receded the chance that Starmer will be replaced before the general election and to be leader Burnham needs the next leadership election to be after the next general election. That looks more likely today than it did a few months ago when people were speculating that Starmer might need to be replaced.
Starmer being safer in his job is good news for Burnham backers, just as Boris being safer in his job is good news for Starmer as next PM backers (since if Boris loses his job first then Starmer can't be next PM).
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/01/omicron-mild-hospital-strain-health-care-workers/621193/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
After this succession of inept posh or posh-ish Tories, Cameron, May, Boris, absolutely why not a working class girl from Brum? She's got a sense of humour, she has a bit of sass. She needs to learn some debating skills, judging by PMQs; she is too genial, she needs to employ ruthlessness, but in desperation I might vote for her, if it came to it
This doesn't surprise me.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10380385/Dont-cry-Women-no-emotional-men.html
"Women are found to be no more emotional than men as a study claims both genders' emotions vary just as much - and men's positive feelings may even yo-yo more
Study shows that women have no more emotional ups and downs than men
Researchers followed 142 people over two months and had them do daily survey
Across the 75 days they found men’s emotions varied just as much as women’s"
Although the chances of it being in 2023 rather than later are now slipping massively imho as the Tories will try and cling on until the cost of living crisis passes.
OTOH, given past form, if you were playing guess the winner it might be a good idea to begin by working out the most likely white male candidate to amass the necessary signatures? After Burnham, Wes Streeting is the current betting favourite from that cohort by some margin, AFAIK he's completely untainted by association with the Corbyn regime, and his seat is located in North London which is Labour's special safe space. Apparently available at 16/1, if you're a gambler, which I rarely am.
I know it's some time ago, but the last time Burnham stood for Labour leader his campaign was woefully lacking. He has improved a lot, but maybe not enough? Nandy is a better bet, I think - the UK's Jacinda Ardern.
The longer it runs, the more chance of Burnham being a candidate in it.
@cjsnowdon
·
1h
‘Adam Finn, professor of paediatrics at the University of Bristol and a member of the JCVI, told The Telegraph that from this data "you might be able to cautiously conclude that restrictions are not the complete answer to this particular wave".’ 😆
That now looks less likely than before. So if Labour does win and Starmer becomes PM the Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves or Shadow Home Secretary may be more likely to succeed him. If Labour dips in the polls again and Starmer is replaced before the next general election as they are already in parliament and the Shadow Cabinet they would also be better placed to replace him.
Having said that Burnham probably has a more natural connection to the redwall than Starmer or any other top tier Labour figure. So if Starmer Labour loses popularity in that crucial area again (it seems to have made big advances back in the redwall in recent months) then he is the man who could reconnect with it. In the meantime he can focus on being Mayor of Greater Manchester, a role that gives him more real power now than Starmer or any of the Labour frontbench have while they remain in opposition
RedfieldWilton has Boris leading Rayner by 16% on a hypothetical best PM poll, Burnham trails Boris by 5% and Starmer leads Boris by 1%
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1473007807989526528?s=20
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1473002773453185034?s=20
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1472992707501080581?s=20
I just don't see how Labour can hope to get away with yet another white male leader, the 827th in a row. At some point it becomes untenable, and we are at that point, the Tories have had two women and the likely Tory successor to Boris, as of now, is a teetotal Borrower of Indian origin, and two foot high, and the alternative is a weirdly hot MILF
Btw. Keep sharing the articles. Yours are usually thought provoking. More often provoking.
Rayner has a really impressive backstory, having fought through all that to be where she is
A hint of Thatcher, perhaps
‘Scots did not 'flock' to England for Hogmanay amid coronavirus restrictions, data shows’
https://www.scotsman.com/health/coronavirus/covid-scotland-scots-did-not-flock-to-england-for-hogmanay-amid-coronavirus-restrictions-data-shows-3519013
1. There is more time for his star to fade, and someone else to overtake him as the heir apparent; and
2. The more likely it is for Starmer to win the election (since the Tories delaying it is presumably a sign they aren't in as strong a position as if they went for a snap election), and in such a scenario Burnham is much less likely to replace him as leader since so much more time would pass when Burnham could become one of an old generation and new figures could gain prominence.
Hendon
Have already agreed with a bunch of previous comments (including by Quincel) because I think they tease out some additional worthy points.
My own tiny, flickering flame, is that, while Starmer is probably safe from getting heaved out in foreseeable future, it seems to me possible he MIGHT just decide to hand it up? He certainly does NOT appear to be having a whole lot of fun at the moment, or at any time really since he was elected Labour leader.
But maybe ain't what you'd call a fun-loving guy?
Another thing that strikes me, is that Labour has finally started developing a bench worthy of prime time. For about first time since Gordo went splat?
factopinion. The mistake Starmer made was making Nandy Shadow FS in the first place - she's much better off shadowing Gove at levelling up. You underestimate her, I think, but we'll see.Unless it all kicks off in Ukraine, no voter gives a flying feck who is shadow foreign sec.
People are assuming that Starmer will lose the next election, but what if he gets a labour a majority? Not impossible, based on the current polls. I think the variables are many, so this isn't something that I would bet on.
There were a few. But many fewer than normal.
Yes, Burnham has been excellent. An interesting dovish voice that reflects the views of most urban Labourites - and of course many non-Labour voters too.
I'm not getting over-excited about this, because I have never voted Labour. Indeed I utterly despise the party and all it stands for, and I would rather vote for Vlad Dracul's nastier cousin, but the last time I had these vague weird stirrings was with Blair - "you know, I could vote for him". I never did, but millions like me really did, and Labour won huge majorities
Mainly it is just her identity: white working class single mum with an illiterate mother. Jeez. Well done her. Seriously! Sends a great message to a lot of disenfranchised people, YOU CAN DO IT
Also she seems to have something about her. An air. Dunno. Sass? Maybe nothing. But it is there. I can imagine her talking patriotically (with all the caveats) and I can imagine me nodding along, thinking, Yeah, Ange, go for it
We've had a long, enervating parade of public school Tories. It is time for A Comp Girl
Which is the absolute sine qua non for him to be even on the ballot.
Rayner did not even do A Levels nor did she have a career of much note before becoming MP. Yes she had a tough backstory but so did many other people
Now she isn't and Lammy, Reeves and Cooper are instead Starmer's top tier
The other thing time does, from a purely practical betting perspective, is make it more likely that some event/swing occurs in the betting markets so you can trade out for a good profit. I think the chances of Burnham just sitting majestically at the top of the market for several years is pretty low. So even if he did become leader following a 2024 election defeat for Labour you would likely have good opportunities to cash out for profit anyway.
I ask this question (as a bald person) because whenever I see his pic, this question springs to mind. Which raises further questions re: possible impact on voters?
Wearing a rug is NOT the kiss of death politically. Especially if only your wig-maker knows for sure!
FYI, this ain't knocking Burnham. Of whom I know next to nothing, except that he's in Labour terms a moderate (I think?) which I tend to like in my center-left politicos these days.
EDIT - Should note that I do on occasion feel intense, unreasoning rage at non-youngish men with great hair!
Lots of single mums with illiterate mothers do well, despite the odds, and good for them, few achieve what Rayner has already done - and bravo to her
I don't want to overdo the adulation, she is a horrible lefty, but if she wins it might be good for the country, and do more for levelling up than any high speed train line to Doncaster
And on that uncharacteristically generous note, night night PB
It is the blatant bullshitting on PB that is so irksome. Loudmouth know-it-alls pointing the finger and laughing at Scotland and Wales when clearly they haven’t got the faintest clue what they are talking about. The Hogmanay exodus nonsense went on for days and days. Blatant lies.
She’s good at the despatch box in infrequent doses, but I don’t see that she has the nous or the ideas to be a good Loto or PM, although I can see her in the Prescott role. Reeves is the one.
No one cares about your Highers once you have your degree.
But that said, who cares. Birmingham, Glasgow, Sunderland, Swindon, Plymouth, they're all up north and they're all toilets, whence it is frankly amazing people emerge vaguely literate
He's had a complete transformation since becoming mayor. He oozes confidence away from New Labour spin doctors. For whom he was the great young hope to continue the never ending reign.
Looks much better when he gets to choose his own clobber too. Cool Dad rather than another shiny suit
That is my honest admission. Make of it what you will
Some people might say that it was bigger deal than being a chemist & tax attorney.
Rayner is just a female John Prescott, nothing more
(And iSAGE is shit branding for a group of scientists in this Time of Global Warming.....it makes it look like they are being perverse for the sake of it.
Oh.)
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1473007807989526528?s=20
Personally find it unbelievable - yet know plenty of cases where it really is the Real McCoy!
I'm pretty sure you were drinking a toast to a return to your roots in the Marches just before xmas.
All that plastic ain't good for the environment.
The equivalent for someone from that background would be astronaut, self made billionaire or something
That nails it.
Not just a bit skint, but frantically worrying about all the next bills, can we get through to the end of the month, will we get evicted, etc. This is the lived experience of many many people - and it is scarring and sometimes harrowing (I recommend the memoir Once In A House On Fire for an eloquent glimpse of fairly modern British urban poverty); it looks like Rayner may well have seen that
That would make her unique in British prime ministers (she should become so) since..... fuck knows. Major maybe? But maybe completely unique in being a single mum as well
A no-brainer? (trading bet, not hold)
Surely be well under EVS when the May council election results roll in.
On the other hand, plenty others disrespect, dislike or distrust the powers-that-be and are motivated politically & electorally accordingly.
One great secret of practical politics, is being able to balance and combine these two elements. Reason for much of the success of FDR, Churchill, Thatcher, Reagan, Blair & Obama.
More seriously, very few people are up to the job, and that's about a lot of things that are hard to predict and measure.
But apply the "Imagine X is Prime Minister. Do you sleep soundly?" test. On the government benches, Boris fails that test. Sunak passes, so does Hunt; Javid, Truss and Gove maybe... that's about it, I think.
For Labour, Starmer would send you to sleep, but that sleep would be peaceful. Nandy and Reeves might pass it, I don't know them well enough. I don't think Rayner does, and I don't see that changing.
London: 51.5072 degrees north
Swindon: 51.5558 degrees north