Skip to content

If after 10 years as PM Andy Burnham has these kinds of figures he'll be happy politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 13,255
edited 3:01PM in General
If after 10 years as PM Andy Burnham has these kinds of figures he'll be happy– politicalbetting.com

Greater Manchester residents believe Andy Burnham was particularly successful when it comes to transportTransport: 75% good jobEconomic growth: 46%Policing: 36%Housing: 31%yougov.com/en-gb/articl…

Read the full story here

«1

Comments

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066
    What we really need is the betting on a 'Burnham Day' where we traditionally throw stones at Lemons. I think it's nailed on.
  • ManchesterKurtManchesterKurt Posts: 1,075
    Omnium said:

    What we really need is the betting on a 'Burnham Day' where we traditionally throw stones at Lemons. I think it's nailed on.

    We already have a Manchester Day around here -> https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/family-kids-news/manchester-day-2026-date-theme-33680779
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,926
    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Yes! And Starmer wasn't a great villain.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,609
    edited 3:12PM
    He won't, Greater Manchester even voted for Corbyn overall. The Burnham bounce polling suggests he will only take Labour to Ed Miliband 2015 or Kinnock 1987 or Brown 2010 levels, certainly not to Blair 1997 and 2001 levels or even back to Starmer 2024 or Corbyn 2017 levels.

    He will be helped by the divide on the right between Tories and Reform though with FPTP, which might cool his desire for PR. Note too a slight majority of Tory voters in Manchester think he did a good job but Reform voters think he did a bad job
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066
    Boo!
  • bobbobbobbob Posts: 162
    edited 3:17PM

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Labour is polling at 18 per cent.

    If a business halved its market share in less than 18 months then the board would replace the ceo
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 59,540

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    And its not even the Tories. I remember when it was conventional wisdom that Labour Leaders were untouchable.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,709
    edited 3:18PM
    HYUFD said:

    He won't, Greater Manchester even voted for Corbyn overall. The Burnham bounce polling suggests he will only take Labour to Ed Miliband 2015 or Kinnock 1987 or Brown 2010 levels, certainly not to Blair 1997 and 2001 levels or even back to Starmer 2024 or Corbyn 2017 levels.

    He will be helped by the divide on the right between Tories and Reform though with FPTP, which might cool his desire for PR. Note too a slight majority of Tory voters in Manchester think he did a good job but Reform voters think he did a bad job

    I think Burnham did a good job in Manchester especially as he has a collegiate attitude to business working across all interested parties and politicians

    The unanswered question is can he move from being a successful mayor in a Labour city to being PM ?

    Time will tell
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066
    DavidL said:

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    And its not even the Tories. I remember when it was conventional wisdom that Labour Leaders were untouchable.
    That was undoubtedly true in the Foot era.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423
    Omnium said:

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Yes! And Starmer wasn't a great villain.
    Please. He wasn't even good in the 2 line speaking role as the security guard that Austin Powers accidentally runs over in Dr Evil's lair.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,526
    bobbob said:

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Labour is polling at 18 per cent.

    If a business halved its market share in less than 18 months then the board would replace the ceo
    Not polling at 18% today...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423
    Foxy said:

    bobbob said:

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Labour is polling at 18 per cent.

    If a business halved its market share in less than 18 months then the board would replace the ceo
    Not polling at 18% today...
    That's because of a market bounce due to the announcement of the new CEO
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066
    I think we ought to say well done to SKS. He really did try, and bafflingly failed in his role. Nearly, nearly,
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,592

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    If being shite is the metric, PM Farage is going to last mere minutes.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,592
    Omnium said:

    I think we ought to say well done to SKS. He really did try, and bafflingly failed in his role. Nearly, nearly,

    He hasn't gone yet.

    He failed because he was a terrible manager and an awful communicator. Everything else is secondary.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,526

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    If being shite is the metric, PM Farage is going to last mere minutes.
    As long as that? 😱
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066
    Can I nominate Keir Starmer for the PB politician of the year award?

    I'd also like to be on record as a big backer for Burnham - "hopeless noddy of the year award".
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,687

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    We haven't. He hasn't been 'a bit shit', he's been the worst Prime Minister in living memory.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,526

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    We haven't. He hasn't been 'a bit shit', he's been the worst Prime Minister in living memory.
    Only if you are a goldfish*!

    *I recognise that possibly goldfish have better memories than urban myths give them credit for.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,859
    Gary Sobers dead. RIP
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,686
    Andy_JS said:

    Reform gain from Labour
    Norfolk Police and Crime Commissioner by-election

    Ref 32,647
    Con 18,343
    Green 16,907
    Ind Pearcey 16,402
    Lab 14,192
    Restore 13,319
    LD 10,499

    Ref 26.69%
    Con 15.00%
    Green 13.82%
    Ind Pearcey 13.41%
    Lab 11.60%
    Restore 10.89%
    LD 8.58%

    A fascinating result! Reform win with a good margin: a good result for them despite all the predictions that they are now declining.

    I can't decide whether Restore's 11% is good or bad. 11% for a minor, far right party is more than such parties usually get, but this is their homeland, so only coming 6th doesn't look good. Reform won this comfortably regardless of them.

    This was the last mayoral/PCC election to be held under FPTP and it shows the failures of FPTP in a multiparty system. Reform won easily, but only got 27%. 27% would only have been third in 2024, when only 4 parties stood. The biggest question in UK psephology is whether voters at the next general election get their tactical act together or not. Reform are beatable in most places.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 9,685


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay erasure, not that it did her any good.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,203

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    Why? What was in the vetting that was not in the papers from decades earlier? As Diane Abbott said, it's Peter Mandelson.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,845

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    And the Labour MP's have basically all signed up to this, and hitched their cart to Burnham. No contest, so if it all goes wrong they all go down together.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 5,679

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    And the Labour MP's have basically all signed up to this, and hitched their cart to Burnham. No contest, so if it all goes wrong they all go down together.
    Maybe, but there are so many of them they will still see out their full term.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,845
    Omnium said:

    I think we ought to say well done to SKS. He really did try, and bafflingly failed in his role. Nearly, nearly,

    Do you think he still doesn't really understand what's gone wrong?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066
    carnforth said:


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay erasure, not that it did her any good.
    She had the opportunity to be a good PM. Her problem was her friends.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,592
    ydoethur said:

    algarkirk said:

    Gary Sobers dead. RIP

    Now there was a truly great cricketer.
    https://youtu.be/YgLfVjwCC0w?is=NwAmt_K3mc6Yf39x

    And Malcolm Nash wasn't too shabby either.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 9,685
    Groucho club MP found not guilty:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9323zddvwko
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,859
    Omnium said:

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Yes! And Starmer wasn't a great villain.
    Omnium said:

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Yes! And Starmer wasn't a great villain.
    However all the PMs who have survived well and long since the modern media age began have been great on leadership quality. Thatcher, Blair, Cameron. Burnham has it. It isn't sufficient but it is necessary for anything beyond a sense that a person is serving an interim term until a proper leader comes along. Boris had it but still failed lamentably. Burnham could easily fail because of known events already and unknowns to come.

    For me the indicator is psychological. Toes don't curl when great leaders have a tough task/speech/debate.

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066

    Omnium said:

    I think we ought to say well done to SKS. He really did try, and bafflingly failed in his role. Nearly, nearly,

    Do you think he still doesn't really understand what's gone wrong?
    Well, do you?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    Why? What was in the vetting that was not in the papers from decades earlier? As Diane Abbott said, it's Peter Mandelson.
    No papers crossed the PMs desk. What was known was kept away from him. That's the point.

    You can have leadership, ownership of risk. Or you can have plausible deniability and fire subordinates for what you told them not to tell you.

    You can't have both.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,592

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    We haven't. He hasn't been 'a bit shit', he's been the worst Prime Minister in living memory.
    And you a fan of Liz Truss. How did you come to forget her?
  • AramintaMoonbeamQCAramintaMoonbeamQC Posts: 4,192

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    The Mandelson thing just made him look spineless, he went with the I was following advice line - it doesn't wash when you used to be in charge of the CPS.

    He has shit judgement e.g. he didn't see the Winter Fuel Allowance cut as an issue until it was an issue. Ultimately, he was weak and shit, which is not survivable unless the economy is booming. If you haven't used your blockbuster mandate to start fixing the basics, then what the hell are you using it for?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,845
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I think we ought to say well done to SKS. He really did try, and bafflingly failed in his role. Nearly, nearly,

    Do you think he still doesn't really understand what's gone wrong?
    Well, do you?
    I 'think' I know why he has been removed, but I wonder if he has the self awareness to understand. He is surely a clever guy. But imagine being told in, say, 2023 that he would be sat there this weekend, two years after winning a huge majority, about to resign from being PM. You wouldn't believe it. And it still feels weird.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423
    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    I think we ought to say well done to SKS. He really did try, and bafflingly failed in his role. Nearly, nearly,

    Do you think he still doesn't really understand what's gone wrong?
    Well, do you?
    How about don't dance on your supporters dreams in big boots while telling them they should like it?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RXID8yMkTo
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,522

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    We haven't. He hasn't been 'a bit shit', he's been the worst Prime Minister in living memory.
    Ah so you're only a toddler then. That does explain a few things.
  • interestedinterested Posts: 56

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    The Mandelson thing just made him look spineless, he went with the I was following advice line - it doesn't wash when you used to be in charge of the CPS.

    He has shit judgement e.g. he didn't see the Winter Fuel Allowance cut as an issue until it was an issue. Ultimately, he was weak and shit, which is not survivable unless the economy is booming. If you haven't used your blockbuster mandate to start fixing the basics, then what the hell are you using it for?
    I attach a pretty big chunk of the reason for his demise to the impractical dogma of his backbenchers.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,845
    carnforth said:

    Groucho club MP found not guilty:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9323zddvwko

    Yet another example where anonymity ought to be allowed for the accused.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 3,402
    carnforth said:


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay erasure, not that it did her any good.
    So social care, dementia effectively self-funded but what's he going to do?
    It's already eye-wateringly expensive for local councils and the individual, councils can't pay more so is he going to ask the fortunate pensioners to contribute towards care for the unfortunate?

    A return to state/council run care homes run not-for-profit rather than PE?
    Just been through this, local Bupa 70-80% of the other private homes, surprise me until I realised Bupa are not-for-profit.
    Still 70-80K per annum from net income / savings.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 23,880
    RIP Sir Garfield Sobers

    Only ever saw him live once at Ilkeston where he scores a ton vs Derbyshire in quick time

    What a player
  • MattWMattW Posts: 34,034
    We can see the attack line Right press will be taking (per the Telegraph):

    "Burnham will take us back to the 1970s."

    (Side note: ~40% of UK population were born before 1980. Yes, PB - you ARE as senior as you feel.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,902
    ydoethur said:

    algarkirk said:

    Gary Sobers dead. RIP

    Now there was a truly great cricketer.
    I hadn't realised he should have been caught on the boundary with that fifth six, though.
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/17/west-indies-cricket-great-sir-garry-sobers-dies

    Top bloke.
    ..He famously declared in 1968 in Trinidad leaving England, led by Colin Cowdrey, 215 to win in 165 minutes.
    The match was lost by seven wickets and there was something of a furore in the Caribbean but Sobers was unrepentant. “That series was so boring,” he said. “The first three Tests had been drawn. England were bowling something like 12 or 13 overs per hour. I was so fed up and this wasn’t what I thought of as cricket”...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,592

    carnforth said:

    Groucho club MP found not guilty:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9323zddvwko

    Yet another example where anonymity ought to be allowed for the accused.
    I suspect I would have packed an overnight bag if my defence was as sturdy as that one looked.

    Taking ones chance with a jury is why Burnham will overturn Lammy.
  • StarryStarry Posts: 233

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    We haven't. He hasn't been 'a bit shit', he's been the worst Prime Minister in living memory.
    What are you doing on here if you're not old enough to vote? If you were out of primary school, you would have remembered Truss, Boris and Cameron's second term. Those with longer memories will remember Thatcher (except for those in the south-east) and Callahan. Wrecking the country is much worse than being profoundly unambitious with a stonking majority.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423
    Dopermean said:

    carnforth said:


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay erasure, not that it did her any good.
    So social care, dementia effectively self-funded but what's he going to do?
    It's already eye-wateringly expensive for local councils and the individual, councils can't pay more so is he going to ask the fortunate pensioners to contribute towards care for the unfortunate?

    A return to state/council run care homes run not-for-profit rather than PE?
    Just been through this, local Bupa 70-80% of the other private homes, surprise me until I realised Bupa are not-for-profit.
    Still 70-80K per annum from net income / savings.
    I still recall, many years ago, a conversation with a very hard lefty, who wanted to murder all the "Bupa shareholders". He found it really surprising that I was giggling as he ranted.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 34,034
    edited 4:12PM

    RIP Sir Garfield Sobers

    Only ever saw him live once at Ilkeston where he scores a ton vs Derbyshire in quick time

    What a player

    Indeed. A great.

    But Ilkeston as a place for famous historic cricket encounters? Who knew?

    Here's mine from within a couple of miles of where the parents lived.

    During Derbyshire’s match against Warwickshire at Blackwell Colliery Cricket ground in 1910, which was to end in a draw, Arnold shared a nine wicket partnership of 283 runs with the Captain, John Chapman. Arnold scoring 123 runs and Chapman 160. This was a world record for first class cricket and has never been beaten. There is a plaque commemorating this event in Blackwell community centre.
    https://www.spanglefish.com/bmwcc/index.asp?pageid=197865

    It still stands:
    https://stats.acscricket.com/Records/First_Class/Overall/Batting/Highest_Partnerships_for_Ninth_Wicket.html
  • AramintaMoonbeamQCAramintaMoonbeamQC Posts: 4,192

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    The Mandelson thing just made him look spineless, he went with the I was following advice line - it doesn't wash when you used to be in charge of the CPS.

    He has shit judgement e.g. he didn't see the Winter Fuel Allowance cut as an issue until it was an issue. Ultimately, he was weak and shit, which is not survivable unless the economy is booming. If you haven't used your blockbuster mandate to start fixing the basics, then what the hell are you using it for?
    I attach a pretty big chunk of the reason for his demise to the impractical dogma of his backbenchers.
    He's got a split of lobby fodder, who will vote for any old shit until they get bollocked by their constituents (Winter Fuel Allowance cut) and the mad/delusional/anyone to the right of Jezza is a Tory/Fascist/Capitalist running dog (hence they shat it on the welfare reforms and ditched the two child cap).

    It was quite a ragbag to hold together, but you need to have gumption to do it, which SKS did not.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 73,263
    carnforth said:


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay erasure, not that it did her any good.

    megan kenyon
    @meganekenyon

    Notable to hear Burnham pledge to fix social care in his acceptance speech. Last party leader to do so so explicitly was Boris Johnson (his promise to end crisis in social care "once and for all" in 2019). A notoriously difficult issue to tackle - Johnson tried with his health and social care levy but it was scrapped by his successors. Big trade off that we can never seem to work out -- who pays and how? Starmer kicked the can down the road with the Casey review. Will be interesting to see how a Burnham government tries to tackle it.

    https://x.com/meganekenyon/status/2078121426398146897
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,941
    Foxy said:

    bobbob said:

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Labour is polling at 18 per cent.

    If a business halved its market share in less than 18 months then the board would replace the ceo
    Not polling at 18% today...
    Averaging 21% atm.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,686
    edited 4:21PM

    carnforth said:


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay erasure, not that it did her any good.

    megan kenyon
    @meganekenyon

    Notable to hear Burnham pledge to fix social care in his acceptance speech. Last party leader to do so so explicitly was Boris Johnson (his promise to end crisis in social care "once and for all" in 2019). A notoriously difficult issue to tackle - Johnson tried with his health and social care levy but it was scrapped by his successors. Big trade off that we can never seem to work out -- who pays and how? Starmer kicked the can down the road with the Casey review. Will be interesting to see how a Burnham government tries to tackle it.

    https://x.com/meganekenyon/status/2078121426398146897
    Japan introduced a mandatory Long-Term Care Insurance system to pay for social care in 2000. It's effectively a ring-fenced tax???, only paid from age 40. Social care is then paid out of the funds raised + general taxation, with some means-tested out-of-pocket payments.

    The Nuffield Trust have a report on it and what it could teach us in the UK: https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/2018-05/1525856899_learning-from-japan-final.pdf
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 23,296
    10 years for Andy as PM?

    He may not get ten months if we have a bond strike in the next few weeks...
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 60,519
    carnforth said:


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay Erasure, not that it did her any good.
    "I try to discover
    A little something to make me sweeter
    Oh, baby, refrain
    From breaking my heart
    I'm so in love with you
    I'll be forever blue
    That you give me no reason
    Why you make a me work so hard"
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,245
    Omnium said:

    I think we ought to say well done to SKS. He really did try, and bafflingly failed in his role. Nearly, nearly,

    I think otherwise. It's an important job and you don't get participation prizes.

    The best that can be said of him is that he was politer than Truss. But Truss had a view of the world and a willingness to execute policies to further that view. She only lacked the political skills to command consent and reassure other powers, so she died rapidly. But Starmer had no view other than to follow the law, which is nice for an eight year old but not for the PM.

    Labour have got to stop putting fools into positions of power. They don't know how to do the job, don't know how to organise and command consent of 400+ MPs, and...well I'll stop because I've ranted about this before. And if he thinks he deserves the NATO job he can just eff the eff off, because he's simply not up to it.
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,601

    Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but credit to the Free Speech Union for standing by their principles

    'The Free Speech Union has said that, should Heather Herbert join the Free Speech Union, we would do our best to help him.

    Heather Herbert posted a vile and deeply offensive statement on the social media platform BlueSky about the tragic murder of Ann Widdecombe.

    The University of Aberdeen employee has now been arrested and charged over his offensive comments.

    While the Free Speech Union does not support Heather’s offensive comments about Ann — a dear late friend of the FSU — it is not an offence, no matter how offensive, to speak ill of the dead.

    Ann was a staunch defender of our fundamental right to free speech, and we very much doubt she would have supported Police Scotland’s actions.'

    This isn’t a Damascene conversion. They’ve offered help to people whatever side of the debate they’re on.

    I did smile at one of this accused persons followers saying they shouldn’t speak to the FSU or seek their help as they are ‘fascists’
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 8,532

    carnforth said:


    Ben Kentish
    @BenKentish
    Andy Burnham specifically mentions social care as a “neglected” issue he wants to address. Let’s see what he actually does about it but hallelujah at hearing a politician who isn’t Ed Davey even talking about one of the worst, and least talked about, failures of the British state.

    https://x.com/BenKentish/status/2078083822789259760

    TMay erasure, not that it did her any good.

    megan kenyon
    @meganekenyon

    Notable to hear Burnham pledge to fix social care in his acceptance speech. Last party leader to do so so explicitly was Boris Johnson (his promise to end crisis in social care "once and for all" in 2019). A notoriously difficult issue to tackle - Johnson tried with his health and social care levy but it was scrapped by his successors. Big trade off that we can never seem to work out -- who pays and how? Starmer kicked the can down the road with the Casey review. Will be interesting to see how a Burnham government tries to tackle it.

    https://x.com/meganekenyon/status/2078121426398146897
    He’ll kick the can down the road when he realises no one’s interested in hearing uncomfortable truths ! Or he could do something a bit left field . Do a review which delivers several options and then put it to a referendum . He can then blame the public . I admit it’s not exactly showing great leadership but he could end up burning through so much political capital on the Kryptonite of UK politics that people will yearn for the Starmer days !
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,151
    FPT - we haven't deployed a frigate or destroyer to the Falklands since 2015, and there are no chinooks anymore, so it's now just a river class patrol vessel, four typhoons (assuming they're all serviceable), a Voyager tanker (currently withdrawn due to Iran) and a roulement infantry company.

    The radar, anti-air and intelligence will be good, and the supplies are all there, but it's not much more than a trip wire now.

    It couldn't repel a serious attack.
  • PJHPJH Posts: 1,170

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    We haven't. He hasn't been 'a bit shit', he's been the worst Prime Minister in living memory.
    Only if your memory doesn't extend to 2022.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,633
    GIN1138 said:

    10 years for Andy as PM?

    He may not get ten months if we have a bond strike in the next few weeks...

    He may not get ten minutes if we have an asteroid strike on Monday... neither is terribly likely.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,522
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    algarkirk said:

    Gary Sobers dead. RIP

    Now there was a truly great cricketer.
    I hadn't realised he should have been caught on the boundary with that fifth six, though.
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/17/west-indies-cricket-great-sir-garry-sobers-dies

    Top bloke.
    ..He famously declared in 1968 in Trinidad leaving England, led by Colin Cowdrey, 215 to win in 165 minutes.
    The match was lost by seven wickets and there was something of a furore in the Caribbean but Sobers was unrepentant. “That series was so boring,” he said. “The first three Tests had been drawn. England were bowling something like 12 or 13 overs per hour. I was so fed up and this wasn’t what I thought of as cricket”...
    The fielder caught it but fell over the boundary rope. I actually remember it being shown on the tv. I was 7 and round at my grandparents. I used to visit often and always got a plate of gingernuts.
  • interestedinterested Posts: 56

    FPT - we haven't deployed a frigate or destroyer to the Falklands since 2015, and there are no chinooks anymore, so it's now just a river class patrol vessel, four typhoons (assuming they're all serviceable), a Voyager tanker (currently withdrawn due to Iran) and a roulement infantry company.

    The radar, anti-air and intelligence will be good, and the supplies are all there, but it's not much more than a trip wire now.

    It couldn't repel a serious attack.

    Yes but could Argentina muster a serious attack?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,203

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    Why? What was in the vetting that was not in the papers from decades earlier? As Diane Abbott said, it's Peter Mandelson.
    No papers crossed the PMs desk. What was known was kept away from him. That's the point.

    You can have leadership, ownership of risk. Or you can have plausible deniability and fire subordinates for what you told them not to tell you.

    You can't have both.
    No, the point is that Starmer should have known anyway, despite the contrived absence of a paper trail. And remember that what really offended Starmer was Mandelson leaking Cabinet secrets, which was discovered from the Epstein files, not vetting.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,816

    FPT - we haven't deployed a frigate or destroyer to the Falklands since 2015, and there are no chinooks anymore, so it's now just a river class patrol vessel, four typhoons (assuming they're all serviceable), a Voyager tanker (currently withdrawn due to Iran) and a roulement infantry company.

    The radar, anti-air and intelligence will be good, and the supplies are all there, but it's not much more than a trip wire now.

    It couldn't repel a serious attack.

    Yes but could Argentina muster a serious attack?
    Not easily, and it would be extremely hard to do it by surprise.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 5,130
    edited 4:33PM

    Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but credit to the Free Speech Union for standing by their principles

    'The Free Speech Union has said that, should Heather Herbert join the Free Speech Union, we would do our best to help him.

    Heather Herbert posted a vile and deeply offensive statement on the social media platform BlueSky about the tragic murder of Ann Widdecombe.

    The University of Aberdeen employee has now been arrested and charged over his offensive comments.

    While the Free Speech Union does not support Heather’s offensive comments about Ann — a dear late friend of the FSU — it is not an offence, no matter how offensive, to speak ill of the dead.

    Ann was a staunch defender of our fundamental right to free speech, and we very much doubt she would have supported Police Scotland’s actions.'

    Indeed. Preston Byrne (pro bono counsel to the FSU) is particularlly good on this point.

    Linehan shouldn't have been arrested for his "kick 'em in the balls" tweet (unless someone did, in fact, commit an s20 assault, in which case he is fair game as an accessory should there be a proven causal link between his tweet and the attacker).

    Speaking ill of the dead shouldn't be an offence either. It should also be remembered that Anne Widdecombe believed that trans women (at least those who have had "the op") are women, which is more than can be said for many regulars here.

    Since we're on #pbfreespeech, how do we feel about JK Rowling suing amnesty international for calling the 51 gender critical organisations listed in their recent report "anti rights" (Including an org that PB's resident terf is a member of)?

    I happen to disagree with the amnesty report and think it's massive overreach, but the correct response is rebuttal rather than trying to silence one's critics with lawfare.

    IMHO the UK needs to introduce US-style anti SLAPP legislation to prevent the super-rich from silencing their critics.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,902

    FPT - we haven't deployed a frigate or destroyer to the Falklands since 2015, and there are no chinooks anymore, so it's now just a river class patrol vessel, four typhoons (assuming they're all serviceable), a Voyager tanker (currently withdrawn due to Iran) and a roulement infantry company.

    The radar, anti-air and intelligence will be good, and the supplies are all there, but it's not much more than a trip wire now.

    It couldn't repel a serious attack.

    A serious attack from whom, and consisting of what ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,902
    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    algarkirk said:

    Gary Sobers dead. RIP

    Now there was a truly great cricketer.
    I hadn't realised he should have been caught on the boundary with that fifth six, though.
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/17/west-indies-cricket-great-sir-garry-sobers-dies

    Top bloke.
    ..He famously declared in 1968 in Trinidad leaving England, led by Colin Cowdrey, 215 to win in 165 minutes.
    The match was lost by seven wickets and there was something of a furore in the Caribbean but Sobers was unrepentant. “That series was so boring,” he said. “The first three Tests had been drawn. England were bowling something like 12 or 13 overs per hour. I was so fed up and this wasn’t what I thought of as cricket”...
    The fielder caught it but fell over the boundary rope. I actually remember it being shown on the tv. I was 7 and round at my grandparents. I used to visit often and always got a plate of gingernuts.
    Yes, there's a video of it on the link, which is why I said "should have been caught". Pretty average fielding.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 23,880

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    The Mandelson thing just made him look spineless, he went with the I was following advice line - it doesn't wash when you used to be in charge of the CPS.

    He has shit judgement e.g. he didn't see the Winter Fuel Allowance cut as an issue until it was an issue. Ultimately, he was weak and shit, which is not survivable unless the economy is booming. If you haven't used your blockbuster mandate to start fixing the basics, then what the hell are you using it for?
    I attach a pretty big chunk of the reason for his demise to the impractical dogma of his backbenchers.
    He's got a split of lobby fodder, who will vote for any old shit until they get bollocked by their constituents (Winter Fuel Allowance cut) and the mad/delusional/anyone to the right of Jezza is a Tory/Fascist/Capitalist running dog (hence they shat it on the welfare reforms and ditched the two child cap).

    It was quite a ragbag to hold together, but you need to have gumption to do it, which SKS did not.
    SKS hadnt got the gumption or inclination to keep anyone to the left of his Right Faction on board
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 37,203
    The Secret Security Threat The Government Don’t Want Us To Know.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJUKR99izKU

    Caroline Lucas hijacks The Rest is Politics. It's climate change, btw.

    Links to reports in the video notes.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    Why? What was in the vetting that was not in the papers from decades earlier? As Diane Abbott said, it's Peter Mandelson.
    No papers crossed the PMs desk. What was known was kept away from him. That's the point.

    You can have leadership, ownership of risk. Or you can have plausible deniability and fire subordinates for what you told them not to tell you.

    You can't have both.
    No, the point is that Starmer should have known anyway, despite the contrived absence of a paper trail. And remember that what really offended Starmer was Mandelson leaking Cabinet secrets, which was discovered from the Epstein files, not vetting.
    That was actually my point - that a proper investigation should have been done.

    Mandelbrot was sending emails out of his official account to his private account, complete with classified documents attached. etc. There was tons of stuff that would have been found by a real investigation.
  • interestedinterested Posts: 56

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    The Mandelson thing just made him look spineless, he went with the I was following advice line - it doesn't wash when you used to be in charge of the CPS.

    He has shit judgement e.g. he didn't see the Winter Fuel Allowance cut as an issue until it was an issue. Ultimately, he was weak and shit, which is not survivable unless the economy is booming. If you haven't used your blockbuster mandate to start fixing the basics, then what the hell are you using it for?
    I attach a pretty big chunk of the reason for his demise to the impractical dogma of his backbenchers.
    He's got a split of lobby fodder, who will vote for any old shit until they get bollocked by their constituents (Winter Fuel Allowance cut) and the mad/delusional/anyone to the right of Jezza is a Tory/Fascist/Capitalist running dog (hence they shat it on the welfare reforms and ditched the two child cap).

    It was quite a ragbag to hold together, but you need to have gumption to do it, which SKS did not.
    SKS hadnt got the gumption or inclination to keep anyone to the left of his Right Faction on board
    I guess you can look at it two ways. Either he didn’t have the gumption to keep the left on board or the left didn’t have the gumption to be realistic/practical.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,902
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT - we haven't deployed a frigate or destroyer to the Falklands since 2015, and there are no chinooks anymore, so it's now just a river class patrol vessel, four typhoons (assuming they're all serviceable), a Voyager tanker (currently withdrawn due to Iran) and a roulement infantry company.

    The radar, anti-air and intelligence will be good, and the supplies are all there, but it's not much more than a trip wire now.

    It couldn't repel a serious attack.

    Yes but could Argentina muster a serious attack?
    Not easily, and it would be extremely hard to do it by surprise.
    I suggested on the last thread we should set up a naval drone testing and training centre there; it would make any serious effort to land troops there almost impossible to plan.
    It's not that difficult to get kit there, as one thing the RAF does have is a decent number of A400s.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066
    The BBC are lumping on with the anti-Burnham idea. Obviously they're right, but quite bold.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,428
    GIN1138 said:

    10 years for Andy as PM?

    He may not get ten months if we have a bond strike in the next few weeks...

    On what basis would there be a 'bond strike' Gin? I think it's very unlikely Burnham will be Labour's Liz Truss.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,902
    The decline for nominations has passed in Clacton.
    https://www.tendringdc.gov.uk/content/13-august2026-election-of-member-of-parliament-to-the-clacton-constituency

    How soon do they publish the list of candidates ?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,824

    It still seems rather surreal - that we have got rid of PM Starmer for being "a bit shit". Future PMs are likely to last months rather than a couple of years, if that becomes the benchmark.

    Or we could have PMs who are not "a bit shit"

    The whining that he was hard done by is getting really boring.

    He had a huge majority, a fair amount of good will and he decide to piss it all away by not listening to his party and never taking responsibility for anything.

    Take The Mandelbrot comedy.

    Some, here, have suggested that it was an obvious use of a poacher to deal with a poacher. The problem is that in the desire Not To Know, Starmer made sure that Mandelbrot wasn't investigated fully. He knew, full well, what was going on down the chain. What Robbins was expected to do - not tell the PM bad news.

    But that's an absence of courage. An absence of leadership. A smart leader would have demanded a five hundred page dossier on Mandlebrot. Because the dirt is always there. If you don't want to know it, it just means that you will be last to know.

    A smart leader would have read it over a Scotch. Then rung Mandelbrot to tell him the bad news - medical retirement. maybe, but he'd have to pull out of being the US Ambassador.
    The Mandelson thing just made him look spineless, he went with the I was following advice line - it doesn't wash when you used to be in charge of the CPS.

    He has shit judgement e.g. he didn't see the Winter Fuel Allowance cut as an issue until it was an issue. Ultimately, he was weak and shit, which is not survivable unless the economy is booming. If you haven't used your blockbuster mandate to start fixing the basics, then what the hell are you using it for?
    I attach a pretty big chunk of the reason for his demise to the impractical dogma of his backbenchers.
    He's got a split of lobby fodder, who will vote for any old shit until they get bollocked by their constituents (Winter Fuel Allowance cut) and the mad/delusional/anyone to the right of Jezza is a Tory/Fascist/Capitalist running dog (hence they shat it on the welfare reforms and ditched the two child cap).

    It was quite a ragbag to hold together, but you need to have gumption to do it, which SKS did not.
    SKS hadnt got the gumption or inclination to keep anyone to the left of his Right Faction on board
    I guess you can look at it two ways. Either he didn’t have the gumption to keep the left on board or the left didn’t have the gumption to be realistic/practical.
    The social workers on the back benches need to enter the real world.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,816
    Nigelb said:

    The decline for nominations has passed in Clacton.
    https://www.tendringdc.gov.uk/content/13-august2026-election-of-member-of-parliament-to-the-clacton-constituency

    How soon do they publish the list of candidates ?

    Wait.

    There's more than one candidate?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 60,519
    The one saving grace of Andy Burnham is that his voice isn't annoying like Sir Keir's.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,423

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    The decline for nominations has passed in Clacton.
    https://www.tendringdc.gov.uk/content/13-august2026-election-of-member-of-parliament-to-the-clacton-constituency

    How soon do they publish the list of candidates ?

    Wait.

    There's more than one candidate?
    There were but the nominations have been put in the bin.
    That's just garbage.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,592
    GIN1138 said:

    10 years for Andy as PM?

    He may not get ten months if we have a bond strike in the next few weeks...

    Treacherous Tories wishing for economic collapse and a Trump invasion of the Falklands.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066

    The one saving grace of Andy Burnham is that his voice isn't annoying like Sir Keir's.

    I bet you that in a year's time you'll find his voice annoying? (20 quid at evens - all wins to charity?)
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,385

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    The decline for nominations has passed in Clacton.
    https://www.tendringdc.gov.uk/content/13-august2026-election-of-member-of-parliament-to-the-clacton-constituency

    How soon do they publish the list of candidates ?

    Wait.

    There's more than one candidate?
    There were but the nominations have been put in the bin.
    That's just garbage.
    Sounds like trash talk to me.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,609
    FIFA President Gianni Infantino:

    “We are aware of the political message display from Argentina. We understand it’s against the rules but we also know it’s a matter of their nationality and we respect it.

    We will make a decision after the final.”

    https://x.com/FabrizioRomaxno/status/2078006000699740325?s=20
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 60,519
    Omnium said:

    The one saving grace of Andy Burnham is that his voice isn't annoying like Sir Keir's.

    I bet you that in a year's time you'll find his voice annoying? (20 quid at evens - all wins to charity?)
    Steady on, Omnium.

    This isn't Rachel Reeves we're talking about!
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 9,738
    Gary Sobers was my childhood hero, narrowly beating John Lennon. I am the proud possessor of his autograph, gained from him at Headingley - can't remember the precise year, but between 66-68.

    I'd rate him as the greatest all-round cricketer ever. He was also a real gentleman. He lived a good life to a good age, though, so no tears.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,941

    The one saving grace of Andy Burnham is that his voice isn't annoying like Sir Keir's.

    first PM in my lifetime without a strange accent
    Harold Wilson.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,902
    HYUFD said:

    FIFA President Gianni Infantino:

    “We are aware of the political message display from Argentina. We understand it’s against the rules but we also know it’s a matter of their nationality and we respect it.

    We will make a decision after the final.”

    https://x.com/FabrizioRomaxno/status/2078006000699740325?s=20

    Wut ?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 60,519

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    The decline for nominations has passed in Clacton.
    https://www.tendringdc.gov.uk/content/13-august2026-election-of-member-of-parliament-to-the-clacton-constituency

    How soon do they publish the list of candidates ?

    Wait.

    There's more than one candidate?
    There were but the nominations have been put in the bin.
    General Waste (for it was he who invented the dust bin) would be so proud!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,902

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    The decline for nominations has passed in Clacton.
    https://www.tendringdc.gov.uk/content/13-august2026-election-of-member-of-parliament-to-the-clacton-constituency

    How soon do they publish the list of candidates ?

    Wait.

    There's more than one candidate?
    There were but the nominations have been put in the bin.
    You think Farage was confused by the "Bin it to win it" slogan ?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,066

    Omnium said:

    The one saving grace of Andy Burnham is that his voice isn't annoying like Sir Keir's.

    I bet you that in a year's time you'll find his voice annoying? (20 quid at evens - all wins to charity?)
    Steady on, Omnium.

    This isn't Rachel Reeves we're talking about!
    Want to make the bet? It's sort of no bet after all as it's just what you think and neither of us gain, but I'm sure you're going to have a dim view of the Liverpool Loon in 12 months time.
  • ManchesterKurtManchesterKurt Posts: 1,075
    Andy_JS said:

    The one saving grace of Andy Burnham is that his voice isn't annoying like Sir Keir's.

    first PM in my lifetime without a strange accent
    Harold Wilson.
    before my time (born 1975)
Sign In or Register to comment.