Skip to content

This is a courageous move by the NEC – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,908
edited 12:23PM in General
This is a courageous move by the NEC – politicalbetting.com

I think Starmer will come to regret this decision by the NEC. It makes him look weak and makes a leadership contest this year look more likely.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • eekeek Posts: 32,357
    First
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,771
    2nd.

    Like Lab in Gorton
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,771
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I would like to thank the NEC for getting me out of a huge betting hole.

    Is the hole that Burnham becomes leader or PM?

    In which case - this is only a temporary let off.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,047
    rottenborough said:

    2nd.

    Like Lab in Gorton

    Or 3rd behind Reform and the Greens ?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,771
    Rayner is available on BF at 5.1

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,857
    rottenborough said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I would like to thank the NEC for getting me out of a huge betting hole.

    Is the hole that Burnham becomes leader or PM?

    In which case - this is only a temporary let off.
    Both but I am seriously under water if Burnham becomes next PM.
  • PedestrianRockPedestrianRock Posts: 600
    This could spark a leadership challenge from some non-Burnham candidates
  • eekeek Posts: 32,357
    rottenborough said:

    Rayner is available on BF at 5.1

    Feels like value now...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,047
    edited 12:29PM
    What happens when another labour mp stands down for Burnham

    The party is not just going to say good we can move on are they

    Civil war beckons
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,639
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I would like to thank the NEC for getting me out of a huge betting hole.

    In fairness to you, the reason you have alwayse been so bearish is that there are so many obstacles to AMIPM - not that any individual one was insurmountable. He had managed the first two (and, arguably, easiest) of those but stumbled at the third. You had always argued that one or more of the obstacles would trouble him, not specified which ones. Your strategy was sound.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,771
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    rottenborough said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I would like to thank the NEC for getting me out of a huge betting hole.

    Is the hole that Burnham becomes leader or PM?

    In which case - this is only a temporary let off.
    Both but I am seriously under water if Burnham becomes next PM.
    The Guardian said yesterday that he had been taken by surprise by the sudden vacancy as he had been planning and discussing about a different Manchester seat.

    Can they block him twice?

    Of course by then, Rayner may be leader and its all a waste of time...
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,615
    We are going to look back at this decision as the beginning of the end for Starmer’s premiership.

    I think it has now become likely he will be challenged for the leadership this year.
  • PedestrianRockPedestrianRock Posts: 600
    The huge own goal here is that Labour supporters who want Starmer to go might think they should vote Green in the by election - which will empower people to say “Andy would have won!” and/or make the leadership look even weaker, because if they can’t win this seat they are set for a cataclysmic 2029
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,771
    eek said:

    rottenborough said:

    Rayner is available on BF at 5.1

    Feels like value now...
    Just topped up.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,857
    eek said:

    Separately Lego and Crocs have created some new shoes for TSE https://www.lego.com/en-gb/product/brick-clog-5010203


    Not my style.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,329
    rottenborough said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    rottenborough said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I would like to thank the NEC for getting me out of a huge betting hole.

    Is the hole that Burnham becomes leader or PM?

    In which case - this is only a temporary let off.
    Both but I am seriously under water if Burnham becomes next PM.
    The Guardian said yesterday that he had been taken by surprise by the sudden vacancy as he had been planning and discussing about a different Manchester seat.

    Can they block him twice?

    Of course by then, Rayner may be leader and its all a waste of time...
    If another seat becomes vacant, the logic is basically the same, so it would seem odd not to block him again.

    His way round that would be to resign as Mayor! Then they can’t block him in this manner (but could still keep him off the shortlist).
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,240
    edited 12:33PM
    Feels like a mistake to me but the big majority on the NEC voting against him does suggest there were serious problems.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 13,232
    Grateful to the Labour party for providing some light relief in these troubling times.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,615
    PedestrianRock said:

    The huge own goal here is that Labour supporters who want Starmer to go might think they should vote Green in the by election - which will empower people to say “Andy would have won!” and/or make the leadership look even weaker, because if they can’t win this seat they are set for a cataclysmic 2029

    I’d be getting on the Greens for the by election, certainly.

    Reform could also challenge though I suspect will be blocked by tactical voting.

    I’d have chances as about 50% Green / 30% Reform / 20% Labour right now.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,639
    Tricky for AB to carry on with his 'this is the role I want - not interested iin Westminster politics ' line now.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,444
    edited 12:35PM
    If I was Starmer I would be looking very carefully at any wedding invitations I received over the summer, especially if the venue was north of Watford.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,848
    5/1 on the Greens to win the by election always looked far better value than 5/1 on Burnham to be next PM.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    'Courageous' in the Sir Humphrey sense of the word.

    Starmer has now made Burnham a serious leadership rival and Burnham allies will now be plotting to get rid of Starmer before the next general election. However, as long as the NEC blocks Burnham from being a parliamentary candidate he cannot stand for Labour leader, so on that basis this NEC decision makes it more likely Streeting for example ends up Labour leader at the next GE rather than Burnham
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,329
    SandyRentool said:

    So Burnham now has to make out that he is fully committed to serving the people of Greater Manchester as Mayor.

    Pillock.

    He made himself look like a pillock at conference, and has done so again.

    I am not convinced by this line of argument. Representing the people of Manchester as Mayor and representing the people of (one bit of) Manchester as an MP are pretty similar activities. He can just say he wants to fight for Manchester any which way he can and that probably works for most people.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 59,515
    So there’s potential chaos in Iran, the Chinese regime looks close to imploding, the US is nudging towards a civil war, and Starmer decides the best thing to do is pick a fight with people in his own party…
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 54,086
    numbertwelve said:

    PedestrianRock said:

    The huge own goal here is that Labour supporters who want Starmer to go might think they should vote Green in the by election - which will empower people to say “Andy would have won!” and/or make the leadership look even weaker, because if they can’t win this seat they are set for a cataclysmic 2029

    I’d be getting on the Greens for the by election, certainly.

    Reform could also challenge though I suspect will be blocked by tactical voting.

    I’d have chances as about 50% Green / 30% Reform / 20% Labour right now.
    As I said on the fag end of the last thread, it now just needs a local poll showing Reform ahead of Labour, and Labour voters will see they can't win and desert to the Greens en masse.

    Next question is whether Zack is up for it?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    PedestrianRock said:

    The huge own goal here is that Labour supporters who want Starmer to go might think they should vote Green in the by election - which will empower people to say “Andy would have won!” and/or make the leadership look even weaker, because if they can’t win this seat they are set for a cataclysmic 2029

    Many of the white working class voters who would have backed Burnham will go Reform now too, while as you say middle class progressives will go Green so Labour are at risk of falling to 3rd in the by election
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,857
    Cookie said:

    Tricky for AB to carry on with his 'this is the role I want - not interested iin Westminster politics ' line now.

    Indeed, the final two paragraphs in the header sum him up.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 33,803
    PedestrianRock said:

    This could spark a leadership challenge from some non-Burnham candidates

    I think it's more likely to delay matters as the Burnham threat recedes.

    It is a pretty pathetic stitch up.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,771
    Sienna Rodgers: Now we look to whether Burnham allies can apply enough pressure to reverse the decision...

    No clear mechanism for doing so in a technical sense. It's been suggested that if half the NEC requests an emergency meeting, that could happen.
  • PedestrianRockPedestrianRock Posts: 600
    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    5/1 on the Greens to win the by election always looked far better value than 5/1 on Burnham to be next PM.

    numbertwelve said:

    PedestrianRock said:

    The huge own goal here is that Labour supporters who want Starmer to go might think they should vote Green in the by election - which will empower people to say “Andy would have won!” and/or make the leadership look even weaker, because if they can’t win this seat they are set for a cataclysmic 2029

    I’d be getting on the Greens for the by election, certainly.

    Reform could also challenge though I suspect will be blocked by tactical voting.

    I’d have chances as about 50% Green / 30% Reform / 20% Labour right now.
    Agree heavily with both. Seems like the betting has been frozen everywhere but Greens feel a stonking value bet.

    I also wonder about Greens to win the next election - purely as a trading bet. If you get on at long odds now and they win the by election you could probably trade that out quite decently when the hype sets in on the Friday morning after.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 23,197
    Peter_the_Punter said:

    Feels like a mistake to me but the big majority on the NEC voting against him does suggest there were serious problems.

    Or that the NEC sub Committee has been stuffed with loyalist by the weak PM

    Bet he secretly admires Putin!!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    What happens when another labour mp stands down for Burnham

    The party is not just going to say good we can move on are they

    Civil war beckons

    The NEC can block Burnham being on the shortlist there too as long as it is controlled by Starmer loyalists
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,329
    HYUFD said:

    'Courageous' in the Sir Humphrey sense of the word.

    Starmer has now made Burnham a serious leadership rival and Burnham allies will now be plotting to get rid of Starmer before the next general election. However, as long as the NEC blocks Burnham from being a parliamentary candidate he cannot stand for Labour leader, so on that basis this NEC decision makes it more likely Streeting for example ends up Labour leader at the next GE rather than Burnham

    If Burnham can’t get back into Parliament until the next election, surely Burnham allies won’t be plotting to get rid of Starmer before then. They need Starmer to stay!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 23,009
    Badenoch’s Desert Island Disc choices are almost entirely dreck.

    She’s obviously a moron.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,688
    HYUFD said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    IanB2 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    kle4 said:

    Given ICE appears to have a memo stating that their view is an executive order trumps, ahem, the 4th amendment, they may well be instructing all their agents they can basically do anything.

    After each execution every prominent member of the regime issues a statement saying they stand fully behind the stormtroopers
    Suggesting that this year we will be moving from 1933 to 1934...
    Looking on the bright side, that's would suggest eine Nacht der langen Messer is on its way. I'm sure we all have our fovourite candidate for the Röhm role.
    The story from the fall of Weimar was that extra-state paramilitary power (the existence of which was essentially a fallout from the end of WW1), which could be deployed by leading politicians on illegal and violent tasks but then responsibility denied when it suited - was exceptionally useful in enabling them to take control of the state - not just government, but civil society. Some of the stories of properly elected centre-left politicians being beaten up in or physically dragged out of their offices, homes or council meetings and promised violence for them and their families until they resigned, which most of them then did - are horrifying.

    Once the levers and organisations of state and society had been fully captured, the existence of semi-detached paramilitary power became a liabilty rather than asset, and an unwelcome alternative source of power, since the ability then existed (and the obstacles had been removed) to deploy violence under direct state control, and send many centre and left wing politicians off for a spell in Dachau.
    With his demonic political instincts Hitler was smart enough to know that the SA had outlived its usefulness and no longer fitted in with the brave new Reich. Non-demented Trump might have realised shooting white US citizens in plain sight looks really bad, now not so much. Miller, Vance, Noem, Bondi et al have dipped their hands in so much blood that they're fully committed, any pause or retreat might result in legal examination.
    The enthusiastic support for the Nazis from big business is the biggest refutation of the idiots' cry 'but they were socialists!'. The tech bros falling into line with Trump is yet another startling parallel.

    Elon Musk
    @elonmusk
    Hitler was a far left socialist. His party was called the national socialists.

    https://x.com/ddiamond/status/2015239226141331949?s=20
    What's going on in the US doesn't, yet at least, look like a concerted attempt to take on and dismantle the sources of opposition power, as happened in Germany in a remarkably determined way and in an amazingly short space of time (and without even majority power, to begin with).

    Insofar as it makes sense, it appears to be some mix of, an attempt to influence the media agenda by pushing immigration and tackling crime to the fore - issues that the Republicans expect to play to their advantage; an attempt to trigger counter-protest in the hope that this will over-react and do more damage to the left than the original injustice does to the right, and playing to their base living in small rural communities far away from the US cities who probably have less understanding of US city life than we do, who will simply see 'their' government "finally getting tough".

    I think it is more than that. The open ignoring of court instructions, the memos telling ICE executive orders are more important than the constitution, the intimidation to obtain voting records, it may not be all encompassing, but it does look like trying to overwhelm alternative sources of power.
    It isn't entirely clear one way or the other. The mid-terms will be crucial. If they are rigged the USA may then be too far gone to be considered a free and democratic State.
    They can't be rigged US wide as mid term elections are run state by state by state election boards, half of which are Democrats
    You don't have to rig everywhere to disrupt.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 23,009
    Starmer had little choice here.
    There was no “good” decision.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,329
    Sandpit said:

    So there’s potential chaos in Iran, the Chinese regime looks close to imploding, the US is nudging towards a civil war, and Starmer decides the best thing to do is pick a fight with people in his own party…

    Not as bad as Trump deciding the best thing to do is to pick a fight, an actual one, with guns, with people in his own country.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,688
    Have to agree the Greens look promising now.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 41,960
    @johnmcdonnellMP

    Message to Keir: Do not underestimate the depth of anger people will feel about this disgusting decision. If you think it strengthens you I tell you it will simply hasten your demise. You could have shown magnanimous leadership but instead it’s cowardice.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,444
    Sandpit said:

    So there’s potential chaos in Iran, the Chinese regime looks close to imploding, the US is nudging towards a civil war, and Starmer decides the best thing to do is pick a fight with people in his own party…

    Well it would be a real problem if everyone everywhere else were getting all the fun (and betting opportunities).

    But I agree. This is when he should have been Prime Ministerial, all hands to the pump, the world is a dangerous place etc. Instead it looks weak, weak, weak.
  • eekeek Posts: 32,357
    Cookie said:

    Tricky for AB to carry on with his 'this is the role I want - not interested iin Westminster politics ' line now.

    It just requires a speech that goes along the lines of

    As mayor I've discovered that I'm very restricted in things I can do unlike other countries so the underground metro we so desperately need is utterly blocked by the Treasury. I had hoped by returning to Westminster to solve these issues but as I'm blocked from doing so I will continue to do the best I can for Manchester while the Treasury blocks us at every turn...

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 41,960
    @SamCoatesSky
    This - below - is a quote from an MP on the left. It's punchy. BUT if it's just the left who kick off, Starmer can ignore that. The question is what the soft left and centre of the party do next.

    Labour MP: "That’s just triggered civil war. The factonalists, the purgers and the control freaks have no idea what they have done. It is not possible to predict where this ends but it is undoubtedly an existential threat to the Labour Party."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    edited 12:39PM
    This is also a sign of weakness by Starmer blocking a leadership rival standing for parliament.

    Cameron by contrast allowing Boris to stand for parliament in 2015 was a sign of Dave's confidence in his own abilities and willingness to have big personalities and talents in his parliamentary party even if they might be future rivals. Starmer by getting his allies to block Burnham just looks weak and full of self doubt and so insecure he cannot even have Burnham as a Labour MP
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 23,197
    rottenborough said:

    Sienna Rodgers: Now we look to whether Burnham allies can apply enough pressure to reverse the decision...

    No clear mechanism for doing so in a technical sense. It's been suggested that if half the NEC requests an emergency meeting, that could happen.

    The SKS loyalists make up over 70% of the NEC so you can forget that.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,365
    Peter_the_Punter said:

    Feels like a mistake to me but the big majority on the NEC voting against him does suggest there were serious problems.

    @algarkirk got it right on the previous thread; the NEC were in zugzwang. Whatever they did would be bad for them.

    That the King of the North acted in a way that put them in that hole shows two things.

    One, he's smart at politics. Two, he's more than a bit of a sh1t.

    We've had someone else like that recently, and it didn't go well.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 48,842
    Unless he's a bit dim Burnham will have expected this. So he presumably has his next moves plotted out.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,615
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    PedestrianRock said:

    This could spark a leadership challenge from some non-Burnham candidates

    I think it's more likely to delay matters as the Burnham threat recedes.

    It is a pretty pathetic stitch up.
    I think the threat from Burnham recedes but I think the threat to Starmer increases. Restive Labour MPs are going to cast around for alternatives, and pissed off Burnham supporters are going to find ways of being disruptive.

    I could see Burnham playing a kingmaker role now, if he starts the firing gun by calling for Starmer to be challenged and throws his backing behind an alternative.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,688
    PedestrianRock said:

    This could spark a leadership challenge from some non-Burnham candidates

    Streeting: I am outraged, i totally wanted Andy back, but this rejection of a 'loyal' figure means i have no choice but to challenge the PM.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,261
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Cookie said:

    Tricky for AB to carry on with his 'this is the role I want - not interested iin Westminster politics ' line now.

    Indeed, the final two paragraphs in the header sum him up.
    He should have worn his robes in the newest gloss, not cast them aside so soon.

    He had no spur to prick the side of his intent, but only vaulting ambition.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,639
    Stuartinromford said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    Feels like a mistake to me but the big majority on the NEC voting against him does suggest there were serious problems.

    @algarkirk got it right on the previous thread; the NEC were in zugzwang. Whatever they did would be bad for them.

    That the King of the North acted in a way that put them in that hole shows two things.

    One, he's smart at politics. Two, he's more than a bit of a sh1t.

    We've had someone else like that recently, and it didn't go well.
    Ooh, good use of the word 'zugzwang'. On that basis alone I nominate @Stuartinromford for post of the weekend.

    I agree with him, too.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,365
    HYUFD said:

    This is also a sign of weakness by Starmer blocking a leadership rival standing for parliament.

    Cameron by contrast allowing Boris to stand for parliament in 2015 was a sign of Dave's confidence in his own abilities and willingness to have big personalities and talents in his parliamentary party even if they might be future rivals. Starmer by getting his allies to block Burnham just looks weak and full of self doubt and so insecure he cannot even have Burnham as a Labour MP

    How did that work out for Dave's Premiership?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,443
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    eek said:

    Separately Lego and Crocs have created some new shoes for TSE https://www.lego.com/en-gb/product/brick-clog-5010203


    Not my style.
    Now, if it said LEGO in gold...
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,365
    Cookie said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    Feels like a mistake to me but the big majority on the NEC voting against him does suggest there were serious problems.

    @algarkirk got it right on the previous thread; the NEC were in zugzwang. Whatever they did would be bad for them.

    That the King of the North acted in a way that put them in that hole shows two things.

    One, he's smart at politics. Two, he's more than a bit of a sh1t.

    We've had someone else like that recently, and it didn't go well.
    Ooh, good use of the word 'zugzwang'. On that basis alone I nominate @Stuartinromford for post of the weekend.

    I agree with him, too.
    I'm touched, but that crown belongs to @algarkirk.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 54,086
    PedestrianRock said:

    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    5/1 on the Greens to win the by election always looked far better value than 5/1 on Burnham to be next PM.

    numbertwelve said:

    PedestrianRock said:

    The huge own goal here is that Labour supporters who want Starmer to go might think they should vote Green in the by election - which will empower people to say “Andy would have won!” and/or make the leadership look even weaker, because if they can’t win this seat they are set for a cataclysmic 2029

    I’d be getting on the Greens for the by election, certainly.

    Reform could also challenge though I suspect will be blocked by tactical voting.

    I’d have chances as about 50% Green / 30% Reform / 20% Labour right now.
    Agree heavily with both. Seems like the betting has been frozen everywhere but Greens feel a stonking value bet.

    I also wonder about Greens to win the next election - purely as a trading bet. If you get on at long odds now and they win the by election you could probably trade that out quite decently when the hype sets in on the Friday morning after.
    At 30 the odds on most seats doesn't have that much room to come in, barring some very unexpected events
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    Stuartinromford said:

    HYUFD said:

    This is also a sign of weakness by Starmer blocking a leadership rival standing for parliament.

    Cameron by contrast allowing Boris to stand for parliament in 2015 was a sign of Dave's confidence in his own abilities and willingness to have big personalities and talents in his parliamentary party even if they might be future rivals. Starmer by getting his allies to block Burnham just looks weak and full of self doubt and so insecure he cannot even have Burnham as a Labour MP

    How did that work out for Dave's Premiership?
    Well he won a majority in 2015, it was his error then to call an EU referendum in 2016 without getting sufficient concessions from the EU first
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,688
    kinabalu said:

    Unless he's a bit dim Burnham will have expected this. So he presumably has his next moves plotted out.

    Funniest thing would be if he only applied intending to get rejected.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,639
    eek said:

    Cookie said:

    Tricky for AB to carry on with his 'this is the role I want - not interested iin Westminster politics ' line now.

    It just requires a speech that goes along the lines of

    As mayor I've discovered that I'm very restricted in things I can do unlike other countries so the underground metro we so desperately need is utterly blocked by the Treasury. I had hoped by returning to Westminster to solve these issues but as I'm blocked from doing so I will continue to do the best I can for Manchester while the Treasury blocks us at every turn...

    Yes, I've no doubt he'll give it a go, and be semi-convincing. But rather less convincing than last time or tge time before.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    kle4 said:

    PedestrianRock said:

    This could spark a leadership challenge from some non-Burnham candidates

    Streeting: I am outraged, i totally wanted Andy back, but this rejection of a 'loyal' figure means i have no choice but to challenge the PM.
    Streeting to be honest is more on the Starmer wing than Burnham wing of Labour, though loyal mainly to himself
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,688
    bondegezou said:

    SandyRentool said:

    So Burnham now has to make out that he is fully committed to serving the people of Greater Manchester as Mayor.

    Pillock.

    He made himself look like a pillock at conference, and has done so again.

    I am not convinced by this line of argument. Representing the people of Manchester as Mayor and representing the people of (one bit of) Manchester as an MP are pretty similar activities. He can just say he wants to fight for Manchester any which way he can and that probably works for most people.
    He won easily so is probably popular there, I'd think they'd be happy if he might become PM.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 23,197
    On Topic the PB editor in chief appears to lack the ability to distinguish between courage and cowardice!!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 54,086
    Gardenwalker said:

    Badenoch’s Desert Island Disc choices are almost entirely dreck.

    She’s obviously a moron.

    How do you know that CCHQ hasn't been doing exhaustive market research into the music preferences of potential Tory voters?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 59,515
    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2015184338803966119

    According to the Hebrew-language daily newspaper Israel Hayom, there is major split in both the Trump Administration and among U.S. allies in the Middle East regarding a potential attack against Iran. Those in favor of strikes against Iran are said to include:

    - Vice President JD Vance
    - Secretary of State Marco Rubio
    - Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth
    - Britain
    - Israel
    - United Arab Emirates

    Those opposed:

    - Special Envoy Jared Kushner
    - Special Envoy Steve Witkoff
    - Turkey
    - Saudi Arabia
    - Qatar
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,615
    isam said:

    The selections for Labour candidates needs to be more democratic and we should end NEC impositions of candidates. Local Party members should select their candidates for every election.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1224662165271056385?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    There’s always a tweet…
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,688
    Scott_xP said:

    @johnmcdonnellMP

    Message to Keir: Do not underestimate the depth of anger people will feel about this disgusting decision. If you think it strengthens you I tell you it will simply hasten your demise. You could have shown magnanimous leadership but instead it’s cowardice.

    I forgot he was still about.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    Voting intention by gender:

    -- Women --
    ➡️ Ref: 22% (+10)
    🔵 Con: 21% (-5)
    🟢 Grn: 18% (+10)
    🔴 Lab: 18% (-17)
    🟠 Lib: 15% (+2)

    -- Men --
    ➡️ Ref: 30% (+13)
    🔴 Lab: 19% (-15)
    🔵 Con: 16% (-7)
    🟠 Lib: 14% (+2)
    🟢 Grn: 13% (+7)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 14 Dec - 9 Jan (+/- vs GE2024)
    https://x.com/LeftieStats/status/2015348922932400497?s=20
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    edited 12:47PM
    '@Keir_Starmer
    The selections for Labour candidates needs to be more democratic and we should end NEC impositions of candidates. Local Party members should select their candidates for every election.'

    Starmer in 2020
    https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1224662165271056385?s=20
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 16,421
    Stuartinromford said:

    Cookie said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    Peter_the_Punter said:

    Feels like a mistake to me but the big majority on the NEC voting against him does suggest there were serious problems.

    @algarkirk got it right on the previous thread; the NEC were in zugzwang. Whatever they did would be bad for them.

    That the King of the North acted in a way that put them in that hole shows two things.

    One, he's smart at politics. Two, he's more than a bit of a sh1t.

    We've had someone else like that recently, and it didn't go well.
    Ooh, good use of the word 'zugzwang'. On that basis alone I nominate @Stuartinromford for post of the weekend.

    I agree with him, too.
    I'm touched, but that crown belongs to @algarkirk.
    How kind. I think it's quite possible that Burnham is in that z-word situation too. And has let all the other candidates make a good move by them doing nothing.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,848
    SandyRentool said:

    So Burnham now has to make out that he is fully committed to serving the people of Greater Manchester as Mayor.

    Pillock.

    He made himself look like a pillock at conference, and has done so again.

    Anything but. By seeking the nomination only to be blocked, Burnham has:

    1. Significantly undermined Starmer's position and those of his toadies by forcing Starmer to instigate his blocking.

    2. Put Streeting in a position where he found it necessary to align himself with the blockers by making the same equivocal public response, so implicating Streeting too, in contrast to Rayner, Powell, Miliband, Khan etc who all came out strongly in favour of Burnham being allowed to stand.

    3. Increased resentment against the factional right amongst the Labour selectorate.

    4. Put himself in a position where his endorsement for whoever carries the mantle as the anti-Streeting candidate will carry real weight, so he's in line for a big Cabinet position (as a Lord) if that candidate carries the day.

    If you want a significant change of direction from this government, and a significant role in that new government, as Burnham surely does, he'll be very satisfied with his week's work. As will Rayner, Miliband, Powell or whoever stands against Streeting in the Summer.

    And such is the unpopularity of Starmer in the country that an internecine Labour civil war that replaces Starmer with someone with Burnham's endorsement will probably do the party some good.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,261
    There is only one solution now left.

    It has to be Ed Balls.

    As leader, he would free @bigjohnowls from the need to support a fascist party.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,848
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    rottenborough said:

    2nd.

    Like Lab in Gorton

    Or 3rd behind Reform and the Greens ?
    Or 4th behind Greens, Reform and anti-Gaza Independent or Galloway?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 59,515
    https://x.com/dpjhodges/status/2015394568200466688

    Dan Hodges:
    Keir Starmer has just ordered the NEC to drive the final nails into his political coffin, with him lying inside it.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,848
    rottenborough said:

    Rayner is available on BF at 5.1

    Rayner 7/1 with BetFred (as next PM).
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,474
    Don't overlook the personal. I suspect that Starmer and his supporters have allowed their loathing of Burnham to overturn their good sense and make what appears to be a seriously bad decision.
    It might be tthey think that blocking him shows strength and decisiveness, as per Kemi taking out Rob-a-Job, but it really doesn't.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 36,769
    One would have thought Burnham would have had the phone numbers or access to phone numbers of the NEC and he would have done a little bit of research as to how the land lay. Instead both he and his party have been soiled.

    Way out of his depth for PM.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,261
    Sandpit said:

    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2015184338803966119

    According to the Hebrew-language daily newspaper Israel Hayom, there is major split in both the Trump Administration and among U.S. allies in the Middle East regarding a potential attack against Iran. Those in favor of strikes against Iran are said to include:

    - Vice President JD Vance
    - Secretary of State Marco Rubio
    - Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth
    - Britain
    - Israel
    - United Arab Emirates

    Those opposed:

    - Special Envoy Jared Kushner
    - Special Envoy Steve Witkoff
    - Turkey
    - Saudi Arabia
    - Qatar

    Kushner and Witkoff are most closely aligned with the Kremlin, and the Iranian government is now essentially a Russian puppet regime. I am not at all surprised that they are opposed. Similarly, Turkey and Qatar must be worried about the potential for refugees while Saudi Arabia would doubtless face further difficulties in Yemen and from terrorists in its own country.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 57,491
    SKS and the NEC are frit!
  • TazTaz Posts: 24,222
    SandyRentool said:

    So Burnham now has to make out that he is fully committed to serving the people of Greater Manchester as Mayor.

    Pillock.

    He made himself look like a pillock at conference, and has done so again.


    ..

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,763
    Peter_the_Punter said:

    Feels like a mistake to me but the big majority on the NEC voting against him does suggest there were serious problems.

    Peter , suggests the NEC are equivalent of Trump's stooges, they just follow any utterance
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,334
    Can you challenge the leader if not an Mp? One would think not.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,848
    kle4 said:

    PedestrianRock said:

    This could spark a leadership challenge from some non-Burnham candidates

    Streeting: I am outraged, i totally wanted Andy back, but this rejection of a 'loyal' figure means i have no choice but to challenge the PM.
    Except that Streeting chose to duck the question yesterday, making the same response as all other blockers on Labour's right.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,258
    edited 1:05PM
    Sandpit said:

    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2015184338803966119

    According to the Hebrew-language daily newspaper Israel Hayom, there is major split in both the Trump Administration and among U.S. allies in the Middle East regarding a potential attack against Iran. Those in favor of strikes against Iran are said to include:

    - Vice President JD Vance
    - Secretary of State Marco Rubio
    - Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth
    - Britain
    - Israel
    - United Arab Emirates

    Those opposed:

    - Special Envoy Jared Kushner
    - Special Envoy Steve Witkoff
    - Turkey
    - Saudi Arabia
    - Qatar

    So Starmer firmly seeking to put the UK firmly in the Trump US circle of its closest allies then alongside Netanyahu's Israel and the UAE.

    After agreeing a trade agreement that got the UK well below the global average of Trump tariffs imposed on its exports to the US and after being relatively neutral on Maduro caputure Starmer now firmly backing a US strike on Iran if it goes ahead. Now Greenland seems to have settled down only on the Chagos Islands is Starmer really diverging from Trump
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,261
    squareroot2 said:

    Can you challenge the leader if not an Mp? One would think not.

    No.
  • DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 956
    I'll wait for more over excitement from bubble inhabitants and continue to lay 2026 exit for Starmer at even better prices, methinks.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 41,960
    Skeir releases a statement

    @Keir_Starmer

    To those in Scotland, and around the world, celebrating over a Burns Supper, I wish you a very Happy Burns Night.
  • TazTaz Posts: 24,222
    ydoethur said:

    There is only one solution now left.

    It has to be Ed Balls.

    As leader, he would free @bigjohnowls from the need to support a fascist party.

    Ed Balls has a cushy number interviewing Z listers about their upcoming reality show or tame interviews with lobbyists advancing their cause on breakfast TV

    Why would he move away from that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,760
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    https://x.com/dpjhodges/status/2015394568200466688

    Dan Hodges:
    Keir Starmer has just ordered the NEC to drive the final nails into his political coffin, with him lying inside it.

    I'm starting to think TSE is wrong, and that this is a great idea by Starmer. If McDonnell and Hodges are against it, it must have something going for it.
    But then you look at some of the people in favour.

    The best side to take on this one is no side, IMO.
  • eekeek Posts: 32,357
    Mexicanpete said:

    One would have thought Burnham would have had the phone numbers or access to phone numbers of the NEC and he would have done a little bit of research as to how the land lay. Instead both he and his party have been soiled.

    Way out of his depth for PM.

    I suspect Burnham and Rayner were both expecting the result.

    Reality is this was a seat that Burnham could have won which Labour will now lose and that will feed into a general malaise as we roll into the Local elections where Labour does very badly.

    Remember that it is impossible for Labour members to remove a sitting Labour PM so you need to push him to the point of resigning first.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,763
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @johnmcdonnellMP

    Message to Keir: Do not underestimate the depth of anger people will feel about this disgusting decision. If you think it strengthens you I tell you it will simply hasten your demise. You could have shown magnanimous leadership but instead it’s cowardice.

    I forgot he was still about.
    the truth though
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,066
    Ive cashed out at a small loss the 2026 keir exit market. Really didn't see it unravelling so quickly for him.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 65,283
    I
    Mexicanpete said:

    One would have thought Burnham would have had the phone numbers or access to phone numbers of the NEC and he would have done a little bit of research as to how the land lay. Instead both he and his party have been soiled.

    Way out of his depth for PM.

    Are you surprised?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,334
    eek said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    One would have thought Burnham would have had the phone numbers or access to phone numbers of the NEC and he would have done a little bit of research as to how the land lay. Instead both he and his party have been soiled.

    Way out of his depth for PM.

    I suspect Burnham and Rayner were both expecting the result.

    Reality is this was a seat that Burnham could have won which Labour will now lose and that will feed into a general malaise as we roll into the Local elections where Labour does very badly.

    Remember that it is impossible for Labour members to remove a sitting Labour PM so you need to push him to the point of resigning first.
    Surely that is undemocratic..
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,225
    edited 1:17PM
    Sandpit said:

    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2015184338803966119

    According to the Hebrew-language daily newspaper Israel Hayom, there is major split in both the Trump Administration and among U.S. allies in the Middle East regarding a potential attack against Iran. Those in favor of strikes against Iran are said to include:

    - Vice President JD Vance
    - Secretary of State Marco Rubio
    - Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth
    - Britain
    - Israel
    - United Arab Emirates

    Those opposed:

    - Special Envoy Jared Kushner
    - Special Envoy Steve Witkoff
    - Turkey
    - Saudi Arabia
    - Qatar

    Seems hard to believe. Weird to see Vance on the side of good for once, rather than lined up with the Axis of Evil.
Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2026