I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Especially as he tactically voted for Plaid
No I didn't, as I said I would have voted for Labour or the LDs as my last 2 votes had they stood candidates not Plaid
At least your second political preference gave you something to celebrate last week, rather than having merely to drown your sorrows at so many defeated Conservatives. We happily give you that.
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Any Conservative considering voting for the Polanski led Greens should certainly be expelled from the party if a member and should not be allowed to call themselves a Conservative if just a voter. As clearly anyone voting for Polanski and his awful party has not a Tory bone in his body
You cannot call yourself a Conservative because you voted for a party that wants to break up the UK.
I voted for 4 Tories on a 6 vote ballot and 2 Plaid as they were the only other party who bothered to stand so still technically I mainly voted for unionist candidates
And Harold Shipman mainly didn't kill his patients.
If Streeting lacks the 81 and Burnham lacks a seat offer, what have we been doing all week?
I predict both to be the case.
Who knows. My old boss used to argue that if any major bit of kit broke and everything got a bit febrile. The best thing to do is send everyone to the pub - they can do less damage there than at work trying to find workarounds. Then the folks who know how to fix it can fix it and everyone can come back tomorrow and get on with the job.
Problem is nowadays it seems no one wants to put their phone down. So you just seem to get endless speculation and rumour. At the moment we know very little. It is not obvious that Streeting has the numbers but he may. It is also not obvious that Burnham has lined up a seat, everyone that anyone speculates about seems to leads to a denial but those denials may be false. It seems that it is time to open a beer and see what tomorrow brings.
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Surely HY is advocating tactical voting - just not to your taste?
No - quite the opposite
No, he said "I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory". That is, he would vote tactically to block the Green candidate. The implication is that in Rusholme for example he would vote Labour to stop the Greens.
And let Burnham win where some would not want that result
Burnham has a -15% rating with Tory voters and -30% with Reform voters, Polanski has a -49% rating with Tories and a massive -62% rating with Reform voters
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Any Conservative considering voting for the Polanski led Greens should certainly be expelled from the party if a member and should not be allowed to call themselves a Conservative if just a voter. As clearly anyone voting for Polanski and his awful party has not a Tory bone in his body
You cannot call yourself a Conservative because you voted for a party that wants to break up the UK.
I voted for 4 Tories on a 6 vote ballot and 2 Plaid as they were the only other party who bothered to stand so still technically I mainly voted for unionist candidates
And Harold Shipman mainly didn't kill his patients.
I voted for all unionist candidates on the ballot paper
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Surely HY is advocating tactical voting - just not to your taste?
No - quite the opposite
No, he said "I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory". That is, he would vote tactically to block the Green candidate. The implication is that in Rusholme for example he would vote Labour to stop the Greens.
And let Burnham win where some would not want that result
Burnham has a -15% rating with Tory voters and -30% with Reform voters, Polanski has a -49% rating with Tories and a massive -62% rating with Reform voters
That 'penalty' decision gets worse with every viewing.
Point has been made that Beaton spent around 20 seconds at the monitor compared with around a 6 minute delay from the end of the West Ham v Arsenal match.
For me the quality of image and camera angles aren't even close to how good the English Premier league version is
Wait til you see some of the previous examples of Scottish VAR, you could fill a comedy show with it
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Surely HY is advocating tactical voting - just not to your taste?
No - quite the opposite
No, he said "I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory". That is, he would vote tactically to block the Green candidate. The implication is that in Rusholme for example he would vote Labour to stop the Greens.
And let Burnham win where some would not want that result
Burnham has a -15% rating with Tory voters and -30% with Reform voters, Polanski has a -49% rating with Tories and a massive -62% rating with Reform voters
Prof David Bailey @dgbailey Apparently @brumlabour can’t appoint its Leader in Birmingham, because it has to await approval from Starmer or Steve Reed! The last centrally annointed leader hardly worked out well. Utter disregard for local members & elected councillors again.
And how does that work regarding possible rainbow coalition with Greens, Lib Dens & Indies to run @BhamCityCouncil ? Birmingham is now hanging around waiting for central Labour Party to distract its attention from leadership struggles to colonially appoint a Brum labour leader.
Yep. When my group of LibDem councillors found ourselves in the balance, me and my deputy had meetings with both Tory and Labour group leaders to discuss a possible deal. The Tory leader asked us what sort of deal we had in mind, I tabled some suggestions I had already prepared and agreed with colleagues, and he promised to get back to me the next morning. So off we trotted to meet the Labour leader and deputy, who immediately launched into a twenty minute lecture about how even the idea of a deal would have to be referred to some local government committee within London Labour Party, then referred to HQ for sign off, with the details of any agreement similarly referred back to the same committee before Labour councillors locally would be able to agree to it. They explained the meeting schedule of the various party bodies that would be deciding on our deal, and it was clear that the whole thing would take weeks, and that we’d never get to see or meet the real decision makers. The next morning the Tory leader got back to us with a few tweaks to what we had suggested, and our coalition deal was done, and lasted the full four years.
The Labour Party is the most horrendous organisation; if you ever get close to it, hold your nose.
Reddit and left Twitter’s opposition to Streeting to me indicates he’d be a good candidate.
Until Labour works out what the problems of the country are, what the solutions to those problems are, what the policies that lead to those solutions are, and how to persuade people to vote for them, it will continue to lose and will deserve to lose. "Owning the libs" does not tell me whether Streeting is good or bad, it tells me you have poor judgement.
I fear that there are a number of Councils who are going to find it difficult to come to any decisions. If no one is working with Reform and Labour stifled by Centralisation and bureaucracy, then there isn't any obvious majority in a few places. Newcastle. Seemed a slam dunk Green Lib Dem administration. Apparently Ed Davey isn't keen however. But there mathematically isn't another solution unless the unlikely event of one of them working with Reform.
Although it's unlikely, it's clearly possible that Starmer sees off this seemingly half-baked insurgency and remains in place, with his power relatively undiminished. And, if so, his personal poll ratings begin to improve, because he's shown he's a political street fighter who can defeat his opponents. I know this may sound bonkers. But stranger things have happened.
I originally said whichever of their parties were second on NEV last week would be safe, that was Kemi not Starmer, certainly with Sky
Kemi lost 60% of her seats outside London, starting from a low base.
Abysmal.
She should be out.
Since when have national party leaders resigned over poor local government elections? What a ridiculous idea. Starmer is only at risk because it's the final straw after two years of doing nothing useful
I fear that there are a number of Councils who are going to find it difficult to come to any decisions. If no one is working with Reform and Labour stifled by Centralisation and bureaucracy, then there isn't any obvious majority in a few places. Newcastle. Seemed a slam dunk Green Lib Dem administration. Apparently Ed Davey isn't keen however. But there mathematically isn't another solution unless the unlikely event of one of them working with Reform.
Davey may or may not have expressed a view, but it really will be up to the council group there to decide whether and what deal to do with the other parties. There’s no central control within the LibDems over local council groups - although there may well be a strategic awareness that helping the rise of the Green Party is likely suboptimal for the LibDems.
I fear that there are a number of Councils who are going to find it difficult to come to any decisions. If no one is working with Reform and Labour stifled by Centralisation and bureaucracy, then there isn't any obvious majority in a few places. Newcastle. Seemed a slam dunk Green Lib Dem administration. Apparently Ed Davey isn't keen however. But there mathematically isn't another solution unless the unlikely event of one of them working with Reform.
Davey may or may not have expressed a view, but it really will be up to the council group there to decide whether and what deal to do with the other parties. There’s no central control within the LibDems over local council groups - although there may well be a strategic awareness that helping the rise of the Green Party is likely suboptimal for the LibDems.
Yes. He used the term "worried". But there isn't an alternative... For believers in PR you'd think they'd relish it.
As this turns to shit I can only say this; Starmer could have prevented all this
How could he have?
Accepted the verdict of last Thursday and laid out a timetable for his resignation
Going back two years he could have actually had a clear plan for government when it was so obvious Labour were going to win; and then implemented that plan.
Indeed so
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
As this turns to shit I can only say this; Starmer could have prevented all this
How could he have?
Accepted the verdict of last Thursday and laid out a timetable for his resignation
Going back two years he could have actually had a clear plan for government when it was so obvious Labour were going to win; and then implemented that plan.
Indeed so
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
This is why I have to back Burnham. At least he wasn't in the tent when this lack of plan was formulated. And he's quite spectacularly failed to bankrupt Manchester.
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Surely HY is advocating tactical voting - just not to your taste?
No - quite the opposite
No, he said "I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory". That is, he would vote tactically to block the Green candidate. The implication is that in Rusholme for example he would vote Labour to stop the Greens.
And let Burnham win where some would not want that result
Burnham has a -15% rating with Tory voters and -30% with Reform voters, Polanski has a -49% rating with Tories and a massive -62% rating with Reform voters
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
Stop insulting conservatives who see tactical voting as legitimate
Surely HY is advocating tactical voting - just not to your taste?
No - quite the opposite
No, he said "I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory". That is, he would vote tactically to block the Green candidate. The implication is that in Rusholme for example he would vote Labour to stop the Greens.
And let Burnham win where some would not want that result
Burnham has a -15% rating with Tory voters and -30% with Reform voters, Polanski has a -49% rating with Tories and a massive -62% rating with Reform voters
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
I'd vote Green over Reform/Restore on the grounds that the Greens are going to deport me like the Re lot.
I'm sane by the way, my mother had me tested.
You don't seriously believe Reform/Restore would start deporting people who are legally in the UK?
Lol the naivety/indifference of white British Reformists is off the scale.
Okay then. Which people do you think are likely to be deported?
As this turns to shit I can only say this; Starmer could have prevented all this
How could he have?
Accepted the verdict of last Thursday and laid out a timetable for his resignation
Going back two years he could have actually had a clear plan for government when it was so obvious Labour were going to win; and then implemented that plan.
Indeed so
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
This is why I have to back Burnham. At least he wasn't in the tent when this lack of plan was formulated. And he's quite spectacularly failed to bankrupt Manchester.
That’s a good point and possibly the best argument for Burnham. He can’t be blamed for this desperate clueless shit-show of a government, because he’s not in it
If he does somehow win the leadership, he needs to clear out most of the Cabinet. It’s like a new editor of a newspaper. The best ones impose their personality with a huge painful purge. It hurts but it works. Everyone grasps: this is new
He obviously starts with kicking Tiny Tears out of Number 11
As this turns to shit I can only say this; Starmer could have prevented all this
How could he have?
Accepted the verdict of last Thursday and laid out a timetable for his resignation
Going back two years he could have actually had a clear plan for government when it was so obvious Labour were going to win; and then implemented that plan.
Indeed so
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
This is why I have to back Burnham. At least he wasn't in the tent when this lack of plan was formulated. And he's quite spectacularly failed to bankrupt Manchester.
Yes but how does he get a seat? The MP for Rusholme has just said he's not resigning.
As this turns to shit I can only say this; Starmer could have prevented all this
How could he have?
Accepted the verdict of last Thursday and laid out a timetable for his resignation
Going back two years he could have actually had a clear plan for government when it was so obvious Labour were going to win; and then implemented that plan.
Indeed so
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
This is why I have to back Burnham. At least he wasn't in the tent when this lack of plan was formulated. And he's quite spectacularly failed to bankrupt Manchester.
Yes but how does he get a seat? The MP for Rusholme has just said he's not resigning.
I don't know. I do know he applied for Gorton and Denton and the Party in Westminster decided they'd put rocket boosters under the Greens and Reform instead.
No one seems to have noticed that Labour are down 4 in that freshwater poll. It’s not just that Reform have got a major boost from the locals, Labour are plunging. The Tories are not
No one seems to have noticed that Labour are down 4 in that freshwater poll. It’s not just that Reform have got a major boost from the locals, Labour are plunging. The Tories are not
As this turns to shit I can only say this; Starmer could have prevented all this
How could he have?
Accepted the verdict of last Thursday and laid out a timetable for his resignation
Going back two years he could have actually had a clear plan for government when it was so obvious Labour were going to win; and then implemented that plan.
Indeed so
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
This is why I have to back Burnham. At least he wasn't in the tent when this lack of plan was formulated. And he's quite spectacularly failed to bankrupt Manchester.
That’s a good point and possibly the best argument for Burnham. He can’t be blamed for this desperate clueless shit-show of a government, because he’s not in it
If he does somehow win the leadership, he needs to clear out most of the Cabinet. It’s like a new editor of a newspaper. The best ones impose their personality with a huge painful purge. It hurts but it works. Everyone grasps: this is new
He obviously starts with kicking Tiny Tears out of Number 11
Clearly this government is moribund. The only possible way back is someone who hasn't been in it. And given that we've three more years of it, like it or not, thanks to those of us who voted for it, it's in everyone's interest that it at least gets some kind of hearing. How that happens is above my pay grade. But that's how I see it.
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
So according to Nick Watt the only person who can save us from Miliband is Starmer .
Apparently Miliband won’t stand if Starmer decides to fight on !
Starmer v Streeting then, I suspect Starmer wins that about 60% to 40% with Ed Miliband backing the PM
It's a stitch-up. Starmer will oppose Streeting right up until the moment when no-one else is viable and then support him for the sake of party unity and it will be a coronation.
If Andy Burnham had any sense he would continue to serve his term out as a successful mayor and wait until after the next general election, to take over from whomever loses it. Becoming Prime Minister now is not very appealing since there is no money in the coffers and the party is divided and lacking realism. Labour could regain power as part of a coalition in about 2031. We may have to wait until 2029 for the next election but we won't be waiting that much longer for the one after I reckon.
As this turns to shit I can only say this; Starmer could have prevented all this
How could he have?
Accepted the verdict of last Thursday and laid out a timetable for his resignation
Going back two years he could have actually had a clear plan for government when it was so obvious Labour were going to win; and then implemented that plan.
Indeed so
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
This is why I have to back Burnham. At least he wasn't in the tent when this lack of plan was formulated. And he's quite spectacularly failed to bankrupt Manchester.
That’s a good point and possibly the best argument for Burnham. He can’t be blamed for this desperate clueless shit-show of a government, because he’s not in it
If he does somehow win the leadership, he needs to clear out most of the Cabinet. It’s like a new editor of a newspaper. The best ones impose their personality with a huge painful purge. It hurts but it works. Everyone grasps: this is new
He obviously starts with kicking Tiny Tears out of Number 11
Clearly this government is moribund. The only possible way back is someone who hasn't been in it. And given that we've three more years of it, like it or not, thanks to those of us who voted for it, it's in everyone's interest that it at least gets some kind of hearing. How that happens is above my pay grade. But that's how I see it.
I tend to agree
I’d prefer Streeting because he’s on the right (and I have a possibly delusional belief he’d be OK)
Failing that, Burnham is the best for the reasons we’ve discussed. He’s not tainted by this abject failure. He’s done well in Manchester (it seems). He’s a fresh-ish face who might bring fresh ideas
Rayner is a horrible risk and a likely disaster Miliband is worse Keeping Starmer? lol
If Andy Burnham had any sense he would continue to serve his term out as a successful mayor and wait until after the next general election, to take over from whomever loses it. Becoming Prime Minister now is not very appealing since there is no money in the coffers and the party is divided and lacking realism. Labour could regain power as part of a coalition in about 2031. We may have to wait until 2029 for the next election but we won't be waiting that much longer for the one after I reckon.
You're convinced a Farage-led government wouldn't last long?
If Andy Burnham had any sense he would continue to serve his term out as a successful mayor and wait until after the next general election, to take over from whomever loses it. Becoming Prime Minister now is not very appealing since there is no money in the coffers and the party is divided and lacking realism. Labour could regain power as part of a coalition in about 2031. We may have to wait until 2029 for the next election but we won't be waiting that much longer for the one after I reckon.
Burnham could beat Farage at the next GE, once Farage gets in he may be difficult to dislodge
If Andy Burnham had any sense he would continue to serve his term out as a successful mayor and wait until after the next general election, to take over from whomever loses it. Becoming Prime Minister now is not very appealing since there is no money in the coffers and the party is divided and lacking realism. Labour could regain power as part of a coalition in about 2031. We may have to wait until 2029 for the next election but we won't be waiting that much longer for the one after I reckon.
He'd be 59 by the next election and possibly facing 5 years as LOTO. Is that really a plan? His time was Gorton and Denton. But the control freaks in Labour HQ weren't having it.
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting leads him by only 7%, even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader. Rayner leads Farage by an even lower 6% in terms of who they would prefer to win the next GE on a forced choice
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting by only 7% even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader
Folk keep ignoring the polling which is staring them in the face. It is said Major became PM because polling showed he had the best chance of winning an election. And he lasted 7 years despite few obvious qualities. Burnham beats Farage. That is all. The rest is overthinking.
Prof David Bailey @dgbailey Apparently @brumlabour can’t appoint its Leader in Birmingham, because it has to await approval from Starmer or Steve Reed! The last centrally annointed leader hardly worked out well. Utter disregard for local members & elected councillors again.
And how does that work regarding possible rainbow coalition with Greens, Lib Dens & Indies to run @BhamCityCouncil ? Birmingham is now hanging around waiting for central Labour Party to distract its attention from leadership struggles to colonially appoint a Brum labour leader.
Yep. When my group of LibDem councillors found ourselves in the balance, me and my deputy had meetings with both Tory and Labour group leaders to discuss a possible deal. The Tory leader asked us what sort of deal we had in mind, I tabled some suggestions I had already prepared and agreed with colleagues, and he promised to get back to me the next morning. So off we trotted to meet the Labour leader and deputy, who immediately launched into a twenty minute lecture about how even the idea of a deal would have to be referred to some local government committee within London Labour Party, then referred to HQ for sign off, with the details of any agreement similarly referred back to the same committee before Labour councillors locally would be able to agree to it. They explained the meeting schedule of the various party bodies that would be deciding on our deal, and it was clear that the whole thing would take weeks, and that we’d never get to see or meet the real decision makers. The next morning the Tory leader got back to us with a few tweaks to what we had suggested, and our coalition deal was done, and lasted the full four years.
The Labour Party is the most horrendous organisation; if you ever get close to it, hold your nose.
"Process"...
That goes some way towards explaining why it's taken Starmer a year and a half, with an impregnable Commons majority, to do not very much at all.
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting leads him by only 7%, even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader. Rayner leads Farage by an even lower 6% in terms of who they would prefer to win the next GE on a forced choice
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
'The timing compounds everything. On a day when documented reporting on Hamas sexual violence was again circulating, the NYT chose to run an opinion column built substantially on unverifiable anonymous testimony asserting that Israelis are conducting systemic rape campaigns, not as a rigorously evidenced investigative report but as an opinion piece with the imprimatur of the paper of record.'
You don't have to like Carlson (FWIW, I hold him in deep contempt) to be alarmed by the way in which the administration is steadily perverting the institutions of the state to go after its opponents.
Prof David Bailey @dgbailey Apparently @brumlabour can’t appoint its Leader in Birmingham, because it has to await approval from Starmer or Steve Reed! The last centrally annointed leader hardly worked out well. Utter disregard for local members & elected councillors again.
And how does that work regarding possible rainbow coalition with Greens, Lib Dens & Indies to run @BhamCityCouncil ? Birmingham is now hanging around waiting for central Labour Party to distract its attention from leadership struggles to colonially appoint a Brum labour leader.
Yep. When my group of LibDem councillors found ourselves in the balance, me and my deputy had meetings with both Tory and Labour group leaders to discuss a possible deal. The Tory leader asked us what sort of deal we had in mind, I tabled some suggestions I had already prepared and agreed with colleagues, and he promised to get back to me the next morning. So off we trotted to meet the Labour leader and deputy, who immediately launched into a twenty minute lecture about how even the idea of a deal would have to be referred to some local government committee within London Labour Party, then referred to HQ for sign off, with the details of any agreement similarly referred back to the same committee before Labour councillors locally would be able to agree to it. They explained the meeting schedule of the various party bodies that would be deciding on our deal, and it was clear that the whole thing would take weeks, and that we’d never get to see or meet the real decision makers. The next morning the Tory leader got back to us with a few tweaks to what we had suggested, and our coalition deal was done, and lasted the full four years.
The Labour Party is the most horrendous organisation; if you ever get close to it, hold your nose.
"Process"...
That goes some way towards explaining why it's taken Starmer a year and a half, with an impregnable Commons majority, to do not very much at all.
Prof David Bailey @dgbailey Apparently @brumlabour can’t appoint its Leader in Birmingham, because it has to await approval from Starmer or Steve Reed! The last centrally annointed leader hardly worked out well. Utter disregard for local members & elected councillors again.
And how does that work regarding possible rainbow coalition with Greens, Lib Dens & Indies to run @BhamCityCouncil ? Birmingham is now hanging around waiting for central Labour Party to distract its attention from leadership struggles to colonially appoint a Brum labour leader.
Yep. When my group of LibDem councillors found ourselves in the balance, me and my deputy had meetings with both Tory and Labour group leaders to discuss a possible deal. The Tory leader asked us what sort of deal we had in mind, I tabled some suggestions I had already prepared and agreed with colleagues, and he promised to get back to me the next morning. So off we trotted to meet the Labour leader and deputy, who immediately launched into a twenty minute lecture about how even the idea of a deal would have to be referred to some local government committee within London Labour Party, then referred to HQ for sign off, with the details of any agreement similarly referred back to the same committee before Labour councillors locally would be able to agree to it. They explained the meeting schedule of the various party bodies that would be deciding on our deal, and it was clear that the whole thing would take weeks, and that we’d never get to see or meet the real decision makers. The next morning the Tory leader got back to us with a few tweaks to what we had suggested, and our coalition deal was done, and lasted the full four years.
The Labour Party is the most horrendous organisation; if you ever get close to it, hold your nose.
"Process"...
That goes some way towards explaining why it's taken Starmer a year and a half, with an impregnable Commons majority, to do not very much at all.
Two years, pretty much
I was allowing then a few months grace to get over the shock of winning, and get they're feet under the table. Even on that generous measure, they've been feeble.
That's not a party political view, it's shared across the political spectrum, including Starmer's current Labour critics.
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting by only 7% even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader
Folk keep ignoring the polling which is staring them in the face. It is said Major became PM because polling showed he had the best chance of winning an election. And he lasted 7 years despite few obvious qualities. Burnham beats Farage. That is all. The rest is overthinking.
I think several could beat Farage. I still see him as a protest vote which will disappear when a serious leader leading a serious party turns up
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting leads him by only 7%, even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader. Rayner leads Farage by an even lower 6% in terms of who they would prefer to win the next GE on a forced choice
It would be interesting to see some analysis of Burnham's vote and Streetings and even why Starmer is such a voter turn-off
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
Can you really be dim and make it as a DPP?
Good night.
Yes.
Also, it's possibly he has got supider as he's gotten older.
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting leads him by only 7%, even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader. Rayner leads Farage by an even lower 6% in terms of who they would prefer to win the next GE on a forced choice
It isn't a presidential election though.
No but I expect the Green and LD vote will collapse to Labour in Labour held marginal seats if it looks like Farage could become PM at the next GE.
I don't however expect the Tory vote to collapse to Reform
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting by only 7% even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader
Folk keep ignoring the polling which is staring them in the face. It is said Major became PM because polling showed he had the best chance of winning an election. And he lasted 7 years despite few obvious qualities. Burnham beats Farage. That is all. The rest is overthinking.
Heseltine actually led Kinnock in polls by more than Major did but given Thatcher trailed Kinnock in polling by 1990 Major was an acceptable compromise for Thatcherites who wanted to hold their seats but could not stand Hezza
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
I wouldn't say 'dim' - just a very narrow horizon. I somehow imagine him pondering over a menu - then ordering the same thing as last time. I think that's maybe my overriding picture of him - 'Same again'.
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
I wouldn't say 'dim' - just a very narrow horizon. I somehow imagine him pondering over a menu - then ordering the same thing as last time. I think that's maybe my overriding picture of him - 'Same again'.
He plays the flute but there are apparently no public videos of him playing it. Sums up Starmer's boring-ness. This would be something interesting for the public to see.
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
Never attribute to malice, that which might be otherwise explained by incompetence.
Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
I wouldn't say 'dim' - just a very narrow horizon. I somehow imagine him pondering over a menu - then ordering the same thing as last time. I think that's maybe my overriding picture of him - 'Same again'.
The biggest tragedy of this as a centre left liberal, is that Labour were in opposition for 14 years. Four election defeats. And they managed to scrape themselves to a huge majority where they shouldn't have been constrained on passing legislation, not if they were good at politics.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I really hope we get a surprise and someone unexpected comes through and wins . It’s bizarre that we’ll end up with two PMs , Johnson and Starmer who had big majorities and couldn’t even get close to serving a full term .
Maybe this is just the new normal .
No it’s not normal
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
THere is a third determined policy.
Corrupt the courts to squash fossil fuel and genocide protesters.
You don't have to like Carlson (FWIW, I hold him in deep contempt) to be alarmed by the way in which the administration is steadily perverting the institutions of the state to go after its opponents.
Indeed, he's a horrible, horrible man, but the degradation of state institutions in general is worrying. And whilst they didn't cause it, the Supreme Court gave a green light to every kind of perversion, abuse, and corruption under the sun.
I can see some Reform and Tory supporters in Rusholme voting for the Greens since neither of those parties stands a chance of winning.
No Tory is ever going to vote for the Marxist Polanski and his party and no Reform vote will vote for uber woke Polanski's party either
You really don’t understand the voters, do you?
I know Tory and Reform voters despise the Polanski Greens far more than they hate Burnham
A few in your circle maybe but that is anecdotal
What Tory or Reform voter is going to vote for a far left Marxist Republican who wants massive tax hikes, unlimited spending, unlimited immigration and is uber woke and wants to rejoin the EU?
You are just silly
Tactical voting is very real
I would vote for any party over the far left Greens as would any sane Tory
I'd vote Green over Reform/Restore on the grounds that the Greens are going to deport me like the Re lot.
I'm sane by the way, my mother had me tested.
You don't seriously believe Reform/Restore would start deporting people who are legally in the UK?
Reform? Probably not, especially as they try to become more and more mainstream.
Peston show poll just show on ITV finds Burnham leads Farage by 16% but Streeting by only 7% even worse than the 11% Starmer lead over the Reform leader
Folk keep ignoring the polling which is staring them in the face. It is said Major became PM because polling showed he had the best chance of winning an election. And he lasted 7 years despite few obvious qualities. Burnham beats Farage. That is all. The rest is overthinking.
Heseltine actually led Kinnock in polls by more than Major did but given Thatcher trailed Kinnock in polling by 1990 Major was an acceptable compromise for Thatcherites who wanted to hold their seats but could not stand Hezza
My first political bet, I won £1 off my Yorkshire Heseltine fan flatmate
If Andy Burnham had any sense he would continue to serve his term out as a successful mayor and wait until after the next general election, to take over from whomever loses it. Becoming Prime Minister now is not very appealing since there is no money in the coffers and the party is divided and lacking realism. Labour could regain power as part of a coalition in about 2031. We may have to wait until 2029 for the next election but we won't be waiting that much longer for the one after I reckon.
He'd be 59 by the next election and possibly facing 5 years as LOTO. Is that really a plan? His time was Gorton and Denton. But the control freaks in Labour HQ weren't having it.
Not for the first time in history, the control freaks seem freakishly terrible at controlling stuff.
Comments
Problem is nowadays it seems no one wants to put their phone down. So you just seem to get endless speculation and rumour. At the moment we know very little. It is not obvious that Streeting has the numbers but he may. It is also not obvious that Burnham has lined up a seat, everyone that anyone speculates about seems to leads to a denial but those denials may be false. It seems that it is time to open a beer and see what tomorrow brings.
For me the quality of image and camera angles aren't even close to how good the English Premier league version is
Wait til you see some of the previous examples of Scottish VAR, you could fill a comedy show with it
RFM: 29% (+3)
CON: 20% (+1)
LAB: 18% (-4)
LDM: 14% (+1)
GRN: 12% (-3)
SNP: 3% (+1)
Via
@tweetfreshwater
, 9-10 May.
Changes w/ 10-12 Apr.
Abysmal.
She should be out.
The Labour Party is the most horrendous organisation; if you ever get close to it, hold your nose.
It is not happening and she now needs to take on Farage with the same gusto
If no one is working with Reform and Labour stifled by Centralisation and bureaucracy, then there isn't any obvious majority in a few places.
Newcastle. Seemed a slam dunk Green Lib Dem administration.
Apparently Ed Davey isn't keen however.
But there mathematically isn't another solution unless the unlikely event of one of them working with Reform.
I know this may sound bonkers.
But stranger things have happened.
I think so
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mieZ8g10bKw
But there isn't an alternative...
For believers in PR you'd think they'd relish it.
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/inside-newcastles-political-dilemma-election-33934931
The Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs has issued a warrant for his arrest. I doubt there is much chance of extradition.
https://x.com/MarkGaleotti/status/2054672066259915177
Labour could have avoided ALL of this - all of it - if they’d spent just a few of those 14 years in opposition deciding what to do in power. Starmer should have entered Number 10 in calm command. With firm ideas, a ready team, a steady gaze at the horizon
Instead they entered office with one plan: to grasp as many freebies as possible and squabble over who got the nice free houses
A pitiful spectacle. They don’t deserve a second term and they won’t get one. They may not survive the defeat coming their way
At least he wasn't in the tent when this lack of plan was formulated.
And he's quite spectacularly failed to bankrupt Manchester.
If he does somehow win the leadership, he needs to clear out most of the Cabinet. It’s like a new editor of a newspaper. The best ones impose their personality with a huge painful purge. It hurts but it works. Everyone grasps: this is new
He obviously starts with kicking Tiny Tears out of Number 11
I do know he applied for Gorton and Denton and the Party in Westminster decided they'd put rocket boosters under the Greens and Reform instead.
https://x.com/NICKIMINAJ/status/2054668229411299550
😩 The UK is truly one of a kind.
They will portray her in film & TV one day…just like they did with Margaret Thatcher.
Apparently Miliband won’t stand if Starmer decides to fight on !
The only possible way back is someone who hasn't been in it.
And given that we've three more years of it, like it or not, thanks to those of us who voted for it, it's in everyone's interest that it at least gets some kind of hearing.
How that happens is above my pay grade.
But that's how I see it.
And yet here we are, 22 months in, discussing how they best replace the PM who has become one of the least liked in history.
And two of the four potential candidates to replace him are the same as those who contested the 2010 leadership election. And the king over the water not only lost that one, but also the 2015 leadership election.
It's just so tragically useless.
I’d prefer Streeting because he’s on the right (and I have a possibly delusional belief he’d be OK)
Failing that, Burnham is the best for the reasons we’ve discussed. He’s not tainted by this abject failure. He’s done well in Manchester (it seems). He’s a fresh-ish face who might bring fresh ideas
Rayner is a horrible risk and a likely disaster
Miliband is worse
Keeping Starmer? lol
Is that really a plan?
His time was Gorton and Denton.
But the control freaks in Labour HQ weren't having it.
Maybe this is just the new normal .
It is said Major became PM because polling showed he had the best chance of winning an election.
And he lasted 7 years despite few obvious qualities.
Burnham beats Farage.
That is all.
The rest is overthinking.
That goes some way towards explaining why it's taken Starmer a year and a half, with an impregnable Commons majority, to do not very much at all.
Starmer, in particular, just had to be a competent man with a plan. Given that he was DPP for years and they had 14 years in opposition, this expectation was entirely reasonable
His failures on both counts are bizarre. I see only two policies where he’s shown real determination and a plan to battle through opposition. But those two policies were “assisted dying” and paying to give away the Chagos islands. The first was highly contentious and the second arguably treasonous
It’s mad. Why those two? It’s not implausible Starmer is compromised in some way. If he isn’t compromised then he’s really quite dim, singularly unsuited to politics, and becoming DPP merely requires a paper shuffling apparatchik
https://x.com/MosheELavi/status/2054618395698418124
'The timing compounds everything. On a day when documented reporting on Hamas sexual violence was again circulating, the NYT chose to run an opinion column built substantially on unverifiable anonymous testimony asserting that Israelis are conducting systemic rape campaigns, not as a rigorously evidenced investigative report but as an opinion piece with the imprimatur of the paper of record.'
https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/2054359125597757797
You don't have to like Carlson (FWIW, I hold him in deep contempt) to be alarmed by the way in which the administration is steadily perverting the institutions of the state to go after its opponents.
With all the drama elsewhere I hadn't clocked they lost at home to Hibs.
Even on that generous measure, they've been feeble.
That's not a party political view, it's shared across the political spectrum, including Starmer's current Labour critics.
Starmer is simply dim. And he's not even dim but cunning, he is just simply and irredeemably, dim
Kemi Badenoch.
Good night.
Also, it's possibly he has got supider as he's gotten older.
I don't however expect the Tory vote to collapse to Reform
Corrupt the courts to squash fossil fuel and genocide protesters.
Restore? Of course they would.