egg

I reckon Whelk's in a very comfortable place. That said, this is the web, so any of us can be whatever we want to say we are. I'm a Kosher butcher, born in Denver, net worth £14m.

Pretty much where I am, although there's a case for swapping Johnson and Starmer for me.

You keep trotting out that nonsense. He didn't.

Whilst I don't agree with the vat on school fees, any kid who needs specialist education should have an EHCP. In that scenario, paying rather than leaving the Tribunal to determine school placement seems unusual. Sure, there's a delay in getting to Tribunal, but getting parental choice when there isn't difficult.

Anyone who uses that description is dopey af.

Yeah, I know, tongue was somewhat in cheek. That said, from Mayor, to PM is quite the leap, and to get that gig without the public understanding what he's about and/or intends, does not sit comfortably with me.

It'll be a tombola of the above. Dunno why, but I see Streeting getting Chancellor, Reeves Home Secretary, Ange Health.

Of course I'm aware he was an MP. The point is that he hasn't been for a while, and however you cut, a mayor is a glorified councillor. I'm not doubting that he has something about him, but there's no doubt that if he's, essentially, coronated by the party, he's got the PM role without fighting a competition either within his party or the public.

Agreed. The idea that a bloke can be a glorified councillor, win a contrived seat, then waltz into number 10 doesn't sit right with me.

Streeting supporting Burnham. Unless a big hitter gives it a go, this'll be a coronation for the Gallagher tribute act.

I'm not convinced he'll be opposed, or at least not seriously.

I see you didn't walk is through his actual points one by one. Give it a go...

Cracking response. I'll copy his comments... "economy slow but steady, workers rights intact, NHS waiting lists moving in the right direction, immigration down, deportations up, Iran well dealt with, and in contrast to the last 3 pms before him, he hasn't killed 200,000 people, beaten his wife, had any affairs, hasn't tanked the economy or made us a laughing stock, insulted any grieving mothers in pmqs, hasn't left d-day commemorations before every other world leader, and hasn't lost an election..." Point out where he's wrong...

🤞🙏🤞 Hopefully so. This is one thing I hope I'm wrong about.

Yep. Re the first part, agreed, he's just done a bad job of doing bad policies. Re the second part, messing it up this badly is almost impressively shit. On the last part, that's largely how I see it, although I suspect we'll end up with reform by a mixture of populism and default - the masses won't see a credible option, and will just think sod it, we need change.

I think it's a mixture. Ego, pride, and probably some fear - will a Burnham left lurch be good or bad for the party/country? Taking Alex's points, would the Starmer replacement have any answer to the populist concerns - welfare, immigration, and tax? I can't see it.

None of that sounds like Burnham's menu. Re illegal immigration, the problem is that there isn't an easy solution. The channel ain't going anywhere, and we'll have masses of boats arising during the upcoming calm weather period - no party can or will stop that. What no party will do either is have an ICE type agency rounding up people, to send them to an unspecified place. The pledges are just that. And Welfare, yep, too much and unsustainable but it's the entire welfare budget, state pension included - that alone is 5% of GDP which is mental.

To see Reform off, Labour and the Tories both have a mountain to climb. There's a long time to go, but if there was a GE tomorrow, we'd be waking up to a Reform government the following day. Fortunately it won't be anytime soon. And yep, Davey has to go. The Libs need work.

I can't see a Tory resurgence in a month of Tuesdays, they're done at national level imo. As for labour, Streeting or Burnham have got a hell of a job on their hands making Labour re-electable. They've got time, but as things stand, the masses have had enough and are adopting a bit of an "anyone else will do" approach. I hope I'm wrong, but as things stand, there's no real threat to Reform unfortunately.

There was a lot of tactical voting going on there. If that was a normal bye election, not a vote to bin Starmer, Reform would have walked that. If I were Farage, I'd be delighted with that outcome.

Hopefully so, but it's taken far too long. The "oppressed and under an existential threat" line has been supported for far too long.

At what point will the US withdraw military aid and supplies to Israel? It's the only way to get them to wind their necks in - still smashing up Gaza and Lebanon, and stealing West Bank land. Additionally, do the Israeli's still have any support on here? I'd imagine that the penny has now dropped with most people.

Nah, they'll see that as a really positive result. Labour won handsomely but I think anyone can see that this was a one off opportunity to can Starmer vote with tactical voting to that end. Looking at the numbers, the Tories, Greens and Libs got less than 1500 votes between them. The Tories and Libs are done, the Greens will only attract a select crowd, and will likely only do well in certain areas. This showd that Reforms only threat is Restore. They'll walk the next GE barring a miracle, but in fairness to their voters, who else?

Yep, awful, nobody has suggested otherwise, but what's that got to do with the point being responded to namely that Starmer covered it up or minimised it?

Monitor