The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

While I get your point, it's a bit disingenuous to call him a glorified councillor. You're aware he did used to be an MP, right?

At the very least he's less robotic than Starmer. I once visited the HoC public gallery and watched him debate with Michael Gove about the bill to close the Sure Start centres. He came across very well and showed Gove up for the pompous prick that he is. I thought he would have been a good choice for Leader when Corbyn resigned.

all well and good that he might have something more about him than a wet paper bag, but we are going to get even MORE labour. Higher taxes, more benefits, more support for illegal immigrants, more net zero.....

He will probably do well to last the 3 years, let alone beyond it

[Lord Duckhunter]

30 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Burnham will have a very difficult time trying to convince the parliamentary labour party that the only way to meaningfully improve things you will have to start with a bit more economic prudence. 

His hands are tied by their ridiculous manifesto. They went into an election they were absolutely guaranteed to win, with the most timid un radical manifesto you could ever imagine.  How can you spout a load of stuff about “change” and then be as radical as the Tory Pinko’s. If they wanted to do labour things and change the country they should have put it in there. It may have cost them 30 or 40 seats, but fuck me they still would have had a decent majority. 
 

If “Andy” tries to do anything other than tinker around the edges, the markets will react & his perceived lack of a mandate will be like a millstone round his neck. He’ll become very unpopular very quickly.

If I was advising him,  id tell him to go to the people in early autumn, put his change agenda to them. He’ll probably win with a significantly reduced majority, but thats the key word, “majority”. Unless he’s a once in a generation politician who can like Mrs Thatcher transform themselves in office and use his personality to impose himself, he will need a radical mandate. Nothing I’ve seen in his past makes me think he’s anything  but a plodder, who has risen to the top due to the lack of any alternative talent the party will accept. 
 

As for Starmer, he was clearly out of his depth. But he was chosen as the new Kinnock, supposed to transform the party into something that could win elections. He would lose one, but eat into the Tory majority , ready for the next  leader to take them to the promised land (and it wouldn’t have been Andy “King of the North” Burnham either). Unfortunately for him, the Tories were so bad he actually won. He was given a very poor hand and preceded to fuck it right up, whilst blaming everyone else. A horrendous PM, morally questionable , with the charisma of a fucking plank. Good riddance.

Edited 1 hour ago by Lord Duckhunter

[ecuk268]

Here's what we can expect:

 

[egg]

38 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

While I get your point, it's a bit disingenuous to call him a glorified councillor. You're aware he did used to be an MP, right?

At the very least he's less robotic than Starmer. I once visited the HoC public gallery and watched him debate with Michael Gove about the bill to close the Sure Start centres. He came across very well and showed Gove up for the pompous prick that he is. I thought he would have been a good choice for Leader when Corbyn resigned.

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. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

Surely everyone, left, right, black, white, commies, pinkos, Far Right, hard left, Romney Marshers can agree on one thing. Steve Bray needs a fucking good hiding….

[AlexLaw76]

Look at the date...weird how him and Big Ange has radically changed their tone.

 

[Sarnia Cherie]

Andy Burnham seems the best prospect when you look at who else might be keen on running in the leadership race. The thought of Wes Streeting, Ed Milliband and David Lammy fills me with dread but that changes to horror at the prospect of Angela Rayner or Rachel Reeves. We shall have to wait and see. It all seems like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. 

[Gloucester Saint]

14 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Surely everyone, left, right, black, white, commies, pinkos, Far Right, hard left, Romney Marshers can agree on one thing. Steve Bray needs a fucking good hiding….

What did he do for a living pre-referendum? Only 56 now.

[Farmer Saint]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

Unfortunately any pretence at you understanding economics has long gone. Tell us about inflation measure -lol

It's interesting - he seems to have married the traits of being both an idiot AND a liar. He really does remind me of another couple of posters that are conspicuous by their absence.

[AlexLaw76]

4 minutes ago, Sarnia Cherie said:

Andy Burnham seems the best prospect when you look at who else might be keen on running in the leadership race. The thought of Wes Streeting, Ed Milliband and David Lammy fills me with dread but that changes to horror at the prospect of Angela Rayner or Rachel Reeves. We shall have to wait and see. It all seems like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. 

Who do you think he is going to give the top jobs to?