to believe Rachel Reeves was crying because

I think if you have been a high acheiver throughout our your life with a gilded career then the 'dream job' and it all goes to shit quickly then it can have a devastating psychological inpact. The bigger you are the bigger you fall.

Maybe Rachel was thinking about her legacy and how if she stays in role how she can face up to interviewers to defend her record. The future must look a bit bleak.

I think Rachel should have really been self aware of her emotional state though in the commons.

‘So Rachel cries. Kemi Badenoch is worse than the worse. Not Cameron, Sunak, etc would be so bad as Kemi because Rachel has cried. The problem is not that Rachel has cried but that Kemi is a bad person for not giving sway to Rachel's tears.
So let's bash Kemi because the real problem here is her not thar Rachel lacks resilience under the pressure that is part and parcel of this job. When a white woman cries, look for a black or brown person to bear the brunt of it.’

OMG this has nothing to do with race. Did you see how Kemi acted? She is not just a random lady, she is LOTO. She should be standing up explaining what her party would do differently and inspiring us with her leadership skills to vote for her. She did nothing like that. In fact can’t really recall her having any opinions outside of culture wars.

And lied about a '£22 billion black hole' which included her throwing ludicrous pay settlements at her union backers.

She's lied from her very first speech as chancellor.

Angela Rayner was also sneering at her. I don’t know what Reeves was crying about, but she’s clearly not up to the job anyway.

McFadden or Mahmood are being mooted as her likely replacements, which she will unless the money markets settle down.

And Liz was whilst she held on for, what, just enough days to secure her PM pension ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rachel-reeves-crying-starmer-pmqs-latest-news-b2781165.html

It’s madness. Starmer can goad and prod, Reeves can’t get it together but Kemi is attacked.

ETA sorry -I've accidentally quoted the wrong person

We're in a period of rapid change. Standard of living will drop. We have an aging population, we're increasing spending on defence, climate change/net zero is expensive - something has to give. We can't expect Scandinavian social spending on American taxes.

I don't understand why Starmer promised not to raise "taxes on working people" in his manifesto. Isn't "tax more spend more" standard left wing policy? If the labour party really believe that the majority of voters want to increase welfare spending, then it makes sense for the majority of us to pay for it.

So Rachel cries. Kemi Badenoch is worse than the worse. Not Cameron, Sunak, etc would be so bad as Kemi because Rachel has cried. The problem is not that Rachel has cried but that Kemi is a bad person for not giving sway to Rachel's tears.

So let's bash Kemi because the real problem here is her not thar Rachel lacks resilience under the pressure that is part and parcel of this job. When a white woman cries, look for a black or brown person to bear the brunt of it.

Not quite the first answer but this one absolutely nailed it for me.

Starmer is the sneering bully.

I agree with almost all of this, except the Sunak bit. He wouldn’t have been able to resist a little jibe.

Badenoch is exactly like a sneering teenage bully, for sure.

And who do you think will be better?

Absolutely. The idea that focus should have been placed on comforting Rachel shows a failure to understand the serious business of the Commons. It is human to cry but come on now, Rachel's crying so publicly has impacted confidence in her. It would have been the same if it was a man crying under pressure so publicly in high office.

No one is responsible for Rachel's tears but Rachel. To start pointing fingers at who should take responsibility for Rachel's feelings is not helpful to women's cause. It just plays to a variety of typical stereotypes.

The Commons is a tough environment as it should be. We want politicians to hold each other accountable and to expect Rachel to be treated with kids gloves is ludicrous.

Hope they feel the pressure. @GoSteadyReadyyep. Typical for Labour.

she hasnt lied about her qualifications and she is just as qualified as any of the men who have done the role in the last few years. She has been handed an impossible situation and is doing her best within very tight confines. She has made mistakes like anyone and is probably exhausted, hormonal and stressed. It’s probably not one thing but lots in combination.
A man might look stressed but probably would be unlikely to cry - but that’s ok our biologies are different but our brains are just as good.
But you know what, it shows she cares about the job.
Does Kemi have any solutions herself? I thought her jeering was like an awful playground bully.
i actually couldnt imagine Blair, Cameron, May, Brown or even Sunak capitalising on that.

I don't care the reason. She should not have been crying in the house. Those pictures have gone around the world and whether the reason is personal or not, it's the perception that matters.

Yields will drop back over this because the fundamentals of the economy have not changed nor has policy, in fact they have started to already...

The UK owes over 2 trillion, its productivity poor, the failure to achieve just 5 billion in savings changes nothing for the markets.

There are plenty who could replace her but i feel, you don't give a shit about the UK, let alone borrowing costs, its about point scoring.

Stephen Kerr’s statement was political point scoring and bland.
If he really was concerned about Rachel reeves then he should have said nothing publicly and reached out to her privately.

personal reasons: she should have excused herself from PMQ. I thought it was good to talk, there would be less speculation and rumours if she was open about her struggles if they are genuine and not linked to getting into trouble for giving long answers and having to do another u turn.

Kier Starmer was right not to publicly acknowledge her distress in front of the whole House of Commons (he discretely asked her if she was ok before the start).

The issue is that Reeves isn’t up to the job, and Labour have an intellectual deficit so can not find anyone suitable to replace her..,,

The markets will become very jumpy and fractious if this is not sorted out very very quickly. Adding even more pressure to a volatile situation. This could swiftly escalate and needs containing.

GCSE Economics, right there.

I have awoken feeling brimful, for the first time in a while.

Why so cheerful? Well, this might just be the beginning of the end for our illustrious government - with luck, it will prove another ‘good news’ day.

Let’s see how Starmer and Reeves respond to a little dial up of the pressure, shall we?

They clearly don’t like it up em, as the saying goes.

Hilarious yet pathetiic how so many Tory supporters are concerned about a very small increase in yields, 4.5 to 4.6..... yet had nothing at all to say when yields went from around 1% to 4.5% with their choice of PM, Liz Truss.....

...and have stayed there ever since... despite getting rid of her.

White woman cries and the black women should suffer for it. Why are some of you trying to turn this into a war against Kemi Badenoch? I guess when it comes to sympathy and support for women, that is only reserved for one group of women? Where is this so called sisterhood and solidarity?

Rachel cries, let's feel sorry for her and let's turn on Kemi Badenoch. I do not like the latter, really can't stand her but what is going on here with the tears of Rachel turning into a bash Kemi?

I understand that many many people disagree with me, but I believe that crying in the workplace is totally unprofessional and unacceptable

I used to work for a Director who cried every time something happened which challenged her. So .....a few times a week. Did my head in