Burnham has won. More turmoil?

The Tories don’t need a plan. They are not in power. Some people seem to think that Labour can still act as if they are in opposition.

Oh dear.

I don't know why you're laughing. Do you support a PM, who thinks a bloke can have a cervix and an incoming PM, who let's down young victims of racist grooming gangs? Let's not forget this government's early prison release scheme, which is in danger of letting free said racist rapists to free up more space. Yes, a right piss take.

I think this is actually a win for reform. Their candidate wasn’t really a challenge was he?

The great gain for Reform is the turmoil of political unrest and they are rubbing their hands together at the oncoming leadership challenge.

It is called subterfuge!

It’s “hysterical” that you can’t read a post properly before commenting. I said, He will go down in history as being one of the worst PMs ever!
I would rather have Boris Johnson that Keir Starmer! Lisa Truss isn’t even worth mentioning.

Are you talking about the Tories?

I do like Andy Burnham. It's a sad day for Manchester to lose him as mayor. However he's more left wing than Starmer at a time the population is swinging to the right so I think will finish Labour off.

I think overall he will be judged on whether he can turn the economy around. People will forgive him for being left wing if they have more money in their pocket. Sadly I think the economy is too far fucked for any fast fixes. But he seems to understand the need to invest for growth rather than austerity measures, or he has in Manchester anyway from what I can see.

I honestly can’t understand why so many people are convinced by him. It will just be more of the same. No plan and u-turns galore.

That said, I don’t think Burnham is a golden ticket. We have too many problems as a country, which have been coming over 20 years. Too much of our income is in the hands of the super rich, and hence not available for infrastructure and other projects.

It may not explain the vote share but I was responding to the poster who said that the only people who vote Labour are people who want to be subsidised by the state. That is not why I vote Labour.

Not everyone believes the current narrative that the only reason we have lots of people who are on benefits is because we have had a Labour government for two years who want everyone to be on benefits in order to keep them downtrodden and voting for them.

We have lots of people receiving in work benefits due to low pay, or receiving state pensions. As someone child free with an income of much more than £50k I am “happy” to pay my share to make society more equitable. There may be more of us than you think.

This! Or do we want to just stand back and dig an even bigger hole. No thanks, we’re not all that dim.

Yeh those Mandelson excuse posts won’t wash.

Burnham’s return is inevitable as Starmer was never a leader and Rachel Reeves is a shocking chancellor.

Starmer has made terrible mistakes:

• Mandelson at the heart of government
• Making it too expensive to give school leavers a foot in the door to build experience
• Putting up business rates and employers national insurance means job losses are mounting and growth stalling
• Not getting to grips with a growing welfare bill we can’t afford.

All this is on his and Rachel’s watch, not the Tories.

He has done better on the global stage as he’s surrounded by technocrats there, just like him.

Burnham will feel like a fresh breadth of air but has been soft on putting the above right and is tacking left. The markets will punish him if veers left.

We can’t afford to be the country Labour want.

I think people want 'change'. Labour's campaign focused heavily on that. It wasn't vote Labour as much as vote Andy for a change from the government. People like and trust him and believe he can do it.
Reform offering up an insultingly poor candidate helped. Though perhaps he was the best they had.
Had Labour not focused on change via Burnham then people may well have been inclined to vote for change via Reform. How reluctantly, and how much as a positive endorsement of their policies, its hard to know, since much pro Reform talk is centred on Labour criticism rather than enthusiasm for what Reform will do differently. As no one seems clear on the details of that.

Exactly

Oh and let’s not forget the Tories knew what a catastrophe they’d caused and how it’s virtually impossible for them as a party to sort it so they legged it and left it to others to try to sort the mess whilst criticising from the sidelines with zero policies.

And as regards Reform!🤣

We’re already in the turmoil with Starmer. It’s just that it’s not intended.

Hi Kier….

How is it futile, when the fella who agitated for Brexit, thereby tanking the economy, is now wanting to be PM - and people are voting for his party?

Surely, it’s not bemoaning what’s past, but being aware of the consequences of what you vote for?

Grooming gang apologist and advocate of men in womens spaces. What's not to like?

Starmer and Reeves are not up to the job.

A change will be good for Labour and for the country.

Maybe then we can now have a real Labour PM with real Labour policies...

And anyone who thinks Farage, a far right, work-shy, Moscow loving, grifter with dodgy donors could be a decent UK leader needs to seriously give their head a wobble.

Tell me you know nothing about how Government policy is implemented and how legislation is brought in by telling me you know nothing about how Government policy is implemented and how legislation is brought in.

The Tories were in power for 14 years. Labour's been in power for just over 18 months. It takes so much time and red tape to undo a previous Govt's work, especially one that had carte blanche to do what it wanted for 14 years. It was only when Labour took office that they could properly go through the books and see how bad the UK's finances were – and that was just a slither of what they needed to do. I do think they have made lame mistakes along the way and I want Burnham to replace Starmer, but the reason people say this is because it's true.

I’ve heard it all now! Oh it wouldn’t be Starmer’s fault would it… no it must be Trumps!

A tired old defence! Seriously. It’s not old and going to get worse,the Bank of England has spoken today re how much of our economy we have lost because of it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg75npqkq4o

The lack of the right owning what they did and the damaging it’s causing,shutting down any discussion on it or attempts to reverse some of the damage is the reason why we’re in a mess.

But crack on,carry on whining about VAT on school fees. 👏🏿

He won't, you know. He'll be a footnote in history at best. Lord Starmer of Oxted was, as Keir Starmer, a successful barrister, appointed Queen's Counsel, and generally thought to have done well as Director of Public Prosecutions, after which he was knighted. However, although he led his party to a huge General Election victory in 2024 and thereby became Prime Minister, his government made a number of questionable decisions (see main entry for UK Labour government 2024-2029) which led to a great drop in his popularity and his party's within a short time. He lost a leadership election to Lord Burnham of Makersfield in 2026 and was elevated to the House of Lords shortly afterwards.