AIBU to think Andy Burnham might call a general election soon?

They very much didn't set the scene, there were people on the right agitating for a GE in 07 when Brown took over, nothing to do with their numbers being more favourable with Cameron than Howard obv. There was just less social media to do it on then.

But I agree with the rest, it's part of the landscape now and inevitable. Personally I tune it out.

I did. I need more coffee! 🤭

I replied before you edited to add being punished at the next election- I agree that's the most likely outcome in the event of another Truss style epic fail. The proposals failed as they were always going to, but I've always thought part of the reason she was able to get in and implement them in the first place is people maybe didn't take her seriously.

Or more to the point giving away money that has to be borrowed at high interest.

I think you meant to quote CagneyLacey? But thank you x

Comprehension fail ?

Whose money was Starmer giving away?

What this country needs is stability, not another bloody general election.

Labour set the scene on this and benefited from the media and outrage on SM to get in. They’ll get the same back whether people now think it’s too much or not.

Worth reminding the meeting that the UK is still paying for her experiment. Turns out giving away other peoples money is expensive, Who knew ?

It does when MPs vote as MPs not Party Members.

Part of the problems the Tory "Strong and Stable ®©" parade of governments faces was there were enough Tory MPs who were able to threaten to abstain or vote against (or for) measures that led to permanent internecine horse trading.

Nobody has made any attempt to silence you. Is everyone supposed to just fall in line and agree with you?

What we need now is three years of stability and a government with its head down so we can make an evidence based decision when we next go to the polls.

Why does need to stop now and not in 2022?

I mean Truss kind of illustrates exactly what I said.

She proposed major changes to the taxation system which she had no mandate to do, the markets, the press and the public hammered her (mainly due to lack of planning rather than the proposals actually being that bad) and she was forced to resign.

I think if her proposals had worked and been well received she would have gone to the country in pretty short order. She didn't actually get round to that because she was deposed before it could happen.

Doesn't matter. It needs to stop. This is the government of the UK, not a playground popularity context.

Ehh, I don't think it will tbh. It didn't in 2022, nobody voted for the Truss plan, and this government have an ever bigger majority. For whatever reason, our system doesn't really prevent this kind of thing.

He would lose half his seats

A party gains the mandate based on the manifesto they present.

That's why all parties try very hard to stick to the manifesto, why manifesto pledge breaks are significant in the news and are avoided at all costs, and why politicians come up with all sorts of weasel words to try to claim they haven't broken manifesto pledges (such as the definition of working people).

Break a major manifesto pledge in an obvious and undefendable way and the subsequent public and media pressure is more than capable of bringing a government down, or ensuring they are punished at the next election.

Considering that he wasn’t even an MP until a few weeks ago, I find it difficult to believe he has a legitimate right to become PM.

Only because you don't understand how our constitution works. Which is derived from the notion of liberal democracy wherein what is not forbidden is permitted. Basically what it means to be British.

Thank you. Labour has a clear mandate. I think some people don't understand the political system.

For those of us who despise Labour, today is A. Good. Day.

Don't be silly. I am not able to silence anyone (if only 😁). If I want to respond to your posts, I will.

I guess you don't like the truth, though.

Yes, and London and the SE pay 45% of the UK’s total income tax.

Arguable.

He will call one at any point he thinks he will have a good chance of winning.

The big problem for Burnham at the moment is that he is promising the biggest change in UK politics in 40 years.

Yet at the same time he is also promising to stick to the core of the 2024 manifesto.

Quite how it is possible to do both is something of a mystery. I suspect he has kept quiet about policy before he is secure in number 10 for a reason.

And I don't think he will be able to continue long without an election if he is going to enact significant changes of the kind he has hinted at.

He would risk losing a massive labour majority. Being popular in very pro-Labour Manchester isn't a very good test. The 'King of the North' also has to win over the south because that is where the majority of the population lives. The current impression he gives is that the South will have to pay more, but benefit less. It isn't really a vote winner.