What time do you think Rachel will hand in her notice tomorrow?

[Neverendingwashingbasket]

I think if it's not in already tonight then it will be before 10am tomorrow.

No, they haven’t. Equally wrong too.
Criticise a person’s politics by all means (Reeves AND Truss) but I for one never go for their looks, clothes, weight, lettuce shelf life etc (no, not even Boris…).

Also speculating when someone absolutely tanking the economy less than a month in the job by sheer incompetence of how the markets work, should go, and taking sweepstakes on someone crying at PMQ clearly having a crisis of some sort is not quite the same thing, is it?

Liz Truss insisted on her ridiculous plan, markets and economy plummeted, she needed to go & it was a matter of when. I hope she had some support when she stepped down, because however incompetent she might have been, it was still brutal.

Rachel Reeves seems to have some sort of emotional issue (and i won't speculate if it’s work/personal/both, but I hope she's supported too.)

For either and a lot more people “out there”, life in the public eye is merciless, so a bit of empathy would probably be better. Or at least refraining from taking bets, comparing people to lettuces etc. Politically disagree all you want with both or either. Leave the rest of the needless nastiness.

Yes I thought the Tories laughing as she cried was pretty grim. If it turns out she’d just heard a relative was terminally ill or similar that behaviour won’t age well.

If it really IS a personal matter, which is so bad you can't hold it together in public, surely you would stay away from the TV cameras? Your colleagues would understand and advise you to stay away from the front bench at least ,given the mood of the Commons yesterday.

And you might even choose to make your personal matter public because it is likely to come out anyway.

If it was personal (bereavement, family issues etc) they should have stayed away if there was a chance they couldn't hold it all together.

She needs to hand her notice in now for her own sanity.

Bloody hell, kick a woman when she’s down, why don’t you?
None of you had a bad moment? Ever?
I hope karma shows you how the world works.

I don't buy the personal issue.
If it was that bad, as a public 'face' you either grit your teeth and get through the 30 minutes, or you decide the best course of action is to stay away.

There are many examples of politicians and other public figures who have created a vacancy at meetings/ events because they decided that was the wisest option at the time.

Yes, she would have predicted people would think she didn't want to face the music, but that would have been better than breaking down in tears and opening up speculation.

Reeves is finding this out. Karma for her own contempt.

Overheard this morning "Politics should be about Politics, not personality"

It really made me think about how much of MN political chat is about personality not politics.

As I said on another thread, I think Badenoch is loathsome and her race is irrelevant.

That's missing the point.

As a Chancellor( which no woman in this country has even been) you're expected to be cool and professional. That means either holding it together for half an hour, or staying away and saying in advance there is a personal matter you are dealing with.

Would we accept a male Chancellor crying?

I am sure we'd not. So it's not acceptable to say it's about kicking a woman. We're supposed to be equal. Don't play the 'Oh she's a woman having bad day card'.

Presumably you didn't have an issue with both Rayner and Starmer ignoring Reeves obvious discomfort? At least one of them would have known what the supposed 'personal issue' was yet neither was willing to show any support publicly.

It's not about personality at all. It's about competence and integrity.

Do appreciate RR wasn't crying when KB said she "looked miserable"?

The aroma of misogyny is strong here.

Because people feel betrayed by the policies Reeves has introduced and would be glad to see the back of her?

God, THIS!

Wasn’t growth 0.7% last quarter ?

Of course. Everyone landing on Kemi. It’s Reeves own party that has their knives out. That’s why she’s crying.

She does have to balance the books though, otherwise the bond markets won't keep lending us money. Labour haven't gone into power and suddenly thought oooh you know what would be great, being a lot more like the Tories than anyone expected.

There is a lot that's about the person rather than what they achieve.

That extends to saying Rachel should be above criticism and offered sympathy for crying in parliament and the female leader of the opposition is fault for holding the government to account in a way that male politicians do without criticism.

Also all the KB stuff. She’s not even part of Labour’s shitshow.

Crying in those contexts was completely different. She was crying because she wasn’t coping for whatever reason. She clearly isn’t up to the job. Churchill cried as a response to very emotive events that were not to do with his inability to do the job , quite the reverse.

Balancing the books is called ‘austerity’.

Half the country moan about benefits claimants being scroungers, the other half can’t see that the country can’t fund rapidly increasing numbers of the workforce being unable to work. She can’t win. Freezing grannies, poor old millionaire farmers like Clarkson, and just think of the privately educated kids. Every move she makes is vilified by the press until they get the answers they want.
Just wait til Nige gets in. Let’s see the media’s tune change then.