Why do so many Labour MPs want Kier out?

[SixtySevenLabubus]

Im not a fan of Labour/ Starmer as such, but I don’t think he’s a bad politician. Why do so many Labour MPs want him out?

I suspect it’s all about self preservation. They can’t see any way of him winning the next GE and so they’re backing someone who’d be more likely to win (and thus they get to keep their jobs).

The big issue will be the economy.

We're spending more on welfare than we, as a country, earn. Some of that goes on supporting immigrants which doesn't help, but the main problem is companies are going under everywhere under the increased tax regime.

The company I work for is closing a factory and halving the workforce. More people on welfare. Less tax take.

The sooner Labour are out, the sooner we can start to repair the damage. We need to cut welfare no matter how unpalatable that is.

He’s just so dull. I can’t stand listening to him. I don’t hear any passion. I’ve thought for years that AB is the best man to be labour leader.

Keir might have made a decent fist of being PM in the 1970s when most politicians were grown ups who talked to grown ups in grown up language. He isnt a good PM in the days of instant soundbite journalism and needing an instant quick fix on every problem. IMO he is in the wrong job - he'd have made a decent fist of Foreign Secretary.

Agree.
When he was elected the feeling was that he wasn't going to have a revolution but would introduce stability to politics after the Tories years of prime minister musical chairs. I liked all the stuff in the manifesto, he has made steady progress, he's shown himself to be an international asset and is doing a good job overall.
I'm furious that they think they can substitute Burnham without asking the electorate.

I think the big issue is, and will be, the economy. It is true that the economy not going well has reduced net migration. I'm not sure that Labour will want to draw attention to that though.

He’s a human rights lawyer who is running the system for lawyers.
Chags deal - unnecessary and will cost 1billion pounds in the long run.
Increased regulation of all kinds on businesses including quite sinister increases in state controls like the push for digital ID and arrests of 1,200 a year over speech crimes.
Rape gangs-refused to have an enquiry initially.
Energy policy- we have the highest energy costs in the developed world.
What’s not to love about Starmer?

The country needs stability against the Iran regime, Middle East conflict and threats from Putin. Installing a new, more left leaning politician is not the way to achieve it. It is reprehensible that hundreds of inexperienced left leaning labour MP are putting self and socialist ideology (a contradiction in itself) before country during an historical period of world conflict.

What are the Iran regime doing to us? It's not our fight. Even most of the people whose stupid president HAS made it their fight realise it's a pointless waste of time money and lives.

We're spending more on welfare than we, as a country, earn.

What a preposterous fake statistic. We spend about 10.8% of GDP on welfare, about half of which is pensions BTW.

But don't worry, you were only out by a factor of 10.

It’s surely not a genuine question, why do do they want Starmer out? He’s dragging the Labour Party into a ditch.
is he concerned about rape gangs? No.
is he concerned about the level of immigration swamping the uk? No.
is he great friends with the mayor of london, who wants Muslim prayer in trafalgar square and thinks beheading in the streets isn’t something to get cross about? Yes.

there are memes all over the internet of Starmer wearing Muslim uniform. He started his term by being outed as having his wife’s clothes bought for her by a Friend… that was his calling card. He should have been ejected then.

nobody trusts him.

I’m not sure anybody would be able to manage a majority of that size, when it was created more by a “fucked off with the conservatives so not voting” rather than “We Want Labour and are coming out in spectacular numbers to get it”.

He has a look on his face of somebody who applied for a Chief Shepard job, thinking sheep, goats, cattle, the usual. And at the last second, just when he was given his uniform, got introduced to an enormous flock of cats.

Could you say what it is you think Andy Burnham will actually do if he becomes leader - and indeed what he actually can do?
He has already said he will stick to the manifesto that won the Labour Party the election. If he wants to make any significant changes to improve anything (EG utilities nationalisation, changes to help with COL, devolution to local Mayors), he needs money. That means Tax hikes. He's said he won't do that. So, as you've said you're a supporter of his, what is it you're expecting from him?

Every whip I’ve ever heard interviewed says given the choice they prefer a small but respectable majority to a giant majority. The reason being large majorities always include a large cohort of candidates who were simply being blooded or were makeweights, who know full well they won’t survive another round. They have no vested interest in supporting any government, just their own prospects locally and for the next job. The MP who “nobly” stood down to gift Burnham a pretty safe seat was under the microscope for his own role in some of the recent scandals.

That majority has been a massive issue for Starmer. However unlike Blair and Thatcher (who faced the same issue in their day) Starmer simply doesn’t press the flesh with his own troops. He barely communicates with his own cabinet let alone the back benchers. You cannot be a leader without putting in the hard hours with your troops, understanding them and knowing what presses their buttons. Blair put huge effort into this and whilst Thatcher was not a natural people person she knew the importance of understanding the tea room.

I’d agree with that.

I picked Keir and Kemi out as future party leaders when Brexit first floated onto my radar. Different reasons, mostly gut instinct rather than political know-how. I though Labour might want to go for a more “steady managing director” direction after so many Big Personalities. Whereas there was a quiet “it factor” about Kemi. Although I was expecting her timeline to be about a decade further into the future than it’s turned out.

He’s not the most unpopular. That was Lizz Truss.

Yougov says Truss, Ipsos says Starmer.

@MandyMotherOfBrian Burnham has also said he’s sticking by the fiscal rules so that makes more borrowing tricky. So we need to know what policies and where’s the money coming from? He’s just saying words at the moment (change!!) but we have no idea what and how?

Maybe it is about going to the tea room but he’s going to have the same unruly and unrealistic back benchers as Starmer. They are a poor group of MPs, more like student agitators. There’s a huge dearth of talent and it’s problematic. A change at the top is just shifting the deckchairs on the Titanic. It’s more comfortable until the ship sinks!

It seems that KS may be resigning on Monday.

@SixtySevenLabubus Yes, heard that too. What a mess! Anointing of King Andy! Do you remember the fuss Labour kicked up when the Cons did this? They are ALL reprehensible. Awful behaviour.

Entirely this, I’m not a natural Labour voter but think Starmer and Reeves have done a good job - and the data backs them up. Last thing I want is the loony left destroying this place even further.

When he took over from Sunak, Sunak made a speech and said he is a good man, and he was right, Starmer is a good man but he’s not a leader, he doesn’t stand for anything, he doesn’t inspire people. As PP said you can agree/disagree with Thatcher as much as you like but you can’t deny she had conviction and she really believed in what she was doing. I didn’t agree with her but I can respect her, she was a leader.

This is depressing..
Media have played a big part in this. So impatient

But why are they all jumping behind burnham? Genuine question. He makes out he’s a northern normal type of guy (ie not Westminster elite) but he’s Cambridge then Special advisor then MP route. Not like some labour MPs who have really worked their way up - like Angela Raynor for example.

what are his policies? Or is it just he’s not Starmer.?

i assume there will have to be some sort of leadership contest though. In a way it’s strange- labour has a massive majority and surely many long standing MPs who could be PM but Burnham gets the job even though he wasn’t an MP at the time of the general election.
loads of people complained about how Liz Truss and then Sunak got the PM jobs saying there was no mandate.

They are reforming welfare! if, for example, they manage to reduce the welfare bill and cut fraud etc to zero you’d still find something else to ‘what about’ about…

for clarification- I am an elected member, Labour. I’ve been a member all my adult life. I worked in Westminster for almost a decade, most of it in opposition. I don’t think this makes me more or less qualified on any of this than anyone else but previously when I’ve attempted to post anything about politics someone advance searches me as ‘a gotcha’ to suggest I shouldn’t have a view on it so.

Many of the new intake think they won seats on their own merit (lol) what you are seeing now is people panicking about their own second term.
they will be jostling to ally themselves with Andy as the same confidence that convinced them they won on merit is the same confidence that means they think they would be excellent ministers. 🤣

Keir and his advisers, and Labour to win and the Fabian’s and Labour together worked to create an identikit PLP by selecting pretty much people in their own image.

the ‘plan’ is a two term plan - it’s not even been 2 years.

the media have been out for him/us from day one- and let’s face it, he’s been terribly advised, has lost his narrative and been leaked about from day one.
Some of that is on him - not all of it though.

i feel a bit sorry for him - that said on the doorstep people were telling us they hated KS, whether you agree with their reasons or not they voted in the locals with this at the fore.
Any self respecting councillor who’s up next year will be shitting themselves about losing their seat particularly if they lost a ward colleague on May.
MP’s need councillors of same political stripe for campaigning etc. so he’s gotta go. I still don’t know how I feel about this.

Indeed.
Do you think Angela Rayner will repeat this tweet, slightly adjusted? Or will she instead, throw her hat in the ring?