to believe Rachel Reeves was crying because

[LargeDeviation]

1. she was upset when Lindsay Hoyle told her to keep her answers short

2. she had an argument with Keir Starmer (possibly about her keeping her job, or about how to handle the inevitable questions about the new £5.5bn per annum black hole) just before PMQs

3. Keir Starmer refused to say she would keep her job in front of the whole country. If he genuinely wanted her to stay, he would just say 'of course she's going to still be Chancellor' and that would be that.

4. she is under immense pressure because she knows she will have soon to breach her fiscal rules, she knows she is responsible for many of the decisions that will lead to that, and she knows the how serious the consequences of her failure will be. We have seen recently (even just today) how vicious the bond market can be.

In short, I believe she was crying because of professional pressures (understandable ones, though largely of her own making, and about which I have little sympathy) and not nebulous 'personal' reasons.

If her parent or partner or child or grandparent or pet is ill the natural thing is to just say 'sorry, a close relative is in hospital and my emotions got the better of me'. Everybody would understand. You don't need huge reams of evidence but you need to give the bare bones of an explanation. She is trying to style it out but we can all see through it.

I will apologise if I'm wrong but long experience shows that 'personal reasons' almost always means 'I'm skiving or jobhunting' when a colleague in the workplace uses it to excuse their time off.

I believe it means even less when uttered by a politican.

It’s PMQs where that’s the name of the game. His attacks aren’t personal. She usually comes in completely unprepared.

It’s lucky KB doesn’t react emotionally when Starmer sneers about her lasting.

Reeves cried after her question not before. It was when Starmer didn’t answer correctly which caused the market jump.

Rayners face while this was going on.

Tears are ok? Of course he’s personal, some are just ok because it’s not a Labour politician.

Badenoch went for someone clearly in distress...

Starmer and Badenoch give as good as they get.. cut n thrust of politics as they say...

Do you not see the difference?

Stephen Flynn SNP clearly does and offered support to Reeves, Badenoch did the opposite, she showed herself for what she is.

Looking at the timings it looks like RR hadn't started crying the first time Kemi said she looked miserable. Then Keir sparked her tears off when he said that "she" won't be in her job (meaning KB but that seemed to start RR off crying). Then Kemi just said that RR looked miserable again but less emphatically. I suspect she was fairly nonplussed and didn't believe what she was seeing and didn't know quite how to react. Who knows. Unfortunate though.

I’ve not criticised Kemi anywhere 😂 I’m calling out your double standards like you’re trying to. But failing since you can’t even read what you’re replying to.

And you can’t read a question.

If you can’t control your emotions in public then government isn’t the job for you.

I am still gobsmacked that a labour government targeted disabled people in the way which was attempted.

It was cruel and dishonest.

Not only was this enormous departure from what people expect of labour it was not in their manifesto and they would never have won the election had they been upfront about any such possibility.

They spun their proposed PIP cuts as a way to stop young people who claimed to have anxiety from sitting in their bedrooms gaming instead of getting a job thus using a modern stereotype they felt everyone could get behind.

The truth was that an enormous number of seriously physically and mentally disabled people of all ages, many of whom either work or have worked until prevented by disability, would lose the essential benefit which enables them to live.

It remains to be seen how this situation will unfold after the forced grudging agreement to limit cuts to future claimants and of a review in partnership with disabled people but even if ultimately no cuts are made (unlikely) this government has shown it is not to be trusted to behave in line with labour principles.

I honestly don’t know what they stand for at all.

I understand that the country was run into the ground by numerous tory governments so something needs to change to get us out of the hole but it is disgusting to use the most vulnerable in society as a ladder.

Therefore it will be a cold day in hell before I have any sympathy for the people responsible for this travesty.

Whatever Rachel Reeves is crying about at least she doesn’t have to worry that she can’t afford to pay her carers, or leave her house, or choose whether to heat or eat all whilst living with chronic pain and life limiting illness.

Sneering “she” won’t be in her job from Starmer. It’s lucky KB doesn’t get provoked by all his jeering.

👏👏

She is the living embodiment, of utter barrel scraping scum.

I really feel for her.

It does, however, show she is not cut from the same mettle as other politicians. They are resilience super heroes. I am constantly amazed at how everything can be going to crap around a politician, everyone hates them, blasted from all sides, terribly hard decisions to be made, and they just get up each morning, carry on and battle through, talk normally and show no sign of a impending nervous breakdown. And then after they are publicly and humiliatingly ( for any normal person) kicked out of politics, they go on worldwide public speaking tours. Astonishing levels of self belief and resilience.

I could never be a politician. I’m just not cut like that.

I can't remember the last Tory party leader who was actually voted in during a GE to become PM, was it Clegg?

Was he ever the leader of the Conservatives?
Edited: he was Lib Dem anyway.

I have no sympathy for some one who can smile while putting disabled ppl into poverty. These so called concessions to protect the existing ppl, will stop in 2028. So when the existing ppl have to renew their claims, they may end up losing money. How are they supposed to buy food and pay bills?

I agree.
Have you seen Yvette Cooper lately?
She used to have a cute elfin face framed by a pixie-cut. Now her face looks pinched and puffy, with eyebags.
Being in the cabinet doesn't agree with some...

Reeves smirks whilst businesses go under, people lose jobs and schools close under the burden of her financially illiterate ‘tough decisions’ , but she fails to get praise from her boss and starts blubbering.

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/ps22bn-black-hole-was-obvious-anyone-who-dared-look

The previous government doesn’t give RR a free pass for incompetence and unprofessional behaviour.

Labour is not doing enough to set them apart from the previous Tory government. How long people would parroting but the Tories? Honestly the Tories are gone.

Labour run on smirking. Only a couple who don’t do it.

@titchy You are surely not suggesting everyone leaving isn’t paying tax. That’s poorly informed and offensive. We live in an international market place for jobs. The left always think the better off are dodging tax. These people have highly mobile careers and everyone who pays tax should be welcome here. Instead we give out the message that you will be fleeced and the money spent poorly on those who shout the loudest and others who cheat the system. People don’t like it.

Missing the point totally.

Women have been fighting for years to be treated equal to men and then when things get a bit hard she starts blubbing in parliament. Probably put the women’s movement back 50 years. If she can’t stand the heat she shouldn’t be chancellor.

Why is the race of the women relevant? I think Badenoch is loathsome and yesterday was no exception, but her race is nothing to do with it.