To think Starmer will be gone by the end of Friday? Or will it be Monday evening?

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

Whoever you are voting for today, it's probably not Labour - they might loose 2,000 seats.

How long exactly will it be before he resigns?

I know, right? Imagine a working class woman with a regional accent in charge of the country- utter disgrace.

GM HT.
Chat later? Very busy day at work, so probably not.

Yeah, you will be here - we both know that.

You love it.

Labour have been sent a message by voters.

Sadly, many in Labour will take that to mean they need to spend even more than they already are.

To the economically illiterate, the answer to failed socialism is always more socialism…

Given that there aren’t 2000 Parliamentary seats probably quite clear I already know that?

I literally gave you half a dozen cited examples of when it has happened in the last hundred years

As of 0717- not exactly looking good for the government.

None of which prove what you appear to think they prove.

As predicted by opinion polls, they are losing around 50% of seats. The picture may change as the rest of the results come in, but at the moment the assertions by some on this thread that Labour would lose 75%+ are looking unlikely. However, we've only had around 23% of the seats so far and we won't get the Scottish or Welsh results until later, so things could change.

Well, Kevin, I understand the point. I am trying to prove which is that governments frequently call elections early even if they’re not sure they’re going to win when they desire a mandate from the electorate.

Who’s Kevin?

Dictation typo, apologies

He won't. Whatever I think of Starmer and Reeves (I have a particular grudge against Reeves' budget) I hope he does not. We need stability. The international crises we're facing as a country need continuity and he must put country before party or ego in this instance. The next General Election is the next opportunity for voters to change the PM.

History shows that government frequently call elections early when they are confident they are going to win. In all the cases you in your post at 11:47 yesterday, the government believed they were going to win. They weren't always right, but that was a major factor. You are trying to argue that these elections happened because the government in each case had somehow lost its mandate. That is simply not true.

On the subject of the thread, it may be that Starmer will go soon. It is reported that Rayner and Streeting are both on manoeuvres, concerned that Burnham may get the leadership if they don't move quickly whilst he is ineligible to run. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that Starmer will be forced out. The lack of an agreed candidate to take over may stymie any moves to replace him.

We need action, not status quo.

Will Labour wake up and realise that the people are sick to the back teeth of leftist woke welfarism?

No, they will eventually replace Starmer with even more of a left wing extremist and drive what remains of their popularity, and the country, into the ground.

Where are you seeing that @prh47bridge?

From Politico at 0919 today -

"Appalling numbers in Angela Rayner’s back yard

When analyzing council results the headline is not enough. You need to look at the underlying numbers — and these are very bad indeed for Labour and the Conservatives.

In Tameside near Manchester, the backyard of potential leadership challenger Angela Rayner, Labour was defending 17 seats and lost 16 of them — all hoovered up by Reform UK.

In Hartlepool, a so-called “red wall” port town that pinged to and from the two main parties recently, Reform gained all 12 seats up for grabs — from Labour (7), the Tories (4) and an independent.

Southampton, on the more prosperous south coast, was a more mixed picture. Labour lost 10 out of 12 seats while Reform gained eight, but there were also gains for the Lib Dems and Greens.

And while the Tories won back their “jewel” council of Westminster, elsewhere in London they had an awful night — losing all 20 seats they were defending in Sutton. The Lib Dems gained 22 and Reform gained two."

Blimey, imagine finally becoming leader of the Party and then losing your seat..

I wonder if there is any such thing as a 'safe' Labour seat anymore. Where on earth would Burnham stand? He's clearly highly ambitious but also fears humiliation.

The Times has reported that Rayner and Streeting both have the support of enough Labour MPs to trigger a contest and that Rayner is considering making a move despite her ongoing HMRC issue. Reports elsewhere suggest that Streeting is concerned about the threat from Burnham so is considering making a move whilst Burnham is still ineligible for the leadership. And the Times has also reported that Milliband, who is apparently viewed as a kingmaker for Burnham, has told Starmer he should consider setting out a timeline for his departure.

These reports may be wrong, but similar reports have appeared on other news outlets.

Unintended consequences.

They make a move and fail - Starmer is strengthened.

That would be the worse case scenario.

Thanks. I’d heard a few things along these lines, was wondering if they’d ramped up again.

Look at this correlation.

The three parties with the biggest gains, the Liberals, the conservatives and Reform are ALL advocating lower welfare and lower government expenditure and the hard left, labour and the greens who want to continue the greatest transfer of wealth from the haves to the have nots, are not really doing very well at all.