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?

No, I think she probably just got sick of waiting for him to move. But it's widely known he has 81 names in his back pocket.

She "came up with this idea this morning"? 🤣

I just don’t see what’s in it for Labour for Starmer to cling on like a limpet. One, he’s hopeless, and two, if he goes down fighting and there’s division in the party it will damage Labour horribly. He should just resign.

It would be embarrassing for Labour supporters if Starmer does go, one way or the other, because they bang on constantly about Tory chaos. But surely better to put up with the embarrassment and to support the ditching of the appallingly bad Starmer?

I very much doubt this Catherine West (who?) challenge will get anywhere though. I can’t see any cabinet minister plotters wanting to look like they’ve been smoked out by a nonentity MP. And it must be unlikely that 81 Labour MPs will follow her like a procession of lemmings.

Yes, that made me laugh. Like she had a eureka moment while drinking her coffee.

It will be interesting to see how many MNer’s who were previously loyal to Starmer, begin to ditch him next week, when they belatedly realise his number is up.

Funny old game.

Well, for one, Starmer’s promise of ‘country before party etc’ is pure, unadulterated bullshit.

He will cling on to the last - that’s the bloke he is. He’s an Arsenal supporter, so he’s used to this philosophy, of course.

Why the insert of, 'Northern' Brown is Northern, he's Scottish.

.

Read the post again.

Perhaps she was still pissed from the night before?

Why?

They are unconnected pieces of information.

FGS, if I have to explain, let’s please move on.

Events have moved on - let’s please focus on those.

Now come on, please explain. I had to explain on MN the whole “Tory Scum” thing awhile back
to a PP. Your turn now.

I posted:

Just lost hundreds of Red Wall seats to Reform, and what does Starmer do?
Appoint someone who called a Northern voter a bigoted woman.
That’ll get them back Keir - you go, fella.

What was incorrect about my post?

I get, totally but @Goldenbear doesn’t.

Thanks - then its @Goldenbear ’s issue.

Agree!

No. I’m not rude either.

It's true he is a dead man walking. Even if he clings on to power now he is very unlikely to make it through as Labour leader to the next election. The question is more when it is most expedient to replace him.

If a new challenge comes from a backbencher could well be instigated behind the scenes by one of the cabinet hopefuls, but no one will no for sure.

As a cabinet minister there is great risk in kicking off the challenge. Your job is almost certainly toast under that prime minister, and the prospect of better jobs/future promotion. You might also be seen as being unreliable in the party.

However if you can persuade a backbencher to kick off a leadership challenge, then you can de-risk your own challenge by then standing because "you had to once the leadership process was underway".

You might ask, what's in it for the backbencher they will almost certainly lose the challenge and the answrer is probably a plum job in a future cabinet or similar favour at some point in the future.

Cabinet members are probably weighing up whether it is a good idea to get their own challenge underway before Burnham gets on the scene, because he is a strong candidate and will limit their own chance of success.

Of course, the general public often sees all this behind the scenes manipulation as a bit distasteful. But it is all par for the course in politics as every politician knows, and it's fairly certain that even though the current incumbent will say negative things about the process of challenging, they will have course conveniently forgotten that they engaged in similar subterfuge during their own rise to power.

Letter to Starmer in full:
Dear Keir,
It is with sadness and deep regret that we, the undersigned former and present Labour councillors, Members of the Senedd, Members of the Scottish Parliament and 7th May candidates from across the UK, write to encourage you to take full responsibility for our party's electoral defeats this week, announce a timetable for your departure, and allow an orderly transition to new leadership for the country.
This week, our party suffered multiple historic defeats: in Wales, Scotland, and all across England.
Your government has delivered transformative things for the country, things we are all proud of: the Employment Rights Act; the Renters Rights Act; investment in public services; dignity and direction on the world stage at a time of tension and instability.
But this week, the public voted with their feet and it is now clear that we will need new leadership to take us into the next election.
We fear that inaction serves only Reform UK and risks handing the keys to Number 10 to Nigel Farage. The British public would not forgive us for this.
For the sake of the communities that our party was founded to represent, we urge you to announce a date for your departure and to guarantee an orderly process to elect your successor.

I agree with all of that.

What I can’t fathom is why the plausible contenders can’t see that time is so important. If Starmer’s there for another year they’ll have a lot less time to make an impact. And if he’s in position until the final year before a GE Labour will be sunk without a prayer of recovery.

I’m not sure that any of the cabinet could really turn things round in any case. But their chances improve with more time.

Having served under Starmer and gone out to argue for him is a bit of a taint in itself. I think that’s why Burnham is regarded as the great hope - he’s less infected by association with Starmer. Rayner, Cooper and Streeting could probably survive the Starmer curse, but not Reeves, Mahmood or Lammy,

Innate cynicism makes me think yesterday's results might put Burnham off resigning as Manchester's Mayor to be a bye-election candidate. Suddenly, no seat looks safe.

But I have just read hallowedturf's "draft letter", and I can see the logic in that too.

My view is very clearly stated. We have a tiny SME DH started in 1992, it still trades profitably, and we have lived a relatively prosperous MC life on the proceeds. We have money set aside over the years since 1992 in our pension that we shall spend in retirement. But we are already 70, and have not retired. Despite Dh's health being uncertain, he still enjoys putting in his 2cents on quotations. And he lives for tomorrow, to make new jobs and opportunities.

But governments don't like or value small businesses. They are small and untidy, and you can't regulate them easily, except by taxation. However, governments ignore them at their own risk, because they create more new jobs for more people than any other

Unfortunately, the definition of a small business also has to embrace barbers and vape shops, alongside ours -- which is a respected sub-contractor in engineering, and a supplier for defense companies and power generation.

Burnham and his allies don't want a contest now. He isn't an MP so isn't eligible to run. The most likely candidates are Streeting and Rayner. Streeting would prefer a coronation. He knows that if it goes to the members, he is likely to lose to Rayner. But at the moment the party does not appear to be in a mood to hand him the leadership in a coronation. And Rayner still has the HMRC issue unresolved, so this is not the ideal time for her either. So, for their own reasons, none of the three leading candidates think this is the right time for them. Of course, their views may change.

I thought Graham Stringer (MP for Blackley in Manchester) was said to be preparing to give up his seat for Burnham? He's late 70s and has been an MP since 1997 so he'd be comfortably off, Labour will be annihilated in 2029 at this rate, so he hasn't got much to lose.