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?

Catherine West was appointed as a junior minister after the general election then removed from post at the last reshuffle. I’m sure she has no personal animus towards Keir Starmer.

The quotes from Starmer loyalists so far suggest it has focussed their minds on keeping him in place.

It’s not that. She’s been speaking on why. She’s panicking about Reform and can see the results this week.

In which case they’ve lost their grip on reality. The question isn’t whether Starmer will have to go but when and that’s increasingly the view of the PLP. Risking a vote of no confidence without the most credible replacement in a position to take up the reins is political suicide.

Who is the credible replacement?

I think you’ve mixed up my commentary on Catherine West and Josh Simons. I’ve not said Catherine West is triggering the leadership contest out of spite - in fact, I’ve not commented on her motivations at all

ETA I now understand your reply was sarcastic, sorry @PrettyDamnCosmic ! I’m not very good at interpreting sarcasm online - a problem I’ve had here before

Try reading the thread. It’s always enlightening.

I'm just wondering who your preference is, Burnham or Rayner? I'm assuming you have discounted Streeting as a credible replacement?

You don’t need to know who my preference is. It’s nothing to do with you.

The problem is that there is no agreed replacement.

Streeting is seen as continuity Starmer and is not popular within the party.

Rayner is popular with the party and would clearly be different, but her problems with HMRC are not yet resolved and some MPs think Rayner would do for the Labour party what Truss did for the Tories.

Burnham is seen as the king over the water, but is not eligible to stand as he is not an MP.

Ideally, Labour would prefer a coronation rather than a drawn out leadership campaign with the risk that the members will vote for someone unsuitable, but there is no sign yet of them agreeing on who should succeed Starmer, n or is there any sign that any of the leading candidates is prepared to stand aside in favour of someone else.

Unlike the Conservatives, the Labour party does not use a confidence vote to oust a leader. There is no mechanism for them to do so. The only mechanism available is the one West is trying to use - an MP getting 81 nominations to trigger a leadership contest.

If you mean he might lose a confidence vote in the Commons, that is highly unlikely. That would require a lot of Labour MPs to either abstain or vote against him, knowing that he would probably call a general election if he lost.

Starmer is in full survival mode to the point where he does not see his position as a duty to serve, instead he feels he has the right to rule.

The Keir Starmer project must continue and the eventual successor must continue the project, anything else is chaos.

A future PM that repudiates Starmer’s policies would show his premiership to have been a failure. Embarrassing for his legacy, even though we all know that he has failed.

When Starmer does go, handing over his project to safe hands, a loyalist, allows him to claim vindication and we get more of the same.

He just didn’t deliver hard and fast enough and we all grew impatient.

😁 Okay. So, I was just asking because you said that there is currently no credible replacement when Streeting might be understood to be a credible replacement. And so if you are saying that he isn't the credible option, who do you think it is? I'm not asking what your password is, it is just a question which followed from your opinion that you presented as fact.

I agree with Blossomtoes, why would that be the case?

Starmer is an optometrist - or an ‘I’ specialist if you prefer.

It’s all about him.

I will do another ten years as PM etc.
F the electorate.

The man is narcissistic.

Play nice please, Blossom.

Who are you to tell her what she should say? She wasn't abusive.

Cynical, but probably close to accurate @Safarisagoody !

Because the media would launch the same level of attack they have with Starmer (whatever you think of his performance the media has been vitriolic beyond reason), did with Corbyn, and Miliband, and Foot…

So you discount any weighting attached to Starmer, his government, and their policies, yes?

And it's doubtful that many will see it as a positive career move to take over at the moment.

I’m not sure what you’re asking. Should the press hold the government to account? Of course. Has this government done/not done things that need questions/criticism? Also of course. But on top of that the media is attacking (and always attacks) the Labour leader, not Starmer per se

Right.

I think it’s down to this government - look at the FT, for example - they backed Labour in 2024. Not now.

Even The Sun did. The press got him in but he’s turned them away too.

As I said, some of it is specific. A large amount - especially from the tabloid press - is just generic.

OK, assuming you are right - in Starmer’s case, I can empathise with the media. Happy not to bore you with the reasoning, because you have probably heard it all before - I still maintain it is valid.