Burnham has won. More turmoil?

[KatiePricesKnickers]

Now Burnham has won, it will trigger a leadership contest, and if he wins, a new chancellor of the exchequer.

Surely this cannot be good for the country, or its finances?

YABU - Burnham is a true leader who will improve the UK for everyone and be a competent and respected leader.

YANBU - FFS, here we go again.

Never be ashamed.

Some pretty ignorant posts on here. So 14 years of austerity could be undone in 18 months, by any government, it's banana republic politics. Not possible, and shows such lack of an ability to critically evaluate the situation. It's the 'I want it now and I want it at my fingers' society, not based on reality. Turning a country around that has been ravaged by conservative ideology at that pace, just isn't rational. Nonetheless, Labour has definitely started to steady the ship, long may this continue.

Whats it got to do with you? I will vote for who I believe in or is that a crime now? Oh yes because nobody can possibly be any better than your beloved Starmer and his failures! I see it’s you who gets upset when people say something negative about him 😂

And a remarkably high percentage of those committed but unambitious Labour politicians are female! What are the chances? I'm sure they're all delighted to be able to concentrate on policy and none of them would really want the top job anyway, unlike their Tory, LibDem, Green, SNP, Plaid, DUP and Sinn Fein counterparts.

You see it in the trade union movement as well. The issues that are particularly important to women rarely rise to the top of the priority list.

@FlyingApple Various points. Andy Burnham is the biggest self publicist on the planet. Failed to be leader of the Labour Party twice and flounced off into the regions to be Mr Big. He’s a lightweight with NO ideas. Just rhetoric and thats not good enough. Andy Burnham is very keen on Andy Burnham. His role and advocacy as mayor won’t translate to Westminster. It’s a complete role reversal.

At the election, the Labour Party had a manifesto. Like many governments they waver from it but Burnham has not set out any policies. So what is he going to do about defence, welfare, sky high borrowing etc?

A pm should be able to operate on the world stage because our position on it is shrinking. If we want any engagement with others, we need to be there and take some initiatives. This will decline as our defence capability is poor and no one thinks we are a great economic power these days. We are declining and Burnham doesn’t pay any attention to defence or economic recovery. He’s never done a job outside politics and self publicity.

Everyone does not want Starmer gone. A few lightweights from the left who want to spend spend spend will and those who are terrified of the polls, but many prefer a steadier approach and are sick and tired of musical chairs! The Cons lost after their in-party fighting and it’s reprehensible Labour are doing the same. Only Makersfeld electors and the Labour Party plus their affiliates has any say in this and why should Starmer go? He’s faced the whole electorate, Burnham hasn’t. Both are plagued with empty words though.

I always wonder why people default to “14 years of austerity”. Why only draw the line there? I dont remember life being golden , say , 20 years ago.

Just answer the question. You demanded straight answers not long ago. Or go have that KitKat.

Don't be silly. Racism is treating someone belonging to one ethnic group worse than someone belonging to another group purely because of their ethnicity. Sexism is treating a member of one sex worse than a member of the other sex purely because of their sex. No sane person could say that white male politicians are being discriminated against because from time to time a female politician or a politician who isn't white gets the top job. White males are hugely over-represented in positions of power in this country and they earn more.

Exactly. It’s the Labour/ Starmer robotic line and answer to everything when asked why their own government is doing so badly - “oh because 14 years of Tory austerity”. It’s like they have nothing else to say, they don’t even say it in a different way, just use the same line over and over again. I’m beginning to think Starmer only has a few words in his vocabulary.
And yes things absolutely were shit under the previous Labour government. Brown selling off our gold reserves at rock bottom price… oh and the recession

Because austerity was a specific policy enacted between 2010 - 2024, aimed at dealing with a crisis within capitalism and reframed to place responsibility for that crisis squarely on the shoulders of the ordinary person.

Nope! Don’t give me that shit! Apparently according to the left racism means anyone who speaks out against mass uncontrolled illegal migration is a “racist”. You however, chose to target a specific skin colour - white men! Can’t be racism when it suits now can it!

It was a damn sight golder than it is now.

I know it was a policy..but what about before that?

But how much of that is down to increasing global factors? Im not arguing for austerity by the way. Im just saying I think its a lazy argument.

Again, just words but no hard evidence.
I get you don't like the man but you can't make sweeping statements like that then crumble when asked to back them up - makes you look a bit of a fool rather than him?

Just so grateful Reform didn't win the by election. They truly are the party of hate mongering and division.

Burnham will be a good PM. Yes, it's a pain to have a new leader but the whole country appears to hate Starmer so it can't go on like this.

Nah makes you look a fool when you’re defending the most popular PM in history. A PM who appoints a paedo pal for a high profile job! Well done to you for tying yourself in knots trying to defend that excuse of a PM👏

You really don't have anything to say do you?

I don’t think the country does hate Starmer. The media have stiched him up.

I think its less about hating Starmer the man, and more being very very frustrated with Starmer the leader.

Neither do you! It’s quite laughable seeing you defend a failed MP who everyone wants to see the back of even though he absolutely couldn’t give a shit about you lol

He’ll slide out of view, it’s not the media either.

Because that’s what the government called it when George Osborne introduced it in 2010. Cameron and Osborne literally referred to it as “the age of austerity”.

20 years ago was 2006. The country had yet to suffer the shock of the Great Recession and was doing pretty damn well.

Eh? Where do you think those apprentices would work? In BUSINESSES.

The two are linked.

I dont think you read my post correctly. I know very well what the age of austerity means. My point is people are only stopping there when they are looking back.