To think Andy Burnham is smug?

[Lyra25]

To think Andy Burnham is smug and presumptuous. Just that really and I have no particular political preference, disillusioned with the lot!

He reminds me of a Thunderbird puppet. Was it Vergil?

Shiny and an improbable smile!

No! Too much to lose!

Maybe Virgil crossed with Brains without the personality to match. And they were puppets.

I think it’s more like getting Starmer who’s sloughed off his skin and that’s what’s underneath.

@Sensiblesal the conversation had been had about 10 posts earlier! It’s already been explained on this thread - I don’t know how many times me and other people can say this.

Yes, people may vote for a pig with a blue/rosette on it. They think they are voting for a party but they aren’t. I am not incorrect in my explanation of the system, we vote for people. What you are saying is many do not understand the system and vote for a party, yes that’s what’s happens (nice and loud for those at the back) but it doesn’t change the system, we vote for people.

He went to Cambridge University from a state school in the 80s so can’t be completely dumb ….. although I’m not a big fan of AB

There's always David Lammy. But, no, if course not. People don't like him either.

People won't be satisfied until Kemi Badenoch is PM, or for some on here, Nigel Farage. Because they think Right to Rule means... well, Right.

@mellongoose the voters in his constituency asked him lots of questions. I saw/heard him on several hustings, question time events. He campaigned in his constituency and apparently every house was knocked on 6 times by Labour Party campaigners.

Im assuming your version of democracy is we vote for every change in government, every change in policy, everything that is different to the manifesto. This doesn’t work, it doesn’t allow for planning or difficult decisions. Checks are put in place to distance politicians from the whims of the public - that’s a misquote of Alexander Hamilton, the guy from the musical.

But this version of democracy is that his manifesto was voted on by only the people of Makerfield (and in fact they are only people who know what his personal manifesto is!) and the rest of the entire Uk is bound by it. That is slightly different to slight variations in government policy.

This thread is so depressing…

He's getting on my nerves already. It's all about him and how wonderful he's going to be for the country. That's up to the voters to decide. Not him.

Ahhh @Clavinovahas arrived. He said there should be a GE not why. He may be hypocrite or he may have just want a GE to get rid of the Tories. The same way you probably wanted a GE last week, and want one this week because you want the government gone.
My point was he understand the system - he does.

And yet we have to just accept him as PM apparently.

💯

@BlueRedCat We have a Parliamentary system and Parliament decides what becomes law. Parliament can check/stop the PM at any time. That’s the democratic accountability.
Also, we have cabinet government where the PM is primus inter pares (fist amount equals) the cabinet lends democratic legitimacy to the PM.
If we had a presidential system then there could be an argument to have another election, but that doesn’t happen in a lot of presidential systems.

@FlyingApple so what changes would you make to the constitution, because if you want a presidential system we would need wholesale change. It’s not one small tweak, we’d have to go back to basics and rebuild. If a change of PM means a GE, then the parliamentary system would no longer function. In fact it would be very dangerous as the life of one person would hold the whole country to ransom. PMs could use it to hold parliament to ransom, do X or I will resign. It’s a very dangerous suggestion.

No. But he's already acting as if he is or at least that it's a foregone conclusion. Smug doesn't even begin to cover it. Arrogant prick

Why?

I voted Labour.

i wanted stability and for the actual job of government to be taken seriously. I didn’t want infighting and distractions and egos.

I didn’t vote for an MP representing Andy Burnham as leader and he is forcing his way into the position which is exactly what I was voting against.

@ElenOfTheWays And you’re a smelly poo head. If we’re at this level of political debate why don’t we get right down to year 2 playground politics. I don’t mind a bit of invective but could you at the very least make a political point first?

@Justusethebloodyphonehow has he forced anything? Elected as MP. Following Labour Party rules. Who has forced who? Labour MPs could stop it, they are choosing not to. Starmer was advised to leave by his cabinet, he wasn’t taken out the back and beaten up,

@Justusethebloodyphone Although, you make an excellent point about the need for stability.

Jesus christ. Exactly 50% of our prime ministers since 1945 have first come into office in between elections so van we please stop with this being something unusual

What aspects of his appearance strike you as 'not very bright'?

Me too

Really? You think this all happened by magic?

He had an important political role already (which also needs stability). He has made his desire to be party leader very clear but did not relinquish his mayoral role until a sitting MP resigned specifically to make room for him - with the very clear intention of forcing Starmer to resign or force a leadership battle.

The kind of antics that I voted against.