AIBU to feel like Andy Burnham is an impostor?

[NotABeliever]

Whenever I see him on TV, my first reaction is a jolt of disbelief — as if Andy Burnham has somehow staged a stunt and pushed out the person who actually earned the right to be in Number 10 but somehow everyone is ok with this. It feels like a con, like he’s occupying a role that isn’t his.

What’s strange is that I don’t dislike Andy Burnham, and I’m hardly a devoted Starmer supporter. Yet something about the way Starmer was removed and replaced so abruptly feels fundamentally wrong and unserious . I keep thinking: Starmer is the one who won the election, not Burnham — so how is Burnham now the Prime Minister? It feels like a huge injustice.

I understand that in the UK we elect a party, not a president, and that whoever leads the party becomes PM. But even within that system, it’s hard to accept that a sitting Prime Minister can be shown the door simply for not being popular enough. With three years until the next general election, how can anyone confidently claim Starmer would have lost? Polls swing constantly.

It just feels like a moment of madness — a sudden upheaval that’s left us starting from scratch with a new cabinet and a new agenda, right when the previous team was in the middle of governing and getting on with the job. I can’t shake the sense that something about this isn’t right, and I’m struggling to make peace with it.

To answer you on all points:

• "He attempted to court the "hero voters" (Reform voters) and neglected his voter base": Reform "hero" voters are still voters. Something like 70-80% of the electorate are unhappy with immigration one way or another. It is correct that he put in policies to try and fix this, for both reform voters (who he is responsible for too!) AND the wider electorate. You will notice Burnham left Mahmood in post, so what is he doing differently?

• "Casting Doom and Gloom": GOOD! We are in the shit, there is no money after years of Tory greeed and pandemic mismanagement! I am sick of BoJos, Farages and Burnhams promising the earth then getting bottled by a feral electorate every two years because no one can keep their promises. Starmer did differently, you hate the thing I like."""!

• "failed to make a clear distinction between Labour and the outgoing government": Again, he was trying to be a centrist government, not immediately lurch to the hard left to overcorrect Tories. Corbyn tried that, it did not work.

• "(targeting disabled people and pensioners)" Not sure what you mean about the disabled people? Heating charges were means tested, tbh I would rather give money to disabled people than millionaire pensioners

• "Many felt he fudged the Gaza issue": He purged the antisemites from the party into Corbyn's new clown car, sounds good to me. The fact they are still whining about it is still music to my ears tbh. He is not saying "muh genocide" like the sectarian-courting greens because that has not been decided, and because he tackled antisemitism, he knows how appalling the gazan marches, "globalise the intifada chants" and the like have been for British jews, who he clearly, AND CORRECTLY, feels sympathy for. Disagree if you like but I think he walked that line OK, almost impossible

• "overly accommodating to Trump, with no real return": He did an incredible job with Trump lol! AMERICA IS OUR NUMBER ONE ALLY, in a fast unstable world where Russia and China would crush us without US alignment, he picked the correct side EVEN THOUGH he clearly does not share Trump's values, and STILL made friends enough to get favourable deals on tariffs etc. Again, a grown up politician, not whining about the TRANSIENT president of our most important ally in a dangerous world, weakening us to hostile actors like Iran and China FOR VIBES

• "He appeared to have no real beliefs and values, he could have been the leader of any of the mainstream parties": His dad was a toolmaker, he is named after Keir Hardie and was raised in a socialist houselhold, he told you that story hundreds of times but his voice is boring so you didn't hear, and the rtight wing press turned it into a running joke, which you fell for. everything I have read about him suggests he really wants people, and especially working people, to do well.

• .". He didn't address the cost of living crisis in any meaningful way": Neither will Burnham. Starmer tried, by reducing the welfare bill. He was stopped by the very people who have now engineered Burnham. I hope I'm wrong but he won't fix it either.

• "And by all accounts he ignored his constituents!": Here is a BBC story from this week alone that shows the exact opposite: Holborn fatal balcony fall investigated as corporate manslaughter - BBC News, note the parent's quotes:

Previously, Garrett said she had emailed her son's MP, former prime minister Sir Keir Starmer, requesting a meeting as part of her campaign for answers.
She said she was pleased his office "came back straight away" and began asking for further information.
She said: "I thought, 'Oh well, if I get a reply it would just be your bog-standard, written-by-someone-else response and he just won't even know that it's gone out', but the fact that he wrote it, so he actually signed it himself at the bottom and wrote a little bit extra, it did seem really genuine.
"When I showed Will, he was just like, 'Oh my God, the prime minister knows who our son was'."

Also on "horrible man Starmer": Beth Rigby on X: "NEW: Am told Keir Starmer wrote handwritten notes for every single member of No 10 staff - in the hundreds - thanking them for their public service" /

I didn’t know this existed, thanks! Spacey is a great actor tbf and the first 2-3 seasons of it are gold.

Also, it’s fine to continue to insult Burnham but don’t complain when we’re stuck with Reform for 5 years.

Mn was more Starmer friendly, there’s far more reliable polls eg personal ratings.

MPs listened to feedback on the doorstep. They’d like to keep their jobs after all.

Thanks for demonstrating the point so perfectly.

Starmer was hugely unpopular both with his own party and the electorate. There is no way he could have stayed.

The Labour Party have decided they want Burnham to lead them. Let’s see what happens.

How many years were the Tories moaned about? You've got what you wanted now. A Labour government with Reform yapping at their heels. You're right about the electorate behaving in ways that lead to undesirable consequences.

Brown was an established sitting MP despite the restaurant stuff

It’s often been said that Brown should have called a GE after he became leader.

This is exactly how I feel.

It appears Burnham only wants top jobs. When he lost the Labour leadership twice he didn’t stay as an ‘ordinary’ MP and work for his constituents, he scuttled off for a top job - mayor of Manchester. He’s only returned to parliament because the top job was lined up for him by his mates. He really is a snake!

As a grass roots Labour Party member I am furious that we didn’t get a say in this! I’ve resigned my LP membership over it - I can’t support a political party / leader that I don’t trust.

The entire thing stinks!

I don't support labour, nor have I ever voted for them, so not sure why you think I've got what I wanted tbh...

Well, I just learned that Larry the cat presented a dead mouse to the press pack on Tuesday. He did it without a lectern. Maybe it's a metaphor.

I've said before on this post but if you shut down democratic conversations you will turn people towards the very thing you are worried about. People need to feel heard and their voices respected. You might not like what they say but there's no quicker way to turn people off (and voting for parties like Reform) than not allowing them to discuss their concerns which is their democratic right. It infuriates me that people try and shut down people's legitimate concerns by saying 'well then Reform will get in'. Part of the reason they might get in is if people feel the mainstream parties aren't listening.

And you said the same for the previous party in gov? Let them be?

Well said!

Keir Starmer will go down in history as one of the most misunderstood PMs we have ever had and I suspect, once Burnham gets going, there will many on the left and right of politics who will regret that Starmer was pushed out of the job.

I wish the Tory party united behind Sunak and let him follow through on his vision

Sunak suffered so much for "not having a mandate" - Burnham may well find the same thing.

Uh huh. It was more of a theoretical question. Where do we draw the line?

Agreed. And I didn't even mention the brilliant job on Ukraine, the alliance with Macron (good, this is the kind of alignment we need with Europe)... etc.

In the interest of fairness, I agree with the poster I responded to that it was a mistake to accept the gifts when he came in, but he can hardly be said to not have integrity imo: look at what happened to Rayner, Haigh, Simons (and now look at their repellent revenge, all done for us of course)

It's not a low bar to suggest that law makers should not have criminal records.

Yes but I wish we'd stayed with Sunak. Tory party infighting meant he couldn't do his vision to make us a hub for AI and tech.

You're entitled to your views, uninformed as they may be. Your post is far too long for me to want to pick through it. Maybe keeping it brief next time would invite more interesting debate.

There would have been a contest... but no one else stepped in to contest him. He didn't just walk in. There was a process to be followed and they followed it. He put himself forward people backed him. No one else put themselves forward

There won't.

Sunak pays all his taxes legally and a lot of it. No criminal conviction. Louise Haigh has a conviction for fraud.

Agree there.

Really? So you wouldn't want someone representing you if they'd failed to pay their TV licence or council tax once, 30 years ago? If they'd taken a tin of formula from a shop without paying because they'd had no way of feeding their baby? Each to their own of course, but I'd rather someone who'd made a human error of judgement represent me than someone like Johnson or Sunak, with their noses firmly and perpetually in the trough.