What is going on with Andy Burnham's social media?

[msagent]

I swear every post I see is following a formula:

• personal anecdote
• link to current issue
• why this means I understand you
• how I'm going to change the world
• join us in doing so

The way they are written makes me cringe. Almost poetic and overly emotive. Maybe it just doesnt work on me.

Anyone else just want some normal?

How incredibly unfortunate that so few voters share that view.

He must be doing it right when his haters have to resort to namecalling.

Tougher with Starmer as he had to be endured. But ha yes plus Burnham seems to be out of road on the tax, borrow and spend from his previous leader and chancellor.

Exactly that. They can’t lay a glove on him politically so have to resort to puerile insults.

I think it can seem that way online, but I do think out in the real world, most people understand that liking Andy Burnham and wanting him to do well for the good of the country doesn’t mean you have to agree with every single decision he and the Labour party make, and nor does not liking him, or not trusting the Labour party, mean you have to have a knee jerk negative response to every single thing he says or does.

They all seem to watch him on SM, or 'endure'

Oh come on, posters on here attack and make fun of all politicians they oppose. It’s just silly to say that because many find him risible that’s a sign of great popularity and achievement. None of the parties is polling above the low twenties.

None of the parties is polling above the low twenties

Incorrect!

The Dave Spart, Norman Wisdom and Mavis Wilton cross is doing better than Badenoch, whose bounce is deflating.

Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 28% (=)
CON: 23% (-1)
RFM: 22% (+1)
LDM: 10% (-1)
GRN: 8% (+1)
RES: 5% (=)
SNP: 3% (+1)

Via
@Moreincommon_
, 16-19 Oct.
Changes w/ 9-12 Oct.

Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 30% (+1)
RFM: 24% (-1)
CON: 22% (+3)
GRN: 8% (-1)
LDM: 7% (-1)
SNP: 3% (-1)

Via
@DeltapollUK
, 16-19 Oct.
Changes w/ 11-14 Sep.

Westminster Voting Intention:

LAB: 27% (+3)
CON: 23% (=)
RFM: 22% (+1)
LDM: 11% (-1)
GRN: 10% (-1)
RES: 3% (+1)
SNP: 2% (-1)

Via
@YouGov
, 18-19 Oct.
Changes w/ 11-12 Oct.

And no @DenizenOfAisleOfShame I am not a fangirl or whatever. I have a healthy level of scepticism towards Burnham. But facts are facts.

@DenizenOfAisleOfShameyou went too far, no one ever says anything bad about non-Labour politicians as you know. The aisle of shame for you ;

Maybe you should “attack” him on something substantive. His personal polling is way ahead of any other leader.

https://www.pollcheck.co.uk/favourability-ratings

Well, I’m happy to be corrected on the recent polls.

But he’s still a comical figure. And we’ll see how he gets on in the coming months. If memory serves it took about nine months for Starmer to become hopelessly unpopular. I doubt Burnham will plumb those depths, but the only way is down.

no one ever says anything bad about non-Labour politicians as you know

True. I'd never say anything bad about Badenoch. Here is a lovely photo of her with Putin's pal.

I agree that all politicians, from all political parties will get mocked. But I suppose I do also think it’s interesting the extent to which Andy Burnham’s opponents - by which I mean his political and media opponents, rather than people posting online - are struggling to land an attack line. So, instead, you get this really contradictory, incoherent criticism: does he talk about pragmatism too much, or is he a populist? is he an out of his depth parochial mayor tinkering at the edges or is he a radical leftist who is going to change the country beyond recognition? is he a bumbling northern idiot or is he a ruthless political manipulator who’d do anything to win power? Is he a typical tax and spend socialist who’s going to crush business or is he up to his neck in UAE money because he sacrificed his principles for Manchester’s growth? No one seems to be able to land a coherent attack line yet - which definitely doesn’t mean they won’t, but with most recent Prime Ministers it seems like the line of attack was fairly obvious early on, and Andy Burnham seems harder for his detractors to get a handle on.

I'll say a positive thing for Mavis (second time today) - at least he's proper Oxbridge rather than Kier's failure to get in (until later) cos he wasn't bright enough despite his fancy (and yes it was despite his whining about tool making and the like) school.

It took no time at all. Starmer was unpopular in certain quarters from the off. He’d been in power a matter of weeks before the freebie scandal hit him and it was all downhill from there. His popularity ratings were always minus.

It’s not other politicians who will convince it’s the public who decide. As they did with Starmer.

Up until he went you’d see people claim he was staying. As he claimed too.

And the public are deciding. Burnham’s popular, however much you might wish he wasn’t and no amount of name calling will change that.

@EasternStandard - edited as forgot to quote, sorry!

Well, yes, exactly - but my point is at the moment, none of the attack lines that Andy Burnham’s political and media opponents are using to try and put the public off him are working. Hence the fact he’s polling consistently highly on personal popularity.

I’m not sure how relevant Keir Starmer is to my point, really - I didn’t want him to be ousted. I didn’t want Theresa May ousted either. I think it’s shameful and embarrassing that we’ve cycled through so many leaders in a decade and would far rather elected Prime Ministers serve their full term (although, I do accept Boris Johnson had to go, given the damage he caused).

It helps to use the right spelling of Starmer's name if you accuse him of not being bright enough.

It’s not really ‘attack lines’ that do it. It was Starmer annoying people regardless of what other politicians said.

It takes more than what the opposition are saying that does it, as it did for Blair, Johnson and other high rating politicians. For each there was an event that changed public mood.

I definitely agree that it is events that really define a politician's career.

You might also be right that attack lines from one politician to another make little difference to public opinion - in fact, that might actually be why Andy Burnham didn't attack a single other leader in his conference speech. If that is the case, and the name-calling doesn't make a difference to public opinion, then I do hope other politicians start to follow the Prime Minister's lead and stop with all the silly personal insults too - I find them very tiresome to listen too.

You're a big fan then? Honestly so far he hasn't actually done much that has any real impact, but he's a damn sight more engaging and engaged than many of his predecessors and looks to have some clear ideas.

Amen 🙏

I think Burnham has a bigger view of UK politics and wants to stop the divisiveness and polarisation. This can only be a good thing imho.

Did you mean Starmer there?