Andy Burnham is just a dumbed down version of Starmer

[WarmHiker]

Just caught a snippet of some confident sounding commentator on tv repeating a line that you tend to hear in all news programmes. That Burnham is personable and has charisma. That line is starting make me think that as a country, the tyranny of low expectations has really hit a new low.

First thing’s first, when did saying ‘isn’t it’ after every sentence pass for charisma. Is the bar for charisma really that low.

Second, the guy’s failed upwards into a job that he’s clearly not fit for. His answer to everything is ‘Booses’.

The economy is on fire, buses. Immigration is out of control, buses. Crime is a problem, buses. We have the most expensive energy, buses. Industry and businesses are shutting down, buses.

He’s basically a small town mayor who accidentally became the prime minister because the quality of talent in parliament is non existent. Manchester is not a small town but running buses in Manchester doesn’t make you fit to be a PM. He was a failed health secretary, failed to be Labour leader twice when he actually had to have proper fight, somehow grifted his way to a mayor job for a decade. And yes his predecessors were any better. But why all the fawning over Burnham.

AIBU to think that we are headed towards a point soon when the public turns on him. He’s utterly out of his depth and the false shine will wear off in no time. A General election is looming.

All in all, so sad to see that this is the calibre of person at the top of government. What has happened to this country that no one smart wants to go anywhere politics.

Having another referendum. Which he hasn’t ruled out but thinks now is not the right time.

Of course, there will be different opinions. That’s good and healthy in a democracy.
I would say though, that the fact that softening Labour’s stance on Brexit has increased, rather than reduced, Labour’s growing poll lead would suggest that, for now, the public are at least open to an honest conversation about our relationship with the EU.

Regardless of what it does to the polls - or to Labour’s electoral fortunes - though, what I personally love about Andy Burnham’s way of talking about the EU and Brexit (and plenty of other things, as it happens) is he doesn’t talk to the public like they’re stupid and can only receive their politics in simplistic soundbites. Just look at how much analysis has gone into his words, on here. You couldn’t do that with many political leaders, because they simply don’t speak with that much detail or nuance.

Or even stronger. He’s going for undermining everything he’s said about strengthening democracy option. From his own words.

I’ve heard some good call ins which provide balance to mn, where some will accept the switch from Burnham.

I think he meant having a referendum now - within this parliament - would be a mistake. He has not changed his stance on that. He isn’t proposing we have a referendum
now. In fact he hasn’t even gone as far as saying there’s definitely going to a referendum in future, he’s said we need a sensible, grown up conversation about our relationship with the EU.

But actually, I think the thing that I really like is that Andy Burnham is not just talking about Brexit in patronising, meaningless soundbites, like “leave means leave”. To me - returning to the initial premise of his thread - the way he is handling the Brexit conversation is the opposite of dumbing down. Maybe it’ll cost him electorally, in the end, but I personally am enjoying having a Prime Minister speak to the electorate in a more grown up, nuanced way.

Just using words so emptily as in that quote a few months ago does the opposite on what to trust. He could be as categoric about anything at it change shortly after.

The words PP have cited as Burnham’s views on a Brexit referendum are not anti-democratic at all. He respects the outcome and isn’t pushing for change. In his own words.

Yet among those with an opinion in a you.gov poll from early this month, there was nearly a 2-1 split in favour of rejoining the EU. (64% in favour, 36% opposed). Acknowledging voters’ evolving opinions and doing what he can to promote the economic wellbeing of the UK is very much part of the PM’s remit.

@Raiderofthelostbattenburg ,

‘Regardless of what it does to the polls - or to Labour’s electoral fortunes - though, what I personally love about Andy Burnham’s way of talking about the EU and Brexit (and plenty of other things, as it happens) is he doesn’t talk to the public like they’re stupid and can only receive their politics in simplistic soundbites. Just look at how much analysis has gone into his words, on here. You couldn’t do that with many political leaders, because they simply don’t speak with that much detail or nuance.’

This is something I couldn’t agree with more, one of the most eloquently written paragraphs in this whole debate!

As I intimated upthread, we have had charismatic and opinionated extremists and centralist technocrats. We haven’t had a charismatic and committed centralist since Blair (and Thatcher before him).

We are too often led by economists. However clever they are, they all seem to believe that politics IS economics, and if only they can carry out the right utility optimisation, it will ‘solve’ politics (step up Sunak, May, Cameron etc). The problem is that they ignore human experience and preferences. For instance, immigration is always a net GDP positive, so your average economist is pro almost unlimited immigration. The reality is we need an honest conversation about how many and where from and how they will fit into existing communities. There are lots of other issues like this (housing in green belt areas, who pays for net zero to name just two).

The electorate deserve to be treated like adults.

The problem with the referendum in 2016 was that what leave exactly looked like was never defined - other than Theresa May's quote of Brexit looks like red, white and blue, which was not exactly helpful. This then led to every Leave voter having a different vision of what Brexit looked like to them, followed by complaints of "this isn't the Brexit I voted for ".

A rejoin referendum would face the exactly the same problem. What does rejoin look like, same terms as before (highly unlikely) worse terms, on any terms etc etc. Plus let's not forget that the previous debacle of 2016-2019 trying to figure out what Brexit looked like sucked so much political focus away from much more important issues facing the country. A successful rejoin referendum would face exactly the same problem.

I think even the ‘conversations’ he posits do that.

A clear economic case for rejoining needs to be made and until the terms are clear we can’t have that. The EU of today is very different to the EU of 2016.

@JimBobsWife ,

‘A clear economic case for rejoining needs to be made and until the terms are clear we can’t have that. The EU of today is very different to the EU of 2016.’

I think the economic case for at least joining the single market is abundantly clear. However, you may well disagree.

Which is precisely why we need to reopen the debate, hopefully in a civilised way, and resolve it (after a discussion) via either a manifesto commitment or another referendum (I prefer the former).

That is how politics is meant to work in a democracy. Having an omertà about rejoining is counterproductive.

No, in principle I would be in favour of this but I don’t believe the specific terms of such an agreement would be in our favour and we would have to accept regulations in areas we might not want to. I believe it is also expected that freedom of movement would be included.

It’s actually sad to see many obsessively hanging onto the defence of every dud prime incoming minister. Just in the hope that they might be thrown a few crumbs and given a few freebies, maybe some more welfare. It’s so bad that they are happy with £2 bus fares while the country is in a dire condition. Anything but admit that they are backing a dud.

Let’s wait a few months, and it’ll be Starmer 2.0. All these people backed him and now are too embarrassed to admit it.

Burnham’s entire MO is to spout nonsense and fantastical notions without actually doing anything and then saying ‘oh look at everything I have done’. And people are falling for it. Sad.

It really irritates me that the £2 bus is seen as “crumbs”.

If you’re on the breadline you probably travel by bus, whether that’s to work or college. Saving a couple of pounds a day, especially if there are two or three if you in a household, adds up to a lot by the end of the month. It could mean you can put the heating on a bit more, not missing a few meals a month or even have a few treats at the end of the month.

These things are massive for some people, how dare people treat them like they are inconsequential.

It is quite arrogant of you to think you know other people’s motives for supporting a politician or political party, OP. I am still assessing Burnham. I simply find it objectionable when people refuse to give a new PM of any party a chance.

If I voted my and my family’s financial interests, I would back the Tories every time. I don’t need £2 bus fares and I have never been on benefits.

Can you imagine a world where people vote for their perception of the national interest?

Same. Badenoch’s proposed IHT cut is targeted firmly at people like us. It’s unaffordable so I’m not voting for it.

I think he’s marvellous

So strange that the hellish years of conservative politics and policies plus the shit show of COVID quickly get forgotten. I for one will never forget the thousands of deaths their incompetence caused not to mention the jobs for the boys the back handlers and contracts given to millionaires for ppe that was absolutely useless, our public services were on their knees while these scummy politicians partied and stripped every penny they could get their scummy hands on.
This Labour government have a massive job ahead trying to undo years and years of neglect this prime minister has restored my faith in true labour values.
I believe the only reason that we’re hearing dissent is because the fraudsters, tax dodgers and nimbys are panicking their game is over and for me it can’t happen fast enough.

The IFS has questioned whether savings from changing the triple lock would be enough to fund a national care service. I’m also not sure why we are calling it “national” if we all contribute to a select few keeping their homes to pass on to their children, but most of us will have to self fund. Where is the incentive for people near the likely cliff edge to keep saving and providing for themselves?

He is doing pretty well for someone in office only three months.

He is doing well if the bar is at the Earth’s core. A reasonable bar is set significantly higher.

The only firm commitment he has given to those with student debt is a promose of greater "transparency" about the government’s ability to change the terms. And (along with other first time buyers) access to even more debt (an interest) for which they will take a 20% cut of any uplift. Everything else discussed appears temporary. A pause is not a lasting fix or even that helpful if interest continues accruing. It appears, mis-selling is ok if you are the government.

As for the Budget, support for NEETs and the other major policies, we will see. But this is a man who said in July “I have a plan”. If his plan was to deepen the North v South divide, leave businesses, investors and tax payers taking defensive positions, and give people who save and support themselves more reason to question why they bother, then he is absolutely smashing it.

If I voted my and my family’s financial interests, I would back the Tories every time. I don’t need £2 bus fares and I have never been on benefits.

I grew up in poverty so have been in a position where even a £2 bus fare would have been a luxury and I am not buying AB or Labour. So other than virtue signaling what is your point?

My point is that OP claimed to know why people support Burnham, or at least object to her attacks on him. She doesn’t. It is always unattractive and unsound for people to make unsupported assumptions about the motives of others.

Fraudsters, tax dodgers and NIMBYs are panicking that their game is over, and for me it can’t happen fast enough.

So how long do we have to wait until the freeloaders time is up too? I suspect I won't forget them (the Conservatives) or your lot.

As someone who hasn't had a leg up, and won't inherit anything, who works, pays tax and tries to provide for myself and my family, I’m tired of every party change feeling like the thin end of yet another wedge.

YABVU to think your lot offers anything better. It's just a different shade of shit.

It is always unattractive and unsound for people to make unsupported assumptions about the motives of others.

Yet this thread is full of them on both sides.

Can you imagine a world where people vote for their perception of the national interest?

Still waiting for someone to offer that as an option to vote for.

A lot of us aren’t.

That's nice for you.

Some of us aren't willing to make excuses for the red flags. A spade is a spade.