Makerfield - today's the day.

[Kayemm]

Having lived in this constituency all my life I used to want to live somewhere where I felt my vote mattered rather than in a very safe labour seat.

Now I'm here and living with the reality, I'm so very nervous.

It does absolutely amaze me that I know so many people who won't vote today.

I imagine Makerfield constituents must feel a bit manipulated/ used.

It’s the same for me. I suspect I’ll have to do it at the next GE unless there’s a radical change in politics before 2029.

I would too if I had to, but a vote for Tory could be a vote for Reform as Badenoch has very much fudged the issue of whether she would enter into a coalition or confidence and supply arrangement with Reform.

The Spectator reported she said she would help put Farage into No.10, but she has denied it.

She hasn't 'fudged' anything.

the Tory leader took to X to dismiss the claim, writing: “This is bulls---. What I ACTUALLY said is we ‘cannot have another Left-wing government. But I’m afraid that Reform has quite a lot of Left-wing ideas’.” She added that she had been clear on “deals, no aggression pacts and so on” that the answer was “no, no, no, no, no, no, no”.In response to a separate post on X from Lee Cain, a former Conservative No 10 director of communications, who also claimed Mrs Badenoch had opened the door to a confidence and supply deal with Reform, Mr Gove responded that it did not “reflect what Kemi Badenoch actually said”.archive.today/IK3Qk

Yes, I know what she said after the Spectator piece was published, which wrote that she said would be willing to put Farage into No.10 if she didn't become PM herself. I think she may be being less than truthful. It would not be the first time that Badenough has fibbed.

Gove is not exactly impartial either and we all know he is as slippery as anything. Has The Spectator retracted/corrected?

I have just checked and the article is still up with this paragraph intact.

Be careful what you wish for...

"This country cannot have another left-wing government" were her actual words.* *
Tim Shipman's interpretation of that is for him to explain, but Kemi's position is unchanged.

Badenough? Grow up.

If I had voted for those councillors then I would stay quiet too

Embarrassment, not shyness

Remind us of the name you use for Starmer.

.

Why do you object to nicknames for Badenoch but not other politicians? It rather smacks of hypocrisy.

This is precisely why, if I lived there, I would be voting against Andy Burnham. On sheer principle.

Bollard.
Rather fitting I think.

Do you tell yourself to "grow up" for using a nickname for Starmer? If not, why not?

I'm terrified of Reform, by their win today won't change the course of events for the current government. Andy's win will move it to the left, damage economy even more, so increase chances of Reform in 2029. So paradoxically, if you don't want Reform, you better vote for it today.

No, because its true.

I find that a surprising take.
I would really like my constituency MP to be PM. Party politics aside, why would it be better to have your local issues represented in the house by a not very bright plumber who struggles to put together a coherent sentence, and would never be more than a nobody on the back benches, than the most powerful man in the country?
Burnham hasn't done anything wrong. Like many others, he knows that Starmers unpopularity is a problem for Labour. He wants a Labour government and thinks, with good cause, that by offering himself for the role he improves their chances. Just because he wants the role for his own sake, doesn't change that.
My view is that what serves Burnhams personal ambition and what serves Labour, are at present one and the same, and Labour are all that stands between us and a Reform government, and I'd not risk that on principle.

This makes no sense, if you oppose Reform/support Labour, by refusing to vote for Burnham you'd be voting against your own principles on principle.

Amazing logic

I feel the same. He has lost two elections for leader, quit Westminster when the mayoralty seemed a better option. Promised at the last mayoral election that Manchester was his one and only love. Within two years he’s angling to get another crack at the leadership with all the expense of additional elections and undermining “his” government.

I have no time for him, whatever his beliefs are this week. I declined to vote for him as leader previously as I’ve seen him change his views with the wind far too many times over the years. He certainly didn’t wow anyone during his time in government (when he was a devoted new Labour Blairite) or when he was cosying up to the back stabbing Milliband or when pretending to be Corbyn lite. I struggle to think of any conviction he has stood by over the years. He has been changing his mind on policy daily during the run up to this by election.

I’m not happy with Starmer - his management of the no10 machine has been appalling, he doesn’t communicate with his own MPs and opportunity after opportunity to share positive stories has been lost due to his own failures. Fundamentally he isn’t a PM personality - most people are not. However if Burnham’s great solution is being a better communicator - that is something he could have been doing as King of the North, supporting “his” Labour government instead of undermining it at every opportunity.

I don’t want Starmer to lead Labour into the next election but a change in leader now will be disastrous - in the run up to the next election maybe not.

Streeting’s problem is mainly with the rank and file membership - but the rank and file membership have proven astonishingly bad at choosing winning leaders (not a problem exclusive to Labour).

It negates your grow up comment @Nuthatch26

I don’t want Starmer to lead Labour into the next election but a change in leader now will be disastrous - in the run up to the next election maybe not. when a leader is as unpopular as Starmer is, limping on really isn't a political option. He's got no authority, it's better to get it over with. Starmer can't persuade the electorate of anything, so there's no progress to be made.
Was the same with Thatcher, Blair, Johnson, Truss - when it's time, it's time.

One rule for me, another for thee, eh?

Well, we might find out in 2029 whether Kemikaze has been truthful re: supporting Farage.