Is Reform done for?

[anotherside]

The last several recent national polls indicate that the election of Burnham as leader has seen Labour retake the lead and would probably form a minority government (or better) if an election was held tomorrow. Reform meanwhile is in the low 20s, while they’re were averaging low 30s just six months ago. Do you think it’s game over for Reform in terms of the next election? Is Burnham enough to secure the next election for Labour? Or could Reform claw it back still?

The polls indicate that.

But if you're glad Burnham replaced Starmer, don't you think Burnham's gain was yours too? If it wasn't for Burnham we'd have still had Starmer (or Streeting..?) which you think was worse.
Gaining politically is a politician's job. It's whether anyone else gains or not that matters when deciding if the action was a pointless waste of money or not.
I don't say this as a Labour supporter. I'd say exactly the same if the Tories took similar action to improve their leadership. Because having better people in jobs is good for us all. The fact it benefits the better person too is neither here nor there. You'd expect it to, or why would they go for it?
To add, people wanted Farage in Clacton and they already had him. Hence the pointlessness of the whole thing. Makerfield created change. Clacton did nothing but cost money.

What double standards? I just posted a poll and chose the most recent one. Would you have complained if the one I posted showed Labour on top? Doubt it.

Yep, and both Burnham's by elections were also completely unnecessary as Labour had over 400 MPs to choose from if they wanted to oust Starmer.

Yes he helped me out, but that’s just my personal view on Starmer. I still see it as the same mechanism as @Nuthatch26says. It just happens to align with my preference in one instance.

I see the by-elections as pretty much the same. It’s allowable and both utilised what is within the remit of political process to get ahead. Yes that’s what politicians do, but still the same.

As for what Clacton got out of it that’s up to the people who voted for Farage / Reform.

I don't see why not. Labour attracts its biggest voter base from the educated middle classes. There's nothing to suggest that is likely to change. It's the WC that he needs to focus on.

So you have managed to speak to all of the U.K.? I think you will find that the PM debacle has also not achieved anything positive and most people are not as confident as you in Burnham and his cabinet.

Not talking about the polls. I feel sure you can work it out.

Well we’ll just have to see, won’t we? You’re unconvinced by polls so we’ll have to wait three years until the next GE.

The people who voted for Farage got nothing from it. He was already their MP. If they wanted him to remain so, then all they've had is a summer of uncertainty, media all over the shop, and their town at the centre of a national joke. All to retain what they already had. Its like cutting short your family holiday, going home and telling your children if they ask you very nicely you'll go back and finish off the fortnight.
The people of Makerfield got the chance to choose something better, and they took it.

But they are not you. And likely feel differently.

You tagged me (again) about a poll I posted, therefore we were talking about polls. 🤷‍♂️

How do they feel then if they likely feel differently? Have they said they felt it was a good use of money to swap Farage for Farage at a cost of £250k? Have they spoken of the benefits of this to their town? I'm not disputing they want him as their MP. But what have they said about the benefit of him resigning so they had to re elect him?

There has been some coverage today not just centred on binface. Some sounded pretty happy, but you’re better off listening - Times radio is a good bet for election stuff

In your opinion.
I admire your mind-reading, can you give me the Lottery Numbers for Sat I won't tell anyone - taa ?

And Nigel just took back what he already had because he was trying to avoid scrutiny.

That's not my opinion it's the law of the land.

I don't know what you're talking about or what laws you mean.

"but it shows they know little - or care little" as I said, now you read minds ?

Yes. And your point is?

It's really perfectly clear. MP tries to avoid scrutiny, calls a fake election but says he'll pay for it. It's a known fact that paying for your own election is not allowed. For very obvious reasons. Then said person will use this to spout nonsense about the Establishment being against him, when he is the establishment,

I think those who support him are happy to have him back. Which isn't the same thing as being happy with the whole unecessary palaver and expense of it all. Objectively speaking, what is there to be happy about? Not a single thing has changed! All I can conclude is if there are people who think he's done a good thing, they either enjoyed a bit of drama, or they don't understand that everything is exactly as it was before and think he's perhaps exonerated now or something. Who knows.

Farage may be in prison by then for taking dodgy bungs from dodgy sources. He’s toast.

It is the law that they can't pay for the election. Given they offered to, its clear that they either did not know this law, or did know it and cared so little for it they thought they would be above it.
Personally I think neither is true. They may know little about the laws but will have access to those that do so would have known their 'offer' would be declined by law. The important thing being that the rumour spread they were paying so the gullible, ignorant, and those who don't check facts may erroneously believe they did. Which appears to have worked!

You’re better off listening, it’s not unknown. Times radio has been a pretty good indicator of feelings. For example they covered the feedback to Labour MPs on the doorstep, which then prompted Starmer being ousted.

As I said, at least they offered, which was more than the Burnham Brigade did when they pushed Josh Simons out of the way to enhance the career of Air Miles Andy.