When & how will Burnham’s honeymoon come to an end?

[Theblueyonder]

Burnham’s leadership has been relatively free of drama, so far, and certainly when compared to his hapless predecessor.

What do we think will represent Burnham’s first real test? The budget, or something else?

Whatever

No PM has represented the majority of the people of the UK since 1931. Let me see how many of the last seven PMs have won a general election - there was Cameron, Johnson and Starmer. May didn’t, Truss didn’t and Sunak didn’t, were they all “illegitimate”?

The statement on Brexit at Makerfield really is a complete flip with just four months later. Why tell such lies when campaigning regarding such a major issue.

Because Burnham has always wanted to be PM and he's done whatever he needed to do to get there including knifing his hapless robotic colleague Starmer in the back. He's in it for himself and his ideology. He is not in it to make the lives of the people of Britain any better.

I’ve listened to that Makerfield statement, it was just replayed on the radio, and he goes on about the importance of respecting a democratic decision. How does someone lie that well.

Labour won with votes from just 20% of the eligible electorate. Burnham was not even an MP at the last general election. Labour only won, not on merit because the public wanted them, but purely because the Conservative vote collapsed because the public hated them even more. Labour won the election in 2024 on less votes than Jeremy Corbyn achieved when he lost the general election in 2019. Such are the huge electoral distortions that result from our first past the post system.

Johnson won a general election by a landslide. Truss and May were at least voted for by the party members. Who voted for Burnham apart from the constituents of Makerfield he lied to? He was foisted on us via the backdoor by powers unseen with no challenge or scrutiny of his policies (not that he had any) by the media or from rival candidates.

Sunak wasn’t voted for by party members, he took over when Truss sent the markets doolally. He came second in the leadership contest.

So now you’re questioning Starmer’s legitimacy? I’m getting whiplash from the twists and turns in your posts.

Yeah and he was as illegitimate as Burnham. A shoe-in. A WEF Young Global Leader, groomed for power by the globalists.

I'm going to be contrary and say there has been no honeymoon period.

Just a relatively calm progress of capable competence. That may not suit everyone, but it's hardly sinister.

If he doesn't stop hammering workers and handing out their money like confetti, I hope he goes.

No worker is paying any more tax than they were in early 2024. Unless, of course, they’re earning more.

And dragged into a higher rate of tax as they won't sort out fiscal drag.

I actually agree with that @SerendipityJane

And I suppose I do also think that it’s telling that so many of the attack lines thrown at Andy Burnham are not only hyperbolic, but also quite contradictory and incoherent. Is he a parochial Northern mayor who only cares about buses or is he a corporate globalist knee deep in corrupt deals with the UEA? Is he a nice enough bloke but not Prime Minister material or is he a ruthless career politician who’ll do anything to cling to power?

It all seems quite knee jerk and desperate. And to be honest, I really think his opponents would do better to give the mud slinging a rest, and focus on selling their own vision to the electorate.

When did the Tories sort out fiscal drag? Think carefully now. Ooooh, that would be not since 2021.

I don’t think so, on hyperbolic. He’s switched on campaigning and a statement that was very clear.

Obviously you won’t mind. And still Starmer going provides some boost as he was bad. We’ll see.

I think there are many reasons why the media might want to portray a "honeymoon" (remembering who prints the headlines that get words into circulation).

However his ability to do in 6 weeks, what Farage has spent 2 years and uncounted millions in not doing (becoming PM, - even though he was practically crowned as out "next PM") must have really, really grated.

And then the fact that with a single stroke, Labour managed to flush the turn that was Mandelson down the pan of posterity forever. Losing the trump card they had against Starmer.

All I have read skimming the news these past months is loads of reporters basically asking each other when "the honeymoon" will end. I don't think it's worrying any real people overly much.

Well it wasn’t that hard. Starmer was so bad Labour MPs were panicking and desperate to replace him.

The attacks bandied about on this thread, amongst them “an idiot”, “illegitimate”, “pathological liar”, “globalist scum” are to my mind, definitely hyperbolic.

And I do think people have had enough of that kind of divisive, ideological, point scoring politics. Andy Burnham talks to the electorate like they are grown ups - capable of engaging with big ideas in a way that is thoughtful and nuanced. I think his opponents would actually start to do better, and would go up in the public’s estimation, if they could start following suit.

My personal view is that Burnham is slowly coming undone.

Plenty lob that kind of stuff at other non-Labour politicians.

He is another operator foisted on us by the World Economic Forum

https://www.weforum.org/people/andy-burnham/

And he is a Fabian

https://fabians.org.uk/local-hero/

He works for them, not for us.

Absolutely, and I personally don’t like it when hyperbolic name calling happens about other politicians either. I’m very much in favour of playing the ball, not the player. But this thread is about Andy Burnham, and I do think one of one of the reasons for his popularity is the way he not only talks about making politics less divisive, he acts on it too. I thought the fact he didn’t criticise the other party leaders in his conference speech was really refreshing.

Reading his praise for Kemi Badenoch stannding up to racist scum was a brief reminder of how decent mainstream UK politics was.

Presumably the "news" is as old as the photo ? And as much use.

He called Danny Tommo a racist, for organising largely peaceful protests against the third world benefit seeking rapists invading our beaches. How exactly is that not divisive?

Aside from that has he actually done anything yet besides talk and bluster? Has he made any difficult decisions? I see he's still kicking the can down the road on whether or not to allow more drilling in the North Sea, putting investment at risk in the process.