Starmer - should he stay or should he go? What difference would it make either way?

[IwantToRetire]

Four ministers resign over Starmer leadership as Lammy says no-one has support to stand against PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c1e2n923v1lt

More than 100 Labour MPs have signed a statement urging Sir Keir Starmer not to stand down
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-resign-cabinet-live-updates-b2974932.html

More than 100 Labour MPs sign statement against Starmer leadership challenge
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/12/labour-mps-sign-statement-against-starmer-leadership-challenge

If it meant that fewer Reform councillors are elected next year, and a greater chance of Reform not being the largest party in 2029, then good.

Wes Streeting would not achieve that.

Imagine the shitstorm should both Andy Burnham lose the by-election and Labour their position as Manchester mayor. It's quite an unnecessary risk.

But in the end it is still the Starmer faction who caused this is the first place by blocking Burnham. ie "local" Labour is not allowed to be a representative democratic process, but the plaything of the (whichever on it is) in faction at Labour Party central.

I hope Andy Burnham has implemented something really positive for the area in recent years. Some of these areas can be forgotten.

You know how you get things like where Beryl in Accounts once did a spreadsheet one way, and it basically calcified into canon? However much of a PITA it is to use and all the formulae are glitchy and all that, it remains the same because that is just how it is and nobody really remembers the Beryl origin story.

It feels to me that that is how Andy Burnham suddenly became the Messiah And Guaranteed Saviour Of All Things. Nobody knows why or how, but now he is and that is the only truth that ever existed.

I don't think Burnham is a saviour, and I don''t entirely trust him (like all pols), but at the same time, I don't think he'd be worse than Starmer, probably better, and all the outrage about an MP stepping down for him? It's happened plenty of times before, both parties, and I don't see it's anything to get worked up about. Yes, the electorate might turn him down, but fair enough; that's the risk. I'd rather not see the Starmer/McSweeney axis running the Labour Party.

I believe that in the Church of Scientology they still use telex. I don't think I've ever seen a telex machine in the wild - it's a sort of primitive fax machine - and lord alone knows where you would find parts for it, but when L Ron Hubbard wrote his admin policies in the 1960s, telex was the shiny new tech, so he told his followers to use it and that became scripture.

I think the Labour Party rule book works the same way.

I view MPs of ANY party finagling the electoral system like this, in order to stage a leadership run, very dimly.

It’s not putting the country first, it’s putting their chance at power first.

I’ve had enough of politicians with massive egos who want to run the country because they like the idea of being PM.

I want politicians to face up to and correct the problems that successive governments have caused over the last three decades. I want them to acknowledge that their usual way of doing things has either stopped working or didn’t actually work in the first place. I want politicians to find actual solutions to society’s problems rather than tinkering around the edges. I want competency in government rather than politicians constantly cranking out pointless legislation.

I want some feckin public service for a change.

Bringing in Burnham says that of the 403 labour MPs, not one of them is seen as fit to run the country. Do they really think we can't see this? Starmer is a horrible lizard like creature but if they can't find someone else in the PLP they should call it a day or stick with him.

a man with no links to their area and no understanding of local needs is being dumped in as his replacement candidate

eh???

The Makerfield constituency is in Greater Manchester where Andy Burnham is mayor. He isn't being parachuted into a constituency in Cornwall.

All political parties are a mess of in fighting. Burnham has been a good major, maybe he does have what it takes to beat Reform. He was born in Liverpool, grew up 12 miles from Makerfield so he's local enough. His family were not rich.

Personally think this is the wrong time for a leadership campaign but the hate for him here is because he's seen as a possibility to see off Reform.

I voted Labour last week @anyolddinosaurand I think trying to dismiss my stance (which I’m not going to restate all over again - it’s on the thread) and that of others on here as hate for Burnham and support for Reform makes you look silly.

Burnham has done good job as Mayor, no argument from me about that, but then I’ve been told Boris Johnson did too.

100 percent. He is owned and just doing the bidding of his bosses, hence , the resistance to leave and pledge to stay 10 years. His main job is to make us all much poorer, create more divisions, fully implement digital ids/ cbdc, full control of population.

Crikey. That's a lot to swallow at breakfast.

I'm not sure that recent developments in Manchester are down to Andy Burnham; more so that continued government support and the wider development culture created by Howard Bernstein have continued to bear fruit. Greater Manchetser's re-invention goes back to the IRA bombing and then to having George Osborne as a local MP.

Andy Burnham is a nice enough guy, but as with the last time he ran for the leadership of the party he is still as bovine and still as wet as he ever was. I don't get why everyone ( in the Labour party and in the media) is raving about him? Could it be that the Greater Manchester contingent has gained enough traction at Westminster to sway and influence the narrative in this way?

Stay! He’s the most stable PM in years! The markets are tanking due to the drama.
He was handed a pile of shit! He pointed out it was shit, he’s trying to polish the shit, and everyone wants him out. Give him a chance. It’s embarrassing tbh.

The problem is that he flips and flops all over the place...and seems to have no firm vision that he can communicate and no drive to see it through.

He also turns voters to everyone else.

Keir should stay and the four possible challengers should support him. Non of them have the countries best interest at heart. It's sheer naked ambition and the people don't matter .

I said on another thread that they tried to oust John Major in a similar way.He told them to put more shut up. He survived a few more years until the 1997 GE, obviously Blair won that.

There no guarantee that any other candidates will get enough support anyway

I do feel sorry for Starmer. He was never cut out to be a leader; his big achievement was getting Labour elected in the first instance....by promising all things to all people. Let's not forget, though, he came in promising to promote Gender Self Id and making it easier for people to 'transition'.

He's always been hated by the Left wing of his party...really toxic stuff. And this toxicity is really the problem. The party is divided between fanatics and ideologues, and those who are more pragmatic and responsive to the public mood. He, Streeting and Mahmood have been demonised as "right wing Blairites" and there could be no worse insult for many than this.

I also suspect him to be autistic...hence his lack of warmth and connection with the public, and lack of expression.

My concern is who comes next and what programme they want to promote; who is paying and promoting them......it could well result in a premature general election...which Reform could well win.

What do you think of Shabana Mahmood? Personally, I really rate her and think she could unite some of the various factions in the wider electorate. ( Apart from the Greens, obviously)

Burnham probably would but he might not get through the by-election.

What do you think of Shabana Mahmood?

Only an extra-fine Rizla separates her from the Tories?