Makerfield By - Election. Burnham v Reform

johnny crossan said:
View attachment 191999
Click to expand...
Local elections versus Parliamentary elections are different, although they do give indicative information.
Many people can't be bothered at local elections, even though the council manages most of the things people really care about - getting pot holes filled, getting the bins emptied, having a free/cheap care home for grandma, etc.

Deform being a protest party attracting those who believe the immigration spin, those who don't like Starmer (or at least believe the anti-Starmer MSM rhetoric) and those who just want to "give them a go, can't be any worse" (a.k.a. turkeys, voting for Xmas).
And there are the pot-holers / bin-emptiers who do vote in local elections, and always against their current council, irrespective of who it is.

Chances are that most of the Deform-leaning people did vote in the local elections, while half(?) the main party people didn't bother.
 
Unfortunately it’s a win/win for Deform, they win and it’s a huge embarrassment for Burnham and takes him out of the picture for now at least and they still have a lame duck PM who can’t control the shenanigans in his own party, he wins they get rid of Starmer who I still maintain is more of a threat in a FPTP general election than Burnham would be.
 
Norbert D said:
Unfortunately it’s a win/win for Deform, they win and it’s a huge embarrassment for Burnham and takes him out of the picture for now at least and they still have a lame duck PM who can’t control the shenanigans in his own party, he wins they get rid of Starmer who I still maintain is more of a threat in a FPTP general election than Burnham would be.
Click to expand...
Why?
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Why?
Click to expand...
See below, better than I could explain it.
In my opinion Starmer collects votes in “middle England” that are unavailable to a traditional Labour politician

Edit, in theory Burnham would gain more votes, but in the wrong places.
 

Attachments

  • 8bc0b862-3672-4ed1-b964-cddf005f89f2.jpeg
    8bc0b862-3672-4ed1-b964-cddf005f89f2.jpeg
    95.8 KB · Views: 23
  • ddf0416c-d45e-41d0-93ee-c115d72ee888.jpeg
    ddf0416c-d45e-41d0-93ee-c115d72ee888.jpeg
    128 KB · Views: 23
TinFoilHat said:
The Greens are asking for a vote on PR from Burnham, so they don't stand a candidate.
Click to expand...

Latest seems to be they are going to properly contest it, though that might just be a negotiating posture. Think it would be a mistake to do so personally. Irrespective of the Green party's momentum of late, I don't think any one party has the juice to carry the public with them to do the things that need to be done to start fixing the country. If we're not to remain ungovernable we need to move into a world of multiple parties cooperating rather than beating the shit out of each other. Labour's recent tactics towards the Green's hardly helps with that but Burnham hasn't really been part of that behaviour I think. He's also an advocate of PR anyway albeit I'm not sure of what type.

Labour needs to get out of the mindset that they can turn the country round on their own because that ship has sailed. But equally the Greens need not to get too high on their own supply either.

As unlikely as it is to happen I think you probably need both parties and the Lib Dems too all working at least broadly together in order to create a big enough mandate for some of the long overdue shit we'll need to wade through over a prolonged period of time in order to rescue the real economy for ordinary people.
 
Chappie said:
What has been offered to the present incumbent to step aside.
Which sane person would walk away from potential earnings of £300000 over the next 3 years .
Very interesting to know the answer to this one.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing, he's new intake too only started in 2024 so not like he can claim hes done his bit and is worn down by Westminster.


On a separate note, if he loses surely Burnham can never show his face in politics ever again.
 
threespires said:
Latest seems to be they are going to properly contest it, though that might just be a negotiating posture. Think it would be a mistake to do so personally. Irrespective of the Green party's momentum of late, I don't think any one party has the juice to carry the public with them to do the things that need to be done to start fixing the country. If we're not to remain ungovernable we need to move into a world of multiple parties cooperating rather than beating the shit out of each other. Labour's recent tactics towards the Green's hardly helps with that but Burnham hasn't really been part of that behaviour I think. He's also an advocate of PR anyway albeit I'm not sure of what type.

Labour needs to get out of the mindset that they can turn the country round on their own because that ship has sailed. But equally the Greens need not to get too high on their own supply either.

As unlikely as it is to happen I think you probably need both parties and the Lib Dems too all working at least broadly together in order to create a big enough mandate for some of the long overdue shit we'll need to wade through over a prolonged period of time in order to rescue the real economy for ordinary people.
Click to expand...
If the Tories step aside as you suggest the Green's should,that would probably result in a landslide for Reform.
Everyone should stand and let the electorate decide their's and their party's fate.
 
Chappie said:
What has been offered to the present incumbent to step aside.
Which sane person would walk away from potential earnings of £300000 over the next 3 years .
Very interesting to know the answer to this one.
Click to expand...

Straight into a cabinet position if Burnham gets in.

It's a gamble but if all the cards fall for him the right way he flies up the political ladder. You lick my political balls and I'll lick yours

All the fucking same.
 
Chappie said:
What has been offered to the present incumbent to step aside.
Which sane person would walk away from potential earnings of £300000 over the next 3 years .
Very interesting to know the answer to this one.
Click to expand...
Up to his neck in the 'Labour Together' skulduggery. Already had to resign a ministerial position over it with potentially more shit coming down the pipeline. Not a bad time to get out of Dodge on that basis alone.

It's also a recognition that a quick decapitation strike is out of the question and the only way they get rid of Keith is via an 'orderly process' .... which meant appeasing the considerable number of 'Burnhamites' in the PLP.

It's pretty much his home turf and on the current trajectory it's going Reform in 3 years anyway. There you go Andy shit or get off the pot. They've basically made him an offer he can't refuse.

The shorter answer is circumstances.
 
Postman Pep said:
Up to his neck in the 'Labour Together' skulduggery. Already had to resign a ministerial position over it with potentially more shit coming down the pipeline. Not a bad time to get out of Dodge on that basis alone.

It's also a recognition that a quick decapitation strike is out of the question and the only way they get rid of Keith is via an 'orderly process' .... which meant appeasing the considerable number of 'Burnhamites' in the PLP.

It's pretty much his home turf and on the current trajectory it's going Reform in 3 years anyway. There you go Andy shit or get off the pot. They've basically made him an offer he can't refuse.

The shorter answer is circumstances.
Click to expand...
Or the next 2 months, I think I would have been looking for a safer seat than this to get back into parliament.
 
Chappie said:
Or the next 2 months, I think I would have been looking for a safer seat than this to get back into parliament.
Click to expand...
Which is part of the reason they've offered up Simons as a sacrificial lamb. They, the Labour right, were hardly going to hang around till a 'safer' route back in was triggered.
 
General public do not like being asked to help a politician achieve his personal political aims. Enough labour supporters will feel Starmer has a 5 year mandate and don’t want this Tory style internal fighting. Burnham will lose big in this by election. All Tories, lib dems, greens, keep starmers and subversives, anti establishment will vote reform. Add these to the already voting reform it won’t be close. No way the public will do Andy a favour.
Also how is he the knight in shining armour that will rescue Britain? His main strength seems to be he’s not in Westminster. When he was a minister he was ordinary and ineffective
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top