If you think Burnham means a radical change in direction I have a bridge to sell you.
Not sure people are after radical change from what Starmer is doing - they just want someone who can communicate with the electorate the good they are already doing.
Personalities matter when it comes to grabbing votes - sadly Starmer doesn't have one.
given they've just passed a Renter Act, and are busy with a Workers Rights Act.
Two good examples of policies which on the surface are good and necessary but which don't really impact the lives of the majority of working people. The rent act has some good stuff in it but people will only feel the benefit if they're renting and have a particularly shit landlord which will a tiny number. Same goes for the workers rights act, which only really affects people with exploitative employers or who've been unfairly dismissed. Good honest 'Labour' policies which almost no one will notice or feel the impact from. It's hardly game-changing stuff, in fact it's the sort of thing the tories might have done under a centre-right leader back in the day.
sadly Starmer doesn't have one
He never has though, He's even said himself; "there's no such things as Starmeronics or Starmerism" People projected onto him what they thought would happen, and what they got was boring managerealism with a lack of communication strategy.
People projected onto him what they thought would happen
Err, no they took his promise of change at face value and two years later concluded that he hadn't really changed much at all.
I suppose "communication" is something that Burnham (or even Streeting) would do better than Starmer.
But actual policy... that would be universally welcome by those pushing for Burnham? My prediction, if he gets to be PM, is he'll disappoint most people who called for him to take over. The conflict between those who want the shift away from fossil fuel to be sped up, and those who want the cost of fossil fuels to be reduced... is just one area of many where he'll be pulled in two different directions.
Err, no they took his promise of change at face value and two years later concluded that he hadn't really changed much at all.
If they'd read past the cover of the manifesto, or listened to any of his campaign speeches (granted, that's not a very inviting prospect), they'd have an idea of what was planned, and how long it would take.
Good honest 'Labour' policies which almost no one will notice or feel the impact from
I think this hits the nail on the head. Right now, the idea that Labour "help those who need help most" counts against them (and will for the next leader). The idea that Labour is the party of the unemployed, the sick, the disabled and people fleeing other countries is what I hear thrown back at me when I make the mistake of talking politics "out there". Starmer has attempted to do something about that, and the Labour party has (rightly IMHO) pushed back on changes aimed at winning over these people. What is Burnham going to do to win these people over? A freeze on fuel duty? Some help with this winter's gas prices? That'll move no one.
If they'd read past the cover of the manifesto
No one reads the manifesto. Is that seriously what Starmer supporters think voters should have done? And they wonder why voters have concluded they're not on their side. 🙄
Right now, the idea that Labour "help those who need help most" counts against them (and will for the next leader).
Yup. Labour are seen as the protector of last resort for those at the bottom, rather than the party which stands and fights for the majority of the working population. This may come as a surprise to some in Labour, but working people aren't really interested in protections because they don't see themselves needing them. Instead all they want is the opportunity to work, be fairly rewarded and be able to independently support themselves and their families. Labour need to be doing everything it can to enable that, rather than saying 'don't worry if it all goes tits-up we'll be here to rescue you'.
Yup, it's why people complain about minimum wages going up (I'm not on the minimum wage, what about me), increased spending on the NHS (I'm not waiting for surgery, what about me), the focus on fixing special needs education (I don't have school age kids, or I do and they don't need special help... what about me)....
I'm not blaming voters here. I'm intrigued about how Burnham gets past this.
To my mind, Burnham has become very good at getting long term changes implemented in Manchester... not quick fixes. I don't think he'll get time to prove himself as PM, if he gets that far. Just as Starmer's "10 years of renewal" is being judged to have already failed after two difficult years (thanks Trump).
No one reads the manifesto. Is that seriously what Starmer supporters think voters should have done?
I guess that answer the question of what d'you think Starmer has changed. If you've not been paying attention, I guess it's all the same. If all you need to be content with a govt is that they look busy, i guess you'll be easily pleased with anything that comes next.
LOL - I seen Reform are poised to select a plumber as their candidate for Makerfield!! 🤣
Just like the Greens did. Hannah Spencer was both a plumber and plasterer. Although they are very different jobs so not sure I quite get that one.
Burnham will be gutted they didnt pick that unlikable prick Matt Goodwin again!
LOL - I seen Reform are poised to select a plumber as their candidate for Makerfield!
?
Burnham will be gutted they didnt pick that unlikable prick Matt Goodwin again!
Given what the nonexistent Reform vetting process has thrown up so far, who knows what joys await the vtoers of Makerfield...
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/st-helens-reform-councillor-says-33952245
Burnham has become very good at getting long term changes implemented in Manchester... not quick fixes.
The Manc congestion charge was a crap idea, implemented craply. It's never mentioned on Burnhams resume but a colossal waste of taxpayer cash.
Like Farge and brexit
It's never mentioned on Burnhams resume
FFS man the Manchester congestion charge died in 2008 and burnham became mayor in 2017.
So... as becoming PM gets closer to Burnham... and the reality of the job gets closer to him...
- he's dropped all his ideas about changing fiscal rules/policy
- he's dropped talk of rejoining the EU in his life time
I don't blame him, he needs to start resetting people's idea of what a Burnham reset of government will do... but for those calling for Labour to be "brave" or to "move fast" or "think big"... they need to stop dreaming that Burnham will do that for them. He's not going to be an opposition leader if he gets the top job, or an insurgent voice from the North with little power to change national policy, he'll be PM... and his wiggle room once he's in that job isn't what so many others are hoping/thinking/claiming it will be. If he gets in, I'll trust him just as much as Starmer to try and steer the country for everyone... and by that I mean I'd trust either of them more than any of the other party leaders hoping to get into government, at the last general election or currently... and I strongly predict come the next general election as well.
Never mind all this shit, he’s going to address the big issues that really effect people’s lives!
He also said he’ll ban international friendlies during the Premier League season.
hes got it in the bag! 😂
Sadly a good number of people would be more behind something about VAR than whether children are growing up in poverty.
Burnham indicating that he won't re-open the EU debate, and isn't looking to change the fiscal rules and settlement.
Remind me why we're doing this again?
- he's dropped all his ideas about changing fiscal rules/policy
- he's dropped talk of rejoining the EU in his life time
I've not seen anything suggesting he was going to do that anyway so it's all bollocks. Burnham has focused on two major things: Giving more power (and money) to local authorities and regions, and bringing utilities under 'public control' (ie not ownership) so that bill payers are protected from market fluctuations and profiteering. The comms are also all focused around how 40 years of neoliberalism has not worked for working people and he wants to reverse that trend. I presume you've seen the campaign video?
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/2056496052824383641?s=20
Burnham indicating that he won't re-open the EU debate, and isn't looking to change the fiscal rules and settlement.
Remind me why we're doing this again?
Sadly, I think it'll be a generation before a majority of people will vote to re-open the EU debate. Even those now in the majority who wish we had never left don't have the appetite for years more of protracted negotiation with the EU. Its just taken up too much bandwidth for too long. And, of course, any politician who suggested it would provoke the mother of all pile ons by the axis of Reform/GB News/the Right Wing Press
It was an act of economic suicide and stupidity of epic proportions, but there's no quick fix and no appetite to prise open that particular divisive wound again. Unfortunately, that debate/argument is the main reason that our political discourse has ended up where it is today.
I've not seen anything suggesting he was going to do that anyway so it's all bollocks.
Just because you haven't been listening to what Burnham has actually been saying up to now, doesn't mean that he didn't say what he said. I'm not accusing him of anything other than changing his ideas to fit the job... I just think that others need to be realistic about what will change at the government level if/when he is in it. What Burnham has said while MCR mayor isn't all going to carry across to Burnham as PM.
Giving more power (and money) to local authorities and regions, and bringing utilities under 'public control' (ie not ownership) so that bill payers are protected from market fluctuations and profiteering.
All regional mayors talk up more funds and powers for the regions. I think he'll stick to this if coming into government... but then when it comes to powers and structures is that really a change from what's already ongoing under the current lot? Really? On the money side, he's right, but without changing fiscal rules... what's his plans there? And on public control... is that all at the regional level... where central gov can only enable (as this and... whisper it... the previous government have been doing) rather than implement... or does he have some national ideas that as a leader of the national government he can get done?
I'm just looking for what concrete change Bunrham will bring... beyond "communication".
If he says specific utilities will be brought under public control, nationwide, then that's the kind of change that will be a very real shift... but saying that "should" happen while MCR mayor isn't the same as stating clearly that it "will" happen if he becomes PM. As per the other big examples already walked back from (EU membership in the long term & fiscal rules for this parliament).
I'm just looking for what concrete change Bunrham will bring... beyond "communication".
nothing of any significance.
nothing of any significance.
Preventing a Reform govt is hardly insignificant. Unless you're also going to claim that Reform will be no different to what we currently have?
I presume you've seen the campaign video?
Correctly identifying the issues that have bought us here isn't a plan for the future. I'll wait till I see the economic recovery plan, and the team he appoints.
Preventing a Reform govt is hardly insignificant
So... is there something firm he'll do differently once PM that'll cut off Reform support? Will he stop the government targeting aslym-seekers in policy and tone? Or double down on that kind of offer to the Reform voters? Or will he win back Green voters and non-voters... if so, how? Given what he's already said this week about the fiscal rules and working with the EU? What's the change... other than a change of face? Because if you think personal popularity will survive the full attack on him that'll kick in once he's PM... I don't share that optimism whatsoever.
Actually TJ, Kelvin and Nickc, you've persuaded me. Lets just stick with Starmer and accept that Farage will be the next PM. What's the worst that could happen? TBH I'll probably do alright out of it if he delivers the tax cuts he promises, so what do I care?
Come on, try harder… Labour needs to turn this around… tell us why Burnham is the man, and how he’ll do it? I think he’s just as likely to mould his politics to the situation as Starmer is… and after two years as PM would be in the same situation as him. Would REALLY like to hear something concrete (not just a video of his fans in MCR shaking his hand) that would give me hope that it’s worth the possible damage of having an “unelected PM” and a leadership contest.
tell us why Burnham is the man, and how he’ll do it?
I don't know he is or if he will. What I do know though is it's not Starmer or Streeting, and probably not Rayner or Miliband. Burnham represents the last hope that Farage can be stopped from becoming PM. That's good enough for me, whatever it is that he does, and it should be good enough for anyone else who doesn't want a hard right fascist as PM.
Having said that though I'm quietly optimistic on Burnham. Not expecting a revolution, just a change in tone which will put working people a the top of the list rather than somewhere in the middle. If he does half of what he talks about in relation to public transport and devolving power to local authorities that will be far more than Starmer has done, so I'd take that. There's potential for a lot more though.
That's good enough for me, whatever it is that he does, and it should be good enough for anyone else who doesn't want a hard right fascist as PM.
Sorry, but I want policy details, not just hugs in the street. He wants to lead the country. I want to know how.
Any/all Labour politicians can (and will) be playing the "vote for me or get Farage" ticket ... and they'd be right... but how does this Labour politician win over people currently voting for and supporting Reform, and/or the Green Party, or not voting at all... what will he be offering them, and their conflicting motivations when it comes to their votes?
My big concern is that Burnham will have a short term bump in the polls, seek to capitalise on it, take us into a general election, and throw away Labour's majority next year. A full term is needed to make a difference in the economy and in public services... and personally I want an election put off as long as possible in the hope the Farage bubble might pop before we get a national vote. Probably a misplaced hope though, given the easy ride he's getting over his obvious corruption.
Lets just stick with Starmer and accept that Farage will be the next PM
I don't think the change to Burnham will make the pro Reform, GBN watching masses suddenly have a Damascene conversion. There's already a head a steam on SM building up around the EU and fiscal policy that is identifying him as "more of the same". Until and unless there's a change in the economic outlook that people can feel in their wallets, the spectre of Farage loom large over all of us.
Sorry, but I want policy details, not just hugs in the street. He wants to lead the country. I want to know how.
Labour have far more policy details than Reform already and it's not making a difference.
A change of face is needed and there's no point doing that a few months before an election.
Labour have far more policy details than Reform already and it's not making a difference.
Reform aren't in government though. Burham isn't trying to become an opposition leader, he's looking to be made PM. He will very quickly judged on what he can deliver, this side of the general election... unlike Farage.
A change of face is needed and there's no point doing that a few months before an election.
I think that's exactly the time to do it, if you're going to.
Oh, on the positive side... that Makerfield campaign video is more relatable than anything Starmer could ever do.
Actually TJ, Kelvin and Nickc, you've persuaded me. Lets just stick with Starmer and accept that Farage will be the next PM. What's the worst that could happen? TBH I'll probably do alright out of it if he delivers the tax cuts he promises, so what do I care?
Burnham will make no significant difference to policy or electoral chances. He is no differenttoStarmer. Indeed personally I would be less likely to vote labour under Burnham as I despise his use of the race card and his total lack of .any ethics.
Shall we do this yet again Uncle Jezza? For the 138th time?
Can you provide us with any evidence whatsoever of Andy Burnham 'playing the race card'?
I'll pre-empt your usual non-answer....
No, you can't (yet again!) because there isn't any, because he has never done so 🙄
There's no shortage of racists presently operating in UK politics, but Andy Burnham isn't one of them
Have to say there's a lot of sour grapes on here from the Starmerites. Just like when the labour right barely disguised their preference for Johnson over Corbyn, this is all coming across as if you'd all rather have Farage than Burnham which is pretty weird. Amazing though how someone so bland and characterless can inspire such loyalty and passion. 😀
Sourgrapes? We just want to know and see that Burnham has a plan… and get some idea about what he proposes to do differently. Choosing some Manchester classics as a soundtrack isn’t enough.
Preferring Farage to Burnham?
That accusation is because we want to know what Burnham is proposing? Nonsense. If Burnham has a plan, let’s get down to it.
If little or no policy changes occur but despite that Burnham has a better comms team that can actually make some headway against the right wing media then that would still be something. While the PR side of politics may feel like an irritating sideshow it is sadly necessary and Starmer seems to be struggling greatly with it.
(Yeah, a more progressive government would be better still, but if the choice is between what we have now or a Reform government then I'd go for what we have now.)
Indeed... clearly better at comms... clearly more relatable to working people... both in his favour... maybe enough to become Labour leader... but he's tried twice before to become leader... and that's when people start to ask the difficult questions... both inside and outside the Labour Party. He needs to offer more than "a better telling of our story". The Labour Party isn't like Reform... owned and controlled by one man, you have to win over MPs and members. The party won't get the same easy ride in the press as Reform either, whoever is leader. Burnham needs to be able to spell out what will change if he takes over... to his party, to the media, and to the voters. Being a decent bloke who's done a good job in Manchester is only a launchpad...
Sourgrapes? We just want to know see that Burnham has a plan… and get some idea about what he proposes to do differently. Choosing some Manchester classics as a soundtrack isn’t enough.
He doesn't have to prove his plan to the electorate yet - all he has to do is win over Labour party members, MPs and the unions to get enough support for a leadership bid. The polls already show he's more popular than Starmer.
You can't formulate a plan until you have the details in front of you, all you can sell is a vision.
He doesn't have to prove his plan to the electorate yet
Well he has to prove himself to the electorate of Makerfield. That's fairly straightforward though because all that entails is saying "I'm not Keir Starmer, I'm not a middle class London barrister who hasn't got the first clue where Makerfield is, and I can talk to white working class people without accusing them of being racist mysoginists".
Honestly presenting himself as a man of the people who understands the white working class may not be a specific policy but that's all many reform-voting people in Makerfield and other similar areas want to hear.
Have to say there's a lot of sour grapes on here from the Starmerites.
I'm no fan of Starmer and I don't think Burnham will move the dial.
