Yeah, that's not why. If anything, the current Labour government is being lambasted by the left for being so restrictive on migrants. That's why he picked Shabana Mahmood as Home Secretary, and that's why she was heckled by a white liberal for "out-Reforming Reform." I can totally understand why you wouldn't understand any of this, because scary dark foreigners are such a major part of your personal identity, that you can't imagine people care about anything else, but Starmer is unpopular for the same reason Republicans here are unpopular: he promised to do something about the cost of living crisis, and so far he's failed.
I get that you want to put this solely on the economy but you and I know it's much deeper than that. That his hand picked Home Sec was lambasted for "out-Reforming Reform" by a white liberal is of little surprise to me (for obvious white liberal reasons), but still isn't indicative of where the discontent actually lay. What helps tell the whole story isn't just that Labour lost 148 council seats leaving them with 68, but that Reform gained 206 council seats.
This wasn't just an indictment or even a wholesale rejection of Starmer and Labour, this was more...much more.
Be clear about what I said. DBM made a pithy comment with his usual X flair that implied migration is the reason the Starmer government is unpopular. It isn't. The cost of living crisis is why the government is unpopular. I did not say that no one in the UK cares about migration. I did not say that migration isn't an issue that will affect votes. And migration is certainly one of the issues that helped Reform do so well today. But the Greens and the Lib Dems did well, too. That wasn't because of migration. And it's not why Labour got spanked. It's not why people were hesitant to so quickly turn back to the Tories, who also got spanked, although not nearly as badly as Labour.
DBM likes to pretend that everything everywhere all the time revolves around third world migration, usually Muslim migration. It doesn't. It's an issue. A lot of people care about it. But it wasn't the albatross hanging around Starmer's neck. The cost of living was the albatross.
Yeah, that's not why. If anything, the current Labour government is being lambasted by the left for being so restrictive on migrants. That's why he picked Shabana Mahmood as Home Secretary, and that's why she was heckled by a white liberal for "out-Reforming Reform." I can totally understand why you wouldn't understand any of this, because scary dark foreigners are such a major part of your personal identity, that you can't imagine people care about anything else, but Starmer is unpopular for the same reason Republicans here are unpopular: he promised to do something about the cost of living crisis, and so far he's failed.
I get that you want to put this solely on the economy but you and I know it's much deeper than that. That his hand picked Home Sec was lambasted for "out-Reforming Reform" by a white liberal is of little surprise to me (for obvious white liberal reasons), but still isn't indicative of where the discontent actually lay. What helps tell the whole story isn't just that Labour lost 148 council seats leaving them with 68, but that Reform gained 206 council seats.
This wasn't just an indictment or even a wholesale rejection of Starmer and Labour, this was more...much more.
Be clear about what I said. DBM made a pithy comment with his usual X flair that implied migration is the reason the Starmer government is unpopular. It isn't. The cost of living crisis is why the government is unpopular. I did not say that no one in the UK cares about migration. I did not say that migration isn't an issue that will affect votes. And migration is certainly one of the issues that helped Reform do so well today. But the Greens and the Lib Dems did well, too. That wasn't because of migration. And it's not why Labour got spanked. It's not why people were hesitant to so quickly turn back to the Tories, who also got spanked, although not nearly as badly as Labour.
DBM likes to pretend that everything everywhere all the time revolves around third world migration, usually Muslim migration. It doesn't. It's an issue. A lot of people care about it. But it wasn't the albatross hanging around Starmer's neck. The cost of living was the albatross.
This isn't going to turn out the way you want if they move too fast. Andy ain't happening yet. They are going to end up with Angela Rayner.
This isn't going to turn out the way you want if they move too fast. Andy ain't happening yet. They are going to end up with Angela Rayner.
ELI5 b/c she is endorsing his return.
This isn't going to turn out the way you want if they move too fast. Andy ain't happening yet. They are going to end up with Angela Rayner.
ELI5 b/c she is endorsing his return.
They have to wait for a byelection to get him back into the Commons first. If the party is impatient, they'll end up with someone else.
Burnham is like the UK's version of Beshear. It should be obvious that he's the best choice politically. But they have a certain (strange) process, thanks to being a parliamentary system, that pretty much disqualifies him until he wins a seat. That's why she and others are so pissed he was blocked. And that's why he was blocked. Starmer isn't stupid. He knew Burnham sitting in the House would have made him a lame duck.
To be clear, I'm not saying Labour suddenly has a chance with Andy in charge. I think they are screwed six ways from Sunday. But at least Andy gives them hope. If they are too anxious to get rid of Starmer, they end up with Rayner or, God forbid, Wes Streeting. And they won't do any better than Starmer.
@goat, where does he fall on the political spectrum, generally and relative to Starmer? Also, what are the implications of a guy from Manchester winning and how does that impact London, etc.?
he's in what they call the "soft left" which means he was a Starmer ally and Corbyn opponent. He's probably slightly left of Starmer, but not by enough that matters. I'm not knowledgeable enough to speak on Manchester vs. London, but I will say Andy has a bit of a populist appeal, and it would make sense if that were tied to his popularity in the blue collar industrial corridor of England.@goat, where does he fall on the political spectrum, generally and relative to Starmer? Also, what are the implications of a guy from Manchester winning and how does that impact London, etc.?
His overall popularity rating is far greater than any other party leader or major Labour figure.
I'm guessing it's a relatively long timetable. If he's smart, he wants Burnham to win. Rayner is bad for the party and Streeting is bad for the country. (Actually, Streeting is probably bad for both.)
So my guess is he'll say he's stepping down sometime in July. That gives Andy time to win his seat and get things in order before the inevitable contest.
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/2055364529668727095
Of course no one can comment on it. Probably just as well though, anyone there who did would end up in jail for mean words.
https://twitter.com/BigBrotherWatch/status/2042640497529790947
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
