Fog Dude Posted November 26, 2025 Posted November 26, 2025 A Tory MSP who's standing down in May after just a single term, explained his decision by comparing the changes in politics since 2021 as being like the difference between The Attitude Era and Ruthless Aggression - a reminder that wrestling fandom sadly doesn't always attract the generally sound people on these here message boards. Also apparently there was a Budget speech today, but its contents (as well as a bunch of stuff that ultimately wasn't announced but that Reeves was obviously considering) had already gradually leaked out over the past few months. Quote
Paid Members Jazzy G Posted January 24 Paid Members Posted January 24 Andy Burnham asking at the 11th hour for permission to stand in the Gorton Byelection probably has the remaining left of the party getting a little excited after the whole theory of him being the one to bring Starmer's leadership to a end and take the party back got floated after the last leadership contest. It'll be interesting to see whether they do give him permission, but I'd also be curious about who'd run to replace him as mayor if he did stand. Quote
Paid Members RedTwoster Posted January 24 Paid Members Posted January 24 I’m excited by the idea of Burnham standing. I have as much faith in him as I do anyone in that party as a potential Farage-stopper. A Reform government - or a Reform-Tory coalition - is a terrifying prospect for me. You’d likely lose the NHS. He’d likely try to end or at least dilute devolution. We’d be out of the ECHR. He’d destroy the BBC, creating a US-style news landscape. Then there’s the prospect of damaging DOGE-style cuts to services, our own version of ICE and a Trumpian-style landscape enabling bigotry and white supremacism at a level we’ve not yet experienced in the UK. And there’s also the prospect of a turbo-charged version of Trussonomics dragging us all into the depths of economic turmoil, along with reversals of green policy destroying the planet even more. Starmer is Labour’s John Major, at least in terms of public perception. If he leads the party into the next election, they’re doomed - and as a result, the country will be. Quote
Paid Members Jazzy G Posted January 24 Paid Members Posted January 24 It could be very refreshing for politics in general if Burnham makes it into Parliament, especially if he was to end up being prime minister. Would it lead to the return of the likes of Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott? The other side of it is that he's challenged for the party leadership twice in the past and lost, and some stuff is coming to light about some rather dubious construction deals he seems to have made, and it may be him trying to get away from that situation before it blows up. There are ways the right wing tabloids can spin this, but I'd also love to see him telling Farage where he can stick it in PMQs Quote
Paid Members BigJag Posted January 24 Paid Members Posted January 24 He's also has questions to answer regarding a coverup of the Oldham grooming and rape cases. Quote
Members SuperBacon Posted January 25 Members Posted January 25 The Labour NEC have voted against Burnham standing. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jan/25/andy-burnham-blocked-from-byelection-race-by-labour-ruling-committee Quote
westlondonmist Posted January 25 Posted January 25 I said to someone Starmer should have backed him and let his allies vote him down. Would take some heat off him internally. I didn't think he'd be allowed to stand anyway, so Starmer could have used this to form some unity. Quote
Paid Members RedTwoster Posted January 25 Paid Members Posted January 25 5 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: The Labour NEC have voted against Burnham standing. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jan/25/andy-burnham-blocked-from-byelection-race-by-labour-ruling-committee Disappointing. I’m not saying he’s a perfect option, but I’d take him over 5-years of Farage any day of the week. The amount of damage that could be done to the country and world in that time is highly significant; so for me, we need a strong Labour to avoid something truly catastrophic. Quote
Paid Members Jazzy G Posted January 25 Paid Members Posted January 25 Yeah, it could have been used as an opportunity to build bridges and possibly unite the party. I love how they're claiming it's because of the financial implications as they get ready to send troops to Ukraine and possibly Greenland. Quote
CTXRussomark Posted January 25 Posted January 25 17 minutes ago, westlondonmist said: I said to someone Starmer should have backed him and let his allies vote him down. Would take some heat off him internally. Internally it would be blatantly obvious what was happening if he did that, and externally it would give the opposition ammunition for saying Starmer isn't even in sync with his own senior leaders. Ultimately it was a no-win situation for Starmer but I think this decision makes him look incredibly weak and scared of Burnham making a potential leadership challenge against him. Definite self-preservation over the interests of the party. Quote
westlondonmist Posted January 25 Posted January 25 7 minutes ago, CTXRussomark said: Internally it would be blatantly obvious what was happening if he did that, and externally it would give the opposition ammunition for saying Starmer isn't even in sync with his own senior leaders. Ultimately it was a no-win situation for Starmer but I think this decision makes him look incredibly weak and scared of Burnham making a potential leadership challenge against him. Definite self-preservation over the interests of the party. I don't really understand why he's not just ousted. The longer him and Reeves stay the less chance Labour have. Surely the other MPs can see that? In the end it's inevitable anyway right? Another round of local elections in May where I see them losing a lot. Incumbent government should expect to lose seats but I think it's a beating. I imagine poor results there will be his end. Quote
Members SuperBacon Posted January 25 Members Posted January 25 29 minutes ago, Jazzy G said: love how they're claiming it's because of the financial implications as they get ready to send troops to Ukraine and possibly Greenland It never makes any sense to make those comparisons to be honest. Defence budget is defence budget which is set. You can't just suddenly borrow money from it for say, an election. I'm not saying the defence budget should be what it is, but this is like saying "Enough money for tea and biscuits at meetings, what about potholes?" Quote
Paid Members hallicks Posted January 25 Paid Members Posted January 25 21 minutes ago, westlondonmist said: I don't really understand why he's not just ousted. The longer him and Reeves stay the less chance Labour have. Surely the other MPs can see that? In the end it's inevitable anyway right? Another round of local elections in May where I see them losing a lot. Incumbent government should expect to lose seats but I think it's a beating. I imagine poor results there will be his end. I think any would-be plotters are waiting for the carnage in May to happen first as a basis for a move against him. The post-election hand-wringing will no doubt result in Labour promising everyone that they have learned their lesson and will be more racist in future. Quote
Paid Members Lion_of_the_Midlands Posted January 25 Paid Members Posted January 25 There will be less carnage in May than there otherwise might be. A lot of councils, I think 26 are delaying elections for a year because of the new mayors that are coming in. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.