Burnham

[BoldonLad]

Maybe, but let's say that some of the people who would vote for the white male Garage might not vote for Badenoch.

We will have wait for an actual election to know what %ge fit that bill.

 

[BoldonLad]

I think a possible interpretation of the data that fits that pattern is that the number of people intending to vote reform has not changed, but labour has got some voters back from LD, greens and undecided. That would put laboour ahead in percentage without reform losing vote voters.

Indeed, that is a possible interpretation

 

[Rusty Nails]

We will have wait for an actual election to know what %ge fit that bill.

The voter info will not give an analysis by racist/non-racist.

 

[Beebo]

Burnham says the country has to get serious about getting the welfare bill down.

Great stuff Andy. But Starmer tried that and his back benchers said no. So unless they have all changed their minds which will make them look a bit silly, you are snookered.

 

[BoldonLad]

The voter info will not give an analysis by racist/non-racist.

It doesn’t need to, the votes all carry equal weight, racist or non-racist

 

[briantrumpet]

Burnham says the country has to get serious about getting the welfare bill down.

Great stuff Andy. But Starmer tried that and his back benchers said no. So unless they have all changed their minds which will make them look a bit silly, you are snookered.

Could well be making himself a hostage to fortune.

 

[Rusty Nails]

It doesn’t need to, the votes all carry equal weight, racist or non-racist

So this was a meaningless post?

We will have wait for an actual election to know what %ge fit that bill.

 

[FishFright]

Maybe, but let's say that some of the people who would vote for the white male Garage might not vote for Badenoch.

I have met a couple of guys who went to Reform that very reason. Both openly racist in a polite way.

 

[briantrumpet]

I have met a couple of guys who went to Reform that very reason. Both openly racist in a polite way.

"Obviously I'm not racist, but..."

 

[FishFright]

"Obviously I'm not racist, but..."

Openly racist but in the polite, upper middle class, old buffer way .

 

[briantrumpet]

There seem to be three main 'camps' on the Burnham question on Bluesky:

1) Starmer loyalists. To them, Starmer was brilliant, soon to be granted sainthood, with a flawless political sense, and a clear way to win the next election. Everything was going fine, and any upturn in the polling is totally down to Starmer. Burnham is a dirty rotten scoundrel who had been plotting for years, and is now just riding on St Keir's coattails.

2) Corbyn-type loyalists, for whom any concession to trying to work with other parties or a system they see as a capitalist conspiracy (well, they might have a point there) is a complete sell-out to capitalism. What's beyond the pale to them is using 'retail politics' to try to gain back left-centrists who have drifted off to the Greens or Lib Dems. It's gotta be pure, or it's undisguised capitalism.

3) Pragmatic left/liberal not-racists who's attention has been caught by the small but quick announcements, which suggest (maybe falsely) that Burnham is going to deliver the 'reset' that Starmer claimed he was making but then utterly didn't. For them, time will tell, but they are sending a message that Burnham deserves time to try.

If the polling trends are to be believed, the third group is drifting towards Burnham and taking people with them, with no great enthusiasm yet, but with a semi-optimistic "Let's see" approach.

 

[BoldonLad]

So this was a meaningless post?

only if you believe that the ONLY reason for voting for/not voting for Reform is that the voter Is/is not a racist.

 

[Ian H]

There seem to be three main 'camps' on the Burnham question on Bluesky:

1) Starmer loyalists. To them, Starmer was brilliant, soon to be granted sainthood, with a flawless political sense, and a clear way to win the next election. Everything was going fine, and any upturn in the polling is totally down to Starmer. Burnham is a dirty rotten scoundrel who had been plotting for years, and is now just riding on St Keir's coattails.

2) Corbyn-type loyalists, for whom any concession to trying to work with other parties or a system they see as a capitalist conspiracy (well, they might have a point there) is a complete sell-out to capitalism. What's beyond the pale to them is using 'retail politics' to try to gain back left-centrists who have drifted off to the Greens or Lib Dems. It's gotta be pure, or it's undisguised capitalism.

3) Pragmatic left/liberal not-racists who's attention has been caught by the small but quick announcements, which suggest (maybe falsely) that Burnham is going to deliver the 'reset' that Starmer claimed he was making but then utterly didn't. For them, time will tell, but they are sending a message that Burnham deserves time to try.

If the polling trends are to be believed, the third group is drifting towards Burnham and taking people with them, with no great enthusiasm yet, but with a semi-optimistic "Let's see" approach.

No one with any socialist leanings has ever been happy with any Labour government. For every Bevan there was always a Bevin.

 

[Rusty Nails]

only if you believe that the ONLY reason for voting for/not voting for Reform is that the voter Is/is not a racist.

That was never suggested as the only reason. The actual comment was "some of the people who would vote for the white male Garage might not vote for Badenoch". We are never going to find out exactly how many because, of course, no one is going to admit that openly.

 

[BoldonLad]

That was never suggested as the only reason. The actual comment was "some of the people who would vote for the white male Garage might not vote for Badenoch". We are never going to find out exactly how many because, of course, no one is going to admit that openly.

My point was about where the Reform vote will go, if, as suggested, they lose vote share.