Keir Starmer would lose to Angela Rayner according to bombshell leadership poll
Sir Keir Starmer would lose a leadership contest to Angela Rayner, polling of Labour members has revealed. More than half of party members surveyed would vote for Ms Rayner as leader if they went head to head.
Only one in three would back Sir Keir. The former deputy leader topped the poll on 52% with the Prime Minister languishing on 33%. The poll also shows that three other potential rivals - Andy Burnham, Ed Miliband and Wes Streeting - would beat Sir Keir in a head-to-head contest.
Not surprising but it isn't easy to know what to say about the possibility of Seaside Ange becoming Prime Minister.
Unfortunately, alternative possibilities offer no reasons to be cheerful. The most remarkable aspect of it all is that there are enough Labour members left to be worth polling.
14 comments:
“…it isn't easy to know what to say about the possibility of Seaside Ange becoming Prime Minister.”
“Aaaaargh!”?
Given the possibility (likelihood?) that the attraction of Hove is not merely the fact that her bidie-innie has ties to the area but also the chance to secure a safe seat for the next election, can we expect to see other Labour grandees migrating in the near future?
One current prediction shows an 82% probability that she will lose Ashton-under-Lyne to Reform, while Labour has a much more encouraging 72% chance of victory in Hove and Portslade. Oh, to be a fly on the wall when the sitting MP is told to fall on his sword for the common good!
What a bunch of alternatives to Starmer.
Rayner with her dodgy CGT and stamp duty money schemes (as long as it's hers);
Burnham who has made a mess of Manchester, so think what he could do if he had a whole country to play with;
Miliband who took umbrage when it was pointed out that each of his (non recycleable) wind turbines used more energy to build and place than it will ever save in it's lifetime;
And Streeting who, allegedly, said his ambition is to be the first openly homosexual Prime Minister for the UK.
I'm surprised Sadiq Khan hasn't put his name in the tin after his oh so successful stewardship of Londonistan.
It seems Pte Frazer was right all along.
Penseivat
Macheath - it could become an interesting spectator sport, betting on the outcome of squabbles over a restricted number of winnable seats, especially if many sitting MPs refuse to fall on their swords. Too many walls for one fly to handle, we need a swarm equipped with internet access.
Penseivat - yes Pte Frazer was right. It's a desperate situation where the levers of power seem to have migrated elsewhere and all we are left with is a useless mix of clowns, nutters, charlatans and bunglers.
Surkier would lose to a Swede ( a neep, in Jockanese) stuck on a pole. Partly due to lesser charisma.
Seaside Ange becoming Prime Minister ... in her nasal green outfit.
"Bidie-innie". Braw. Thanks.
Sir Cur should appoint Ange Chancellor of the Exchequer. That would ruin her reputation PDQ. Though, come to think of it, only among humans, perhaps not among Labour supporters.
Doonhamer - yes, he'd be hard pressed to match the charisma of any vegetable, even a turnip.
James - I hope not, but we may have to stomach it. Time to watch everything in black and white perhaps.
dearieme - an interesting appointment, especially if Ange has the gumption to point her finger at Treasury officials and their advice.
"...where the levers of power seem to have migrated elsewhere ..."
This!
Actual power is now exercised by the Quangocracy, the Judiciary, and often - infuriatingly - the EU. In theory Parliament could recover its authority, but it would require Maggie-level determination, which doesn't seem to exist anywhere. I think Reform understand the problem, but it's doubtful they'll ever be professional enough to make any real progress.
Sadly, it's quite possible that Private Fraser was right.
Tis a state to be in. Ruled for the next four years by a dwindling bunch of idiots.
Peter - I agree, it would require a Maggie-level determination and solid, experienced backing to make the changes. Reform doesn't seem to have that. It may be worth a punt at the election, assuming we have one, but mainly because the other parties have to be opposed. That's not really enough to be optimistic.
Tammly - yes, it's so bad that it isn't easy to see how things could improve unless less malign influences are evolving from a connected world.
"Time to watch everything in black and white perhaps"
Don't forget Ted Lowe's advice: For those of you who are watching in black and white, the pink is next to the green
It may well be that Reform won't be enough to restore political health in the long term. But they might be an excellent short term purgative to remove the 'wets' from the centre right, and the communists from the centre left.
Dave - ha ha, I remember that.
DJ - that's a good way to view Reform, as a political purgative. Maybe that's what Trump is in the US.
Post a Comment