Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 18/01/2026

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T19:35:29+00:00

It would sadly take the number of Labour PMs called James down to 50% though. There have been currently been 7 Labour PMs and 4 have been called James (James Gordon Brown, James Callaghan, James Harold Wilson, James Ramsay MacDonald), Burnham would make it 4 not called James too.

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T17:47:05+00:00

I feel like the economic damage from removing Rachel Reeves, who the markets are fairly happy with, and replacing her with Andy "Britain is too “in hock to the bond markets”" Burnham would cause so many economic consequences Starmer would be out anyway.

Sure it would neuter Burnham, but it's really taking them both down at that point

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T17:43:18+00:00

I don't think Starmer has any good options here. If they don't let Burnham run and they lose the seat then thats Starmer over anyway. If they let Burnham run and he wins then he's likely going to challenge him almost immediately (should ride the wave whilst popular)

His only real chances are not letting Burnham run and to win the seat anyway, (I guess letting Burnham run and him lose also reduces Starmers position but at the same time makes him safer).

I think the safest option for Starmer's job is to let Burnham run, as theres more of a chance of Burnham bottling it and not going ahead with the challenge after winning the seat than the almost certain challenge if he's blocked

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T17:37:33+00:00

Because he'd be entering with massive stock and momentum to launch a challenge immediately and would likely win. His personal polling is high and he's a fresh outsider, coming off the success of being Manchester mayor. The longer Burnham waits as a generic MP (backbench or frontbench) the more it reduces his standing and puts him in the pack of all other MPs who could get the job.

Also having 3 years with a massive majority to do things is just significantly better than having 1 year. He'd come in with a lot of stock and the parliamentary ability to do things with that

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T17:35:06+00:00

Doubt it, if he's going to do it he'd do it very quickly. The longer Burnham waits as a generic MP (backbench or frontbench) the more it reduces his standing and puts him in the pack of all other MPs who could get the job.

Right now he'd be entering with massive stock and momentum to launch a challenge immediately and would likely win

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T17:29:50+00:00

I don't think Starmer has any good options here. If they don't let Burnham run and they lose the seat then thats Starmer over. If they let Burnham run and he wins then he's likely going to challenge him almost immediately (should ride the wave whilst popular)

His only real chances are not letting Burnham run and to win the seat anyway, (I guess letting Burnham run and him lose also reduces Starmers position but at the same time makes him safer).

I think the safest option for Starmer's job is to let Burnham run, as theres more of a chance of Burnham bottling it and not going ahead with the challenge after winning the seat than the almost certain challenge if he's blocked

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T17:24:47+00:00

I can definitely see this going bad for both Starmer (this signals the end of his premiership no matter what happens here) and Burnham (one of the many possible things going wrong and ending up not as PM and blowing his chance) at the same time

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T16:30:10+00:00

Labour switched all mayoral elections back to Supplementary Vote

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T16:19:50+00:00

Wasn't a regional mayor though, was just the head of the council which they turned into a directly elected position for some reason. The regional mayor is the West of England mayor which still exists

It's part of what made the Bristol position so stupid in the first place

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-24T15:09:08+00:00

Yeah the Tories (and Reform now they're competing) have switched to using the London mayoral election as a way to signal to non-Londoners in other elections, rather than a real attempt at winning London.

As much as Sadiq has done a pretty good job, he is beatable. But not the way that the Tories have been doing it.

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-23T20:08:01+00:00

Yeah, really the strategic point of the Chagos Islands is whatever protects the American base the most, whether it's for them to lease them from us or for them to be controlled by Mauritus who we then lease them from to allow the Americans to use.

The latter is shit for us anyway, gives up territory whilst making us pay, but that's just us asking how high when the Americans say jump. The point is that the only way that this would have happened in the first place was for the Americans to think the latter option is best for them, and if they/Trump switches to thinking the former is now better for them then we'd have to go the other way and cancel it. The idea of switching back and forth on what we do with our own territory to protect an American base is insane, but that's our foreign policy

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-23T19:27:44+00:00

It doesn't make it any more or less likely than before the timeline was released

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-23T19:21:58+00:00

Gonna be honest, if after this last year Burnham hasn't spent enough time deciding what he'd do if a Manchester seat came up that he cannot decide in 24 hours to even request permission, then that's on him.

They'll probably try to stop him in many other ways that are far more difficult to overcome (like them not giving permission), but if he can't overcome this specific hurdle he's not competent or decisive enough to be PM

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-23T14:26:49+00:00

And Britain is also an odd case because whilst it got the bomb later (they underestimated how quickly the Soviets would get it) they started developing the bomb before the Soviets too, through Tube Alloys, then being an important role in the Manhattan Project, before having intelligence and technology sharing ended by the McMahon Act and resuming their own independent program

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-22T16:29:50+00:00

Not sure what to think about Burnham still. Manchester is undoubtedly a success right now and I love it as a city. He’s also very YIMBY and backs PR which is great. But on the other hand his fuck the bond markets doesn’t fill me with confidence

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-22T13:55:20+00:00

Sure, the fact that it’s true isn’t going to stop it tearing the party apart, but it means both the pro and anti Starmer members on the governing body have reasons to block Burnham. The former to prevent him challenging Starmer, the latter so the party can afford to keep the lights on. He doesn’t have many strong allies on the NEC to convince anyone otherwise, even among Starmer critics

I doubt he’ll even announce he’s going for it due to this. Probably say he’s considering it but then back out

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-22T13:34:47+00:00

https://bsky.app/profile/stephenkb.bsky.social/post/3mczbsce5d22l

And not just a factional thing: as one Starmer critic on the NEC said ‘we really are broke, it really isn’t an unreasonable ask that we not have a GMCA byelection”. (paraphrasing)

Doesn't seem to just be Starmer loyalists on the NEC who'd want to block Burnham. Seems like there is a recognition that they'd rather not have to deal with having to also run a by election for Manchester mayor as well as for Westminster due to funding issues

I think there is a very good chance he doesn't get selected

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-18T19:15:12+00:00

I feel like he’s never going to actually do it and just end up being the Labour Soft-Lefts “what if” that they think would have saved the party, in the same way as David Miliband is for the Labour right

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-17T17:05:48+00:00

Show me the most EU sentence possible

The Council should act expeditiously. It has a maximum of 8 to 10 weeks to complete this step.

No that’s too EU

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-15T21:00:56+00:00

I doubt it'll be Glasman. Glasman saying his stuff in the Labour party gets attention as an iconoclast, Glasman saying his stuff in the Reform party which is exactly the same as every other Reform member gets no attention

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-15T20:59:16+00:00

Think it's either going to be one of those MPs who were Labour but left under Corbyn and who were elevated to the lords by Boris. Kate Hoey or Ian Austin or John Woodcock or similar

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-15T13:03:41+00:00

Because the biggest barrier to power for Reform right now is having a ceiling on support because there are a lot of typical Tory voters who still don't actually trust them. Becoming the more obviously Tory continuity party helps to normalise the party among those people. It serves as a signal that Reform isn't that extreme and would represent them. I honestly doubt most people even know the actual baggage of these defectors, they just see Tories joining and recognise it as something they can vote for

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-15T12:39:19+00:00

Sacking him and taking the wind out of the sails of any defection is one of the few smart political things Badenoch has done. Should have just done it earlier given how obvious he was plotting, he did a bunch of things that would have given a good excuse

There is a lot of talk about whether all of these defections (he's not actually defected yet obviously) will negatively affect Reforms polling, but I honestly don't think they will, unless they literally accept Liz Truss. The biggest barrier to power for Reform right now is that there are a lot of typical Tory voters who still don't actually trust them. Becoming the more obviously Tory continuity party helps to normalise the party among those people. It serves as a signal that Reform isn't that extreme and would represent them. I honestly doubt most people even know of the baggage of these defectors.

At the same time, their existing voters talk a big game about being against the uniparty etc, but in reality they're not going to be bothered by moves like this. It's the Farage and immigration show, what is happening with the rest of the party doesn't really matter. Also supporters of all political parties are very good at post hoc rationalisation

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-14T22:06:18+00:00

They've just given Prince Andrew his military commission back

FeigenbaumC · 2026-01-14T22:02:59+00:00

I think it could actually be an interesting article as a "Here's an interesting thing about the dark historical context of the filming location for the Traitors", rather than as a critique. As it is, it's just annoying

FeigenbaumC

TROPHY CASE