18/6/2026 by-elections - including Makerfield

[AlterEgo]

Sorry, but what on earth is a "melt", let alone a "big melt"?

Urban Dictionary: melt

melt: an absolute complete ****ing idiot

www.urbandictionary.com

 

[Railwaycat]

Urban Dictionary: melt

melt: an absolute complete ****ing idiot

www.urbandictionary.com

Which Andy Burnham certainly isn't, and neither is Keir Starmer, for all his lack of leadership faults.

 

[AlterEgo]

Which Andy Burnham certainly isn't, and neither is Keir Starmer, for all his lack of leadership faults.

Which of the various listed definitions are you objecting to in this premium piece of Internet discourse of "he is NOT a melt (I don't know what one is)?"

 

[Bayum]

The full breakdown of the vote for the 6 main parties is interesting:
Labour 54.8%
Reform 34.5%
Restore 6.8%
Conservative 2.2%
Green 0.7%
Lib Dem 0.4%

Or put another way, 98% of the left/centre vote went to Labour, 79% of the right wing vote went to Reform, imferring left/centre voters have a better understanding of the concept of tactical voting than the right. There's the obvious caveat it's only one constituency but an encouraging sign if you're in the 'anyone but Reform/Restore' camp.

Who'd have guessed that people who vote for parties centred around individualism, self-preservation and self-sufficiency are the same people who won't change what they do for the greater good.

Ah but don’t forget, lots of Reform voters voted Labour because their message was ‘Get Starmer out’ in the local elections… Funny how they threw the kitchen sink at the plumber if that was their bold plan…

 

[nw1]

Sorry, but what on earth is a "melt", let alone a "big melt"?

I've never heard the term either, despite being a frequent Internet user. Perhaps I'm too old.

 

[Railwaycat]

Which of the various listed definitions are you objecting to in this premium piece of Internet discourse of "he is NOT a melt (I don't know what one is)?"

"Listed definitions"?
You've listed one, which clearly is the one you intended to be used, otherwise you'd have listed another one - and if you think I'm going to even look at an "urban dictionary" for other definitions you're mistaken.

 

[AlterEgo]

"Listed definitions"?
You've listed one, which clearly is the one you intended to be used, otherwise you'd have listed another one - and if you think I'm going to even look at an "urban dictionary" for other definitions you're mistaken.

No, I didn't list any, I simply provided you with a link, which you lazily didn't open. I actually didn't write anything there.

That's how links to websites often work - they give you a little preview of the content, perhaps in your case it was acting as a mirror.

"Burnham is NOT a MELT (I do not know what one is) and I will NOT look at Urban Dictionary to find out what one is"

 

[nw1]

Anyway, I think we can probably agree that to be quite frank, when you consider some of the opposition (hello Nigel), Burnham really isn't that bad at all. It's doubtful he will wave a magic wand and solve all the country's problems, but then again who will?

I'm all ears if anyone can suggest a specific individual, from any of the main parties, who will do a significantly better job than Burnham. I don't think I can. So in the absence of such a Superperson, we have to work with what we have.

Looking back at our list of PMs since 1979, few stand out as being particularly appealing characters. Best IMO was the much maligned Gordon Brown. I think it's unrealistic to have someone really good as PM, best we can hope for is someone who isn't too bad. There are few UK (or indeed international) politicians I have unreserved respect for, they are all flawed to a greater or lesser extent.

 

[Harpo]

Looking back at our list of PMs since 1979, few stand out as being particularly appealing characters. Best IMO was the much maligned Gordon Brown.

Brown worked well as the brake to Blair’s accelerator. Brown & Darling arguably gave us two brakes, which is probably where we are with Starmer and Reeves. Burnham’s choice of chancellor will be interesting.

 

[Cowley]

I think we’ve probably said all there is to say on these by-elections now, so rather than us discussing things that would probably be better in the various political party threads, we’ll draw this one to a close.

Thanks everyone