Posted on 07/15/2026 9:08:13 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Andy Burnham, the former Greater Manchester mayor who has frequently criticized President Donald Trump, is poised to become the United Kingdom's next prime minister after emerging as the only candidate to replace outgoing Labour leader Keir Starmer.
Burnham, 56, received nominations from 322 of Labour’s 403 Members of Parliament on the first day of the leadership process, far surpassing the 81 required to enter the contest and leaving potential rivals with virtually no path to qualify. He is expected to be formally confirmed as Labour leader Friday and appointed prime minister by King Charles III on Monday, July 20, following Starmer’s resignation.
Britain’s parliamentary system allows the governing party to replace its leader — and therefore the prime minister — without holding a national election. The next nationwide election does not have to be held until 2029.
Burnham’s rapid path to Downing Street is drawing criticism from political opponents and foreign-policy analysts who say he has not faced the scrutiny that would normally accompany either a competitive party leadership race or a general-election campaign.
"Andy Burnham is the least scrutinized incoming U.K. Prime Minister of recent times," Alan Mendoza, executive director of the London-based Henry Jackson Society, told Fox News Digital.
"He has faced neither a general election nor an internal party leadership debate in order to establish his positions for wider consumption," Mendoza said. "He wasn’t even a candidate at the last General Election."
Burnham did, however, win 54.8% of the vote in June’s Makerfield parliamentary by-election, defeating Reform UK’s candidate and returning to the House of Commons after nearly a decade away. Before returning to Parliament, he had been directly elected mayor of Greater Manchester three times.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage argued in a previous interview with Fox News that Burnham should seek a new national mandate.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It’s a lot like how Carney took over Canada. Not much of an election.
He’s Wingnut
I’ve heard he’s more socialist than Keir Starmer.
Britain can’t seem to catch a break. The Socialist Quicksand keeps getting deeper and deeper.
He won’t last 12 months.
He will last but he’s another WEF guy. It’s incredible. Nothing will change. They’re just shovelling the s**t around as George Carlin would say, every few years.
Limey wankers.
From Mayor to Prime Minister in the blink of an eye. Proof that the entire Labour Party is devoid of any ideas to help their country and now descends to mob sentiment rule.
Neither Burnham nor Starmer are Socialists. Burnham was a mainstream Blairite as a minister but later backed Brown. His subsequent record as a metropolitan mayor suggests he’s a pragmatist rather than ideologue.
So they continue the downward spiral.
Do the Brits realize many Americans hate them more than they hate us?
A civilization continues to decline. Sad.
Does Andy Burnham identify as a socialist.
Yes, Andy Burnham identifies politically as a socialist. He has been associated with the soft left of the Labour Party and has described himself as a socialist since at least 2010.
Socialists often pretend to be centrists, until they are firmly in power. Then they show their real selves.
So a guy who got around 25,000 votes is about to become PM of the entire country and he is even worse than Carney.
The classic definition of socialism is the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Commitment to this was once in the Labour party’s constitution, until it was famously removed by Tony Blair in 1995. Nowadays the Labour Party has little interest in extensive state ownership.
I prefer to stick with the classic definition, as ‘Socialist’ is too often no more than a vague term of abuse for anything to the left of one’s own position.
The classic definition of socialism is the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Commitment to this was once in the Labour party’s constitution, until it was famously removed by Tony Blair in 1995. Nowadays the Labour Party has little interest in extensive state ownership.
I prefer to stick with the classic definition, as ‘Socialist’ is too often no more than a vague term of abuse for anything to the left of one’s own position.
Socialists hide themselves until they are in power.
His reputation is that of a socialism who pretends to be a liberal.
That assessment comes from Brit I can trust.
He tried for the leadership twice before but was said to be too extreme. Now I’m told he’s just regarded as middle of the road!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.