Starmer + Sunak debate thread

[MidnightPatrol]

Anyone interested in discussing the debate this evening? On ITV now.

You have ruined the apocalyptic politics with that clear and informed explanation!

They’re both pretty awful. Sunak was annoying and interrupting talking over people. But Starmer disappointingly, couldn’t seem to answer questions directly and credibly. At times he seemed overwhelmed and unable to respond to Sunaks’s jibes.

Sunak is just so much more experienced at this. I don’t believe a word the lying toe rag multi millionaire says. But he spoke with more authority, conciseness and directness and that creates a veneer of credibility.

so he is superficially believable, where’s the substance?

They are also heavily contested by Labour

Starmer didn’t seem to heavily deny it though. Why not, if he’s confident it’s not true?

Sunak was SO annoying, talking the loudest and the longest and a pp was right that he got more air time than Starmer. I don’t want the Tories in again but seeing Starmer tonight made me nervous about Labour’s plans. There was not much substance to anything discussed, I felt. Instead Sunak just shouted over everyone and Starmer seemed too hesitant or vague. Doesn’t fill me with any confidence to make an informed choice on July 4th!

How hard would it to be for Starmer to say “my key priorities will be the NHS and education, which have received under investment under the conservatives.”? The fact he can’t even commit to the basics is disappointing. It’s like the prize is his to take but he’s not convinced he wants it.

Sunak came across as desperate, tetchy and plaintive. Starmer seemed far calmer and more in control. I just wished he’d given more direct answers and addressed the £2,000 thing properly.

I thought exactly the same. Starmer was a bit boring but thats what i want from a pm. Sunak lost it and churned out sound bites shouting instead of debating. Starmer was more analytical

He did aay later thar some taxes will go out but didn't expand on what though.

There is no substance. He just sounds more convincing. He also kept having a go at Starmer asking him questions which Starmer seemed unable to answer. Starmer kept looking exasperated and said things like ‘if I could get a word in edgeways’.

I just wish Starmer was able to come across better in situations like this. I’m not convinced he’s the best person for the job. But he’s (marginally) better than the alternative.

I thought èxactly the opposite

Neither of them were at all impressive. The format of the programme was poor, not enough time given to each question and poorly chaired .

He definitely did deny it. He said it was nonsense. Their manifesto hasn't been published yet, the detail will be in there, hth.

Thank you! Exactly this.
To anyone remotely educated it just made Rishi look ignorant and childish.

It's such an important cornerstone of the justice system.

And given how many politicians of every party start out life as barristers it seemed a particularly silly thing to start throwing about. It's like criticising a doctor for treating a criminal. In those professions you are duty bound to put personal views aside

I wanted Starmer to be better, I wanted him to give me reason to vote Labour. But I was a bit disappointed. He was too polite and didn’t shut down things that he should have quick enough.

Sunak was exactly as vile and pompous and arrogant as I expected.

The presenter was awful and Sunak was given preference to respond back a 2nd time far more than Starmer, also allowed to continue talking/ranting far longer and allowed to question Starmer directly which Starmer was not permitted to do, but then talked over him so he couldn’t answer.

None of that should have been permitted. If you can’t do it fairly then don’t bother tbh as it’s just infuriating.

If the limit is 45s and someone goes on and on then they should just turn off the mic.

Hell would freeze over before I vote Tory. I really wanted Starmer to show me why I should vote Labour (as I have in the past) but I’m not yet convinced and the for first time in my life am considering not voting at all.

We'll agree to disagree on that. The only "clearly articulated" plans sunak had were the "gammon bait" plans of national service and planes to Rwanda. And even then he couldn't explain why, if they were so great, the Tories hadn't implemented them already.

He did expand - he listed the VAT on public schools, closing loop-holes in the Nom Dom tax, taxing oil and gas companies and I think there was a fourth too. Those are the taxes that will rise. He also clearly stated the £2000 thing was nonsense and explained how the figure came about.

He re-stated clearly their policies on NHS, education, immigration and was great on explaining why the ECHR is not a 'foreign court.' I agree he was perhaps too polite, but Sunak came across like an absolute boor and a deeply unpleasant bully. Just vile, and Etchingham had no control over him whatsoever.

If people feel like Starmer didn't do well, fine, but saying he didn't explain anything is just wrong.

Party politics aside, Sunak is a better politician and leader than Starmer.

Without covid and Truss, Sunak would've been a successful PM. As it is, the Tories are a busted flush.

Labour will win, and for a month or two people will feel gratified that they've taught the Tories a lesson (until they realise they're not going to be any better off under Labour). Tories will be back in 5 years.

Sunak is a better politician and leader than Starmer.

His party has literally disintegrated, with MPs refusing to stand or worse, standing but refusing to campaign and going on holiday instead! He's never even shown with anyone anymore - who exactly is he leading?? His political instincts are terrible.

I completely agree with you and I’m now really concerned that the outcome of this election may not be as certain as everyone thought. The format of the programme was lacking and bias towards Sunak, the presenter ineffective too in terms of what she allowed to get away with. I’ve learned nothing new apart from how horrible Sunak is and how lacking Starmer seems to be. Like you, I’m not sure who I can possibly vote for now. The debate was really unhelpful to viewers I felt.

The presenter was awful and Sunak was given preference to respond back a 2nd time far more than Starmer, also allowed to continue talking/ranting far longer and allowed to question Starmer directly which Starmer was not permitted to do, but then talked over him so he couldn’t answer.

So as a result you feel you can't vote for...Starmer??

A better leader?! A man who led us into the idiocy of eat out to help out ? A man who called an election and then panicked and flailed around for a soundbite policy and came up with the idiotically patronising "bring back National service" which is basically something bigoted old men say after too many pints?

I think Sunak did strangely well.

He did if you listened. He said it was a figure pulled from the air by sunak's team and nothing to do with actual costings. I'm not a starmer fan and fear they'll rehash the PPP thing that we're still paying for from the bliar era. What is shocking is that they say it's one of us that will be next PM. How's that for democracy when there are more than 2 parties.

So as a result you feel you can't vote for...Starmer??

I’m saying that the format was pointless and very unhelpful for undecided voters trying ti get an understanding of their potential next PMs.

I am hoping the other debates and question times on the BBC will be better managed.

Despite what the media seem to think, if they ask a question I would much rather they be given a sensible amount of time to properly answer before being interrupted, 46s is stupid - I do actually want to hear what they have to say - I don’t want them to be harried into giving pointless yes/no to complex questions on complex topics that warrant much more than an over simplistic one word answers.

The issues are too important to be reduced to such ridiculous gimmicks.