Tonight's TV debate Sunak v Starmer - any predictions?

[CallingOccupantsOfInterplanetaryCraft]

Anyone up for a watch thread? Maybe even debate bingo. I know I know, don't threaten me with a good time. (Bingo suggestions: natural party of business, Labour has no plan, end the chaos, Rayner will take over, assorted references to Starmer's time as DPP probably blaming for Jimmy Saville again, inflation is down etc etc.)

At this point I seriously doubt anything like this will remotely change the game Nick Clegg style. I read somewhere the only way Sunak could come out of this ahead in the polls is if Starmer pulled off a mask scooby-doo style to reveal he's Jeremy Corbyn, which admittedly would be great telly.

I'm so fed up with the endless rhetoric but will definitely watch later anyway.

Well don't worry, because the idea that everyone will be forced to rip out their gas boilers and ditch their petrol cars by 2030 is another scare tactic from the Tories.

They had 45 second sound bites to answer. I'm sure you'll agree that perhaps not a huge amount of time to give an in depth and detailed answer to the question. What is sunak doing? Or saying he will do anyway. Other than moving the problem to someone else's door. Ilegally in the face of international human rights laws. Haven't we made enough of a mess of the continent of Africa without moving our issues, expensively, to them, rather than working on stopping the problem in the first place.

I'm sure there may be more detail when they release their manifesto and in the coming weeks, though bearing in mind how many people on here seem to have no idea about what either party has already committed to, because many have failed to do the slightest research, I doubt that will make much of a difference either way.

@IClaudine this was a scare tactic by Sunak. They will not be asking everyone to rip out what they have. They will be ensuring that all new build are built with this technology by that time. Something the Tories have backtracked on. To change millions of households in 5 years isn't feasible, practical or in fact environmentally friendly.

Yet another bare faced lie by the Tories, who are increasingly taking their lead from Donald Trumps style of "campaigning"

But should the Tories win, Truss could and easily become our PM again, the membership love her and the Cons haven't changed the leader voting rules.

Thats truly terrifying and a very realistic possibility.

It was a difficult watch because Starmer just could not outline HOW he was going to do anything. My DD who knows nothing about politics came away with 2 takeaways - we will be worse off by 2k a year and all KS does is slag Sunak off without actually commenting on his own policies. We are yet to learn what they are. V disappointing by KS, unfortunately

At least Starmer came across as faux sympathetic. Although I didn't think it was faked. Sunak made absolutely no attempt to try and fake sympathy.

Indeed.

The way of working is scare tactics rather than facts. Guesswork. Lots of people fall for it every single election.

@Clutterbugsmum Sunak didn’t say the CPS were extremists, he said that while Starmer was at the CPS he defended extremist groups in court. Obviously missing the point that everyone is entitled to representation and that acting as someone’s barrister is not the same as aligning to their beliefs, but he was not talking about the CPS as an organisation.

Paul Johnson (IFS) has said the most likely tax rises after the election will be VAT and on pensions, seeing as both parties have “ruled out” (big finger quotes there) rises in Income Tax and NI (ignoring the obvious effects of freezing the tax thresholds).

The other option, for Labour at least, is that when they come in they pull out the dodgy tradesman line and with lots of sucking of teeth declare “Oh no, it’s worse than we thought, it’s gonna cost more.” and abandon the Income Tax/NI pledge. His words, not mine, and he also said he’d be very angry if either party did this as the IFS have been saying for ages that they’re going to have to put taxes up to pay for spending pledges.

Again, I really recommend listening to the interview with him!

Sounds like she has been listening to you. Examining what has occurred over the last 14 years isn't usually referred to as 'slagging off' its making them realise what they've been responsible for and maybe be a little accountable 🤔

Oh argh, thanks for reminding me. And she's standing for election so really could lead a putz.

How did Sunak go into any more detail? They have 45 second sound bites. The point of these isn't to give detail. The detail will come in the form of a manifesto. And actually he answered every single question with some detail. Or as much detail as he could get in. He talked about going for the gangs. How that will be achieved will be complex and more than 45 seconds can allow. Although I'm sure you can read the manifesto when it's released in detail.

The absolute failure of many people to even make themselves aware at a very basic level, what has actually been pledged already be each party, to then slate them for having said nothing about it, absolutely astonishes me. Do some basic fact checking people!

Will the next debates be after manifestos published?

Watched a bit, confirmed neither of them are fit to run the country. 🤷

But this is what happens when you reduce important political policies to a glib game show format.

Politicians rely on people not fact checking.

It is hard to believe Starmer was a barrister or whatever. Even if you don’t focus on what he said from a performance he looks like a rabbit in the headlights. He doesn't seem sharp or on the ball. We don't have to like them but we have to believe if they represent this country they look confident, assertive and like they wouldn't take any shit. He is none of those things.

Yep, Sunak came across as completely devoid of any compassion for the people he was addressing in the audience. I found the look in his eyes quite unsettling actually! There's something really off about him, something I hadn't noticed before the debate.

I am disappointed in Starmer's performance, but he does seem to care about the country. I wonder how old school politicians would do in these US style debate shows. I doubt Atlee would have captured the audience with charisma and sound bites (and he was one of our finest PMs).

Tell your DD not to fall for the £2k tax rise lie.

The calculations are based on assumptions set out by Conservative-appointed political advisers. Starmer tried to explain this but he got cut off by the presenter and shouted down by a very tetchy Sunak.

The 2030 thing scares me, I can’t afford to change my car, my heating,nor do I wish to, 2030 is basically 5 years away, how many people have thousands and thousands sitting about, and there is no other way for labour to achieve 2030 than to make us all make those changes. Thats what 2030 is.

I understand kier is a millionaire, he is worth about 8 million, his father wasn’t just a tool maker, he was disingenuous, his father owned the factory, but I expected better from him to put these sort of costs on us if he got in. He didn’t even deny it. Just said some think tank had said sunaks policy was more expensive, but then couldn’t give detail on why.

It takes a lot of self control to allow someone else to speak without talking over them, especially when they are lying and misrepresenting you.

For me, this is a sign of strength, not weakness. A weak man shouts over people, lies, behaves aggressively, exactly as Sunak did last night.

That’s not true, they were done by the civil service which is independent. Starmer said it wasn’t true, but he failed to say how we would pay for it. Other than some nonsense about non dom and energy companies which have already been done.

his policies have to be paid for, he kept saying things will be fully funded, but how, we can’t borrow more, the tax has been done that he’s talking about.

Cmon now, we all watched it, we saw starmer attempt to do the same thing. It was clear Sunak had him on the ropes, he talked over him when he was refusing to answer the question. He was stopping him answering a different question or throwing out daft sound bites.

He needs to demonstrate some confidence and assertiveness. He comes across as a doormat and politicians do need to talk over each other and shout the loudest. He looks like he wouldn't say boo to a goose. Bet Putin etc are pissing themselves laughing.

"That’s not true, they were done by the civil service which is independent."

Wrong.

The Treasury Permanent Secretary who Coutinho deployed this morning to defend the £38bn/ £2k claim wrote to the Opposition to say it “should not be presented as having been produced by civil service”… this could be problematic…

x.com/faisalislam/status/1798256781011120471?s=46&t=Uw4lJNwxFZFnX0Xs3doHYg

More Tory lies.

This is the labour plan...

To achieve our mission by 2030, a Labour government would:
● Quadruple offshore wind with an ambition of 55 GW by 2030
● Pioneer floating offshore wind, by fast-tracking at least 5 GW of capacity ● More than triple solar power to 50 GW
● More than double our onshore wind capacity to 35 GW ● Get new nuclear projects at Hinkley and Sizewell over the line, extending the lifetime of existing plants, and backing new nuclear including Small Modular Reactors
● Invest in carbon capture and storage, hydrogen, and long-term energy storage to ensure that there is sufficient zero emission back-up power and storage for extended periods without wind or sun, while maintaining a strategic reserve of backup gas power stations to guarantee security of supply
● Double the government's target on green hydrogen, with 10 GW of production for use particularly in flexible power generation, storage, and industry like green steel

no mention of your car or boiler..... as i said lies.

Starmers father never owned the factory, he was a worker who later went self employed.

8m vs Sunaks 800m and remember Sunak made much of his money betting against the UK in 2009 and his wife carries on making money from Russia...