[Politics] Starmer v Sunak *** Official Match Thread ***

[Berty23]

It might end up being useful for starmer that all sunak had was the 2k lie. In the next debate he can debunk this and sunak will have to make up something else. I assume they will have a good line about how leaving ECHR kills Brexit and GFA.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Well I had before I watched it. It’s help me to decide not to vote for either of them

Unless you live in North Yorkshire or north London, neither of them will be on the ballot paper. Look up your own local candidates and their suitability.

 

[Machiavelli]

Who is this new woman on Today?

She’s awful.

I think you're talking about Emma Barnett who I think has settled in very well.

 

[de la zouch]

Both are awful at public speaking, however Starmer definitely is the worse of the two (unfortunately)
The best quote about Starmer came from a legal ex colleague “good with the judge, awful with the jury”

 

[Bodian]

Then hopefully Starmer will expose that at the next debate.

Having scepticism, I think there’s something more subtle going on here. Labour have a put a red line on not raising some taxes, but not on hugely raising overall taxation.

Where’s the money coming from to improve the partly falling to bits NHS, transform the lives of the millions working just to exist, subsidise the millions of new affordable homes needed, fix our third world roads, a big pay rise for doctors? I haven’t mentioned VAT on schooling, as that’s ear marked for new teachers.

You heard it here first. Taxation will significantly increase.

As it will under the Tories.

Whilst Sunak kept banging on about him lowering taxes again and again - as Staremer pointed out, his Government have put up taxes something like 36 times in the last 14 years and they are now at their highest ever levels.

 

[beorhthelm]

Treasury are now saying Sunak’s £2000 claim is incorrect.

think the treasury are trying to push back on whether they produced all the numbers or others involved.

the actual number is less important than what are the supposed commitments. probably all very worthwhile, are they funded with taxes or borrowing? there are a few promises floated for health with no apparent funding, given all the taxes promised not to raise.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I think you're talking about Emma Barnett who I think has settled in very well.

She's great if you like your journalists making ridiculous straw man arguments and talking over the answer. Or not holding someone to account who has just said his party's headline policy is rubbish.

Personally, I think Today should be better than that.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I didn't watch the debate because one hour of trying to outdo each other is not helpful, nor can any detail be discussed. It just boils down to personalities like a tv talent show.

I don't mind paying a bit more tax if it means we get a health service, social care, schools that aren't crumbling, and travel services that work. What I want to see ended is corruption where contracts are given to donors in return for massive profits that never get reinvested.
The water companies, railways, hospitals and schools are a mess, and need public money to rescue them, not to be paid out in dividends to shareholders.

 

[Machiavelli]

Then hopefully Starmer will expose that at the next debate.

Having scepticism, I think there’s something more subtle going on here. Labour have a put a red line on not raising some taxes, but not on hugely raising overall taxation.

Where’s the money coming from to improve the partly falling to bits NHS, transform the lives of the millions working just to exist, subsidise the millions of new affordable homes needed, fix our third world roads, a big pay rise for doctors? I haven’t mentioned VAT on schooling, as that’s ear marked for new teachers.

You heard it here first. Taxation will significantly increase.

I think it's more likely to be the commitment to have debt falling will be what goes. As you know, the IFS has pleaded with the two main parties to 'fess up about the state of the public finances.
If taxes do go up (and I think they should because it's not hyperbole to say that after 14 years the public sector is broken), you won't be surprised that I think this should be on assets and conspicuous and carbon consumption.

 

[chickens]

I missed it, but in some ways I’m glad I did. It sounds like a shitshow, and a shaky start for Kier. He’s clearly going to have to practice communicating in a clearer, punchier style, it doesn’t sound like he was suited to the format at all.

Rishi was always going to have the sense of entitlement to be completely unphased, his government has been working in soundbites since 2010.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Then hopefully Starmer will expose that at the next debate.

Having scepticism, I think there’s something more subtle going on here. Labour have a put a red line on not raising some taxes, but not on hugely raising overall taxation.

Where’s the money coming from to improve the partly falling to bits NHS, transform the lives of the millions working just to exist, subsidise the millions of new affordable homes needed, fix our third world roads, a big pay rise for doctors? I haven’t mentioned VAT on schooling, as that’s ear marked for new teachers.

You heard it here first. Taxation will significantly increase.

I think it's already been exposed as a complete lie, even if it was repeated 8 times

Thanks for the tip on taxation rising, I'll get a bet on that later today with my bets on Bears defecating, The Pope's religion and Dolly Parton's sleeping position

 

[mrjon1976]

I will precis what i am about to say that I voted Tory in 2019, but am undecided now. I cannot see a logical reason to vote for them again, but have yet to be convinced by any of the other candidates thus far.



Watching the debate last night, it struck me that Sunak is using the tried & tested "repeat a lie often enough and it sticks" philosophy. To me, he came across as rude, disrespectful and the moderator needed to rein him in more. Starmer's style is not suited to these type of debates, but I have to say that when he was allowed to make a point, he made it count (NHS waiting lists being the prime example, as well as the remark of a vote for the Tories is like handing an arsonist his matches back."



From what I can see, the Tory policy is centred around the pensioner vote - they have nothing else to draw down on after 14 years of ruining this country. They didnt bring inflation down - market forces did. they havent resolved the NHS pay disputes - the unions did not agree to them at all (and as an aside, the promise of the Govt ensuring that the pay review in April would be sped through has fallen by the wayside). They didnt bring the energy prices down - market forces did (and they are forecast to go back up again in October just as people need to use it again - imagine my shock). Sunak was banging on about furlough, which is fine for those who were paid to stay at home during COVID, while others had no choice but to work and put ourselves at risk (being an NHS worker, I fall into this category). And every taxpayer is paying for this even now - something he conveniently did not say. The facts are that the cost of living is higher than it has been for years - and this has happened on their watch., I don't trust them to resolve this at all, as all they care about is lining their own pockets and being slaves to their rich donors.



As for Starmer, I have never voted Labour before. As a person, I find him more trustworthy and humble than Sunak is. I an unsure how Labour will make my life better, as the country is broken and the economy is just bereft of money (possibly lop-sided in favour of the select few). My current view is they surely wont make as big a mess of it as the Tories have - but it is a very low bar to start from.

 

[A mex eyecan]

Unless you live in North Yorkshire or north London, neither of them will be on the ballot paper. Look up your own local candidates and their suitability.

I meant parties

 

[Berty23]

The bit the blows some minds is that the public are on balance no more supportive of tax cuts than they are tax rises. If anything they would prefer tax rises if it meant better public services.

 

[drew]

Starmer playing the long game. Use the lie in the 2nd debate which is obviously nearer the election and then proving the lie then will be fresher in the memories of the floating voters!

 

[portslade seagull]

I didn't watch the debate because one hour of trying to outdo each other is not helpful, nor can any detail be discussed. It just boils down to personalities like a tv talent show.

I don't mind paying a bit more tax if it means we get a health service, social care, schools that aren't crumbling, and travel services that work. What I want to see ended is corruption where contracts are given to donors in return for massive profits that never get reinvested.
The water companies, railways, hospitals and schools are a mess, and need public money to rescue them, not to be paid out in dividends to shareholders.

Always said I wouldn't mind paying another penny or two if it is directed at the services that need it ie Police, NHS ( although they need to cull the many layers of management which could release more money to frontline nurses ) Schools and care services which have been neglected

 

[GJN1]

Why can't someone point out to Sunak - WHAT WAS THE ALTERNATIVE? Not operating the furlough? That would have ended well. All rich countries were doing some sort of furlough. It wasn't his idea.

What was his idea was 'Eat out to Help out' which resulted in thousand more covid deaths and another lockdown. He didn't design it to kill people but Rishi Sunak is a terrible human being.

As one of the 3.8 million excluded from any financial assistance during COVID I’d like to know how he intends to convince me why I should vote for him.

 

[albionalba]

Always said I wouldn't mind paying another penny or two if it is directed at the services that need it ie Police, NHS ( although they need to cull the many layers of management which could release more money to frontline nurses ) Schools and care services which have been neglected

It hasn't worked in high-tax Scotland....all of the public services are just as much of a shambles.

 

[medwayseagull reborn]

I will precis what i am about to say that I voted Tory in 2019, but am undecided now. I cannot see a logical reason to vote for them again, but have yet to be convinced by any of the other candidates thus far.



Watching the debate last night, it struck me that Sunak is using the tried & tested "repeat a lie often enough and it sticks" philosophy. To me, he came across as rude, disrespectful and the moderator needed to rein him in more. Starmer's style is not suited to these type of debates, but I have to say that when he was allowed to make a point, he made it count (NHS waiting lists being the prime example, as well as the remark of a vote for the Tories is like handing an arsonist his matches back."



From what I can see, the Tory policy is centred around the pensioner vote - they have nothing else to draw down on after 14 years of ruining this country. They didnt bring inflation down - market forces did. they havent resolved the NHS pay disputes - the unions did not agree to them at all (and as an aside, the promise of the Govt ensuring that the pay review in April would be sped through has fallen by the wayside). They didnt bring the energy prices down - market forces did (and they are forecast to go back up again in October just as people need to use it again - imagine my shock). Sunak was banging on about furlough, which is fine for those who were paid to stay at home during COVID, while others had no choice but to work and put ourselves at risk (being an NHS worker, I fall into this category). And every taxpayer is paying for this even now - something he conveniently did not say. The facts are that the cost of living is higher than it has been for years - and this has happened on their watch., I don't trust them to resolve this at all, as all they care about is lining their own pockets and being slaves to their rich donors.



As for Starmer, I have never voted Labour before. As a person, I find him more trustworthy and humble than Sunak is. I an unsure how Labour will make my life better, as the country is broken and the economy is just bereft of money (possibly lop-sided in favour of the select few). My current view is they surely wont make as big a mess of it as the Tories have - but it is a very low bar to start from.

If you read your own post again as though it was written by someone else, there is only one conclusion you can reach about which way to vote.

 

[pb21]

I didn't think Starmer made enough of the fact that if things were going to get better under Sunak, as he suggests, why did he call an election 6 months earlier than needed, instead of allowing time for him to be able to evidence it.