Would give Sunak the edge. Starmer had a few too many times where he avoided a direct question and went on tangents about his toolmaker dad, the DPP, and WW2 for some reason. Sunak more aggressive but hit his key points home better.
Talking to Davey now. Got flustered when challenged on their figures
He is so reassuring. Not talking over her. Calm. Measured. But putting his points across. Refusing to bite on quickfire questions. "Sometimes the questions are more complicated than yes or no"
ITV have Tice on for Reform not Farage in their debates
I think that's a good decision from Reform's perspective. They need to show they're not a one-man-band and Tice might match up better against Mordaunt and Rayner.
Talking to Davey now. Got flustered when challenged on their figures
He is so reassuring. Not talking over her. Calm. Measured. But putting his points across. Refusing to bite on quickfire questions. "Sometimes the questions are more complicated than yes or no"
Sunak has been very aggressive and scored some hits .
Starmer should have done better to refute some of the attacks .
I think Sunak edged it but his manner at times was quite annoying and I do think his answer on the NHS was awful . Of course people might try and go private if they have the money but many couldn’t afford to .
Labours campaign will go big on that and Sunaks will go big on the 2,000 pound tax bombshell.
Sunak's manner was essentially trolling - shouting over the moderator, demanding SKS answer questions that he was already in the middle of answering, responding to things that hadn't actually been said. He needs to calm it down a bit next time, or he risks sounding manic.
Starmer was more polite, listened to questions, empathised better. If he'd come out with something like Reagan's "there you go again" line, Sunak would have been destroyed - but he didn't. The danger for him is that he tries to go more aggressive next time, which won't suit him.
I think the actual winners were the audience - responded appropriately, asked some good questions, and no shouting or jeering of the sort that BBC QT audiences get up to.
Talking to Davey now. Got flustered when challenged on their figures
He is so reassuring. Not talking over her. Calm. Measured. But putting his points across. Refusing to bite on quickfire questions. "Sometimes the questions are more complicated than yes or no"
1) There were no killer shots in the debate. To be honest they should probably be held after manifestos are launched such that there's more material to work with.
2) On a purely personal basis, I found Sunak's style incredibly grating and irritating. But Starmer struggled to respond to the aggression with memorable lines of his own.
3) On the face of it, the YouGov poll for what is essentially a draw is a win for Sunak given relative polling, but also a win for Starmer given it implies no decisive win or media narrative of a clear Sunak win.
4) I would be surprised if it has a statistically significant impact on polling.
Overall a score draw I think, with Sunak very fracrtonally edging it.
He will have successfully scared a lot of pensioners over Starmer's pension tax plans, while Starmer gave some better impressions of being well-motivated. I wonder if Sunak actually really does treasure and feel protecrive of his national service policy, though, however born on the hoof and seemingly opportunistic as it was.
Reflecting on it, no one watching will have gained any NEW doubts about Sunak. They might have about Starmer.
That’s the big take out.
That’s why Starmer’s uncombative performance tonight is important. We have seen elections quickly turn around in the last 4 weeks, US 2016, UK 2017, We have also seen massive polling fails in history, here and around the world, today in India.
The allocation of 45 seconds for an answer is a hindrance. You can’t explain in any meaningful way topics as important as the cost of living, security, etc. Far better to have fewer questions, longer answers - it’s meant to be a debate after all.
Choose a better moderator. Julie Etchingham is excellent as an anchor on ITV News but lacks the fire to tell the candidates to shut the f*ck up.
Is there much point having a debate before the manifestos have been revealed? “He hasn’t got a plan”. “Yes I have.” “Show me.” “It’s in my manifesto.
I actually enjoy Steven Flynn's performance at Westminster. But do have to laugh because he rightly says that the Tory government's time is coming to an end without wanting to accept that the SNP's government's time is also coming to an end.
1) There were no killer shots in the debate. To be honest they should probably be held after manifestos are launched such that there's more material to work with.
2) On a purely personal basis, I found Sunak's style incredibly grating and irritating. But Starmer struggled to respond to the aggression with memorable lines of his own.
3) On the face of it, the YouGov poll for what is essentially a draw is a win for Sunak given relative polling, but also a win for Starmer given it implies no decisive win or media narrative of a clear Sunak win.
4) I would be surprised if it has a statistically significant impact on polling.
Strongly agree with point one there - it is actually quite bizarre to have these debates without the manifestos.
Is that all 2019 voters or just the ones still intending to vote Tory. If former there’s a case to make for seeing a bit of firming in the Tory share.
All 2019 Conservative voters, including those now backing Labour or Reform
All 2019 voters *who watched the debate*. Which outside of you and Moonrabbit is about another 7 people. We watched this because we have to. Normal people make better choices.
Is that all 2019 voters or just the ones still intending to vote Tory. If former there’s a case to make for seeing a bit of firming in the Tory share.
All 2019 Conservative voters, including those now backing Labour or Reform
All 2019 voters *who watched the debate*. Which outside of you and Moonrabbit is about another 7 people. We watched this because we have to. Normal people make better choices.
Is that all 2019 voters or just the ones still intending to vote Tory. If former there’s a case to make for seeing a bit of firming in the Tory share.
All 2019 Conservative voters, including those now backing Labour or Reform
All 2019 voters *who watched the debate*. Which outside of you and Moonrabbit is about another 7 people. We watched this because we have to. Normal people make better choices.
It was on ITV at prime time not GB news at 3am on a Monday morning, far more will have watched it than that
Talking to Davey now. Got flustered when challenged on their figures
He is so reassuring. Not talking over her. Calm. Measured. But putting his points across. Refusing to bite on quickfire questions. "Sometimes the questions are more complicated than yes or no"
Biggest issue I saw was that Mr Starmer did not swat down Mr Sunak, and was not crisp enough. Mr Sunak was more to the point and precise, but the points were not very worthwhile.
The interview with Ed Davey in ITVx afterwards was far more informative.
"They don't tell me about the stunts until a few hours before."
They need Judge Chutkan (sp) or Judge Merchan to moderate.
Another reflection. The ECHR stuff will be the “row” tomorrow as the media track down all existing Cabinet Ministers and ask them for a view.
It’s definitely in the manifesto. Will what is left of one Nation Tories kick up a fuss knowing it’s not going to happen because of the election loss?
If it is caveated they will be able to dodge the question anyway - they could always say they are confident the court will not prevent it so its fine anyway to include it, then if they are in power afterwards nothing to stop them going against it.
Is that all 2019 voters or just the ones still intending to vote Tory. If former there’s a case to make for seeing a bit of firming in the Tory share.
All 2019 Conservative voters, including those now backing Labour or Reform
All 2019 voters *who watched the debate*. Which outside of you and Moonrabbit is about another 7 people. We watched this because we have to. Normal people make better choices.
You are being very silly and seems you cannot accept that the public did vote Sunak as the winner
Neither were surprising or particularly interesting. Moon Rabbit who cheered on her champion from start to finish spoke for most. No one was looking for enlightenment and they didn't get any.
I hope they cancel the next one or invite more leaders. That was just painful to watch .
Next time Starmer needs to down a few pints of Stella and take a few lines beforehand...it seems that 2019 Tory voters take to leery, aggressive, mansplaining antics...
It didn't work for Rushi against Liz Truss mind...but I doubt Rushi has a reverse gear for his debate style...
Starmer did have the best line around waiting lists and Rishi saying he was good at maths. Got a laugh, and it sounded off the cuff even though I'm sure it wasn't.
Sunak hit his core lines around tax raising and lack of plan hard, without quite overdoing it.
Flynn talking up the bongo polls showing Labour on a 200 majority. People should be free to make their own choices and reject failed idiots.
I quite agree! Why vote for cuts and failure with the SNP. He says "a bill to ban privatisation" and a guarantee that Scotland's public services get funded properly.
But health is devolved so "privatisation" south of the wall has no impact in Scotland. What does have an impact are the SNP's cuts to front line services. And they can't blame Westminster whilst wasting so much money on their own priorities like the GRA whilst my mum ended up stuck on a trolley for 2 days and you can't get an NHS dentist...
Is that all 2019 voters or just the ones still intending to vote Tory. If former there’s a case to make for seeing a bit of firming in the Tory share.
All 2019 Conservative voters, including those now backing Labour or Reform
All 2019 voters *who watched the debate*. Which outside of you and Moonrabbit is about another 7 people. We watched this because we have to. Normal people make better choices.
Talking to Davey now. Got flustered when challenged on their figures
He is so reassuring. Not talking over her. Calm. Measured. But putting his points across. Refusing to bite on quickfire questions. "Sometimes the questions are more complicated than yes or no"
Starmer did have the best line around waiting lists and Rishi saying he was good at maths. Got a laugh, and it sounded off the cuff even though I'm sure it wasn't.
Although it was obviously wrong as anyone with a cursory knowledge of calculus would know.
Is that all 2019 voters or just the ones still intending to vote Tory. If former there’s a case to make for seeing a bit of firming in the Tory share.
All 2019 Conservative voters, including those now backing Labour or Reform
All 2019 voters *who watched the debate*. Which outside of you and Moonrabbit is about another 7 people. We watched this because we have to. Normal people make better choices.
You are being very silly and seems you cannot accept that the public did vote Sunak as the winner
Did I not respond to your post earlier defending the Sky News headline saying Sunak won? He did - so the YouGov poll states.
Talking to Davey now. Got flustered when challenged on their figures
He is so reassuring. Not talking over her. Calm. Measured. But putting his points across. Refusing to bite on quickfire questions. "Sometimes the questions are more complicated than yes or no"
I actually enjoy Steven Flynn's performance at Westminster. But do have to laugh because he rightly says that the Tory government's time is coming to an end without wanting to accept that the SNP's government's time is also coming to an end.
This might well be the case, but given how much the political landscape has shifted in the past two years, I wouldn't be confident declaring the result two-ish years in advance. There will be a high water mark for Labour at some point, as there is with all parties. I've set out that I think it'll come ~6 months after a Labour victory in this general election, assuming Labour do win. When do you think it'll be? And if Labour start to edge downwards before the Holyrood election, due May 2026, who will be the beneficiaries? Conservatives? Maybe. Lib Dems? I guess that's possible. SNP? Could happen.
Starmer did have the best line around waiting lists and Rishi saying he was good at maths. Got a laugh, and it sounded off the cuff even though I'm sure it wasn't.
Sunak hit his core lines around tax raising and lack of plan hard, without quite overdoing it.
Sunak was correct to say it had started coming down, but he did not say it peaked after he made the pledge.
Narrative changes are what come out of this. Sunak has a hook now. Disastrous campaign.... he won the first debate/first blood. It stems the reverse midas accusations. Its a building block to stop the bleeding and try and get a respectable result. The 'campaign collapse' narrative will dry up
1) There were no killer shots in the debate. To be honest they should probably be held after manifestos are launched such that there's more material to work with.
2) On a purely personal basis, I found Sunak's style incredibly grating and irritating. But Starmer struggled to respond to the aggression with memorable lines of his own.
3) On the face of it, the YouGov poll for what is essentially a draw is a win for Sunak given relative polling, but also a win for Starmer given it implies no decisive win or media narrative of a clear Sunak win.
4) I would be surprised if it has a statistically significant impact on polling.
Strongly agree with point one there - it is actually quite bizarre to have these debates without the manifestos.
Issue there is the manifestos are still a week away and only arrive as the football kicks off
It obviously won’t happen, but a turnaround in the next few weeks and a Tory win would be hilarious, just to see the faces of the MPs who jumped ship.
It would be slightly amusing. More amusing is if the polls start to shift the Tories way and they get high on hopium only to end up with a result not much different to the more optimistic and of current polls.
Starmer did have the best line around waiting lists and Rishi saying he was good at maths. Got a laugh, and it sounded off the cuff even though I'm sure it wasn't.
Sunak hit his core lines around tax raising and lack of plan hard, without quite overdoing it.
Sunak was correct to say it had started coming down, but he did not say it peaked after he made the pledge.
I think a bit unfair for him to be laughed at for that.
Political jibes are rarely fair. Was every line Sunak tried on Starmer fair?
Sunak needed to achieve his targets earlier or more time to see them obviously be succeeding - as it is few people will probably believe him on that point.
The one moment when I think Sunak nearly scored a clear hit today was on the pension tax plans. Core Tory voters there, and they should make more of that in the campaign overal.
Starmer is best when he hints and unpacks more of his underlying motivations, while Sunak was in his terrier mood from back in the Tory leadership debates that made that fracrionally more difciult today. Maybe it will add a one or 2% Tory boost in the polls ?
Maybe it's just that being PM gives one a sheen that makes one win a debate.
Though maybe winning a debate (remember how Jez banged on about having won the argument?), doesn't feed through into winning an election or being any good at governing.
If UK politics can grow out of that Oxbridge Union tosh, good.
I actually enjoy Steven Flynn's performance at Westminster. But do have to laugh because he rightly says that the Tory government's time is coming to an end without wanting to accept that the SNP's government's time is also coming to an end.
This might well be the case, but given how much the political landscape has shifted in the past two years, I wouldn't be confident declaring the result two-ish years in advance. There will be a high water mark for Labour at some point, as there is with all parties. I've set out that I think it'll come ~6 months after a Labour victory in this general election, assuming Labour do win. When do you think it'll be? And if Labour start to edge downwards before the Holyrood election, due May 2026, who will be the beneficiaries? Conservatives? Maybe. Lib Dems? I guess that's possible. SNP? Could happen.
Its possible the SNP could reinvent themselves and go forward into their 3rd decade.
Some interesting details in the MRP study, such as the Tory vote in Ynys Mon only falling from 35.5% to 30%, (although they still lose the seat to Labour).
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
The blocker isn’t planning (at the moment) but planning permissions stacking up.
The ultimate cause of that is local monopolies for house builders - who then throttle building to keep prices up.
But ultimately this suits the politicians (“we granted 7 billions planning applications!”) the NIMBYs and the politicians again (“we played the system for you and only 3 houses were built”)
Labour shouldn't panic just yet, but their campaign has been somewhat faltering. First there was the needless distraction over Diane Abbott; now we have Sir Keir limping into second place behind Rishi when he should have crushed him like an ant beneath his brogue. I mean, it's not as if there isn't plenty of weaponry to hand to blow the Tories out of the water.
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
The blocker isn’t planning (at the moment) but planning permissions stacking up.
The ultimate cause of that is local monopolies for house builders - who then throttle building to keep prices up.
But ultimately this suits the politicians (“we granted 7 billions planning applications!”) the NIMBYs and the politicians again (“we played the system for you and only 3 houses were built”)
Planning is a blocker.
Councils in London reject phone masts because they apparently aren't in keeping with the landscape. What landscape?
Starmer did have the best line around waiting lists and Rishi saying he was good at maths. Got a laugh, and it sounded off the cuff even though I'm sure it wasn't.
Sunak hit his core lines around tax raising and lack of plan hard, without quite overdoing it.
Sunak was correct to say it had started coming down, but he did not say it peaked after he made the pledge.
I think a bit unfair for him to be laughed at for that.
Looking at that graph it looks too early to be confident its coming down. It sometimes ticked down from 2012 to 2019 but the long-term trend was going up. Is it currently trending down, or ticking down, it looks too soon to tell.
Starmer didn't really say anything about immigration, he just (correctly) pointed out the Tories' failure and the need to smash that gangs, so that score feels somewhat harsh. Sunak talked about tax rises from Labour a lot and Starmer's rebuttal didn't seem to cut through so that makes some sense. The rest mostly seems like generic view of each party.
Did say Sunak edged it. But I've done boxing and prosecuting as analogies. Here's another PB favourite. How about one day cricket? Sunak's won the toss (actually there isn't one), put them in and seen them make a leisurely 350. His top order have got themselves out, retired hurt or mysteriously signed for the opposition mid innings. So he's come out flailing and connected with a few against a very defensive field and unambitious bowling. It will have cheered the partisan crowd. It may mean the difference between losing by 200 runs or 120. But they still need 150 off 60 balls.
Loving Tice. "Who make the decision" / "who calls the shots" and he sets out why Farage is a better draw than he is. Good! Honesty! Shut the idiot questions down because all the hacks seem to think there is a scandal to ferret out when we all know that Farage owns the party and created it as his personal cult vehicle.
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
The blocker isn’t planning (at the moment) but planning permissions stacking up.
The ultimate cause of that is local monopolies for house builders - who then throttle building to keep prices up.
But ultimately this suits the politicians (“we granted 7 billions planning applications!”) the NIMBYs and the politicians again (“we played the system for you and only 3 houses were built”)
How can we improve the market to allow many small building companies to build 5-20 houses on new plots? And would it actually help?
"One wouldn't answer the question clearly & the other one just talked over him"
A fairly damning verdict on the 1st debate from our focus group of Milton Keynes voters, almost all of whom said they felt less enthusiastic about the election & more worried having watched it.
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
Starmer talking about home ownership and building homes, and need to change planning laws. Good news to me, but is it actually popular?
He's hit the nail on what needs to be done.
I've said for years planning restrictions and NIMBYs are the number one block in this country. If he follows through on that, then he's won my vote with that - but what's the detail because that's a big if.
The blocker isn’t planning (at the moment) but planning permissions stacking up.
The ultimate cause of that is local monopolies for house builders - who then throttle building to keep prices up.
But ultimately this suits the politicians (“we granted 7 billions planning applications!”) the NIMBYs and the politicians again (“we played the system for you and only 3 houses were built”)
The blocker 100% is planning.
Planning permissions can only stack up because the local monopolies are those who get planning permission as they can work the planning system.
Reform planning, let anyone with the skills build a house without spending a fortune on lawyers seeking permission first which is only viable for large developers planning large estates, and see the monopolies destroyed by competition.
Neither were surprising or particularly interesting. Moon Rabbit who cheered on her champion from start to finish spoke for most. No one was looking for enlightenment and they didn't get any.
I hope they cancel the next one or invite more leaders. That was just painful to watch .
“Moon Rabbit who cheered on her champion from start to finish”
Not true at all. I came with Emmerdale waiting on catch-up to bomb out any moment. But who expected Rishi to out debate Starmer all through it as clearly as that? My comments are perfectly neutral and balanced. Rishi debated just like you should in a debate. Starmer was supposed to put gloves up in the ring, and jab back, that’s why the fight looked unedifying, it was Starmer’s fault.
No leader in such a big debate should allow such big blows to land on them as Starmer allowed tonight. Instead of preparing was he in the pub watching football?
Comments
I will go against the grain and say I thought both were ok.
But the moderator was awful. It's not an easy task, but Sunak barrelled over her in the first half.
If that is Reform / Lib Dem’s then Farage will be going after Rishi..
Marvellous. LibDem majority of 704 incoming.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/02/italian-village-with-46-residents-has-30-local-election-candidates
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1798102719993184499
Hi.
Starmer was more polite, listened to questions, empathised better. If he'd come out with something like Reagan's "there you go again" line, Sunak would have been destroyed - but he didn't. The danger for him is that he tries to go more aggressive next time, which won't suit him.
I think the actual winners were the audience - responded appropriately, asked some good questions, and no shouting or jeering of the sort that BBC QT audiences get up to.
1) There were no killer shots in the debate. To be honest they should probably be held after manifestos are launched such that there's more material to work with.
2) On a purely personal basis, I found Sunak's style incredibly grating and irritating. But Starmer struggled to respond to the aggression with memorable lines of his own.
3) On the face of it, the YouGov poll for what is essentially a draw is a win for Sunak given relative polling, but also a win for Starmer given it implies no decisive win or media narrative of a clear Sunak win.
4) I would be surprised if it has a statistically significant impact on polling.
Overall a score draw I think, with Sunak very fracrtonally edging it.
He will have successfully scared a lot of pensioners over Starmer's pension tax plans, while Starmer gave some better impressions of being well-motivated. I wonder if Sunak actually really does treasure and feel protecrive of his national service policy, though, however born on the hoof and seemingly opportunistic as it was.
That’s why Starmer’s uncombative performance tonight is important. We have seen elections quickly turn around in the last 4 weeks, US 2016, UK 2017, We have also seen massive polling fails in history, here and around the world, today in India.
Normal voters do not watch the debates.
That’s said, the electorate is not homogeneous and the overtalking of the moderator will have irritated a lot of people.
Steve
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1798102719993184499
Biggest issue I saw was that Mr Starmer did not swat down Mr Sunak, and was not crisp enough. Mr Sunak was more to the point and precise, but the points were not very worthwhile.
The interview with Ed Davey in ITVx afterwards was far more informative.
"They don't tell me about the stunts until a few hours before."
They need Judge Chutkan (sp) or Judge Merchan to moderate.
I hope they cancel the next one or invite more leaders. That was just painful to watch .
It didn't work for Rushi against Liz Truss mind...but I doubt Rushi has a reverse gear for his debate style...
Sunak hit his core lines around tax raising and lack of plan hard, without quite overdoing it.
I quite agree! Why vote for cuts and failure with the SNP. He says "a bill to ban privatisation" and a guarantee that Scotland's public services get funded properly.
But health is devolved so "privatisation" south of the wall has no impact in Scotland. What does have an impact are the SNP's cuts to front line services. And they can't blame Westminster whilst wasting so much money on their own priorities like the GRA whilst my mum ended up stuck on a trolley for 2 days and you can't get an NHS dentist...
We’ve had enough of the fuckers.
Bigjohnowls.
There will be a high water mark for Labour at some point, as there is with all parties. I've set out that I think it'll come ~6 months after a Labour victory in this general election, assuming Labour do win. When do you think it'll be? And if Labour start to edge downwards before the Holyrood election, due May 2026, who will be the beneficiaries? Conservatives? Maybe. Lib Dems? I guess that's possible. SNP? Could happen.
Did Sunak do enough to narrow the gap
Did Starmer turn anyone off
https://image.assets.pressassociation.io/v2/image/production/d49c500c9959605a11f25a49836917a7Y29udGVudHNlYXJjaGFwaSwxNzE3MDY5OTgz/2.76113017.jpg
I think a bit unfair for him to be laughed at for that.
Trustworthy: Sunak 39% / Starmer 49%
Likeable: Sunak 34% / Starmer 50%
In touch: Sunak 17% / Starmer 66%
Prime Ministerial: Sunak 43% / Starmer 40%
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1798104621736665407
Sunak needed to achieve his targets earlier or more time to see them obviously be succeeding - as it is few people will probably believe him on that point.
Sunak did well: 55%
Sunak did badly: 44%
Starmer did well: 60%
Starmer did badly: 40%
Who did better on...
Cost of living: Sunak 38% / Starmer 51%
NHS: Sunak 28% / Starmer 61%
Education: Sunak 31% / Starmer 52%
Tax: Sunak 53% / Starmer 32%
Immigration: Sunak 45% / Starmer 42%
Climate change: Sunak 24% / Starmer 48%
Starmer is best when he hints and unpacks more of his underlying motivations, while Sunak was in his terrier mood from back in the Tory leadership debates that made that fracrionally more difciult today. Maybe it will add a one or 2% Tory boost in the polls ?
Who was more...
Trustworthy: Sunak 39% / Starmer 49%
Likeable: Sunak 34% / Starmer 50%
In touch: Sunak 17% / Starmer 66%
Prime Ministerial: Sunak 43% / Starmer 40%
yougov.co.uk/politics/artic… #ITVdebate
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1798104621736665407
% of debate viewers who think
Sunak did well: 55%
Sunak did badly: 44%
Starmer did well: 60%
Starmer did badly: 40%
yougov.co.uk/politics/artic…
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1798105756828340345
Maybe it's just that being PM gives one a sheen that makes one win a debate.
Though maybe winning a debate (remember how Jez banged on about having won the argument?), doesn't feed through into winning an election or being any good at governing.
If UK politics can grow out of that Oxbridge Union tosh, good.
https://www.survation.com/survation-mrp-labour-set-for-record-breaking-majority/
The ultimate cause of that is local monopolies for house builders - who then throttle building to keep prices up.
But ultimately this suits the politicians (“we granted 7 billions planning applications!”) the NIMBYs and the politicians again (“we played the system for you and only 3 houses were built”)
Councils in London reject phone masts because they apparently aren't in keeping with the landscape. What landscape?
But I've done boxing and prosecuting as analogies.
Here's another PB favourite.
How about one day cricket?
Sunak's won the toss (actually there isn't one), put them in and seen them make a leisurely 350.
His top order have got themselves out, retired hurt or mysteriously signed for the opposition mid innings.
So he's come out flailing and connected with a few against a very defensive field and unambitious bowling.
It will have cheered the partisan crowd.
It may mean the difference between losing by 200 runs or 120.
But they still need 150 off 60 balls.
Again you are being silly
Sunak won and the bigger issue is 85% support from 2019 conservative voters
A fairly damning verdict on the 1st debate from our focus group of Milton Keynes voters, almost all of whom said they felt less enthusiastic about the election & more worried having watched it.
https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1798106556686319970
I'm sure a classical scholar can think of an appropriate tag.
Planning permissions can only stack up because the local monopolies are those who get planning permission as they can work the planning system.
Reform planning, let anyone with the skills build a house without spending a fortune on lawyers seeking permission first which is only viable for large developers planning large estates, and see the monopolies destroyed by competition.
Not true at all. I came with Emmerdale waiting on catch-up to bomb out any moment. But who expected Rishi to out debate Starmer all through it as clearly as that? My comments are perfectly neutral and balanced. Rishi debated just like you should in a debate. Starmer was supposed to put gloves up in the ring, and jab back, that’s why the fight looked unedifying, it was Starmer’s fault.
No leader in such a big debate should allow such big blows to land on them as Starmer allowed tonight. Instead of preparing was he in the pub watching football?