What was needed in that debate was a big hammer and the words “SHUT UP” shouted by the host. And maybe a tiny bit of fact checking fed back to her through an earpiece.
And ultimately the fact that Starmer couldn’t (or wouldn’t?) answer some very direct questions made him seem evasive. It was frustrating because I expected him to do better considering his experience as a barrister cross-examining others.
Ultimately, the debate gets reduced to a few clips on the news and Sunak provided the better soundbites for those clips.
Indeed. But there's time for people to think about that "£2000" between now and election day... it'll be interesting to see whether the Tories keep repeating it, or leave it to fade into a "Labour cost us more" vague feeling and move on to stop people questioning it too much...
- it's actually £500 a year of imaginary tax rises (£2000 over four years)
- it assumes any imaginary tax increase will be the same for all households irrespective of income
- it includes spending pledges that Labour have already said won't be paired with personal taxation changes at all
If they do keep the attention on it... will it be like "the bus" where the lie just gets more effective as opponents point out how bleeding obvious the lie is... or will people have branded Sunak a liar ahead of polling day? It could go either way.
As it’s the only thing that’s landed for Sunak since the campaign began, I suspect we’ll be seeing a lot more of it
Lets just make shit up then endlessly repeat it
So it would appear allowing Sunak to repeat his 2000 quid bollocks was a deliberate tactic as labour had Bowler’s letter in their back pocket and now they can spend the rest of the campaign calling him a bare faced liar. Are they actually that clever? I dunno buts it’s totally backfired on Sunak so I’m not complaining.
It’ll be interesting to see whether the Tories keep repeating it, or leave it to fade into a “Labour cost us more” vague feeling and move on to stop people questioning it too much…
Of course they'll keep using it. Bare-faced lying and then doubling-down on the lie is an established tactic in normal day-to-day Tory politics now, let alone during a dirty and desperate election campaign.
The lie is concise and impactful, the rebuttal is more complex and requires a level of engagement that the important bits of the electorate are not willing to give.
A lie repeated often enough will trump any attempt at the truth, sadly. Because facts are frequently complicated but lies are simple.
Starmer is slow at everything. He'll take weeks to get the fully formed answer to Suank's claim out there. Not sure that'll work for him. Hope it does of course.
Interesting that green investment is part of the basis for this nonsense personal taxation claim (it's to be funded* by fossil fuel taxes and government borrowing**)... presumably this was expected by Labour... will be interesting to see how they try and clarify it.
[ * people know that there isn't a direct stream of money from tax to investment, no MMT rants please ]
[ ** yes, yes, it's not borrowing as you, I, or companies do ]
I am hopelessly biased against the Tories, but I’m very surprised polls are reporting that Sunak ‘won’ the debate. I thought he came off as tetchy and robotic with his repeated £2000 attack line.
One question for me would be how many poll respondents actually watched the full debate and how many saw bits of it or 'Highlights' from the little I did see (as I wandered out to the garage in disgust) Sunak's belligerent "attacking" style probably makes for better soundbites and thus the "winner" will be the one that got more time on the Sun/DM/Independent/etc released highlights reel.
Starmer isn't a punchy communicator or as comfortable reeling off workshopped phrases as most other politicians, it's a significant issue for him.
He waffles and gives background his tone is a bit too calm overall. I think it was on the News Agents podcast earlier they said "if you're explaining your losing" and they're right. These Leader's debates are not really about facts or details, they're about shaping appearances and perceptions of the figureheads, specifically for people that don't really care about politics but are noticing that things are broken and stuff costs more. If Sunak can scare voters with tales of future Labour taxation then he could at least put a dent in Labour's majority.
TBH The fact that the £2K tax claim is basically made up is less important than the fact that Sunak made it stick in people's heads, and that Starmer wasn't forceful enough in his rebuttal of it. This is textbook RW rhetoric incept fears, present yourself as the solution...
Lets just make shit up then endlessly repeat it
Or just make the rebuttal compete with an endless tide of new shit. It's an established method of neutralising any issue that makes you look bad. Give the media something else to look at, even a bad thing, and the REALLY bad thing just disappears into the haze. I mean, how many of us are still ranting about the Tories partying their way through the pandemic? That alone should still be major talking point - so should the Conservatives' links to Russian cash.
https://bylinetimes.com/2022/03/21/flooding-the-zone-the-bannon-playbook-governing-british-politics/
So it would appear allowing Sunak to repeat his 2000 quid bollocks was a deliberate tactic as labour had Bowler’s letter in their back pocket and now they can spend the rest of the campaign calling him a bare faced liar. Are they actually that clever? I dunno buts it’s totally backfired on Sunak so I’m not complaining.
https://Twitter.com/emmaburnell_/status/1798262831818645887?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
TBH The fact that the £2K tax claim is basically made up is less important than the fact that Sunak made it stick in people’s heads
Let's spend £350 million on the NHS instead...
Indeed... could got either way binners/nickc.
Barristers ask questions, they don't answer them!
– it’s actually £500 a year of imaginary tax rises (£2000 over four years)
If it only cost £500 pa per household to un-**** this country, that'd be a ****in bargain
The problem with looking for fact, applying common sense and balanced judgement is that so many of the voting public are happy to forego all that and get news from Ticktock and the Daily Wail.
You missed out just repeating the last time because you believe rightwingers are truly 'patriotic'.
But yes, you are basically right. I know lots of pretty intelligent folk who just don't give a monkey's about this stuff because it is all such a turn-off.
I think the £2000 lies from sunak are going to be a massive own goal.
With the evidence and the ability to turn it into a nice little soundbite, the label sunak is a liar could take hold, plus it also gives ammo for future debates.
A response of 'Is that a lie too?' Would be hard for lil rish to fight against
Interesting... but chock full of apprehension. I honestly have no idea which way it'll go. I have no confidence it'll go against Sunak and his party based on recent national votes.
Survation MRP is not kind to the tories
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1798062683394306547?t=W9MSeOeM83_lrK5kzFg8-A&s=19
And this is pretty frog faces announcement
Didn't someone a few pages back claim that only left wing politicians get killed? Obviously it was a ridiculous statement anyway, but only took a day to age incredibly poorly given thatt a far right politician in Germany has been stabbed.
I know this isn't a presidential contest and it really pains me to say it but I though Sunak came out on top. I was surprised Starmer was not more confident, concise and better at debating. He failed to shut down the £2,000 claim, he failed so shut down the tax on pension argument and he failed to answer how he would resolve the junior doctors strike. I expected better from him.
Didn’t someone a few pages back claim that only left wing politicians get killed?
A Conservative MP was killed most recently.
What was being rebuffed was that it was only "the Left" that resorted to "more than words".
Didn’t someone a few pages back claim that only left wing politicians get killed?
I dont think anyone said that?
The latest Savanta poll on the debate has Starmer 'winning' overall, and on all the key topics, particularly NHS and Public Services...
(First link I could find, don't ever read the standard btw...)
Sunak used the Trump method to good effect... talk over your opponent and make them look week and lacking answers when they don't respond to you and stick to the debate rules. At least he wasn't doing the walking around to stay in shot thing.
I’ll be voting labour even though I’m more of a Liberal democrat.
Because you think there is a risk that Rishi Sunak might win the election?
I would imagine it's a tactical vote to get the incumbent Tory out. In my constituency the candidate most likely to oust the current Tory MP is Libdem which is what I would usually vote anyway. If Labour were better placed than Libdem I would not hesitate to vote for them on this occasion.
I did only see the last 1/2 (from immigration onwards) it did feel as if Rishi got a lot more speaking time than SKS and ended up having the last word quite often although not necessarily when it counted.
even the daily mails Dan Hodges is not impressed (the Mail still ran with the £2000 figure on its front page tho)
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1798306248158498870
So it would appear allowing Sunak to repeat his 2000 quid bollocks was a deliberate tactic as labour had Bowler’s letter in their back pocket and now they can spend the rest of the campaign calling him a bare faced liar.
Whether deliberate or not, hey, gift horse and all that. Ashworth on R4 Today programme was very forthright in calling them outright lies, Sunak a liar, etc. which makes me think they are fully aware and planning to keep using.
seems like classic barrister stuff from Starmer
Isn't it great we actually get to have rows about politics?
Just popping this in as a reminder, for some perspective.
think the top image is from Operation Jubilee (the Dieppe raid 1942) not Operation Overlord
Any rebuttal on the £2k cost will be easily deflected because the BBC and Civil Service are fully staffed by far left sympathisers out to discredit the Tories.
Facts have a well known liberal bias.
Any rebuttal on the £2k cost will be easily deflected because the BBC and Civil Service are fully staffed by far left sympathisers out to discredit the Tories.
Next you'll be saying lefties can't spot sarcasm 😋
lols
Tory Chairman has finally found a safe seat on his 3rd attempt! but local party members not happy
https://twitter.com/joepike/status/1798317506870100428
BBC and Civil Service are fully staffed by far left sympathisers,’ ever thought of comedy as a career?
No Im no good at jokes I’m just pointing out how the rebuttal will be portrayed in most of the media
think the top image is from Operation Jubilee (the Dieppe raid 1942) not Operation Overlord
And the award for unnecessary pedantry goes to...
Tom-B: Didn’t someone a few pages back claim that only left wing politicians get killed? Obviously it was a ridiculous statement anyway, but only took a day to age incredibly poorly given thatt a far right politician in Germany has been stabbed.
Poopscoop: Farage is lucky he is a far right politician it has to be said though. They get drink thrown at them, left wing politicians get stabbed and shot in the street.
Posted 22 hours ago
No Im no good at jokes I’m just pointing out how the rebuttal will be portrayed in most of the media
The BBC's political editor goes in studs-up -
"Mr Sunak sought to hammer home his claim Labour would hammer you for more tax, a suggestion it took Mr Starmer some time to dismiss as false."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmjjzxg7k6no
Bloody lefties!
The Tories are desperate to avoid the headline of failing to find candidates for every seat
https://twitter.com/tomorrowsmps/status/1798335719645335579
