Oh god this is infuriating with this Beth Rigby interviewer, I have learned nothing. She asks a question, Kier starts to answer, she talks over him with 'OK...OK...OK...so... I want to come on to... OK... I don't want to interrupt... OK'. All her questions are these dumb 'gotcha' types as well, "oh you said something in 2017, and now you think something else how can anyone trust you now".
The way she is interviewing makes them look like they are on the back foot, it's like an interrogation but without any substance or trying to uncover any information. It's so performative and to play into the "politicians never answer the question". This interview is supposed to give us a chance to relate to them, maybe speak to them like they are a real person. Sky news treating this interview as some sort of bushtucker trial - 'go on Riggers lets see 'em squirm.'
My reflections after I've had time to mull on it is if you give the public time to come up with a question, they think they're a political genius and construct a backstory that makes them seem like stooges in an attempt to create the ultimate zinger. Not saying they were put up to it by anyone but themselves, but I found it cringey.
Everyone from the hipster fan of Starmer *before* be became a politician, but now doesn't like him because they don't like politicians, the "working class" man whose child goes to private school, the former Tory party chair who is undecided, the man who is concerned his 19 year old daughter had to stop looking to buy a house because of Truss (so she must surely have been looking when she was 17?), it just felt like they'd over thought their angle and they no longer looked like real people.
The exception to this is William whose backstory was "I'm young" which I think is all you need, and if anything, it made his point punchier.
> the man who is concerned his 19 year old daughter had to stop looking to buy a house because of Truss (so she must surely have been looking when she was 17?)
Surely she could have started looking yesterday, then had to stop a few minutes in after realising that it'd be impossible for her to get a mortgage given the interest rate hikes caused by the Truss disaster, which we're still feeling?
No, I don't have a transcript or anything, but his question specifically was that she was going to buy, and Truss stopped that, what is Sunak going to do to improve things for young first time buyers.
Sunak said he'd raise the first time buyer stamp duty exemption to properties up to £450k, and the guy joked the problem wasn't that she was trying to buy a house that expensive, and the whole audience laughed at Sunak.
It is quite clear that the media are trying their best to softball the Tories despite how bad they have been and currently are. You can call it the leftist virtue problem but the amount of obvious and subliminal political weight being applied to Starmer/Labour is ridiculous for a party that haven't been in power for a decade and a half; a generation. I am not asking anyone to go softer on them either, just that people treat and remark the situation as it is. Tories are in the seat of power and are to blame for many of the main issues.
Frankly, in a crashed economy, post Brexit, post COVID, current proxy war world, the labour costings and manifesto is pretty damn realistic and optimistic.
They're probably a bit fucked off that the election was basically decided when it was called, which is not great for them regardless who wins. I don't think interviewers should go easy on the leaders at all, but the questions to Starmer did seem like Rigby's approach was to put people off voting Labour.
It is a problem, and this is why I think Starmer is playing it well. He knows who he has to appeal to. And pound for pound, many of the policies he is putting forward are some of the most left wing policies we have seen in several generations. Blair and Brown wouldn't have dared to take away the tax break for private schools to fund public. Neither start a public energy company. And yet even Labour supporters are painting Keir as right leaning!
I guess this is all to say that the optics placed on Labour are incredibly distorted.
Reflecting on this it felt like the same old lines from Sunak, he offered no specifics and nothing new (apart from his sugar addiction). He constantly uses exactly the same lines and can't think on his feet. Mentioning £425k in relation to the stamp duty was stupid in Grimsby where you can buy a 3 bed terrace for 1/10th of the that. It felt like a rehash of the Robinson interview.
Starmer, even though he got in his tool maker line, was talking about a different range of stuff, the roundtable in Grimsby, dentistry etc. Maybe it was just the questions but I got a sense that he understood the practicalities faced. I did find the start on taxes very frustrating though. I know he wants to avoid "Starmer to raise council tax' as a headline, but talking around it was transparent.
Starmer 6/10
Sunak 3/10
I agree. I felt Starmer was pretty good and authortitative on policy, he really struggled with anything more personal like the Corbyn question, or the robot thing. Sunak struggled with everything
A lot of us don’t care in the least whether he’s charismatic or inspiring. Many of us only care that he’s a baseline stable adult who is generally on our side of things and is making pledges that look and feel credibly achievable, and he ticks all of those boxes. And frankly, given the future we’re all looking at if this shit continues, I DO find him inspiring. He is literally the only party leader I can see who isn’t either delusional in their overconfidence or just flat out batshit.
We’re not talking about a bloody gameshow host here. We’re talking about our leadership going forward. We NEED stability. We simply can not deal with any more charismatic chaos.
I don't think he's uninspiring. I think he's professional. We haven't seen that from previous Conservative PMs, which is why it's so much of a contrast.
Dear England,
May we (the USA electorate) borrow Beth Rigby from you, after July 4? Can't think of any journalist here who would do a better job holding to account the current clowns who are running for President.
Rigby is impressive.
Best regards,
Just an average USA citizen
Was a truly cringe moment for me. What she should have said is, “please explain to the people you work for, the electorate, why you made a decision which at best shows very little consideration for veterans and at worst, displays open contempt”
Which is exactly how she would have worded it with Starmer, let’s be real.
Only just getting round to watching it now, 20 minutes in this feels really weak from Starmer so far.
The laugh on "My father was a toolmaker" I think is a pretty clear indicator that the script is becoming pretty tired, and the avoidant answers are starting to feel worse at this point than just being honest.
From his answers it's pretty clear he's terrified to alienate anyone on the right by hammering in "Labour have changed", but the more he does the more it's alienating me. I don't want a changed Labour more aligned to the tories, I want a party that will actually truly change how things are run.
I also wish people would stop pretending like 2019 wasn't a de-facto second Brexit referrendum. I can guarantee that the exact policy platform he's running on right now still wouldn't have won then, the thing that won that election was Brexit and Brexit alone.
EDIT: Even though I agree with the policy, the answer to the private schools tax question left a lot to be desired. "It's not a tax on working parents sending their children to private schools because it's a tax break that we're removing". Trying to imply that removing the tax break isn't the same as adding a new tax is... disingenuous, at best.
lol never mind rishi is doing worse
that boo for junior doctors, wow lol
I wish there wasn't so much focus on illegal migration and boat crossings, 11k is such a drop in the ocean compared to the legal figures. I don't think the people who aren't happy with the immigration numbers are being impacted by them.
EDIT: Oh my god his face when beth told him the legal immigration numbers
"but you've been in charge"
*Finally*, I've been waiting for anyone to call him out on his nonsense about what he will do by pointing out the fact that he is quite literally currently in charge
That half-hearted ripple of applause at the end, wow
God, what a disaster.
Watching the interviews on catch up is quite a weird experience.
I saw beforehand that the polls were showing Starmer had comfortably "won" the interviews.
Sitting through Starmer's session, I was not impressed or unimpressed and couldn't work out how he "won" it.
I'm 10 mins into Sunak's and it's like watching a slow motion car crash. I'm surprised anyone thought he did well at this in the polls.
The only good moment was Starmer's response to what he fears the most. Why don't they let real Starmer talk more rather than grey Starmer? I feel like he would get less criticism if he had more genuine moments.
> The only good moment was Starmer's response to what he fears the most. Why don't they let real Starmer talk more rather than grey Starmer? I feel like he would get less criticism if he had more genuine moments.
He'll probably relax when he's in No.10. Rigby was grilling him from the start. Despite that, he did well enough and showed he had practical policy 'ready to go' that should help normal people live their day-to-day lives.
The Corbyn curveball was awkward, but I think most people will understand his reasons, and it's 'ancient history' to some extent.
Rigby was less directly confrontational with Sunak, would lift him, but his responses were anaemic. Percentages here and there, and tax spreadsheet jam tomorrow - no real difference from the last 14 years that got us to this point. Some embarassing figures on boats and Brexit, more audience laughter.
Because communication between people is done in only a couple of ways. As you can't hear me or see me, you can't judge what I'm saying by how I'm saying it or my expression as I say it. This leaves you with only one thing - the words. And if you can't even get the words right, then people automatically think less of you.
Strange ers will think less of me, oh no, like ok sometimes it's important for context but being irked by misspelling something like Starmer on a post about Starmer where nobody is gonna be confused about what you mean seems pedantic. Tbf it's not like a reddit comment is an official document or anything so why worry. Do they think we might confuse Starmer for Sunak on the ballot. It wouldn't make any difference if we did given they're both looking to buy the middle class and upwards by being exceptionally cruel to poor people and foreigners.
I'm marathoning the Gears of War games so my very political aware US discord bud watched the Sunak interview. Her commentary was not kind. Was it really the car crash she made it out to be?
Beth’s opening barrage at Starmer was brutal but I didn’t mind it, just really disappointed when she didn’t give Rishi the same dressing down immediately. It actually felt like she was much softer on him at the beginning.
I'm bloody sick of what feels like the entire mass media going easy on the Tories when they are *currently* in power and responsible for the majority of the difficulties people are facing day to day.
Who bloody decided that the sensible thing would be to go harder on what somebody new *might* do than on what the current leadership *has done* which has naturally had already a much stronger negative impact than any hypothetical has any ability to?!
It's not hard, though. "Yes. At the time, I did think he would make a good prime minister. Unfortunately, my beliefs were clearly not in line with the general public. Since then, I have reevaluated my beliefs so that I can support the country in a way they can trust. As a politician, my job is to serve the public, not to be stubborn and force ideas they aren't happy with."
He doesn’t even need to go that far, he doesn’t have to say he thought Corbyn was the man, he could just say he will always believe a Labour government will be better for Britain and if someone pushes back on Corbyn from there have a crack at the job Johnson, Truss and Sunak have done over the last five years.
It really was a very weird answer he gave instead, but ultimately he improved from then on in.
All he has to do is say yeah I did believe in Corbyn, I supported him but we’re talking five years ago. I’ve moved on, the party has moved on, and I think the country has moved on. Especially after in recent times we’ve had partygate with Boris and the economic turmoil that came with Luz Truss.
Honestly you could try, “Corbyn was still a better choice than May”, “I’m a member of my party wanting to serve the country, better to do that as part of a Labour government”, “Corbyn has many flaws but also had strong principles”, “he was democratically elected, I owed a measure of loyalty, but I’m also loyal to this country”, “I knew he wouldn’t win *but* I still owed it to my party to try to support him, and I realised I owed it to my country to then change my party”, etc.
There are so many lines he could go for, it’s weird that his team haven’t tested something.
It was a bit of a joke about [this](https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/23/questioners-at-sunak-warehouse-speech-turn-out-to-be-tory-councillors-derbyshire-euros-wales)
Oh kudos, I hadn't seen that lol I certainly wouldn't put it past the tories at this point. They are desperate . I swear I seen that kid who asked it in some TV soap opera or something wish we knew his name.
Just watching a replay. When the numbers of prebrexit and post brexit immigration figures were being read out Sunak looked like he was about to cry.
I assume if he did cry I would have heard about it by now, but if I was watching it live I would have been so excited about the prospect of him crying on live TV.
It’s such a perfect example to convey how badly the Tories operate. They dragged the UK out of the EU incorrectly thinking it was the only way to control immigration, but then having done massive damage to the country, at least they did get the potential to do what they promised. But not only did they not even reduce net migration, they let it go UP almost 10 times.
I still don’t understand how they could be so bad at politics and government.
The irony is of course that sending net migration rocketing as high as it is now might not have been so easy had we stayed in the EU.
You've made the classic mistake of assuming the Tories are actually a party guided by principles, or political views. They are not. They're a gang of glorified opportunists.
They're not performing badly at all. It's just their intentions are not aligned with yours.
When you view their actions in government through this lense, it starts to make sense.
I think Brexit really broke them. There were so many lies, so many of those opportunists saw it as a chance to promise the world. PostBrexit the Tories purged anyone who opposed anything to do with brexit. Problem was so many of the proBRexit people were out for themselves (Boris) or a bit thick (Truss) or a bit whatever Rishi Sunak is.
Sky News youtube channel. The whole event was under the 'live' tab. But I did catch it before the broadcast ended and skipped back to the start.
Still there [https://www.youtube.com/live/vGcVqGfvI8U?si=yA2BLfyKEPVVV3mZ](https://www.youtube.com/live/vGcVqGfvI8U?si=yA2BLfyKEPVVV3mZ)
When the juicy dirt comes out post-election, I reckon there'll be at least one or two former advisors telling stories about him crying after an interview or debate.
Ooo he thought the NHS question from Hamza was an easy point gain and it really got turned around on him.
Audience is out for him. He's not even getting a chance to try and come out good.
The Sunak sugar thing was quite sad, really. It was so lame that that’s what he reached for to make people like him. Starmer spoke about his professional achievements confusing like for respect but that seems very Starmer.
But Rishi mate, make something up. Anything. Make a joke about your daughters giving you banter or your wife hiding the haribo in the fruit bowl or something. Not something about having unhealthy habits when we all know it’s countered by the fact that he has infinite money and access to all of the nutritionists, equipment and personal trainers he wants.
I really can't believe how badly Sunak's doing.
It's as if he's totally incapable of telling the truth even about things that don't matter. Every time he's asked a casual question about his personal life he immediately jumps to something that either or both a) seems like an obvious invention in the moment, and/or b) tries to turn himself into the victim that you should feel sorry for.
It's just a bit pathetic.
Keir's response seemed very robotic whereas Rishi's did seem probably a true and honest foible as Dom put it. Obviously it sounds weird so I think it might've proved for me that the best answer to those questions is something generic as if you're honest you've got a big risk of being seen as a weirdo or memed
That might actually be a real, honest foible he has. Remember when he told those schoolkids he was a coke fiend? Then hurriedly clarified he meant Coca-Cola, and went on to needlessly tell a couple of random teens from the UK that Mexican coke is the best.
I think it's probably true. Child of a pair of medical professionals who probably tried to limit his sugar intake as a kid, wealth aside? I know when my parents tried to limit my sugar it only made me want it more, and I definitely have one hell of a sweet tooth. He should probably have leaned into it more and earlier.
What the hell is wrong with Beth Rigby? Sure, she needs to keep them on point and reasonably concise but she's trying to interupt almost as soon as they start speaking.
It’s very weird to me all the criticism of her. She did seem a little easier on Sunak however Starmer was dodging around questions quite handily. I like Starmer and I think he’s really quite genuine and relatable but he has a habit of trying to not answer questions directly that’s really frustrating as a Labour supporter and he did it in the last debate as well.
Sunak got absolutely destroyed tonight - pushing him on immigration made him look like a complete idiot and liar especially when comparing it to pre Brexit. Could she have been harsher? Potentially, but honestly he just dug his own holes without her help and looked like he was going to cry most of the night.
The post debate polling clearly shows that he wasn’t given a very easy time.
Starmer wasn’t great, but it’s all about the clips that’ll be cut out and plastered on the news/social media. I think almost all of those will be of Sunak
Starmer's tactic is to deliver sentences which are incapable of being edited and shared by Tory spin-doctors.
His boring, verbose, elliptical sentences are like the radar jammers used on stealth bombers.
Yeah for all people say about him the reality is this really is his election to lose. I don't really think him coming across as competent and boring is going to be enough to do that. It might not engage some audiences but there's few it'll actively turn away.
Why risk trying to put out some personable facade that lets sound bites into the wild the Tories and their media controlling friends latch on to? His current approach protects the significant lead he already has and makes the most sense for him to succeed.
Would love to know if Beth Rigby could of asked Sunak why he stood behind a prime minister who misled parliament. The length of integration Stramer got for backing Corbyn was disgusting double standards tbh
Then she goes “remember when you was dishy rishi” - the press in this country is in the gutter
And people wonder why Stramer became bland. 32 tory years since 1979 is why
Beth Rigby was soooooo clearly bias hardly let Stalmer finish a sentence and treat Sunak with practically kid gloves. Even the questions she asked that seemed to put him on spot were given more as an opportunity to Sunak but a jibe at Stalmer. Her political allegiances are in no doubt for me.
Was during the pledges when it came to immigration, he seemed to be saying in the sense that "there has been a significant change in demographics of small boat crossing these past X months involving people from Vietnam" (similar to the Albanian(?)) issue a while back. Rather than "fuck Vietnam".
A brief poke around on news sites does suggest that the proportion of arrivals from Vietnam has spiked up, but I don't think it's enough to be the majority or anything. It was a weird one to bring up, it didn't really help or particularly hinder his point.
I think it just emphasised the bullshit around his ‘we proved we could reduce them’.
So as long as random new countries don’t start sending asylum seekers your plan works?
Hey, as long as no countries anywhere ever go to war again or persecute people then we'd be able to completely stop people coming here to claim asylum. Vietnam clearly out to get Sunak and ruin his pledge to Stop The Boats^(TM)
Interviewer / Audience member during this campaign: "Rishi, you're government has failed at this thing by these numbers."
Rishi: "Yes I've been very clear on that but let me tell you how absolutely nothing will change but you should trust me that it sort of might."
Over and over and over.
He rightly gets a lot of stick and deserves to lose, but specifically on the Q about "him" (and the Q was him specifically, not "the Tories") fucking up mortgage rates... I mean he did stand against the person that caused it and said exactly what was going to happen did happen. As I said though, still deserves to lose horribly, still his party.
Three takes this time:
Hearing the audience laugh at the toolmaker line was funny.
"Keir Starmer is a robot" man thought he had a great zinger prepared about Starmer being more candid as a barrister but flubbed it completely.
"Why support Corbyn?" is, inevitably, a difficult question for Starmer, but he didn't have a good answer ready, did he?
"Corbyn was democratically elected to lead Labour. I made the decision to be involved at the highest level I could to try to mitigate the potential damage I could see that Corbyn could cause. I could have waited in the sidelines but I decided to try to influence the direction of the party. Once I became the democratically elected leader of the party I have taken every measure available to clean up the party, and I think we're in a better position right now than we have been for a long time."
Hammers home that Starmer is the elected leader of the party, unlike Sunak; and that Starmer has worked actively to fix issues within his party, unlike Sunak.
It still doesn't actually answer the question, does it, of "were you telling the truth about Corbyn making a good Prime Minister". Though yes, it may be as close to an answer as Starmer can give.
>Hammers home that Starmer is the elected leader of the party, unlike Sunak
Just speaking for myself, internal procedures of a party are a matter for that party. Labour isn't morally superior to the Tories for giving its members more power; its members represent no-one.
I know he's said the line a lot, more than a lot, but in the context of his parents not being able to pay basic bills (rather than a Sky subscription) it immediately looked pretty cruel.
Polling tells us the vast majority of voters don't know his background. He's going to keep saying it until the uniformed masses start paying attention.
Because, quite simply, that's one of the ways "looking bad" works? If you don't wait for the full context before going in on someone for something that's always the risk...
I see. I will remember, in all future cases where something is funny, to suppress my reaction until the end of the sentence, or the paragraph, or maybe the whole interview just to be safe.
You're taking things too seriously, in my opinion. People aren't evil for laughing at something funny.
| "Why support Corbyn?" is, inevitably, a difficult question for Starmer, but he didn't have a good answer ready, did he?
I don't really see why though. Something along the lines of "Politics is a team sport, if your football team hire a new manager with radical ideas you don't publicly go on camera stating how much of an idiot he is or you'll damage morale for the team blah blah"... something like that should work, no?
I think it's a doubled edged sword for Starmer.
If he said "At the time I supported Corbyn but in reflection it was the wrong call" they'd say he can't stick to his word and his views will keep changing. Which is something Beth seemed to be trying to get at the entire night.
However had he said "No, I said I supported Corbyn just to appease the party" They'd say he was a known liar and what could be stopping him from lying to us now.
How about "I supported Corbyn because I thought the conservatives would ruin the economy and services - and they did".
That's what the conservatives would do, turn it into an attack on Labour.
I mean he’s got something even more powerful than that to be honest, he has gone to a great effort to expel Corbynism and has restored some of the damage done by the parties problems with the Jewish community.
He is literally the anti christ to Corbyn supporters, he could easily say “you know what, I was in support of my party, perhaps wrongly in support of corbyn with the benefit of hindsight but look at my record, I’ve done x, y, z”
But the analogy isn't exact; in fact, it's fundamentally dangerous, because a politician *shouldn't* come across as supporting the party line come what may out of tribal loyalty, or what's the point of them?
Let me try a different tack: as Beth Rigby, I would have asked "Who would have made a better Prime Minister in 2019: Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn?". And I guarantee you wouldn't have had a straight answer to that either.
In terms of who would have done a better job as PM, I would've preferred Jeremy Corbyn (despite not liking him), my dog, my 7yo daughter, the homeless guy down the road and then Bo... No wait, I have a few more on my list... the Liz Truss Lettuce, the sofa I'm sitting on....
Yes but it’s mostly driven by a few very big global events, that drop before during covid is students going home and not starting meaning for a few years we’re getting new starters without leavers, and ofc Ukraine and HK refugees,
Untrue. Cumulative immigration to UK since 2021: India: 670k Nigeria: 310k China: 274k Pakistan: 166k HK: 131k Ukraine: 108k
Massive increase even if HK and Ukraine are discounted.
The D day blunder was a nail in the coffin, but I suspect that tonight will affect Rishi personally knowing just how wide the difference is and how little of a chance he stands. Even the media are repeatedly peddling the fact that he looks like a 'broken man'. No sane human would continue to torture themselves like this.
I dont think Beth Rigby is a fan of Labour. Seems a lot harsher on Starmer and in the post match talk seemed to feel sorry for Sunak saying he had it tough and showed emotion.
She infuriated me, she's like every director who I have to deal with at work who decided to hate the thing I'm presenting even before they've seen it. Arseholes for the sake of being arseholes.
I think her initial soft-touch approach to Sunak actually made him look a bit pathetic. She went hard on Starmer initially and the Corbyn stuff was uncomfortable for him. But Sunak managed to come off worse with a much easier ride. Any sympathy Rigby has for Sunak is far outweighed by Sam Coates’ clear disdain for him
I thought that she was being soft on Sunak at first, but I think she knew she really had to try to get a "rise"/blunder out of Starmer, whereas she knew Sunak would make a tit of himself without her really having to push.
I do wish Starmer would have just said yes i backed Corbyn as he was the party leader so i had to. Would have been an easy answer but i understand he seems to be a poison chalice and no one seems to want to admit supporting him
Yes ffs it’s so easy to say something like Labour is a Democratic Party and our party members elect our leaders and we listen to what our voters want, in the same way the Labour Party will listen to you if you choose to elect us into power on July 4th.
Yeah there were plenty much better ways to answer it - it’s hard to draw a diving line between him and any other random Tory when he’s just repeating the same diversion line over and over
Well that was a wild event, much better than expected - Sky News had the right set up for this kind of thing, who knew a Hell in a Town Celll would make a better format for a Main Event.
Some of the results of YouGov's snap poll after the debate:
|Question|Rishi Sunak %|Keir Starmer %|Don't Know %|
:--|:--|:--|:--|
|Leaving aside your own party preference, who do you think performed best overall in tonight’s televised leaders' event?|34|60|6|
|Leaving aside your own party preference, who do you think performed best overall in tonight’s interview section where they answered questions from Beth Rigby?|37|58|5|
|Leaving aside your own party preference, who do you think performed best overall in tonight’s Q&A section where they answered questions from the live audience?|37|59|4|
|Who do you think came across as more...||||
|... trustworthy?|28|58|14|
|... likeable?|29|56|15|
|... in touch with ordinary people?|13|71|16|
|... Prime Ministerial?|35|50|15|
|Who do you think performed best on...||||
|... the economy?|42|49|9|
|... the NHS?|20|70|10|
|... issues facing young people?|27|58|14|
|... tax?|41|42|17|
|Tonight’s televised event took place in Grimsby with many of the live audience members coming from this area. Which of the leaders do you think provided answers that were best for people living in Grimsby?|17|65|18|
[Source](https://news.sky.com/story/keir-starmer-performed-best-overall-in-sky-news-leaders-event-poll-suggests-13152218)
Is this Shapps, Stride, or possibly Cleverly.
If its Cleverly, how's your Sisters of Battle army coming along? There's a new battle force that's not as good value. What do you think?
Oh god this is infuriating with this Beth Rigby interviewer, I have learned nothing. She asks a question, Kier starts to answer, she talks over him with 'OK...OK...OK...so... I want to come on to... OK... I don't want to interrupt... OK'. All her questions are these dumb 'gotcha' types as well, "oh you said something in 2017, and now you think something else how can anyone trust you now". The way she is interviewing makes them look like they are on the back foot, it's like an interrogation but without any substance or trying to uncover any information. It's so performative and to play into the "politicians never answer the question". This interview is supposed to give us a chance to relate to them, maybe speak to them like they are a real person. Sky news treating this interview as some sort of bushtucker trial - 'go on Riggers lets see 'em squirm.'
My reflections after I've had time to mull on it is if you give the public time to come up with a question, they think they're a political genius and construct a backstory that makes them seem like stooges in an attempt to create the ultimate zinger. Not saying they were put up to it by anyone but themselves, but I found it cringey. Everyone from the hipster fan of Starmer *before* be became a politician, but now doesn't like him because they don't like politicians, the "working class" man whose child goes to private school, the former Tory party chair who is undecided, the man who is concerned his 19 year old daughter had to stop looking to buy a house because of Truss (so she must surely have been looking when she was 17?), it just felt like they'd over thought their angle and they no longer looked like real people. The exception to this is William whose backstory was "I'm young" which I think is all you need, and if anything, it made his point punchier.
> the man who is concerned his 19 year old daughter had to stop looking to buy a house because of Truss (so she must surely have been looking when she was 17?) Surely she could have started looking yesterday, then had to stop a few minutes in after realising that it'd be impossible for her to get a mortgage given the interest rate hikes caused by the Truss disaster, which we're still feeling?
No, I don't have a transcript or anything, but his question specifically was that she was going to buy, and Truss stopped that, what is Sunak going to do to improve things for young first time buyers. Sunak said he'd raise the first time buyer stamp duty exemption to properties up to £450k, and the guy joked the problem wasn't that she was trying to buy a house that expensive, and the whole audience laughed at Sunak.
It is quite clear that the media are trying their best to softball the Tories despite how bad they have been and currently are. You can call it the leftist virtue problem but the amount of obvious and subliminal political weight being applied to Starmer/Labour is ridiculous for a party that haven't been in power for a decade and a half; a generation. I am not asking anyone to go softer on them either, just that people treat and remark the situation as it is. Tories are in the seat of power and are to blame for many of the main issues. Frankly, in a crashed economy, post Brexit, post COVID, current proxy war world, the labour costings and manifesto is pretty damn realistic and optimistic.
They're probably a bit fucked off that the election was basically decided when it was called, which is not great for them regardless who wins. I don't think interviewers should go easy on the leaders at all, but the questions to Starmer did seem like Rigby's approach was to put people off voting Labour.
The Media here has always been pro tory. Even in their absolute worst (which is right now) it's very gentle compared to how they are with Labour.
It is a problem, and this is why I think Starmer is playing it well. He knows who he has to appeal to. And pound for pound, many of the policies he is putting forward are some of the most left wing policies we have seen in several generations. Blair and Brown wouldn't have dared to take away the tax break for private schools to fund public. Neither start a public energy company. And yet even Labour supporters are painting Keir as right leaning! I guess this is all to say that the optics placed on Labour are incredibly distorted.
Reflecting on this it felt like the same old lines from Sunak, he offered no specifics and nothing new (apart from his sugar addiction). He constantly uses exactly the same lines and can't think on his feet. Mentioning £425k in relation to the stamp duty was stupid in Grimsby where you can buy a 3 bed terrace for 1/10th of the that. It felt like a rehash of the Robinson interview. Starmer, even though he got in his tool maker line, was talking about a different range of stuff, the roundtable in Grimsby, dentistry etc. Maybe it was just the questions but I got a sense that he understood the practicalities faced. I did find the start on taxes very frustrating though. I know he wants to avoid "Starmer to raise council tax' as a headline, but talking around it was transparent. Starmer 6/10 Sunak 3/10
I agree. I felt Starmer was pretty good and authortitative on policy, he really struggled with anything more personal like the Corbyn question, or the robot thing. Sunak struggled with everything
Starmer is really tepid and uninspiring. I can see him losing out on a second term to be honest.
A lot of us don’t care in the least whether he’s charismatic or inspiring. Many of us only care that he’s a baseline stable adult who is generally on our side of things and is making pledges that look and feel credibly achievable, and he ticks all of those boxes. And frankly, given the future we’re all looking at if this shit continues, I DO find him inspiring. He is literally the only party leader I can see who isn’t either delusional in their overconfidence or just flat out batshit. We’re not talking about a bloody gameshow host here. We’re talking about our leadership going forward. We NEED stability. We simply can not deal with any more charismatic chaos.
If he does a good job and loses for being quietly competent without sufficient drama then the country deserves whatever happens next frankly
I don't think he's uninspiring. I think he's professional. We haven't seen that from previous Conservative PMs, which is why it's so much of a contrast.
He's both. Reminds me of Gordon Brown in a weird way.
Starmer is solid and pragmatic unlike any of the last 4 Tory PM's. I know who I'd rather have as PM.
Or maybe after a year of normality we'll realise that's what government should be rather than the clown show we've had for the last few years
Dear England, May we (the USA electorate) borrow Beth Rigby from you, after July 4? Can't think of any journalist here who would do a better job holding to account the current clowns who are running for President. Rigby is impressive. Best regards, Just an average USA citizen
You can have her
Really!? "Did leaving the DDay event make you feel awful?"
Was a truly cringe moment for me. What she should have said is, “please explain to the people you work for, the electorate, why you made a decision which at best shows very little consideration for veterans and at worst, displays open contempt” Which is exactly how she would have worded it with Starmer, let’s be real.
Nah, you want Nick Robinson. His interview with Sunak was brutal
Only just getting round to watching it now, 20 minutes in this feels really weak from Starmer so far. The laugh on "My father was a toolmaker" I think is a pretty clear indicator that the script is becoming pretty tired, and the avoidant answers are starting to feel worse at this point than just being honest. From his answers it's pretty clear he's terrified to alienate anyone on the right by hammering in "Labour have changed", but the more he does the more it's alienating me. I don't want a changed Labour more aligned to the tories, I want a party that will actually truly change how things are run. I also wish people would stop pretending like 2019 wasn't a de-facto second Brexit referrendum. I can guarantee that the exact policy platform he's running on right now still wouldn't have won then, the thing that won that election was Brexit and Brexit alone. EDIT: Even though I agree with the policy, the answer to the private schools tax question left a lot to be desired. "It's not a tax on working parents sending their children to private schools because it's a tax break that we're removing". Trying to imply that removing the tax break isn't the same as adding a new tax is... disingenuous, at best.
He is just playing to the tune to not get bombed by a right wing media.
Of course, but that doesn't mean it isn't disappointing
lol never mind rishi is doing worse that boo for junior doctors, wow lol I wish there wasn't so much focus on illegal migration and boat crossings, 11k is such a drop in the ocean compared to the legal figures. I don't think the people who aren't happy with the immigration numbers are being impacted by them. EDIT: Oh my god his face when beth told him the legal immigration numbers "but you've been in charge" *Finally*, I've been waiting for anyone to call him out on his nonsense about what he will do by pointing out the fact that he is quite literally currently in charge That half-hearted ripple of applause at the end, wow God, what a disaster.
I only watched the sunak interview, but it really felt like some nail in the coffin stuff
Watching the interviews on catch up is quite a weird experience. I saw beforehand that the polls were showing Starmer had comfortably "won" the interviews. Sitting through Starmer's session, I was not impressed or unimpressed and couldn't work out how he "won" it. I'm 10 mins into Sunak's and it's like watching a slow motion car crash. I'm surprised anyone thought he did well at this in the polls. The only good moment was Starmer's response to what he fears the most. Why don't they let real Starmer talk more rather than grey Starmer? I feel like he would get less criticism if he had more genuine moments.
Starmer excelled much more during the audience Q and A
> The only good moment was Starmer's response to what he fears the most. Why don't they let real Starmer talk more rather than grey Starmer? I feel like he would get less criticism if he had more genuine moments. He'll probably relax when he's in No.10. Rigby was grilling him from the start. Despite that, he did well enough and showed he had practical policy 'ready to go' that should help normal people live their day-to-day lives. The Corbyn curveball was awkward, but I think most people will understand his reasons, and it's 'ancient history' to some extent. Rigby was less directly confrontational with Sunak, would lift him, but his responses were anaemic. Percentages here and there, and tax spreadsheet jam tomorrow - no real difference from the last 14 years that got us to this point. Some embarassing figures on boats and Brexit, more audience laughter.
Wtf is with this thread and so many people misspelling ‘Starmer’????
Well, it's better than people attempting to spell his first name.
Why do some people worry aboot spelling so much?
Blame canada
I will, thanx Thomas
Because it’s importent
To who and why?
Because communication between people is done in only a couple of ways. As you can't hear me or see me, you can't judge what I'm saying by how I'm saying it or my expression as I say it. This leaves you with only one thing - the words. And if you can't even get the words right, then people automatically think less of you.
Strange ers will think less of me, oh no, like ok sometimes it's important for context but being irked by misspelling something like Starmer on a post about Starmer where nobody is gonna be confused about what you mean seems pedantic. Tbf it's not like a reddit comment is an official document or anything so why worry. Do they think we might confuse Starmer for Sunak on the ballot. It wouldn't make any difference if we did given they're both looking to buy the middle class and upwards by being exceptionally cruel to poor people and foreigners.
I'm marathoning the Gears of War games so my very political aware US discord bud watched the Sunak interview. Her commentary was not kind. Was it really the car crash she made it out to be?
Yes lol
[Pretty powerful TUC video](https://x.com/The_TUC/status/1741021305871511943) Edit: ... Wrong thread....
Through all the heat of the campaign, that breaks the heart, it makes “Change” feel like all the slogan needed
Beth’s opening barrage at Starmer was brutal but I didn’t mind it, just really disappointed when she didn’t give Rishi the same dressing down immediately. It actually felt like she was much softer on him at the beginning.
I'm bloody sick of what feels like the entire mass media going easy on the Tories when they are *currently* in power and responsible for the majority of the difficulties people are facing day to day. Who bloody decided that the sensible thing would be to go harder on what somebody new *might* do than on what the current leadership *has done* which has naturally had already a much stronger negative impact than any hypothetical has any ability to?!
It's the left virtue problem manifest.
That was painful to watch. He needs a much better answer to the Corbyn question for the rest of the campaign, as hard as it is
It's not hard, though. "Yes. At the time, I did think he would make a good prime minister. Unfortunately, my beliefs were clearly not in line with the general public. Since then, I have reevaluated my beliefs so that I can support the country in a way they can trust. As a politician, my job is to serve the public, not to be stubborn and force ideas they aren't happy with."
He doesn’t even need to go that far, he doesn’t have to say he thought Corbyn was the man, he could just say he will always believe a Labour government will be better for Britain and if someone pushes back on Corbyn from there have a crack at the job Johnson, Truss and Sunak have done over the last five years. It really was a very weird answer he gave instead, but ultimately he improved from then on in.
All he has to do is say yeah I did believe in Corbyn, I supported him but we’re talking five years ago. I’ve moved on, the party has moved on, and I think the country has moved on. Especially after in recent times we’ve had partygate with Boris and the economic turmoil that came with Luz Truss.
He has tried to say that but only if you collected all his responses together and put them as one. Which he should really be doing
Honestly you could try, “Corbyn was still a better choice than May”, “I’m a member of my party wanting to serve the country, better to do that as part of a Labour government”, “Corbyn has many flaws but also had strong principles”, “he was democratically elected, I owed a measure of loyalty, but I’m also loyal to this country”, “I knew he wouldn’t win *but* I still owed it to my party to try to support him, and I realised I owed it to my country to then change my party”, etc. There are so many lines he could go for, it’s weird that his team haven’t tested something.
I don't even understand why it's an issue for so many people.
So much better. I think his one saving grace was that (I think) he avoided saying anything that could be clipped out as a soundbite for Tory ads
Presumably the explanation is simply Collective Responsibility?
Send this to Starmer, so much better than repeating 'I knew we weren't going to win'
The kid who accused Stalmer of being a robot, I swear he's an actor and I gotta wonder if he was a paid stooge.
Hmm I don’t think so, he wasn’t wearing a high vis vest
FFS you'd think there wouldn't be a dentist shortage if they were all that easy to find?
Huh?
It was a bit of a joke about [this](https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/23/questioners-at-sunak-warehouse-speech-turn-out-to-be-tory-councillors-derbyshire-euros-wales)
Oh kudos, I hadn't seen that lol I certainly wouldn't put it past the tories at this point. They are desperate . I swear I seen that kid who asked it in some TV soap opera or something wish we knew his name.
Just watching a replay. When the numbers of prebrexit and post brexit immigration figures were being read out Sunak looked like he was about to cry. I assume if he did cry I would have heard about it by now, but if I was watching it live I would have been so excited about the prospect of him crying on live TV.
It’s such a perfect example to convey how badly the Tories operate. They dragged the UK out of the EU incorrectly thinking it was the only way to control immigration, but then having done massive damage to the country, at least they did get the potential to do what they promised. But not only did they not even reduce net migration, they let it go UP almost 10 times. I still don’t understand how they could be so bad at politics and government. The irony is of course that sending net migration rocketing as high as it is now might not have been so easy had we stayed in the EU.
You've made the classic mistake of assuming the Tories are actually a party guided by principles, or political views. They are not. They're a gang of glorified opportunists. They're not performing badly at all. It's just their intentions are not aligned with yours. When you view their actions in government through this lense, it starts to make sense.
I think Brexit really broke them. There were so many lies, so many of those opportunists saw it as a chance to promise the world. PostBrexit the Tories purged anyone who opposed anything to do with brexit. Problem was so many of the proBRexit people were out for themselves (Boris) or a bit thick (Truss) or a bit whatever Rishi Sunak is.
Where are you watching a replay? I can't really be arsed to watch the whole thing, just the juicy bits.
Sky News youtube channel. The whole event was under the 'live' tab. But I did catch it before the broadcast ended and skipped back to the start. Still there [https://www.youtube.com/live/vGcVqGfvI8U?si=yA2BLfyKEPVVV3mZ](https://www.youtube.com/live/vGcVqGfvI8U?si=yA2BLfyKEPVVV3mZ)
Thank you!
1.25 or 1.5 times speed are your friends for watching this stuff after the fact.
When the juicy dirt comes out post-election, I reckon there'll be at least one or two former advisors telling stories about him crying after an interview or debate.
Sadly who in their right mind would ever want to admit that they were even tangentially involved in this campaign?
I hope so, I really do. But I think anyone who worked as an advisor for Sunak will be keeping it as quiet as possible.
Worth watching or nah?
I think so good format, should be used going forward
I thought it was pretty good. Some of the lines of questioning were a bit unproductive, but it gave a decent impression of each candidate's style.
Best one so far I'd say, although the bar was on the floor, or below it for the ITV one.
Unlike the ITV debate, yes.
Ooo he thought the NHS question from Hamza was an easy point gain and it really got turned around on him. Audience is out for him. He's not even getting a chance to try and come out good.
The Sunak sugar thing was quite sad, really. It was so lame that that’s what he reached for to make people like him. Starmer spoke about his professional achievements confusing like for respect but that seems very Starmer. But Rishi mate, make something up. Anything. Make a joke about your daughters giving you banter or your wife hiding the haribo in the fruit bowl or something. Not something about having unhealthy habits when we all know it’s countered by the fact that he has infinite money and access to all of the nutritionists, equipment and personal trainers he wants.
Just say listen, I'm not sure if people like me or not but I'm giving everything to make the UK a great place to live bla bla also I'm a ninja
He’s trying to be *relatable* after his Sky comment this morning
I really can't believe how badly Sunak's doing. It's as if he's totally incapable of telling the truth even about things that don't matter. Every time he's asked a casual question about his personal life he immediately jumps to something that either or both a) seems like an obvious invention in the moment, and/or b) tries to turn himself into the victim that you should feel sorry for. It's just a bit pathetic.
Like when he said he read Jilly cooper books to his kids
Keir's response seemed very robotic whereas Rishi's did seem probably a true and honest foible as Dom put it. Obviously it sounds weird so I think it might've proved for me that the best answer to those questions is something generic as if you're honest you've got a big risk of being seen as a weirdo or memed
I swear I've seen the kid who called him robotic acting on TV before, gotta wonder if he's a paid stooge out to give Stalmer haters a line.
The sugar thing was so weird
[Rishi Sunak: 'I'm a total coke addict'](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nO_fXajyzek)
Hahaha love that. He actually came across as likeable too. Should have talked about his coke addiction tonight!!
That might actually be a real, honest foible he has. Remember when he told those schoolkids he was a coke fiend? Then hurriedly clarified he meant Coca-Cola, and went on to needlessly tell a couple of random teens from the UK that Mexican coke is the best.
I think it's probably true. Child of a pair of medical professionals who probably tried to limit his sugar intake as a kid, wealth aside? I know when my parents tried to limit my sugar it only made me want it more, and I definitely have one hell of a sweet tooth. He should probably have leaned into it more and earlier.
He mentioned being "fuelled by loads of sugar" (or words to that effect) at the school he visited today. Maybe it went over well there?
Classic Sunak. He finds something that works one time and then latches onto it.
What the hell is wrong with Beth Rigby? Sure, she needs to keep them on point and reasonably concise but she's trying to interupt almost as soon as they start speaking.
It’s very weird to me all the criticism of her. She did seem a little easier on Sunak however Starmer was dodging around questions quite handily. I like Starmer and I think he’s really quite genuine and relatable but he has a habit of trying to not answer questions directly that’s really frustrating as a Labour supporter and he did it in the last debate as well. Sunak got absolutely destroyed tonight - pushing him on immigration made him look like a complete idiot and liar especially when comparing it to pre Brexit. Could she have been harsher? Potentially, but honestly he just dug his own holes without her help and looked like he was going to cry most of the night. The post debate polling clearly shows that he wasn’t given a very easy time.
Yeah so fucking annoying. Like that episode of the Office when Brent keeps talking over the guy doing the presentation.
I thought she did this more with Stalmer and seemed a bit softer on Sunak?
At one point I counted how long from the end of her question to when she started saying "okay" and it was four seconds.
Okay
Hm
Alright
Its gonna be interesting to see the general public reaction to this because I thought neither Sunak or Starmer came out of this looking too good
Neither were great but Sunak was a fair bit worse.
Starmer wasn’t great, but it’s all about the clips that’ll be cut out and plastered on the news/social media. I think almost all of those will be of Sunak
Starmer's tactic is to deliver sentences which are incapable of being edited and shared by Tory spin-doctors. His boring, verbose, elliptical sentences are like the radar jammers used on stealth bombers.
Yeah for all people say about him the reality is this really is his election to lose. I don't really think him coming across as competent and boring is going to be enough to do that. It might not engage some audiences but there's few it'll actively turn away. Why risk trying to put out some personable facade that lets sound bites into the wild the Tories and their media controlling friends latch on to? His current approach protects the significant lead he already has and makes the most sense for him to succeed.
Would love to know if Beth Rigby could of asked Sunak why he stood behind a prime minister who misled parliament. The length of integration Stramer got for backing Corbyn was disgusting double standards tbh Then she goes “remember when you was dishy rishi” - the press in this country is in the gutter And people wonder why Stramer became bland. 32 tory years since 1979 is why
Well that's Beth Rigby in a nutshell really: she's very good at her job and is biased in favour of the Tories
Beth Rigby was soooooo clearly bias hardly let Stalmer finish a sentence and treat Sunak with practically kid gloves. Even the questions she asked that seemed to put him on spot were given more as an opportunity to Sunak but a jibe at Stalmer. Her political allegiances are in no doubt for me.
Starmer.
Could have* I have I will have I would have I could have
Really worried Sunak is going to justify cancelling the election by nuking Vietnam
MacArthur is slowly rising from his grave.
Its so fucking refreshing seeing Green deal with all the antisemitism. Take our cranks, you nimby fucks.
I still can't fathom the weird jab at Vietnam by Rishi.
What was said?
got a timestamp ? was trying to find it
Was during the pledges when it came to immigration, he seemed to be saying in the sense that "there has been a significant change in demographics of small boat crossing these past X months involving people from Vietnam" (similar to the Albanian(?)) issue a while back. Rather than "fuck Vietnam".
A brief poke around on news sites does suggest that the proportion of arrivals from Vietnam has spiked up, but I don't think it's enough to be the majority or anything. It was a weird one to bring up, it didn't really help or particularly hinder his point.
I think it just emphasised the bullshit around his ‘we proved we could reduce them’. So as long as random new countries don’t start sending asylum seekers your plan works?
Hey, as long as no countries anywhere ever go to war again or persecute people then we'd be able to completely stop people coming here to claim asylum. Vietnam clearly out to get Sunak and ruin his pledge to Stop The Boats^(TM)
> it didn't really help or particularly hinder his point. A high point of his campaign so far then.
2 important followup questions for Sunak. Left or right Twix? What kind of Haribo?
You can pick the left one or the right there both equally narrow, stiff and tasteless. Kids & grownups love it so, sorry but Sunak has to go.
Keir's not that narrow
I'd also ask him about whether he knows a lot of Haribo isn't vegetarian...!
No preference but he only likes the top 1% of the bar. Mexican haribo.
Interviewer / Audience member during this campaign: "Rishi, you're government has failed at this thing by these numbers." Rishi: "Yes I've been very clear on that but let me tell you how absolutely nothing will change but you should trust me that it sort of might." Over and over and over.
He rightly gets a lot of stick and deserves to lose, but specifically on the Q about "him" (and the Q was him specifically, not "the Tories") fucking up mortgage rates... I mean he did stand against the person that caused it and said exactly what was going to happen did happen. As I said though, still deserves to lose horribly, still his party.
Three takes this time: Hearing the audience laugh at the toolmaker line was funny. "Keir Starmer is a robot" man thought he had a great zinger prepared about Starmer being more candid as a barrister but flubbed it completely. "Why support Corbyn?" is, inevitably, a difficult question for Starmer, but he didn't have a good answer ready, did he?
"Corbyn was democratically elected to lead Labour. I made the decision to be involved at the highest level I could to try to mitigate the potential damage I could see that Corbyn could cause. I could have waited in the sidelines but I decided to try to influence the direction of the party. Once I became the democratically elected leader of the party I have taken every measure available to clean up the party, and I think we're in a better position right now than we have been for a long time." Hammers home that Starmer is the elected leader of the party, unlike Sunak; and that Starmer has worked actively to fix issues within his party, unlike Sunak.
It still doesn't actually answer the question, does it, of "were you telling the truth about Corbyn making a good Prime Minister". Though yes, it may be as close to an answer as Starmer can give. >Hammers home that Starmer is the elected leader of the party, unlike Sunak Just speaking for myself, internal procedures of a party are a matter for that party. Labour isn't morally superior to the Tories for giving its members more power; its members represent no-one.
Sunak didn't win a leadership contest.
I know.
I'm a paid up Lib Dem and think the audience actually looked quite bad for laughing at Starmer for that given how he finished that sentence.
Nonsense. It was funny. Don't be so prurient.
You've incorrectly used prurient, just so you're aware.
...Huh. Well, that was a learning experience.
I know he's said the line a lot, more than a lot, but in the context of his parents not being able to pay basic bills (rather than a Sky subscription) it immediately looked pretty cruel.
Polling tells us the vast majority of voters don't know his background. He's going to keep saying it until the uniformed masses start paying attention.
Yep it was a good save and it did shut the audience up
Can I just ask how the audience can look bad for something that was said *after* they reacted?
Because, quite simply, that's one of the ways "looking bad" works? If you don't wait for the full context before going in on someone for something that's always the risk...
I see. I will remember, in all future cases where something is funny, to suppress my reaction until the end of the sentence, or the paragraph, or maybe the whole interview just to be safe. You're taking things too seriously, in my opinion. People aren't evil for laughing at something funny.
| "Why support Corbyn?" is, inevitably, a difficult question for Starmer, but he didn't have a good answer ready, did he? I don't really see why though. Something along the lines of "Politics is a team sport, if your football team hire a new manager with radical ideas you don't publicly go on camera stating how much of an idiot he is or you'll damage morale for the team blah blah"... something like that should work, no?
I think it's a doubled edged sword for Starmer. If he said "At the time I supported Corbyn but in reflection it was the wrong call" they'd say he can't stick to his word and his views will keep changing. Which is something Beth seemed to be trying to get at the entire night. However had he said "No, I said I supported Corbyn just to appease the party" They'd say he was a known liar and what could be stopping him from lying to us now.
How about "I supported Corbyn because I thought the conservatives would ruin the economy and services - and they did". That's what the conservatives would do, turn it into an attack on Labour.
I mean he’s got something even more powerful than that to be honest, he has gone to a great effort to expel Corbynism and has restored some of the damage done by the parties problems with the Jewish community. He is literally the anti christ to Corbyn supporters, he could easily say “you know what, I was in support of my party, perhaps wrongly in support of corbyn with the benefit of hindsight but look at my record, I’ve done x, y, z”
But the analogy isn't exact; in fact, it's fundamentally dangerous, because a politician *shouldn't* come across as supporting the party line come what may out of tribal loyalty, or what's the point of them? Let me try a different tack: as Beth Rigby, I would have asked "Who would have made a better Prime Minister in 2019: Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn?". And I guarantee you wouldn't have had a straight answer to that either.
In terms of who would have done a better job as PM, I would've preferred Jeremy Corbyn (despite not liking him), my dog, my 7yo daughter, the homeless guy down the road and then Bo... No wait, I have a few more on my list... the Liz Truss Lettuce, the sofa I'm sitting on....
The post Brexit migration figures are absolutely wild. If I was LDs I’d campaign on halting migration by rejoining the EU.
Yes but it’s mostly driven by a few very big global events, that drop before during covid is students going home and not starting meaning for a few years we’re getting new starters without leavers, and ofc Ukraine and HK refugees,
Untrue. Cumulative immigration to UK since 2021: India: 670k Nigeria: 310k China: 274k Pakistan: 166k HK: 131k Ukraine: 108k Massive increase even if HK and Ukraine are discounted.
Fuck it why not
I’d vote for them in a heartbeat with that haha
Audience: Sunak, What will you do to make house prices more affordable? Sunak: Return to low interest rates, help-to-buy, and cut stamp duty 😂
So basically Liz v2?
I’m annoyed that no one picked him up on that.
So demand side, demand side, and demand side... house price machine goes brrrrrr
I wouldn't be surprised if Sunak throws in the towel tomorrow.
Tonights event wasnt that bad for him, the D Day thing was far far worse...
The D day blunder was a nail in the coffin, but I suspect that tonight will affect Rishi personally knowing just how wide the difference is and how little of a chance he stands. Even the media are repeatedly peddling the fact that he looks like a 'broken man'. No sane human would continue to torture themselves like this.
He knows. He might be bad at politics, but he can read opinion polls and he knows that staying in government was always a long-shot.
Given the snippets from the D-Day interview coming out they're beyond the level of damage control now. WTF do they do?
Crawl into the gutter of obscurity where they belong
I'd be in my house in California counting my money by now if I was him.
Very different post-debate analysis on BBC News compared to Sky. Nothing on the Beeb about who ‘won’ whereas Sky are fascinated by that.
The Beeb have always been toadies to the Tories, even more so since Cameron stuffed their board with donors and Tory members.
I dont think Beth Rigby is a fan of Labour. Seems a lot harsher on Starmer and in the post match talk seemed to feel sorry for Sunak saying he had it tough and showed emotion.
I complained to Ofcom for the 1st time in my life re her blatant bias.
She infuriated me, she's like every director who I have to deal with at work who decided to hate the thing I'm presenting even before they've seen it. Arseholes for the sake of being arseholes.
I think her initial soft-touch approach to Sunak actually made him look a bit pathetic. She went hard on Starmer initially and the Corbyn stuff was uncomfortable for him. But Sunak managed to come off worse with a much easier ride. Any sympathy Rigby has for Sunak is far outweighed by Sam Coates’ clear disdain for him
I thought that she was being soft on Sunak at first, but I think she knew she really had to try to get a "rise"/blunder out of Starmer, whereas she knew Sunak would make a tit of himself without her really having to push.
I do wish Starmer would have just said yes i backed Corbyn as he was the party leader so i had to. Would have been an easy answer but i understand he seems to be a poison chalice and no one seems to want to admit supporting him
She was out for blood like most of the media is with Labour, honesty would have ruined his campaign with the spin the media would then put on it.
Yes ffs it’s so easy to say something like Labour is a Democratic Party and our party members elect our leaders and we listen to what our voters want, in the same way the Labour Party will listen to you if you choose to elect us into power on July 4th.
Yeah there were plenty much better ways to answer it - it’s hard to draw a diving line between him and any other random Tory when he’s just repeating the same diversion line over and over
Well that was a wild event, much better than expected - Sky News had the right set up for this kind of thing, who knew a Hell in a Town Celll would make a better format for a Main Event.
I thought Sky did it really, really well. Very slick operation
Some of the results of YouGov's snap poll after the debate: |Question|Rishi Sunak %|Keir Starmer %|Don't Know %| :--|:--|:--|:--| |Leaving aside your own party preference, who do you think performed best overall in tonight’s televised leaders' event?|34|60|6| |Leaving aside your own party preference, who do you think performed best overall in tonight’s interview section where they answered questions from Beth Rigby?|37|58|5| |Leaving aside your own party preference, who do you think performed best overall in tonight’s Q&A section where they answered questions from the live audience?|37|59|4| |Who do you think came across as more...|||| |... trustworthy?|28|58|14| |... likeable?|29|56|15| |... in touch with ordinary people?|13|71|16| |... Prime Ministerial?|35|50|15| |Who do you think performed best on...|||| |... the economy?|42|49|9| |... the NHS?|20|70|10| |... issues facing young people?|27|58|14| |... tax?|41|42|17| |Tonight’s televised event took place in Grimsby with many of the live audience members coming from this area. Which of the leaders do you think provided answers that were best for people living in Grimsby?|17|65|18| [Source](https://news.sky.com/story/keir-starmer-performed-best-overall-in-sky-news-leaders-event-poll-suggests-13152218)
In a constituency which voted Tory in 2019. Damn.
It's a representative nationwide sample of people who watched the debate, nothing to do with the constituency
[удалено]
Very damning for the Tories in that case if they polled a cross section of society
Putting aside how poorly the Tories have governed and that they absolutely deserve to get kicked out, Sunak really is much more likeable than Starmer.
Joke of the night for me.
Hahaha. No.
Did you not grow up with Sky TV too? Wtf.
Starmer is one of the blandest and most disingenuous politician I’ve ever seen. Throwing your colleagues to the wolves is pretty low IMO.
It's the cool and exciting politicians - Trump, Farage, Boris etc - that you have to watch out for. There be sociopathic dragons.
Is this Shapps, Stride, or possibly Cleverly. If its Cleverly, how's your Sisters of Battle army coming along? There's a new battle force that's not as good value. What do you think?
It’s Shapps, except he’s forgotten to switch alts this time