It’s a circus Strolls but for me it has to be endured. I can’t stand what our politicians have become but I have the right to make a choice and the only way is to listen to the arguments, their specific answers and judge these people who will influence the future.
It became clear that Sunak was going to lie about Labour's tax plans and that Starmer wasn't going to contradict him because he's **** scared of saying anything at all of consequence. Based on the opinion polls, Starmer's ultra-cautious approach has been remarkably successful, but it drives me nuts. What I wanted to hear from him was, '****ing right I'll put taxes up, but they won't be on ordinary families, they'll be on families like yours'.
Was that a debate? 2 blokes talking ****e to get people to believe them. I wouldn't even bother voting but I really do despise these corrupt Tory ****s. It's a safe Labour seat here anyways.
I watched about 40 minutes. It was unpleasant watching. A real scrap...Sunak loud and aggressive, Starmer a bit (but not a lot) quieter. On a personal level...nothing to do with politics... I found Sunak rude and brattish last night , something I actually have never thought before, in fact I have thought quite the opposite. Starmer was too passive in some sections. He let Sunak repeat the £2000 tax hike lie several times...He will have to counteract that properly soon..... In the performance...Sunak won....but it won't have made much difference. It was really unconstructive...
Like you (I’m sure) I did some research into the £2k tax hike claim and I’m not so sure it is a “lie”, Vern, but rather a deduction for political points scoring based on Labour’s stated spending pledges. The Red Corner has publicly stated no tax rises for the poorest in society, yet their spending plans don’t reconcile with the Treasury forecasts on tax take, so Sunak and his cronies have assumed (absent any clarification from Starmergeddon) that Labour will have to bend their own fiscal rules to meet these pledges. They’ve taken the excess spend over tax revenues and divided by the number of households with at least one adult working to derive the £2k. All Surkeer had to do was take that head on and explain, as Stroller would wish him to do, that he’s going to disproportionately tax the ‘rich’ (by whatever definition he applies to that term, but you can bet it’ll be the middle classes that take most of the pain) but he didn’t because (1) he’s clearly a reflector and not that good thinking on his feet, and (2) he needs to keep enough of the entrepreneurs, business leaders and toffs onside until he’s in Downing Street.
Apparently the Tories have claimed that the £2k figure came from the Treasury, which the Treasury has denied. It is probable that Labour knew this already and Starmer didn’t refer to it last night precisely to give him the chance to discredit Sunak in the post match analysis. Whether this is clever or not I don’t know. I do think it’s all rather pathetic from all sides. I’m very glad I didn’t watch the debate if this was the level of discussion. For those who watched, do you have any better idea of the policies of either party as a result of watching?
You will have just been made aware, by the news flash, Uber that the Treasury ( whatever Sunak said) have distanced themselves from the calculations in a letter 2 days ago .. Even I did not expect that Sunak would try that trick ..the same one that Borus did on the side of a bus
Its what happens when we are a 2 party country (basically usa) and one party has **** the bed so bed in the last 9 years
No Stan I don't Sunak concentrated on this 2000 pound lie Starmer concentrated in liz Truss. Sunek was rather superior and spoilt brattish, especially to the lady who was finding it increasingly hard to make ends meet. " look my policies are working now" ..obviously not!! Starmer was somewhat dull..(I keep thinking...maybe what we actually want...after the drama of Boris and Liz). This 2000 tax hike will come back to bite someone. I thought it was Starmer last night, this morning I think it may be Sunak
Indeed. As I said above, Roland Rat's gang took Labour's spending pledges and the Treasury figures, then ran their own calculations and reached their own conclusion for political points scoring. What else would you expect them to do? I run forecasts and projections, backed up with underlying assumptions and (most likely) influenced by my own personal bias in some areas, all the time in my line of work. The only guarantee with any of them is that they'll be wrong and somebody else doing the same thing will come up with a different answer.
I think the issue is that they claimed the figure was an official civil service estimate. It isn’t, apparently. As if I could care less. Any policy insights from the bitchfest that you spotted?
For me Starmer was as unimpressive as ever, whilst Sunak adopted the same ‘aggressive’ approach as he did in his debates with Truss. It didn’t help him then, and I don’t think it will now. Starmer has said, Wales under Labour will be the blueprint for the UK under a future Labour Government, I sincerely hope that, if that is to be the case, the quality of Labour MPs in Westminster will be far better than those residing in Cardiff Bay. Having lived under a Labour Government in Wales for 25 years, in some respects, I fear the worst - the NHS, school results are both worse in Wales, and having started out with the same average wage income as Scotland, it is now (I believe) c£3,000 lower in Wales. And yet, I despair at the Tories …. If ever a vote for None of the Above was appropriate…. In some respects, it’s a pity that Andy Burnham wasn’t the Leader of the Labour Party. I was in Manchester a few weeks ago for the BSA Conference and he gave the speech to welcome the delegates: in my opinion, he is far more impressive and charismatic than Starmer. I felt then, as I do now, that if he were the Labour Leader, people would be voting ‘positively’ for him, whereas I feel that people will not be voting ‘for’ Starmer but against the Tories..
Sunak said that “independent treasury officials” had costed Labour’s spending plans and that they “amount to a £2,000 tax rise for every working family”. Clever. I still don’t like the rat-faced twat, though.
