The 2024 General Election - July 4th

[trousers]

14 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

What a mess. Neither being given enough time to answer. Talking over each other. Starmer is spending too much time being empathic and not enough answering questions.

Trying to cram too much in. Perhaps they should have covered fewer subjects in more depth.

Yeah, crap format and an hour is never enough time for a well paced 'debate'

[Holmes_and_Watson]

Final score Trousers?

[trousers]

3 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Final score Trousers?

From a biased or unbiased viewpoint...?

[egg]

Didn't see it until about 920. Both were irritating, but Sunak at least answered questions. I'm none the wiser where Starmer is on defence, or on how he'll deal with gangs in France or elsewhere. He disappointed me, and Sunak's summary of him wasn't inaccurate. 

[sadoldgit]

The BBC have just run a fact check showing Starmer got more right than Sunak who was throwing around a £2k tax rise under Labour which looks unfounded. I don’t know how anyone is suppose to get their heads around this type of questioning, including the two people in the spotlight.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

3 minutes ago, trousers said:

From a biased or unbiased viewpoint...?

Good that you can separate them.

Either or both 😀

[Fan The Flames]

5 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

I can’t say that someone standing in a free, democratic election being physically harassed in public is something we should particularly celebrate. I’d rather we left that to the Russians, personally. Plus it’s totally counterproductive, Farage will basically just say, "oh look, the tolerant left are at it again," and his popularity will probably step up another notch.

She could be a young conservative.

[The Cat]

Was a terrible debate. Not sure anyone came out of that with any credit.

[sadoldgit]

Call me old fashioned, but I really hope that people don’t vote based purely on either Starmer or Sunak’s performance on something like that. How can you possibly give an in depth and cogent answer to a complex question in 45 seconds? 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

Didn't see it until about 920. Both were irritating, but Sunak at least answered questions. I'm none the wiser where Starmer is on defence, or on how he'll deal with gangs in France or elsewhere. He disappointed me, and Sunak's summary of him wasn't inaccurate. 

Even Sunak looked embarrassed about the National service question. But repeatedly, and directly, asked Starmer what he would do across topics and there were, as you say, no answers. Sunak even got to play that into his closing statement.

[The Kraken]

3 minutes ago, The Cat said:

Was a terrible debate. Not sure anyone came out of that with any credit.

Disagree. Stramer comes out with credit for calling Sunak a prick.

https://x.com/ianrichmiller/status/1798095291859534039

[trousers]

8 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Good that you can separate them.

Either or both 😀

Is the Saintsweb fraternity ready for a balanced viewpoint though...?

[rallyboy]

Rishi spent the whole show making up shit.

I think his speech writers have given up and just send him out with crap material - chuck in his crap delivery and inability to think of anything useful and he's fucked.

Starmer on points for me, mainly for being less annoying.

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

Call me old fashioned, but I really hope that people don’t vote based purely on either Starmer or Sunak’s performance on something like that. How can you possibly give an in depth and cogent answer to a complex question in 45 seconds? 

No, most people will vote in accordance with their own preconceived biases and the swing voters who fall outside of that have probably long since made up their mind already (most likely on the side of Labour). I’d put myself in the latter category, nothing Sunak says in the next month is going to convince me that I want another five years of Tory rule.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 minute ago, trousers said:

Is the Saintsweb fraternity ready for a balanced viewpoint though...?

Don't worry. We're sure to be able to take your unbiased, well considered statement, and twist it to support our own views. 🙂

[egg]

8 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

Disagree. Stramer comes out with credit for calling Sunak a prick.

https://x.com/ianrichmiller/status/1798095291859534039

I wish he did...desperate I think, sadly. 

[egg]

10 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Even Sunak looked embarrassed about the National service question. But repeatedly, and directly, asked Starmer what he would do across topics and there were, as you say, no answers. Sunak even got to play that into his closing statement.

Yep, the crowd laughing said it all. That and Rwanda are 2 of the most desperate policies of recent times. Starmer needs to do more to sway the swingers imo. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

I imagine both sides will be happy. Starmer is so far ahead in the polls, he only needed to avoid a catastrophic night, and Sunak really needed to come out fighting & prop up his core vote. 
 

Starmer surprised me because he looked poor on a couple of occasions, bit slow on his feet, as a lawyer I was expecting more but I guess he’d been coached within a inch of his life. Looked a bit shaken on immigration, tax on state pensions and net zero. 
 

Sunak over did the 2k tax stuff, and talked over the bird, which will have put some off. The national service stuff was poor but fair play to him for ploughing on and owning the policy. 
 

Who won will be down to your politics, I thought Sunak did, but by nowhere near enough to change anything . Mrs Duck who is a raging leftie thought the same & found Starmer “annoying”. She’s still not voting Tory though, which is all Labour needed to do. Maintain their support, and stop the undecided from coming down on the Tory side. 

[revolution saint]

Typical TV debate and won't change any minds.  Thought Sunak did better than I expected initially but then came across as a cock by constantly interrupting.  Starmer needed to shut down the 2k tax thing quicker and remind everyone who had raised taxes to their highest level in 70 years.  Seems pretty clear Labour aren't going to make any grand pledges but also needs to be more positive when asked what Labour would do on stuff.  National Service proposal is an open goal even Che couldn't miss - needs to double down on that too.

I guess Starmer is never going to be a brilliant orator and Sunak is an irritating prick.  Doubt I'll bother watching any of the others.

[sadoldgit]

Watching Starmer here and on PMQs, especially when he was up against Johnson, he sometimes looks as if he has just found himself in a parallel universe where the rules he grew up with no longer apply. In court you have to abide by certain rules of conduct and they are very strict and regulated. When he finds himself faced with someone throwing out all kinds of crap and doesn’t give a stuff about any semblance of playing by the rules, especially someone who is currently the PM, in front of millions on the tv, he looked baffled at times. He got into his stride in PMQs and I’m sure that his PR team will sharpen him up for the next time. He doesn’t need to spend any more time reminding us of his working class credentials, he just has to reassure the country that he will do what he can to repair the damage done to this country and not repeat the mistakes of the last 14 years. In court you have all the time you want to make your point. In these kind events you have less than a minute.

He was better when he was talking about his mission take make things better for ordinary people and that is where he leaves Sunak standing. Sunak clearly doesn’t have a clue about what life is like for normal people and any attempt at empathy comes across as scripted and hollow. 

No surprise to see the front pages of the right wing press coming out for Sunak.
 

 

Edited June 4 by sadoldgit

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

Definitely a 0-0 stalemate, but Starmer had a slightly higher xG.

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

Is the Saintsweb fraternity ready for a balanced viewpoint though...?

It’s reflective of the country I’d say as most people that post on here are cocks and so are most people in this country 

[Weston Super Saint]

8 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

The BBC have just run a fact check showing Starmer got more right than Sunak who was throwing around a £2k tax rise under Labour which looks unfounded. I don’t know how anyone is suppose to get their heads around this type of questioning, including the two people in the spotlight.

This is so true.  Labour have never raised taxes when they've been in power. Never. Ever.

(nor have the Conservatives. Ever).

[Weston Super Saint]

Oh dear!  Starmer looks like Ashley Cole in 'that' picture.  Sunak looks like Mr Potato head.  Choices, choices.

 

[Fan The Flames]

BBC fact checking has blown the £2000 tax rise apart already, shame Starmer couldn't do it in the night. It's just more lies and gaslighting from the Tories.

[CB Fry]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

This is so true.  Labour have never raised taxes when they've been in power. Never. Ever.

(nor have the Conservatives. Ever).

I think the point is the tax burden is going up for people in this financial year and future ones from the most recent budgets/financial statements from Sunak and Hunt. Literally impacting people now. Sunak's routine is pretending he will reverse something his government have done very recently and trying to pin that on Starmer. If it was that critical he could have acted differently in the first place, we're talking about the last 12 months after all.

The line worked better than it should have, Kier too slow and cautious to push back on it.

[egg]

17 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

BBC fact checking has blown the £2000 tax rise apart already, shame Starmer couldn't do it in the night. It's just more lies and gaslighting from the Tories.

Sadly, a lot of dinlos will have taken the lie as fact and vote with their wallet. 

[sadoldgit]

As we have seen so often with Trump, Farage and Johnson, if you have got nothing, then just tell a lie loudly and repeatedly. This stuff works on people with a low attention span. Starmer needs to learn about sound bites and how to combat them. This is not a courtroom or even the Commons at PMQs. It is gladiatorial and cut throat. We know all about the 14 years of Tory mismanagement. What is going to stick in many people’s minds is £2000.

Edited June 5 by sadoldgit
Added text

[Weston Super Saint]

48 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

I think the point is the tax burden is going up for people in this financial year and future ones from the most recent budgets/financial statements from Sunak and Hunt. Literally impacting people now. Sunak's routine is pretending he will reverse something his government have done very recently and trying to pin that on Starmer. If it was that critical he could have acted differently in the first place, we're talking about the last 12 months after all.

The line worked better than it should have, Kier too slow and cautious to push back on it.

It's almost as if they're happy to obfuscate the truth.

[badgerx16]

What were the viewing figures for the debate ? I was was watching the Lionesses beat France.

[whelk]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Sadly, a lot of dinlos will have taken the lie as fact and vote with their wallet. 

Wouldn’t think it has much effect. Don’t know what viewing figures were though. Being rebuffed thoroughly this morning so unless those only watched that debate and not much else. 
Can also help Labour as exposes Sunak lying just like Johnson.

[whelk]

21 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

What were the viewing figures for the debate ? I was was watching the Lionesses beat France.

I wish I’d done the same

[whelk]

50 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

As we have seen so often with Trump, Farage and Johnson, if you have got nothing, then just tell a lie loudly and repeatedly. This stuff works on people with a low attention span. Starmer needs to learn about sound bites and how to combat them. This is not a courtroom or even the Commons at PMQs. It is gladiatorial and cut throat. We know all about the 14 years of Tory mismanagement. What is going to stick in many people’s minds is £2000.

Agree but I wouldn’t overly worry about the 2k thing. 4 weeks to go yet

[badgerx16]

19 minutes ago, whelk said:

Agree but I wouldn’t overly worry about the 2k thing. 4 weeks to go yet

I think people will look at the 2K thing and dismiss it as bs coming from a party that has itself shafted the country with an increased tax burden.

[Saint86]

10 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

The BBC have just run a fact check showing Starmer got more right than Sunak who was throwing around a £2k tax rise under Labour which looks unfounded. I don’t know how anyone is suppose to get their heads around this type of questioning, including the two people in the spotlight.

I don't want to burst your bubble, but saying its "unfounded" seems to be jumping the gun? What's been said is that its based on lower bound cost estimates of Labour's polices. What was very telling, is that Starmer was unable to fully deny it, and spent a very long time to even try denying it, he just floundered - and that tells me all i need to know about what they're really intending to do with taxes down the line when they get in. You'd be a fool to think otherwise i think. The only thing that would satisfy me is Labour actually demonstrating how they'll afford these policies - All we've had till now, is very careful wordings about which taxes they won't rise - but they've been very coy on many others. And frankly, even things like increased VAT/corporation tax, tax band freezes, pushing for net zero by 2030 etc. seem to be at odds with Labour also targeting a "policy" to have the uk as the fastest growing economy by 2030, i can't see how taking steps that will likely hamper the uk economy and limit consumer spending will help us - so again (and as many others have said), the question for Starmer is "how?" - and i am still none the wiser myself. Maybe another debate will give him the chance to answer.

As for Labour's private school policy, honestly what a shitfest. I live in Bristol where there are already not enough state schools and too many private schools. It likely means my youngest will be at risk of not attending the same (state) school as his elder brother as a result of private school kids dropping back into the state school system. They aren't going to magically build more classrooms, or train/hire more teachers in the short term, and private school teachers aren't just going to magically walk away from the private sector to work in the state sector for less pay. Its an absolute car crash of an policy, based entirely on ideology for what i can see, with no real thought for how it will impact specific areas of the country, and one that will worsen the burden on the state and will just screw over working and middle class parents. It will also be the children of hard working aspiring parents that miss out lets be honest, the ones that already stretch themselves to help their kids - and we all know damn well that the rich elites (on both sides of the political divide) will still be able to afford private schooling - which will then widen the gap to the rest of us frankly. Nice one! 🤦‍♂️

As for Starmer saying he'll "smash the gangs" on illegal immigration. That isn't a policy, its just words. Both the British and French governments have been trying to do that for years. "How?". Tax, immigration, the NHS, Education. Its not good enough to be the opposition to this government and be able to offer so little substance on how they'll make it better or what they'll offer.

Anyway, our vote is for the worst government in waiting i've ever seen (starmer's labour - who will get elected purely because they aren't the conservatives), or 5 more years of this conservative government.



At least we can all get the popcorn out and laugh at America in November ey?

[whelk]

42 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

I don't want to burst your bubble, but saying its "unfounded" seems to be jumping the gun? What's been said is that its based on lower bound cost estimates of Labour's polices. What was very telling, is that Starmer was unable to fully deny it, and spent a very long time to even try denying it, he just floundered - and that tells me all i need to know about what they're really intending to do with taxes down the line when they get in. You'd be a fool to think otherwise i think. The only thing that would satisfy me is Labour actually demonstrating how they'll afford these policies - All we've had till now, is very careful wordings about which taxes they won't rise - but they've been very coy on many others. And frankly, even things like increased VAT/corporation tax, tax band freezes, pushing for net zero by 2030 etc. seem to be at odds with Labour also targeting a "policy" to have the uk as the fastest growing economy by 2030, i can't see how taking steps that will likely hamper the uk economy and limit consumer spending will help us - so again (and as many others have said), the question for Starmer is "how?" - and i am still none the wiser myself. Maybe another debate will give him the chance to answer.

As for Labour's private school policy, honestly what a shitfest. I live in Bristol where there are already not enough state schools and too many private schools. It likely means my youngest will be at risk of not attending the same (state) school as his elder brother as a result of private school kids dropping back into the state school system. They aren't going to magically build more classrooms, or train/hire more teachers in the short term, and private school teachers aren't just going to magically walk away from the private sector to work in the state sector for less pay. Its an absolute car crash of an policy, based entirely on ideology for what i can see, with no real thought for how it will impact specific areas of the country, and one that will worsen the burden on the state and will just screw over working and middle class parents. It will also be the children of hard working aspiring parents that miss out lets be honest, the ones that already stretch themselves to help their kids - and we all know damn well that the rich elites (on both sides of the political divide) will still be able to afford private schooling - which will then widen the gap to the rest of us frankly. Nice one! 🤦‍♂️

As for Starmer saying he'll "smash the gangs" on illegal immigration. That isn't a policy, its just words. Both the British and French governments have been trying to do that for years. "How?". Tax, immigration, the NHS, Education. Its not good enough to be the opposition to this government and be able to offer so little substance on how they'll make it better or what they'll offer.

Anyway, our vote is for the worst government in waiting i've ever seen (starmer's labour - who will get elected purely because they aren't the conservatives), or 5 more years of this conservative government.



At least we can all get the popcorn out and laugh at America in November ey?

The old we only send our kids to private schools because it’s 20% cheaper than it should be argument and now they will all flood the state system. Boo fucking hoo 

 

[The Kraken]

13 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

As for Starmer saying he'll "smash the gangs" on illegal immigration. That isn't a policy, its just words. Both the British and French governments have been trying to do that for years. "How?". Tax, immigration, the NHS, Education. Its not good enough to be the opposition to this government and be able to offer so little substance on how they'll make it better or what they'll offer.

Just an idea, but the manifestos are out by the end of the week, maybe they're the best indication of just how much substance is being offered.

[sadoldgit]

From what I am hearing this morning there is no bubble to burst. It was BS.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11m307jjvo.amp

I think that everybody understands that Starmer and Labour have a tough job turning this country around after 14 disastrous years. If he was standing there telling us how wonderful things were going to be from day 1 I would be a lot more worried. The worst opposition as you put it can’t be any worse than what we have been experiencing.

Edited June 5 by sadoldgit

[Fan The Flames]

2 hours ago, Saint86 said:

I don't want to burst your bubble, but saying its "unfounded" seems to be jumping the gun? What's been said is that its based on lower bound cost estimates of Labour's polices. What was very telling, is that Starmer was unable to fully deny it, and spent a very long time to even try denying it, he just floundered - and that tells me all i need to know about what they're really intending to do with taxes down the line when they get in. You'd be a fool to think otherwise i think. The only thing that would satisfy me is Labour actually demonstrating how they'll afford these policies - All we've had till now, is very careful wordings about which taxes they won't rise - but they've been very coy on many others. And frankly, even things like increased VAT/corporation tax, tax band freezes, pushing for net zero by 2030 etc. seem to be at odds with Labour also targeting a "policy" to have the uk as the fastest growing economy by 2030, i can't see how taking steps that will likely hamper the uk economy and limit consumer spending will help us - so again (and as many others have said), the question for Starmer is "how?" - and i am still none the wiser myself. Maybe another debate will give him the chance to answer.

As for Labour's private school policy, honestly what a shitfest. I live in Bristol where there are already not enough state schools and too many private schools. It likely means my youngest will be at risk of not attending the same (state) school as his elder brother as a result of private school kids dropping back into the state school system. They aren't going to magically build more classrooms, or train/hire more teachers in the short term, and private school teachers aren't just going to magically walk away from the private sector to work in the state sector for less pay. Its an absolute car crash of an policy, based entirely on ideology for what i can see, with no real thought for how it will impact specific areas of the country, and one that will worsen the burden on the state and will just screw over working and middle class parents. It will also be the children of hard working aspiring parents that miss out lets be honest, the ones that already stretch themselves to help their kids - and we all know damn well that the rich elites (on both sides of the political divide) will still be able to afford private schooling - which will then widen the gap to the rest of us frankly. Nice one! 🤦‍♂️

As for Starmer saying he'll "smash the gangs" on illegal immigration. That isn't a policy, its just words. Both the British and French governments have been trying to do that for years. "How?". Tax, immigration, the NHS, Education. Its not good enough to be the opposition to this government and be able to offer so little substance on how they'll make it better or what they'll offer.

Anyway, our vote is for the worst government in waiting i've ever seen (starmer's labour - who will get elected purely because they aren't the conservatives), or 5 more years of this conservative government.



At least we can all get the popcorn out and laugh at America in November ey?

Project Fear

Pretending Labour are going to do bad things whilst ignoring that the Tories are already doing the very same things.

Fuck public schools.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Parties have played fast and loose with figures for years. Labour used to talk about Tory “cuts” to the NHS when it was actually increased spending but by a lower % increase than labour. They’ve also claimed cuts to NI are linked to future pensions when they know full well it’s not hypothecated. It’s part and parcel of politics, no need to get your knickers in a twist over it. 
 

It can be very effective if it plays into people’s perceptions. That’s why Sunak went so hard on tax, and why Labour always talk about NHS cuts. 
 

It’s too simplistic to say that’s a lie, or that’s the truth. It’s far more subtle than that. Take the point Sunak made about taxing the state pension. It’s an absolute fact that Tory policy is it won’t be taxed. For the first time ever it will be taxed under Labour. But the reason for this is the deliberate Tory policy of fiscal drag, and it only applies to people who only receive the state pension (which will be fewer & fewer due to auto enrolment). Is it a lie, no. But it’s twisting of facts. It’s disingenuous, in other words, politics. Fact checkers, my arse. Waste of time. 

[buctootim]

19 hours ago, The Kraken said:

Magical artistry.

 

 

 

Look at the guy laughing. He deserves to lose his job for that. 

Edited June 5 by buctootim

[Lord Duckhunter]

32 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Fuck public schools.

That’s the spirit comrade, fuck them. Hopefully, they’ll all go bust & the rich twats have to use the state sector. That’ll bring class sizes down in the comprehensive sector. 

[whelk]

15 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

That’s the spirit comrade, fuck them. Hopefully, they’ll all go bust & the rich twats have to use the state sector. That’ll bring class sizes down in the comprehensive sector. 

Yeah poor old Eton. Maybe supplement with a grant

[Fan The Flames]

8 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

That’s the spirit comrade, fuck them. Hopefully, they’ll all go bust & the rich twats have to use the state sector. That’ll bring class sizes down in the comprehensive sector. 

Taking leaps again Ducker, I was talking in terms of the VAT. We have loads of stuff going on, that needs to be paid for and people are worrying about a price rise for the well off. All going bust - you old drama queen.  

Personally I would have left it as no VAT and removed their charitable status. But at least Labour are doing something bold.

Don't forget to doff your cap when you pass the Squire.

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

Project Fear

Pretending Labour are going to do bad things whilst ignoring that the Tories are already doing the very same things.

Fuck public schools.

Did you hear Sunak say anything last night about the mythical £2000 tax increase being over the period of the next Parliament (5 years)?

What happened to bringing back integrity Rishi? Another Tory liar.

[sadoldgit]

43 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Taking leaps again Ducker, I was talking in terms of the VAT. We have loads of stuff going on, that needs to be paid for and people are worrying about a price rise for the well off. All going bust - you old drama queen.  

Personally I would have left it as no VAT and removed their charitable status. But at least Labour are doing something bold.

Don't forget to doff your cap when you pass the Squire.

Funny when the poorer element of society are told to feed themselves on 30p, give up Netflix, mobile phones and going to the nail bar when money is tight, the higher end of society want sympathy when private school fees go up. Here’s a thought, do what the plebs are told to do, suck it up, tighten your belts and send your kids to public school instead. After all, we are all in this together aren’t we? 

[whelk]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Funny when the poorer element of society are told to feed themselves on 30p, give up Netflix, mobile phones and going to the nail bar when money is tight, the higher end of society want sympathy when private school fees go up. Here’s a thought, do what the plebs are told to do, suck it up, tighten your belts and send your kids to public school instead. After all, we are all in this together aren’t we? 

Good post SOG on assumption you meant state not public schools

[ecuk268]

3 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Did you hear Sunak say anything last night about the mythical £2000 tax increase being over the period of the next Parliament (5 years)?

What happened to bringing back integrity Rishi? Another Tory liar.

Fraser Nelson, in that pinko rag The Spectator, did an analysis of the Tories plans using the same methodology and came up with an increase of £3000.

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Funny when the poorer element of society are told to feed themselves on 30p, give up Netflix, mobile phones and going to the nail bar when money is tight, the higher end of society want sympathy when private school fees go up. Here’s a thought, do what the plebs are told to do, suck it up, tighten your belts and send your kids to public school instead. After all, we are all in this together aren’t we? 

I couldn’t give a flying fuck about toffs going to private school, but you’re deluded if you think making them pay more won’t effect the comprehensive sector. I was told by the head of a grammar school during the financial crash that parents taking their kids out of private schools were affecting the chances of poorer kids getting into his Grammar. It’ll be exactly the same now, parents on the borderline of affording private fees, will game the system to get to the better comps as well as increasing the numbers. You think this policy will hit the rich, it won’t. They’ll be ok, it’s the poor having less opportunity & bigger class sizes  that will eventually suffer because of it. Still it’s great class warfare and gets dopes like you excited. 

Edited June 5 by Lord Duckhunter

[pingpong]

I remember when outright lies were looked on poorly by the general public, now it seems not to matter. Shame on sunak, I thought he was one of the tories with some integrity.

By the way that £2000 works out as 40 quid a month. I'd actually happily volunteer to pay that if it is spent on public services, its a bargain.  I would have expected a much higher cost to start sorting out the mess they've made.