TV Leadership Debates

1finny

1finny

Well-known member
Wonder what is going to happen here?

Sunak, according to the Express (?) has challenged Starmer to 1 a week.
The offer has been, apparently declined. I don’t even think it is allowed under electoral law unless all leaders participate.

Bigger picture …….
Whilst I think Starmer could roast Sunak in debates these things are fraught with danger. He has most to lose.
There is a school of thought that when you are so far ahead why risk it?
I think Johnson took this approach,

Easier for Sunak - its ‘shti or bust.

Suppose they will go along as before and just be dull
 
It would be interesting to see them debate without the hooting & calling from the backbenchers to disrupt and drown out the others points.

I agree that Starmer would win but think it would be closer than annihilation.
 
Colgates_shaving_foam said:
The problem Sunak has is that he hates being questioned or shown to be wrong. He does that weird nasal voice and gets very tetchy, obviously because he has grown up with an overwhelming sense of entitlement.
Click to expand...
A structured Q&A would destroy Sunak.. in a more casual interview he has the annoying habit of just talking and talking and talking, reciting a pre written speech and moving so far away from the original question which he obviously doesn't want to answer. He did this with Nick Ferrari on LBC yesterday and you could hear Ferrari becoming more and more exasperated as he couldn't get a word in edge ways to ask another question!

They would need a strong host to make sure questions are answered and it doesn't just become a party political broadcast.
 
1finny said:
Wonder what is going to happen here?

Sunak, according to the Express (?) has challenged Starmer to 1 a week.
The offer has been, apparently declined. I don’t even think it is allowed under electoral law unless all leaders participate.

Bigger picture …….
Whilst I think Starmer could roast Sunak in debates these things are fraught with danger. He has most to lose.
There is a school of thought that when you are so far ahead why risk it?
I think Johnson took this approach,

Easier for Sunak - its ‘shti or bust.

Suppose they will go along as before and just be dull
Click to expand...
Didnt May take a similar approach of dodging debates?

Worked for Johnson (God knows why) backfired for May.

I agree with the school of thought that Starmer would absolutely rinse the little pr*ck.

But also agree Sunak has nothing to lose. He'd probably just use them to throw some mud in the hope something sticks. The more debates he has the more mud he can chuck.

Certainly think weekly is unnecessary and no reason for Starmer to take the risk. And Im sure the tories know that anyway. They just want to be able to accuse him of running scared (without a hint of irony given their last leader who fought an election hid in a fridge).
 
It's about time they just had something put in to the process that was mandatory so there was no question of people dodging, challenging to extra debates etc. A General Election is an important event and it's dumb that a big chunk of the news leading up to it is about who's a chicken. It's playground stuff.

It's also hypocritical for anyone that lambasted Johnson for dodging them to be suggesting Starmer should do the same. Make it mandatory and get rid of the nonsense.
 
The reptile Andrew Neil interviewed Jeremy Corbyn (a set up really) and afterward fat xxxx disgusting pervert Johnson never turned up for his interview( or so Neil says).

If wouldn't turn up if I was KS unless Hooter lugboy and his call centre robbers were within punching distance.
 
The side lagging behind always wants debates, hoping the other side mess up

For what debates we do have, Sunak is mechanical, unlikeable and has zero record of success over 14 years to call on. It can't go well for him

And, apparently, these debates don't switch the dial anyway

Labour win this election easy. It's just a case of by how far
 
Paintolerance said:
The side lagging behind always wants debates, hoping the other side mess up

For what debates we do have, Sunak is mechanical, unlikeable and has zero record of success over 14 years to call on. It can't go well for him

And, apparently, these debates don't switch the dial anyway

Labour win this election easy. It's just a case of by how far
Click to expand...
I really want to believe that but I do think there are so so many shy tories out there who will go out and vote.

I worry the potential labour voters won't bother and we end up with a re run of what happened in the brexit referendum.

I think it will be much closer than predicted.
 
Good to give the Tories a taste of their own medicine. Even local Tory MPs avoided hustings when they were clearly winning the race so why should Starmer indulge Sunak's whims?
 
Sunak only appears on GBeebies, answering easy questions from a hand picked audience, reported on by hand picked media outlet.

Could see this ending well for him........

As above, wouldn't bother if I were Starmer......but can see the RWM crucifying him for it. Don't think he can win really.
 
My theory is Sunak is attempting to call Starmer's bluff. Knowing full well Starmer wouldn't want or feel the need to do 6 debates, the media can then spin it as 'Starmer bottles debates'.

These debates are always disappointing, especially when there's 3 or more candidates.
 
Labour are massively ahead in the polls, and I think that all they need to do to win by landslide is avoid bacon sandwiches, anti Semitism, and any potential slip ups of gaffs. Even though I think that Starmer would wipe the floor with Little Wet Rich Rishi, a series of leadership debates where Tories lay traps is only in the best interest of the Tories.
 
Colgates_shaving_foam said:
The problem Sunak has is that he hates being questioned or shown to be wrong. He does that weird nasal voice and gets very tetchy, obviously because he has grown up with an overwhelming sense of entitlement.
Click to expand...
Anybody that sounds like Will from The Inbetweeners is going to get called a debate w@nker.
 
SmallTown said:
Hate these debates. So many people get confused between our politics and the US, and think we are electing a prime minister. Not a local MP. These things help fuel that confusion
Click to expand...
That's because the system works so we essentially are. It doesn't matter who your MP is if the country is run by a different party. Unless you have a very specific local issue which requires your MP to be from a specific party then who the Prime Minister is is far more important.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top