Okay, I’m now done watching too. I dunno if this is because I’m biased, but while neither performance was fantastic, Starmer overall came across better than Sunak. By the incredibly low standards set by politicians, Starmer seemed more honest, and I definitely noted him being irritated with some of Sunak’s more blatant lies. Sunak came across as a smug public school boy who always feels like he has to be right. I was particularly not impressed with Sunak making out that Labour would require people to replace boilers and cars “when they don’t need to”, when it’s bloody obvious that the plan would be to replace them with more climate-friendly options when existing stock wears out. I wish Starmer had been more deft in challenging him on that kind of bullshit.

Starmer’s experience as a lawyer helped him here, I think. He’s used to debating, although clearly he’s more used to a courtroom where he can speak at length to make his point. He’s not good at succinct so the 45 second time limit didn’t give him a chance to do his best debating. Sunak treated it more as an argument where it was more important to win than to put across a serious and thoughtful point.

Overall, I’m not a huge fan of Starmer, but I’m still happy to say I would rather have him as prime minister than Sunak.