Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer fight for a poundshop presidency
The general election reveals the absurdities of Britain’s presidential turn
Neither Rishi Sunak nor Sir Keir Starmer is a natural politician. That may be a strange thing to say about a man who was the youngest prime minister since 1812 and an opponent who is on track for a historically large majority. But in a less feral era of British politics, Sir Keir would have capped off a successful legal career with a few years as attorney-general and Mr Sunak would still be a mid-ranking cabinet minister rather than the boss. Extreme events put both in a high place, like a fishing boat marooned halfway up a hill after a tsunami.
All their flaws and frailties were on display during their first televised head-to-head debate on June 4th. Neither shone. Mr Sunak has two registers: simpering and hectoring. When members of the public laid out their hardship stories, Mr Sunak responded with the learned empathy of a man worth £651m ($830m). When the debate moved to technical matters, he responded with the pernickety fluency of an over-promoted junior minister. Sir Keir, meanwhile, is remarkably wooden for a former barrister, clumsily dragging every other question back to his tenure running the Crown Prosecution Service. The viewer was left pleasantly surprised that anyone was jailed during his stint there.
Explore more
This article appeared in the Britain section of the print edition under the headline “A poundshop presidency”
Britain June 8th 2024
More from Britain
The race to become leader of Britain’s Conservatives
An exhausted party seems to think that it doesn’t have to change
How deep is Britain’s fiscal “black hole”?
Rachel Reeves sets out her first big decisions as chancellor
Shabana Mahmood, Britain’s new Lord Chancellor
The new justice secretary is both progressive and religious
How King Charles III counts his swans
A ritual that pleases conservationists and annoys the birds
Britain’s army chief fears war may come sooner than anyone thinks
Could the army cope without more money and troops?