"Mr Cameron also confirmed for the first time yesterday since announcing his resignation that he wants to stay on as an MP after leaving Downing Street."
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott 2m2 minutes ago Journalists will now try to coax @andrealeadsom into talking about May's looks/weight/health. Guaranteed.
Should be easier to avoid any trap there - the side by side pictures of the pair on the BBC yesterday they even had the same haircut as one another, a colleague said they looked like they could be sisters.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
It's not taboo to say you love your kids.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RUNNING THE COUNTRY HERE NOT HER KIDS
Running the country isn't that difficult actually, Brown did it for a while and I can't think of anybody less suited to the job, OK it ended in tears which was inevitable.
I find this interesting, EVERY PM gets absolutely slaughtered at the end, I wonder what will skewer May.
The notion that people only have a stake in the future through genetics seems a bit narrow to me. Isn't one reason that people get involved in politics to leave a better legacy than inheritance (not that the country's been that good at it but execution is a different question from intent). It might even be a partial explanation as to why politics seems to attract a disproportionate number of gay people.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
That's not taboo, people say that all the time. I don't quite get why that would translate into more votes for either of them though. Fine, people never love like they love their own children. Do parents really think not knowing that love makes it harder to negotiate a trade deal or other government business?
Does Merkel have any children btw? No one questions her ability to do the job!
Elizabeth I - Gloriana herself - didn't have any kids
This forum seems to have been very busy since the newspaper reviews. Think this will be a mega storm tomorrow on the broadcast media. She may not survive this weekend even
I wouldn't go that far.
Yes, I seem to remember an awful lot of posts about a certain George Osborne crying at Mrs. Thatcher's funeral.
This forum seems to have been very busy since the newspaper reviews. Think this will be a mega storm tomorrow on the broadcast media. She may not survive this weekend even
Of course she will, there has to be a Brexit candidate against May who the members get to vote on, there may be a little storm tomorrow over these comments by September and after the debates it will be a minor footnote, though I expect May to win comfortably as she would have done anyway
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
It's not taboo to say you love your kids.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RUNNING THE COUNTRY HERE NOT HER KIDS
Running the country isn't that difficult actually, Brown did it for a while and I can't think of anybody less suited to the job, OK it ended in tears which was inevitable.
I find this interesting, EVERY PM gets absolutely slaughtered at the end, I wonder what will skewer May.
Not living up to her gravitas, of appearing to be a safe pair of hands. For all his failures, up until his EU challenge which he could not overcome, Cameron came across as reasonably competent, not too extreme. May comes across as safe and competent. If she is proven as none of those things, it need not take something big to slaughter her, there will be a shift in how she is perceived and she'll have lost her appeal.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
For people with no compassion or heart for the person unable to have children. You're barking up the wrong tree here.
No. You can have sympathy but still get the point that someone without kids cannot truly grasp the feelings of someone who has. I have this in my very immediate family.
This forum seems to have been very busy since the newspaper reviews. Think this will be a mega storm tomorrow on the broadcast media. She may not survive this weekend even
The question is whether Leadsom would choose to deliberately insult May over the fact that she can't have chiildren. I don't believe she would, so there must be another explanation.
If this true, her support will go up 5 points. Plus Tebbit's support.
When you have to explain you have lost.
The Times will not have reported this without the evidence. They are professionals against an amateur who has just holed her campaign below the waterline.
This is going to lead tomorrows news. I expect Ms Leadsom to be vindicated.
Whether she is or not she's either a fool for being suckered or a horrible human being. Neither suggests she should even be in the final two, let alone PM.
Precisely. Although I blame the 84 MPs, rather than her.
Again, 84 idiots. Would have preferred Gove on the ballot as at least he would have been a relatively safe option in case he accidentally won it. Experienced, a bit crazy but backed by the Notting Hill wing so would never go too far off the reservation.
If this true, her support will go up 5 points. Plus Tebbit's support.
When you have to explain you have lost.
The Times will not have reported this without the evidence. They are professionals against an amateur who has just holed her campaign below the waterline.
This is going to lead tomorrows news. I expect Ms Leadsom to be vindicated.
Whether she is or not she's either a fool for being suckered or a horrible human being. Neither suggests she should even be in the final two, let alone PM.
Glad you're able to keep an open mind. Well done You.
This forum seems to have been very busy since the newspaper reviews. Think this will be a mega storm tomorrow on the broadcast media. She may not survive this weekend even
I wouldn't go that far.
Yes, I seem to remember an awful lot of posts about a certain George Osborne crying at Mrs. Thatcher's funeral.
I went to that (outside on the road). It was surprisingly moving.
If this true, her support will go up 5 points. Plus Tebbit's support.
When you have to explain you have lost.
The Times will not have reported this without the evidence. They are professionals against an amateur who has just holed her campaign below the waterline.
This is going to lead tomorrows news. I expect Ms Leadsom to be vindicated.
Whether she is or not she's either a fool for being suckered or a horrible human being. Neither suggests she should even be in the final two, let alone PM.
Glad you're able to keep an open mind. Well done You.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
Yes, but it doesn't affect their eligibility to be prime minister. Now you have a little cry about how much you love your kiddies, and drink plenty of water before you go to bed.
Is that meant to be amusing or sarcastic or patronising or something?
If this is even close to true Leadsom has no chance of getting any kind of brief let alone a big one. May will dump her onto the back benches and her public supporters too I hope.
The question is whether Leadsom would choose to deliberately insult May over the fact that she can't have chiildren. I don't believe she would, so there must be another explanation.
Yes, the explanation is she's an idiot who was trying to portray herself as more 'sympathetic' but did it so unbelievably crassly that she managed the diametric opposite.
Remember when George Galloway, Nigel Farage and Peter Bone all came out on the opening night for Brexit (in those hideous ties), people claiming it was "all over" then...
Well I'm going to be a bit controversial and say I feel sorry for Crabb.
It's just muck raking.
Oh come on, I'm a great believer in live and let live but if you're trying to present yourself as the Prime Minister you can't be messaging women in that manner, his judgement is awful. And as somebody wearing his Christianity as a badge of honour he's an absolute hypocrite.
His "error" is worse than Leadsom's imo, I'd like to hear her side of the story before she gets hung out to dry.
Agreed 100%. She said some foolish things - in all likelihood - without realising how they'd be interpreted.
He... ummm... propositioned someone over WhatsApp weeks before running for the leadership.
Classy.
Being a potential Prime Minister must go down well with the ladies. You can't blame him for making the best of it as he was only going to be a potential Prime Minister for a couple of weeks.
The question is whether Leadsom would choose to deliberately insult May over the fact that she can't have chiildren. I don't believe she would, so there must be another explanation.
She's naive, inexperienced and a bit in love with herself?
This forum seems to have been very busy since the newspaper reviews. Think this will be a mega storm tomorrow on the broadcast media. She may not survive this weekend even
She will go the distance in this contest and get at least 35% of the vote, if not more, I would put good money on it. The party wants a contest, for perception and legitimacy, more than they want a coronation I suspect, even if pulling out were deserved, and given her tactic to cry foul over this, even if the times was above board she'll continue to pick up significant if minority support. It will just slot into the narrative
This got me labelled as a fascist the other day, but it is possible for a policy to be such that negative tactics against it, which will be labelled as fear mongering, to be justifiable. And that also goes for sometimes people will say things that justifiably invite ridicule and condemnation.
But even if it objectively is reasonable, indisputably so (and at present it seems this instance will be disputed), you will get enough people who either like what was said, dislike the people doing the attacking enough it doesn't matter if they are right, or just won't care at all.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
It's not taboo to say you love your kids.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RUNNING THE COUNTRY HERE NOT HER KIDS
Perhaps it would be wise to concentrate on that then? Just a suggestion.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
For people with no compassion or heart for the person unable to have children. You're barking up the wrong tree here.
No. You can have sympathy but still get the point that someone without kids cannot truly grasp the feelings of someone who has. I have this in my very immediate family.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
That's not taboo, people say that all the time. I don't quite get why that would translate into more votes for either of them though. Fine, people never love like they love their own children. Do parents really think not knowing that love makes it harder to negotiate a trade deal or other government business?
Does Merkel have any children btw? No one questions her ability to do the job!
Elizabeth I - Gloriana herself - didn't have any kids
And that led to us being ruled by Scots! The horror!
Just tested this on my dad over WhatsApp, ex-Con member left when Dave became leader in the mass exodus, he obviously has children (two, including me). Absolutely disgusted. I'll message my mum tomorrow and ask her. Apparently those of us without kids don't get it...
The realisation this row is probably not as big a deal as it seems, a lot of people getting indignant on Leadsome's behalf or furious on May's, and then a wind down as it dawns we've got 2 months of this to god. God's sake Tories this doesn't have to last more than a month.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
I don't think it's taboo to say that. No ones denying that parents love their kids. I don't see it sticking in people's minds as you suggest though. Electorates as a whole are generally not as stupid as we assume them to be. Especially a subset electorate of party members who will pay more attention to politics than the population as a whole. This will be remembered in one of two ways:
1. Andrea Leadsom makes disgusting smear against May, destroys reputation (does a Gove)
2. She has in fact been smeared by the times, the backlash works in her favour as she is vindicated, and it helps her campaign.
But it won't help her campaign for the reason you suggest because people don't make associations like that. You don't like someone more just because they are also a mum.
The realisation this row is probably not as big a deal as it seems, a lot of people getting indignant on Leadsome's behalf or furious on May's, and then a wind down as it dawns we've got 2 months of this to god. God's sake Tories this doesn't have to last more than a month.
The full article is up. I'll quote some of it for those who aren't subscribers.
Andrea Leadsom has said that being a mother makes her a better choice for prime minister than Theresa May because it means that she has “a very real stake” in the future of the country.
In comments showing how personal she is prepared to make the Tory leadership contest, Mrs Leadsom said in an interview with The Times that the home secretary must be “really sad” not to have children.
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
Mrs May, 59, and her husband, Philip, were unable to have children and she hinted of their sadness in a recent interview. Mrs Leadsom, 53, who has two sons and a daughter with her husband, Ben, said that being a mother meant that the future of Britain was more important to her. “Genuinely I feel that being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.”
Nor is it presented as one. People don't speak in headlines.....
Given how often leadsom goes on about being a mother, using it to justify Brexit and her campaign for PM, its fair enough for an interviewer to explore the subject in a bit more detail and find out why she thinks having kids makes her a better person. If she's too stupid to see the trap she's walking into then we don't want her anywhere near the negotiations with Europe.
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
That's a direct and offensive comparison with Theresa May.
Theresa May insisting she is no "remainer" in the Telegraph o_O !?
I'm sorry but I'm reasonably sure she was on the remain side of the argument during the campaign, however quietly...
There are no people in this Tory contest who were advocating post referendum that we should Remain. The choice now is between what types of leave each candidate will seek to deliver, who has the best chance of delivering that vision, and also who would be better at the other aspects of government they will need to deal with. Could be May, could be Leadsome, but it's not an untruth to acknowledge Brexit is Brexit even if one was Remain before - even in the fevered dreams of some hoping for Brexit being overturned, whoever is Tory leader after Cameron could never attempt it.
Just because they're not advocating it doesn't mean they won't try to do it. Usually governments have to work hard on all kinds of unpopular tedium just to squeeze another fraction of a percent of growth out of the economy. May would have a magic wand that she could wave create billions of pounds of extra wealth, and probably hundreds of thousands of extra jobs. Or rather, she has a magic wand that does the opposite, and all she has to do it not wave it. I know the voters have told her to wave it, but they often change their minds, and in any case they didn't tell her *when*.
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
That's a direct and offensive comparison with Theresa May.
The key is whether that is transcribed accurately or whether it's stitched together out of context.
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
That's a direct and offensive comparison with Theresa May.
Thanks, I was just going through and bolding all of the direct quotes.
The thing that people will remember is that Leadsom is a mum, and May is not.
It may well be politically incorrect and taboo to say this but most people never love like they love their own children. It's an extremely emotional pull. All parents know it.
It's not taboo to say you love your kids.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RUNNING THE COUNTRY HERE NOT HER KIDS
Running the country isn't that difficult actually, Brown did it for a while and I can't think of anybody less suited to the job, OK it ended in tears which was inevitable.
I find this interesting, EVERY PM gets absolutely slaughtered at the end, I wonder what will skewer May.
Brexit will skewer her in the end. As long as the continent of Europe exists it will divide the Tories. May has a very fine balancing act ahead. She only has to fail once, much like Cameron has.
The full article is up. I'll quote some of it for those who aren't subscribers.
Thanks.
Looks like Leadsom can spin against the apparent meanness implied in the headline, although her 'completely opposite and made up' sort of comments do seem hyperbolistic as well, as there are many comments made about having children and how that affects her views, not one throwaway comment that would be easily misinterpretable.
It won't dissuade Leadom die-hards and she isn't going anywhere, and May won't want to push back hard on it directly, plus some people will, as we've seen, automatically defend it, so anyone looking for Leadsom to not last the distance is dreaming. But though it won't bury her, on that quoting, it isn't as simple to dismiss as she claimed either.
The full article is up. I'll quote some of it for those who aren't subscribers.
Andrea Leadsom has said that being a mother makes her a better choice for prime minister than Theresa May because it means that she has “a very real stake” in the future of the country.
In comments showing how personal she is prepared to make the Tory leadership contest, Mrs Leadsom said in an interview with The Times that the home secretary must be “really sad” not to have children.
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
Mrs May, 59, and her husband, Philip, were unable to have children and she hinted of their sadness in a recent interview. Mrs Leadsom, 53, who has two sons and a daughter with her husband, Ben, said that being a mother meant that the future of Britain was more important to her. “Genuinely I feel that being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.”
The energy minister made clear that she intended to highlight the difference over children in the campaign. Asked to contrast herself with Mrs May, she said:“I see myself as one, an optimist, and two, a member of a huge family and that’s important to me. My kids are a huge part of my life.”
“I have always believed that campaigns should be about real-world issues — and putting forward a positive vision for the future. The public are tired of people acting like politics is a game, so a clean campaign is what our party and the country deserve,” she said.
In her interview Mrs Leadsom conceded that the subject of Mrs May’s lack of children could be painful for her opponent, but pressed on. "I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible.”
However, she said that having children kept her focused. "It means you don’t want a downturn but, never mind, ten years hence it will all be fine. My children will be starting their lives in that next ten years so I have a real stake in the next year, the next two.”
She suggested motherhood means that she had more empathy than Mrs May. “I think when you are thinking about the issues that other people have you worry about your kids’ exam results, what direction their careers are taking, what we are going to eat on Sunday.”
What will tomorrow bring? "My pancreas and me, by Andrea Leadsom?"
"My pancreas and I", surely?
My pancreas attracts every other Pancreas in the universe With a force proportional To the product of their masses And inversely proportional To the distance between them
I don't see how there's any wiggle room here. These are the actions of a nasty, nasty human:
'The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”'
I think the last quote is quite damaging as well, implying that one has to be a mother to care about how well children are doing at school and if they are eating properly. Thoroughly a disgusting comment unworthy of our great party. I hope she has the decency to resign.
You know, I don't think this hideous and unnecessary outburst is an accident.
If you look at Leadsom's blog, it's FULL of "Tory Mum" branding. Every second sentence she reminds us that she's the proud blue bearer of sentient azure sexcrement.
The full article is up. I'll quote some of it for those who aren't subscribers.
Andrea Leadsom has said that being a mother makes her a better choice for prime minister than Theresa May because it means that she has “a very real stake” in the future of the country.
In comments showing how personal she is prepared to make the Tory leadership contest, Mrs Leadsom said in an interview with The Times that the home secretary must be “really sad” not to have children.
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
Mrs May, 59, and her husband, Philip, were unable to have children and she hinted of their sadness in a recent interview. Mrs Leadsom, 53, who has two sons and a daughter with her husband, Ben, said that being a mother meant that the future of Britain was more important to her. “Genuinely I feel that being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.”
The energy minister made clear that she intended to highlight the difference over children in the campaign. Asked to contrast herself with Mrs May, she said:“I see myself as one, an optimist, and two, a member of a huge family and that’s important to me. My kids are a huge part of my life.”
“I have always believed that campaigns should be about real-world issues — and putting forward a positive vision for the future. The public are tired of people acting like politics is a game, so a clean campaign is what our party and the country deserve,” she said.
In her interview Mrs Leadsom conceded that the subject of Mrs May’s lack of children could be painful for her opponent, but pressed on. "I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible.”
However, she said that having children kept her focused. "It means you don’t want a downturn but, never mind, ten years hence it will all be fine. My children will be starting their lives in that next ten years so I have a real stake in the next year, the next two.”
She suggested motherhood means that she had more empathy than Mrs May. “I think when you are thinking about the issues that other people have you worry about your kids’ exam results, what direction their careers are taking, what we are going to eat on Sunday.”
“I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible.”
Theresa May insisting she is no "remainer" in the Telegraph o_O !?
I'm sorry but I'm reasonably sure she was on the remain side of the argument during the campaign, however quietly...
There are no people in this Tory contest who were advocating post referendum that we should Remain. The choice now is between what types of leave each candidate will seek to deliver, who has the best chance of delivering that vision, and also who would be better at the other aspects of government they will need to deal with. Could be May, could be Leadsome, but it's not an untruth to acknowledge Brexit is Brexit even if one was Remain before - even in the fevered dreams of some hoping for Brexit being overturned, whoever is Tory leader after Cameron could never attempt it.
Just because they're not advocating it doesn't mean they won't try to do it.
That is true, technically, but I've written thousands of words on why I think, even if that is the secret plan, or might become the plan later, politically it will never be feasible for May to even attempt it, and I just didn't have the energy to do so again. Suffice to say, it boils down to the improbability of a scenario that would allow for it, the probably shorter timescale to declare article 50 than May or a secret re-remainer would prefer that would facilitate such a scenario, and the political reality of the Tories post referendum one even if the other pieces fell into place.
Mrs Leadsom entered the final stretch of the Tory leadership contest notable for her lack of cabinet experience and fielding serious and legitimate questions about the veracity of her CV. In her first substantial interview since eliminating Michael Gove from the running, in The Times today, she needed to show judgment and a grasp of detail. She showed neither. Worse, she appeared gratuitously callous towards her vastly more experienced rival, and blind to political reality.
“I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible.”
So, if she drops out does Gove take her place in the vote? I'm not sure of the rules here.
We won't find out, but I'd have thought May would win by default - Gove was eliminated, and if Leadsom had withdrawn then and there, that would have been it, there was no guarantee to the members they would get a vote, so I'd assume if someone pulls out during the last 2 contest it's over.
Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his life. These don’t appear to be the actions of a PM confident of winning the referendum
Why don't they just concentrate on her lack of experience?
I've come to the conclusion that having kids is a perk. David Cameron had kids and he certainly passed the bar - and he shares the similar lack of experience that Andrea does. (Admittedly his SPAD work is less impressive than her business experience in my opinion) Yes it's terribly sad that Theresa can't have kids but they are shares in the future and they do give you another dimension of emotion that one struggles to experience otherwise.
“I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible.”
But then she goes on to do exactly that!
In the context of why she feels being a mum is important to her politics, it was not specifically an attack on May as such, although clearly you may think that was implicit
Why don't they just concentrate on her lack of experience?
Oh, we're on to the 'the enemy are rattled' stage of the defensive maneuvering now? Remember how often when Ed M's chances were dismissed it turned out it was because the Tories were afraid of him? It's one of my favourite political tactics, since it's used both when the enemy are and aren't rattled, so non partisans cannot tell how serious things are.
As to your question, even if this is a storm in a teacup (and I think Leadsom will do about as well as she would have done anyway despite it), she was the one who said these things. Even if her explanations are a-ok, it wasn't her opponents manufacturing something to attack her.
She'll survive this easily, but I can already see if she does say something indisputably terrible we're going to get the same logic as those Corbynistas who hate it when Corbyn's words are directly quoted, aka smearing.
Is that the best you can do - the leavers on here will confirm that since the result I have become totally committed to Brexit and will do everything to see it happen. It just I want someone who will make it happen, not an inexperienced and incompetent leader
Mrs Leadsom entered the final stretch of the Tory leadership contest notable for her lack of cabinet experience and fielding serious and legitimate questions about the veracity of her CV. In her first substantial interview since eliminating Michael Gove from the running, in The Times today, she needed to show judgment and a grasp of detail. She showed neither. Worse, she appeared gratuitously callous towards her vastly more experienced rival, and blind to political reality.
Been saying for the last week that Leadsom and her team have been running an appalling and divisive Leadership campaign, but Theresa May deserves a personal apology from Leadsom after those nasty personal comments.
Even with the " I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible." I don't think she is going to avoid a shitstorm over this. It's probably curtains.
Why don't they just concentrate on her lack of experience?
I've come to the conclusion that having kids is a perk. David Cameron had kids and he certainly passed the bar - and he shares the similar lack of experience that Andrea does. (Admittedly his SPAD work is less impressive than her business experience in my opinion) Yes it's terribly sad that Theresa can't have kids but they are shares in the future and they do give you another dimension of emotion that one struggles to experience otherwise.
Comments
I find this interesting, EVERY PM gets absolutely slaughtered at the end, I wonder what will skewer May.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/751520931818930176/photo/1
Back to playschool, sonny.
This got me labelled as a fascist the other day, but it is possible for a policy to be such that negative tactics against it, which will be labelled as fear mongering, to be justifiable. And that also goes for sometimes people will say things that justifiably invite ridicule and condemnation.
But even if it objectively is reasonable, indisputably so (and at present it seems this instance will be disputed), you will get enough people who either like what was said, dislike the people doing the attacking enough it doesn't matter if they are right, or just won't care at all.
https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/
1. Andrea Leadsom makes disgusting smear against May, destroys reputation (does a Gove)
2. She has in fact been smeared by the times, the backlash works in her favour as she is vindicated, and it helps her campaign.
But it won't help her campaign for the reason you suggest because people don't make associations like that. You don't like someone more just because they are also a mum.
The full article is up. I'll quote some of it for those who aren't subscribers.
Andrea Leadsom has said that being a mother makes her a better choice for prime minister than Theresa May because it means that she has “a very real stake” in the future of the country.
In comments showing how personal she is prepared to make the Tory leadership contest, Mrs Leadsom said in an interview with The Times that the home secretary must be “really sad” not to have children.
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
Mrs May, 59, and her husband, Philip, were unable to have children and she hinted of their sadness in a recent interview. Mrs Leadsom, 53, who has two sons and a daughter with her husband, Ben, said that being a mother meant that the future of Britain was more important to her. “Genuinely I feel that being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.”
The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”
That's a direct and offensive comparison with Theresa May.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservative-leadership-andrea-leadsom-says-she-is-better-suited-as-prime-minister-because-she-has-a7128141.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1679a750-4505-11e6-b22f-79eb4891c97d.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/furious-row-andrea-leadsom-claims-8382783
Looks like Leadsom can spin against the apparent meanness implied in the headline, although her 'completely opposite and made up' sort of comments do seem hyperbolistic as well, as there are many comments made about having children and how that affects her views, not one throwaway comment that would be easily misinterpretable.
It won't dissuade Leadom die-hards and she isn't going anywhere, and May won't want to push back hard on it directly, plus some people will, as we've seen, automatically defend it, so anyone looking for Leadsom to not last the distance is dreaming. But though it won't bury her, on that quoting, it isn't as simple to dismiss as she claimed either.
Pancreas in the universe
With a force proportional
To the product of their masses
And inversely proportional
To the distance between them
'The energy minister and underdog in the fight for No 10 declared that Mrs May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a part of what happens next.”'
If you look at Leadsom's blog, it's FULL of "Tory Mum" branding. Every second sentence she reminds us that she's the proud blue bearer of sentient azure sexcrement.
“I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible.”
Trololol
Mrs Leadsom entered the final stretch of the Tory leadership contest notable for her lack of cabinet experience and fielding serious and legitimate questions about the veracity of her CV. In her first substantial interview since eliminating Michael Gove from the running, in The Times today, she needed to show judgment and a grasp of detail. She showed neither. Worse, she appeared gratuitously callous towards her vastly more experienced rival, and blind to political reality.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/implausible-leadsom-rl7kxjjbh
Why don't they just concentrate on her lack of experience?
Can you not copy entire chunks from The Times.
They've sent Mike some very threatening letters in the past when one poster on here kept on doing exactly that on PB
Along with TSE, Alistair M, Richard N.....
When a politician tells you what something isn't about, then that is exactly what it is about.
"This sort of thing never happened when I edited the newspaper", she says.
Then again I'm not on the outrage bus about none policy stuff.
Are you man enough to apologise/retract that? If not, well we know you're impervious to facts.
Really you talk nonsense.
So how do you explain these threads?
Leave's major advantage in the last three weeks of the campaign.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/02/leaves-major-advantage-in-the-last-three-weeks-of-the-campaign-the-tory-press-is-on-their-side/
Perhaps Leave really are going to win this referendum. What if the phone pollsters are wrong
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/05/22/perhaps-leave-really-are-going-to-win-this-referendum/
Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his life. These don’t appear to be the actions of a PM confident of winning the referendum
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/05/01/greater-love-hath-no-man-than-this-that-he-lay-down-his-friends-for-his-life/
Remain’s long term problems
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/04/24/remains-long-term-problems/
Apathy and the older voters might be the key for Out winning the referendum
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/05/31/apathy-and-the-older-voters-might-be-the-key-for-out-winning-the-referendum/
I could link some more that I had written in the same vein, but I don't want to embarrass you any further.
Yes it's terribly sad that Theresa can't have kids but they are shares in the future and they do give you another dimension of emotion that one struggles to experience otherwise.
As to your question, even if this is a storm in a teacup (and I think Leadsom will do about as well as she would have done anyway despite it), she was the one who said these things. Even if her explanations are a-ok, it wasn't her opponents manufacturing something to attack her.
She'll survive this easily, but I can already see if she does say something indisputably terrible we're going to get the same logic as those Corbynistas who hate it when Corbyn's words are directly quoted, aka smearing.
I would personally prefer May though I win a lot more with Leadsom, but I do think people are letting their personal desires get ahead of them.
People are getting so rattled that they are losing sight of what they need to do. It's very much like Remain when they started insulting everybody.
Even with the " I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’, because I think that would be really horrible." I don't think she is going to avoid a shitstorm over this. It's probably curtains.
Leadsom's comments were vile, ill-judged and unworthy of someone who aspires to lead our great nation.