Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Women are suffering more than men, proportionately, from the cuts, and there is his habit of patronising women in parliament, even if it is cross-party (his rudeness, at least, is democratic). He said "calm down dear" to Labour MP Angela Eagle during a debate; it was Prospect who compared him to a private gynaecologist and he is in that incarnation, all bulging blue eyes and false concern. Last week he called his own MP Nadine Dorries "frustrated" during prime minister's questions. He then giggled and apologised ? government by U-turn and giggle.

He not doing women any favours with attitude.



http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/jan2011/8/4/image-1-for-paper-pics-18-jan-2011-gallery-553268354.jpg

Women are suffering more than men, proportionately, from the cuts


UUUURRGH! More of this Fawcett Society crap. Women are 'suffering' proportionally more than men because women *benefit* proportionally more than men from government spending. More women than men are employed by the PS. Plus also the FS mistakenly included child benefit payments as female income.


I didn't hear any complaints during the good years that men were benefiting less from Budget announcements.


As someone once quipped, if there was a major catastrophe the Guardian headline would read, "WORLD COMING TO END - WOMEN DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED.

It not just the cuts Lol it is the way he perceives women that old Tory hooray henry type the little women at home thing going on. I think the reason why women voters are put off him is women in tend bare a grudge when you piss them off not to mention his patronising comments recently.
As for the other stuff, I think he is realising it is a problem. The PR people are onto it (though the list of stuff released yesterday to attract the female vote was rather laughable). He'll change his spots quickly enough now he realises it could cost him votes.

Ridgley Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Last week he called his own MP

> Nadine Dorries "frustrated" during prime

> minister's questions. He then giggled and

> apologised ? government by U-turn and giggle.


Ah yes, this is the one where the slow news day at the Guardian took this completely out of context. Did anyone see Nadine Dorries on Newnight after this?


And I say this as someone who isn't a fan of Cameron either.

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> a Guardian-reading pedant writes:

>

> if you google Nadine Dorries frustrated you get

>

> this - heavy on the Mail, less so on the Guardian


I wasn't using this as an opportunity to take a pop at the paper, it happened to be the only one that I'd read and was able to comment upon. As I said, Newsnmight will put you straight on the Nadine Dorries story. No need to be so defensive Guardianistas.


Nuclear war every 28 days!!!!!!!!!!


PS politicians changing their spots when they realise it could cost them votes?! Pass the smellng salts please :)

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
    • There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda and far more across their briefs than any minister I've seen in years. The consensus was that Labour are so unpopular and untrusted by the electorate already, as are the Conservatives, that breaking the manifesto pledge on income tax wouldn't drive their approval ratings any lower, so they should, and I quote, 'Roll The Dice', hope for the best and see where we are in a couple of years time. As a strategy, i don't know whether I find that quite worrying or just an honest appraisal of what most governments actually do in practice.
    • They are a third of the way through their term Earl. It's no good blaming other people anymore. They only have three years left to fix what is now their own mess. And its not just lies in the manifesto. There were lies at the last budget too, when they said that was it, they weren't coming back for more tax and more borrowing. They'd already blamed the increase in NIC taxes on what they claimed was a thorough investigation. They either knew everything then or they lied about that too .   They need to stop lying and start behaving. If they don't the next government won't be theirs, it will be led by Nigel Farage.  They have to turn it round rapidly. Blaming other people, telling lies and breaking promises isn't going to cut it any more.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...