I seem to be taking a bit of a kicking. This is my last post, as I am about to name change (for other reasons than avoiding being hounded).
What do I think of AL?
In the beginning, I thought:
I thought she was really good on the EU debates - which were the first I had heard of her. I was impressed that she had been CIO of Invesco Perpetual for 10 years, and from that I deduced a series of skills and personal attributes that you would need to do that job well. Then, I was impressed with the polite, clear, calm way she conducted herself on the MN webchat. I read that she'd been sexually discriminated against when returning from maternity leave and TBH I was impressed that she'd managed to overcome that, as it can end many a career. Finally, I read that she had a special interest in very young children, something which probably motivates me more than anything else. So, to me, having voted for Brexit myself, this was a woman who ticked a lot of the right boxes.
However, I am not some sort of politics obsessive, so although I watch some political programs I don't exactly devote my day to it. One thing I did not do was read AL's blog. I heard reference to it for the first time two days ago when the political hacks started trawling through it looking for dirt on her, and I googled it for the first time yesterday afternoon basically between my two posts that were four mins apart - the first one saying that I thought the offending views Breakingdad referenced were taken from a blog and the post four minutes giving the URL.
A few days ago, my positive opinion on AL began to weaken. I was not impressed by the lying about her CV. Not being CIO blew a big hole in her profile and the stupidity of telling lies that can easily be checked put a big question mark over her.
With regard to that blog piece, on family life, I posted the URL and then read it. TBH I scanned past the title, not giving it much thought at all. I was looking for an attack on single mothers which is what the post was being described as. I couldn't find justification for calling it an attack on single parents. I read it as a call for a sensitively handled debate into what's best for children, not whether single parents were bad people or otherwise.
Having had it pointed out to me quite strongly, I can see that the title was ill-chosen and could be offensive. Personally, I suspect that the offence was not intended but its clearly been taken. The 70% statistic is worth saying if true, but was it true in 2006, or ever?
I think, like the lying, and being caught doing it, that's another bad sign about AL. I am wondering if she has learned to say things more carefully since 2006 when she was still working? I would expect she has because she obviously isn't stupid and that was at the very beginning of her political life, when she was just a local councillor but now she's running for PM.
So, I'm not a Conservative party member, and therefore will not be voting. However, if I was I am not sure whether I would vote for AL or abstain, because I couldn't bring myself to vote for TM.