Coffee House

David Cameron reads blog comments

7 January 2013

5:37 PM

7 January 2013

5:37 PM

The Cameron/Clegg press conference did not teach us very much — save that the chemistry between the two is as good as ever, that they can still finish each other’s sentences and exchange bad jokes. The Prime Minister’s bad joke related to one of the comments under his interview with Matthew d’Ancona yesterday where he (in effect) said he wanted to stay in No10 until 2020.

When asked about this today, the PM replied that a commentator on the Telegraph Online complained: ‘It’s already 20:51 and you’re still here.’ The assembled journalists treated his joke with the same respectful silence that they did to Clegg’s ‘unvarnished truth’ joke. ‘You’re all very slow today,’ Cameron chided. Part of the silence, I suspect, was surprise that the PM reads the comments under the piece — something journalists don’t always do. I was on Richard Bacon’s Five Live show where he expressed amazement: a PM that spends his time reading comments on blogs? “That way madness lies,” he said.


But Cameron is a faithful reader of blogs: he once told me that he reads Coffee House every day. And it’s hard to read a blog without reading the comments, especially under the Disqus system where the best comments get voted up to the top. James Forsyth’s blog about Diane Abbott’s conversion to family values on Friday, for example, had Trevor Kavanagh as the top comment (with 135 votes) and La Abbott herself adding a defence.

Coffee House, I like to think, has comments that are always worth reading — which is why someone of Kavanagh’s stature joins the debate. Coffee House, quite simply, offers the smartest debate on the web. Now and again, we are trolled – Cabinet members under pseudonyms no doubt – but our new year resolution is to only print comments from our registered users. This will make the smartest debate on the web smarter still.

Now, there is a difference — to paraphrase Thatcher — between blog commentators and the vox populi. But the strength of internet debate is that we, the authors, simply open a conversation which others continue.

I was reading a New Yorker cartoon book last night, and saw a Lillian Ross one from 1947 depicting two men at opposite ends of a bar. The barman asked one: ‘Excuse me, sir, the gentleman over there wants to know if you would care to join him in a little argument.’ That person would probably be online, now, having all the argument he likes. If you like debate, you probably like reading comments on blogs. It’s good to know that the PM does too.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • JohnHoulihan

    Dave — don’t listen to Liberal swine

  • Crocodile Skin Wallet

    I think this is boring… Crocodile Skin Wallet

  • liquid cigarettes

    I would like to say thanks to Fraser Nelson for submit this blog. I am so happy to read this news about David Cameron. David Cameron was born into a wealthy English family. He received a quality Education, and excelled in his studies at a young age. It’s very small description from me. I have read full biography of David Cameron. He is very friendly person. He always do that what people need. Presently, UK is very powerful country, because of David Cameron. He is always working hard for best growth of UK.

  • rndtechnologies786

    Good thought.

  • 文燕

    Both in auto industry and some other industry, universal
    have a great impact. It concluding the following basic
    components: radiator
    , seal
    , quick
    , pipe hose or pipe
    . You can select the suitable spare parts for your car or
    other vehicle.

  • barbie

    How about telling the truth for a change. We won’t get an powers back, the wet rag, as said as much, and 2018 won’t do at all. In fact you may not win the next election so the polls predict, what then for this nation? You will leave us in the grasp of Labour once more, and that means Tories will never be forgiven. As for the USA, they should keep their mouths shut, we don’t need their input.
    No, what you should so is let the people choose their destiny the same as the Falklands will shortly. You are now being conned by Europe, may be its time you listened to some of the ‘odd ones’ in UKIP, who seem well aware how the ground lies and how the country is thinking, Labour and yourself are blind to our wishes, and you will be ignored if this goes on. His so called great speech should now contain the words, the British people will decide their own destiny, and have a referendum now. Blackmail should not work, and this is blackmail from Europe and the USA. We will now see if Cameron is made of steel or brass, both shiny but one is worthless.

  • JabbaTheCat

    “Coffee House, quite simply, offers the smartest debate on the web.”


  • Hugh

    Dave, if you are reading this, get back to bloody work. It’s one thing me wasting away my day on here, but you’re meant to be running the country, and the evidence to date is that you can’t really afford the time off.

  • Scrapper

    Cameron should read John Redwood’s daily blog before he bothers with this here pot pourri, much more interesting reading over at JR’s.

  • NeilMc1

    Telling that Cameron reads Matthew D’Anconna who is a sycophantic supporter of, err, Cameron. Thus he learns nothing from the exercise, other than he has huge support out there in the real world and thus does not need to change.

  • Rhoda Klapp

    He doesn’t just read here, he comments here too. Goes under the name of Hookslaw. 😉

    • Noa

      Really? I’d put him down as telemucus…

  • jazz6o6

    “…….. Coffee House, quite simply, offers the smartest debate on the web…….”

    In your dreams Fraser.

  • The Red Bladder

    I know I shouldn’t but I can’t help but wonder if his lips move as he reads them?


    I don’t believe that David Cameron reads the comments. I don’t believe he is interested in what the conservative electorate think or want. He is too busy leading us all beyond authority into the socialist paradise that he and Clegg and Milliband know that we need even if we don’t.

  • valedictorian16

    I’m not a blogger – just part of vox populi, hopefully he’s read a couple of mine, and is indeed – paying attention!
    Something I, don’t usually- get a lot of, when I come to Spectator, to play.
    When I do get some, it’s usually… all for the wrong reasons.
    Which I am told, often, are mine.

  • AndrewEllis000

    The discussions lately have been relatively troll, and thereby abuse light; and all the better for it. ToryOAP has retired his mask and reverts to his true identity in keeping with the new order. Let us see how long it lasts. And as for Cameron reading these blogs – how masochistic?

  • Steve

    Sometimes the comments are better than the posts, as with most of Alex Massie’s posts.

  • London Calling

    what kubrickguy says I agree…

  • fitalass

    I remember reading the excellent Matthew Parris autobiography a few years ago, and his time working for Mrs Thatcher was fascinating. So reading this article and discovering that Cameron does read some of the comment threads of articles or blogs shouldn’t be such a surprise when you consider that Thatcher according to Parris used to make it a point to check the views of the readers of the Sun or the Mirror.

    Maybe the surprise expressed by some journalists is because it makes it harder to describe Cameron as being out of touch when he makes an effort to do just that online. But I suspect that Thatcher would have been doing exactly the same if technology had been that advanced back in her day as a politician. If only our politicians could be as openly honest, witty or cynical about their opinions of the political lobby as they are in their columns or on twitter about the politicians.; Now that would be a welcome and highly entertaining addition to on line debate. 🙂

  • Bellevue

    Well, Dave, if you do read the comments (which I doubt….) here is my tuppence worth….
    I will never believe another word you say, particularly when it comes to the EU. You LIED on the Marr show about Norway and government by fax.
    I will be voting UKIP and if that allows Labour to win, so what? With the unelected EU as our real government, it doesnt matter which puppet is in charge of our local government in Westminster.
    There is NOTHING you can say that would make me believe you any more.

  • anthony Scholefield

    Unscientific polls work but are not infallible. In other words Cameron could judge popularity,observe counter arguments,foresee tripwires etc by reading commenters but always realizing the data he gets should be counterchecked.

  • London Calling

    I am good… for the Laurel and Hardy of politics, silence is golden unless its positive news without any sentence finished by the other half….:}

  • London Calling

    Just checking i’m still registered

  • Kubrickguy

    Dear David,
    If you are reading this, please consider that many life long
    Tories have become deeply disillusioned with the fact that you have not stuck
    to core Tory principles. Many (myself NOT included) will be voting UKIP in
    protest. Where’s the Hayek in your fiscal policies? You should be lowering
    taxes, rolling back the state and slashing red tape (Cowperthwait). Please consider bringing our troops home and stop waging foreign wars we can not afford, creating enemies in the process. Defend our territories by all means (Falklands, etc…) but no
    more foreign campaigns, we are BROKE we can not afford them. Defense should
    mean just that ‘defense’. £12 Billion foreign aid? The State should not be
    funding this, by all means encourage individuals and private enterprise to fund
    via charities etc… but we are BROKE we can no longer afford it. “We are
    on an economic war footing”, your words not mine, ‘we have to reduce our deficit’, your words not mine. China, India and surplus economies should now be funding aid, they have themoney, and means to do it, we do not.
    You have denied the Country a referendum on the EU, you
    whipped eighty of your own back benchers against the vote, this was deeply
    wrong, regardless of your views, the people of Britain and your own MP’s deserve
    the right to choose. We can join EFTA and still enjoy access rights, trading
    rights with the EU but be free to trade where ever we please, give ‘The People’ the rightto choose, it is not your right to deny them. You still have a chance to be one
    of the great PM’s and win the next election, instead of being remembered as the
    PM who divided and split the Conservative vote causing damage for years to come,
    and the one who denied the British people there choice on Europe. You can still turn the economy around, look no further than the Swiss model, Hayek, Thatcher and Cowperthwait for your working model and it does work, it has been proven to work. Encourage the banks to start lending to British business once more, lower their taxes and get them driving the economy, Thatcher did it, you
    can too. I hope you read this and it gives you the inspiration you need to do
    the right thing for your Country. Churchill, Thatcher, Cameron… It is still
    possible! Prove us all wrong and do the
    right thing. Thank you for reading this…

  • Swiss Bob

    Dave believes in (Catastrophic) Climate change even though the NOAA admits the hypothesis has been falsified, how thick is he?

    • salieri

      I would like to agree – if only I could understand what the second sentence of that quotation is supposed to mean. Garbage In, Garbage Out.

      • Swiss Bob

        It means the hypothesis is bullshit.

  • Boudicca_Icenii

    I think you’re deluding yourselves by saying the Coffee House offers the smartest debate on the web. It doesn’t.
    I doubt if Cameron reads the comments in the DT himself …. I expect a minion does it for him and points out any that are interesting or supportive. It’s getting harder and harder to find any supportive ones.

    • the viceroy’s gin

      Yes, I can’t imagine Dave’d be interested in reading how his party is poised to underperform to even their meager 2010 totals. And this won’t be happening because anybody thinks the Millipedes are anything special. It’ll be a pure rejection of all things Cameroon.

  • wrinkledweasel

    None of this includes me. I wear a tin foil hat. vote Lib Dem and believe that Hitler is alive and living with Iain Dale. Besides, Fraser is in the pay of Common Purpose and the Scientologists so believe not a word he says.

  • the viceroy’s gin

    So the unregistered can no longer comment here? I guess that’s one way for the Speccie teenagers to censor commentary.

    I mean, what could those unregistered plebs possibly have to say that would be of interest to the Londonistan bubble intelligentsia?

    • Luke R

      No-one has to be unregistered, it doesn’t cost anything extra.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        Then it can’t be of much use, other than as a censorship tool.

        • Luke R

          I dont think it’s as much censorship as quality control and accountability. Newspapers cant print anything they choose, neither do they fill their papers with people trolling each other, when people are accountable they tend not to abuse as much.

          Those that aren’t accountable also lack reference and even if they reveal something of note, it wont really be verified or taken with any added credibility.

          • the viceroy’s gin

            But by your own admission above, the registration does none of what you’re now claiming for it… no “quality control”… no “accountability”… nothing.

            It’s nothing, and would appear to be merely a censorship tool.

            • Luke R

              I would say it encourages folk to be a – little – more accountable for what they say, leaning hopefully to more quality posts (beauty being in the eye of the beholder when it comes to quality I would say). I would hazard a guess there was a certain amount of censorship before too. So it does somewhat (or will turn out to do somewhat) what I claim for it.

              If (as you say) by my “own admission”, it does none of what I’m claiming for it and (as you say) “it’s nothing” how can it also be a censorship tool?. It’s either a tool that leans slightly towards what I hope (accountability, less abuse), or what you think (a censorship tool), or something else entirely which you also happen to believe (nothing). Which one of your two mutually exclusive beliefs are you going to hang your hat on?

              • the viceroy’s gin

                It’s you that’s claiming that the policy is “nothing”. I’m claiming that it DOES nothing other than censor a significant portion of the commentariat.

                Now, please explain how this misguided policy brings on these wonderful characteristics you’re attaching to it. Near as I can figure, it is nothing but the aforementioned censorship tool. But I’m prepared to be persuaded otherwise. Give it a shot.

                Well, there is another piece of this. The Speccie teenagers may also want to prepare for a potential revenue grab, and this is likely preparatory for such an attempt. However, I wouldn’t advise that. This publication is nearly valueless, and certainly of no more value to many than the effort it takes to click on it, which I’m certain the teenagers will find out when those clicks drop off now, given the misguided policy. Any guesses what happens when a revenue grab takes place? Right.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Are posts being moderated as well now?

                • Luke R

                  If this publication is nearly valueless, why do you bother with it?, also, I haven’t claimed the policy is nothing.

                  YOU have claimed that I have claimed it’s nothing. YOU are claiming the policy is nothing whist claiming it’s an extra layer of censorship. It cant be both.

                  A claim without explanation whilst demanding explanation from me on (what I see) as claims that are self evident.

                  What don’t you use your real name btw?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Actually, I value the commenters here, or at least a portion of them. The publication itself is substandard, and is just the venue to find and read those commenters. The publication itself is nearly valueless, as mentioned. It just has the cachet that legacy publications generally have, drawing off a more robust masthead, which tends to draw a legacy commentariat, which IS of value.

                  You’ve claimed that the new policy has mysterious benefits, and have provided no explanation for that claim, despite repeated requests. I’ve pointed out that the new policy censors commentary, which is self evident, and requires no explanation.

                  And are you now trying to censor my screen name?

                • Luke R

                  I’ll avoid the you/me/you claiming it’s nothing thread I think, messy.

                  You dismiss my appeal to self evidence, whilst pointing towards your own so-called self evidence. That being, that somehow making people comment on Spectator website by using the registered Disqus method is some new *extra* censorship of notable significance.

                  I have no power to censor your screen name and neither do I want to. My last question was honest enough. Why wouldn’t you use it?. In the past when I haven’t, and still don’t in some cases (I’m changing slowly), it was because my real name was either taken (being able to use your real name seems easier these days) or because I wanted to remain anonymous.

                  On a personal level (here’s MY evidence>) I feel using my real name and importantly in this debate, the same account over different sites makes me feel more responsible for what I say. I’m less likely to start throwing insults around and as it happens for some reason, even to take insult so personally. It also feels less self important than hiding my very ordinary thoughts behind (what can be) some puffed up nom de plume. Nowadays I try to choose to either not speak or stand by what I say under my own name. I think the Disqus system encourages this by making what you have written on some other websites more cross-reference-ble, particularly when people often use different names for different sites which allows them to be less consistent in their views as someone who consistently argues under one personality/name is more likely to.

                  On a blog of mine in which I controlled the output, I might censor if I thought you were being overly insulting, libelous incapable of operating with a little self-censorship, or even adding nothing to the debate (I’ve been banned from sites for this last one, and I accept it). It’s not my place (or The Spectator’s place) to promote those people who think every libelous or overly insulting, dull utterance is some pearl of wisdom worthy of framing (see Youtube/Twitter) – which would be my and their right to do so. I would guess The Spectator censors in the same way that the Times chooses to not print every brainfart that is sent into their letters page, I would guess even less so to a large degree because of reasons of having more space that The Times. The Spectator website allow all the boring ones whilst sensibly deleting the libelous or overly insulting ones, as they always have done I’m sure. There’s nothing wrong with that.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  No, I don’t think I’ll bother reading through that verbose nonsense. A couple sentences in, it seems the same boring drivel you’ve posted previously.

                  You see, simply said, there’s no need for you and the Speccie teenagers to censor anything. Just ignore what isn’t useful, as I just did.

                  The few sentences I read still neglected to support your assertions that the Speccie’s new policy has any value, so we must assume there aren’t reasons to enact it. I mean, other than that you and they want to censor what people say (or set up the aforementioned revenue grab).

                • Luke R

                  Disqus has some uses, looking through your comments it’s obvious you have nothing positive to say for yourself or for anyone else.

                  I’m guessing you were never captain of the debate team either.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  I’m guessing you’d like to censor my comments. Take my advice, it’s easier to ignore people, rather than struggle to censor them.

                  You’re kind of boring though, so it’s an easy ignore.

                • Luke R

                  You’ve said nothing worth censoring even if I could and I’ll choose to ignore what I please. I don’t need your non sequitur logic thank you.

                  You say about me that “You’re kind of boring though, so it’s an easy ignore” (Whilst not ignoring me). If The Spectator should ignore everything rather than censor it would end up looking like Youtube or a twitter thread.
                  You said you ignored parts of my reply and then went on to ask why I haven’t replied to your questions – “The few sentences I read still neglected to support your assertions that the Speccie’s new policy has any value” When I did, but you conveniently ignored them because they didn’t suit the line your going with.

                  Are you one of those “need to have the last word types”? No matter how deranged that last word is is?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Hmmmm, for a guy who doesn’t want to censor me you certainly spent a lot of hot air above whining about me, my name and whatever else.

                  Shorten it up to one paragraph. I’ll read that much, no more. You’re too boring for anything more.

                • Luke R

                  Has this been your first few days on the internet or something?

                  I know it was longer than the pithy one liners you’re probably used reading and dishing out, but if you demand answers of someone you really do owe it to read the reply, it wasn’t war and peace you know.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Nope, 2 paragraphs. You’re too boring for a second.

                • Luke R

                  ZING! you really got me there. LOL! They’ll be teaching kids about that takedown in schools next week. If only I can pick myself up off the canvas for a second.

                  I fear you’re probably extremely comfortable with the way this conversation has gone. It must be a sport for you.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Maybe you should look at this as something other than zinging and censoring. You wouldn’t be so boring. And again, keep it at 2 paragraphs.

                • Luke R

                  Well my little sausage, I suppose we might as well keep going ..

                  You put the phone down.
                  No you.
                  No you.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Wait… censorship, zinging AND cannibalism? And more boring paragraphs?

                • Luke R

                  No you.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Well, the length is improving. But the content? Boring. Still.

                • Luke R

                  We’ll count to three and then we’ll put the phone down at the same time.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  No, lengthening up again. And boring still.

                • Luke R

                  No you.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Better, but still boring.

                • Luke R

                  I’m gambling The Spectator might start censoring the pair of us if this carries on.


                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Well, they and you like your censorship. That’s the first non-boring thing you’ve posted. Keep it up.

                • Luke R

                  My last message wasn’t too long for you?

                  Maybe I have something in common with The Spectator in the same way you and a monkey flinging crap at it’s caged wall do.

                  This could be censored on the “Get a room” clause.

                  No you.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Goodness, a total collapse now. Boring and verbose. A veritable deluge.

                • Luke R

                  Have you ever been wrong?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  So it’s 20 questions then? You’re even boring yourself now.

                • Luke R

                  I think I might have caught the habit of asking questions in which I’m not interested in an answer to from yourself.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Now you’ve gone boring and unintelligible.

                • Luke R

                  I’ve replied to this with a previous message that’s waiting moderation!, It basically says, if you use the word boring again it means I’ve won the argument.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  So your comments are so boring they’re getting moderated?

                  Damn. That’s what I call boring.

                • Luke R

                  Thanks for conceding the whole argument to me. You might be stupid wrong, repetitive and boring but you’re fair.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Well, I’d concede the boring contest to you, obviously. And apparently, the moderator agrees with that result.


    David Cameron wears a hair net in bed.

  • Haldane1

    “He once told me that he reads Coffee House every day”. A long time ago I’d wager.

  • CharlieleChump

    Oh and Dave, pass this to Georgie, the higher you put VAT, the more seductive and profitable it becomes to defraud the VATman.

  • Magnolia

    Before Fraser congratulates himself too much he should remember than the main fault with Disqus is that of the non-collapsible reply system which allows the nasties and the self opinionated to hitch a ride on to a top comment rather than to put one up in their own right and risk being left out or marked down to the bottom.
    Free speech is wonderful but, as we’ve recently found out, hate filled typed spew is a bind which needs to be removed.
    I know that the Dear one reads my comments because he’s taken my advice about the colour of his ties. Purple for Marr yesterday and also for todays PR stuff. Mr Clegg is a Lib Dem today so he has gone back to his unusual (now-a-days) golden yellow tie colour, just for today. Normally he wears the Labour purple tie.
    I advised the boss and the government (here on CH) to wear purple ties, just like Labour, to take the sting and subliminal message out of their moving away from the New Labour red tie time more towards Conservative mimicry.
    It’s nice to know that the boss is a little bit savvy.
    Dave should continue with the blue shirt though which I suspect Ed Miliband and Ed Balls would never dare to wear.
    A blue shirt looks lovely with a purple tie and Dave should continue with the very nice dark navy blue tie for those more serious sombre moments.
    Looking back the one thing that I remember about the government’s wedding day is that they both wore blue suits. It set a trend. Even Labour politicians now wear blue suits. Interesting?

    • Fraser Nelson

      From now on, the trolls wont be able to post on Coffee House – we’ll only take comments from registered users…

      • perdix

        The problem with many blogs is the hysterics of many “odd” people.

        • racyrich

          Is that (thinly disguised) code for UKIPers?

      • TomTom

        really ? That is not very inclusivre

      • Adrian Drummond

        I found it pleasing to see Trevor Kavanagh post on “Parts of the Left are beginning to realise that they got the family wrong.” However, he does not appear to be registered. It would be a shame if this was to be his last post.

      • ShoeOnHead

        fraser, individuals are multifaceted. identity is prismatic, and communities like this exist as a holdover from the interest-driven web. you will lose something very valuable.

        (shoe on head)

      • Justathought

        A troll-free zone, that makes a great change!

      • salieri

        So Con HQ, Lab HQ, DimLump Year 10 Debating Group, Ed Ballsx3 – and some quite important people as well – are all registered, too? What a very interesting Register the Speccie must now hold. It would be so tempting to try a Freedom of Information request…. But it would not, of course, be deemed to be in the public interest.
        For me, the biggest disappointment will be losing most of Andy Carpark’s multiple sock-puppets, which so mischievously but gloriously take the mickey out of the strident, the humourless and those with learning difficulties.

      • Coffeehousewall

        So will telemachus and his many aliases be prevented from posting even though they are registered personas? If not then you have achieved nothing. Trolls are excluded successfully from the www coffeehousewall co uk site by constant strict vigilance.

      • anyfool

        That is a great pity, some of the most amusing and ascerbic comments come from trolls.

        Quickly do a U Turn, show Cameron he is not alone.

      • Malfleur

        Testing, testing, where’s your Neathergate article?, where’s your Neathergate article?

  • Rhoda Klapp

    Dave, if you are reading this, please stop telling us you are going to repatriate powers by a mechanism which cannot work. Also please stop telling us that Norway thing. It is at best a severe misrepresentation of the situation and at worst a lie. And now your europe speech is to be given in the Netherlands. You surely have not lost your certain touch for pissing people off.

    • CharlieleChump

      Not one EU country will agree to Dave’s “renegotiation”, he has no veto, they’ll just bugger on and do what they want anyway. it may take them longer but they have a massive talent for can kicking.

      • jazz6o6

        I wonder what would happen if we unilaterally started to enact laws on our own account and ignored EU regs that didn’t suit us.

        • CharlieleChump

          Our helpful activist judges would grant judicial review and the legislation would be struck down. If we don’t break free of the EU strangle hold we will suffer a lingering fate.

          • CharlieC

            Well more to the point, we’d be taken to the ECJ by the Commission, who would then rule us in violation of whatever random directive covers the breach, then apply a daily fine of €€€€€€ until the UK complied…

          • jazz6o6

            Ah yes I forgot our traitorous judges.

    • TheOtherTurnipTaliban

      Oh noooooooo! We might end up fabulously wealthy and teaming with stunning ladyfolk…

      Well one of the two, anyway.

  • EJ

    These days I disagree with The Speccie’s stance on most issues but I do respect the fact that they allow such lively debate in the comments section. That’s not to be sniffed at in these times of all-pervasive left-wing group-think.

    Let’s hope Dave does read the comments. Might give him some concept of how thoroughly disillusioned conservatives are with his leadership. How angry they are at his total failure to tackle immigration while they watch their country turn into a third world cesspit. How exasperated they are with his lies and deceitful gymnastics over Europe. How dismayed they are at his relentless pursuit of trendy metropolitan causes like gay marriage and overseas aid while the country collapses around us.

    Dave – you are hemorrhaging support. If you do not grow a pair and start governing like a conservative you will be stuffed in 2015.

    • CharlieleChump

      EJ: you get my vote

    • Seasurfer1

      David, In the recent Honours List I note that the least number of awards were given to the real Wealth Creators of our great country – Manufacturers, Retailers ,Primary Industralists, Agriculture and Finance.
      Let us try and get the UK back to the greatest Workshop of the World and add real wealth to the Country. Productivity is no longer a fashionable word and practice – but it should be. Added value is the success of the Economy and will ensure that you maintain a Prime Ministerial Role.
      Please do not throw it all away on a redefinition of Marriage, or by upsetting the Mothers vote by taking away Child Benefit.
      To achieve the above is quite simple – given the will.


      EJ, you are aware that many of the long term conservative commenters here have been simply banned under the latest regime? While the trolls have been given a free rein.

      • arnoldo87

        One man’s troll is another man’s loyalist. If Cameron himself made a post on this blog, he would probably be regarded by most as a troll

        • Noa

          And, if not a troll, certainly an odd fellow and a metropolitan liberal.

  • Noa

    ‘It’s already 20:51 and you’re still here.’ The assembled journalists treated his joke with the same respectful silence that they did to Clegg’s ‘unvarnished truth’ joke…

    Very droll that, Fraser.

    Perhaps, like many of the posters on CH, they missed the humour, or simply mistook the Odd Couple for clowns rather than comedians.

  • xyz xyz

    The leftie trolls… is david cameron posting!

  • TomTom

    So Cameron and Clegg finish each others sentences…. the way the Coalition is going they could get married and become Bishops

    • Michael Cockerham

      That really would bring a whole new meaning to bashing the bishop.

    • CharlieleChump

      But they’d fail at that too . . .

    • barbie

      That really tickled me, thanks!