On Speculating About Speculation

[danieldwilliam]

Speculation rages on twitter about the identities  of the two political figures at the centre of revelations about an affair which has said to have stunned the Prime Minister and rocked Downing Street.

I say rages – a few dozen tweets.

A few brave individuals (1) have even gone as far as to name two potential figures (2).

Generally I’m not that interested in the sexual relationships of politicians (3) – unless they are exposing themselves as hypocrites I fully expect them to behave much like other people and, whilst I don’t exactly approve of adultery it doesn’t particularly affect the ability of the people involved.

But in this case I think it might.

If we ever find out.




(1) utterly stupid in the light of the MacApline – Bercow case

(2) including one wag who suffixed his tweet of “If it were X and Y that would interesting.” with  *innocent face* clearly not having grasped the implications of the Bercow decision or the Attorney General’s recent note on the applicability of the contempt of court for cases sub judice

(3) as distinct from sexually harassing folk. Or sleeping with someone connected with Russian intelligence.

Comments

[andrewducker]

I'm surprised that it's not been made public outside of the UK.

[andrewducker]

I'm going for Samantha Cameron and Kate Middleton.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

It's remarkable just how thoroughly, and easily, Twitter has been silenced on this by the show of force on MacAlpine.

[f4f3.livejournal.com]

It's funny, but after John Major and Edwina Currie all other political sex scandals are going to be an anticlimax. Obviously.

[rhythmaning.livejournal.com]

Several people on Twitter reckoned they knew who it was last night. None came up with the goods. "*innocent face*"