RUTH Davidson, like Wet Wet Wet and measles, is making a comeback.
The darling of the commentariat returned to frontline politics last Saturday and straight back into the hearts of the journalists in the Unionist media.
“She’s back: and Ruth Davidson could be the one person who can save the Tories”, screamed the headline on a Martin Kettle column in The Guardian.
Yesterday, many of the UK’s newspapers dedicated acres of coverage to baby Sussex, but it turns out he was only the media’s second most anticipated arrival this weekend.
Actually, in fairness, her return was not massively well received by all of the nation’s hacks.
“Complaints that Ms Davidson is a one-trick pony are not entirely mistaken,” Alex Massie wrote in The Times.
While Andrew Nicoll, writing in The Sun, noted: “So successful have the Tories been in holding the SNP to account and blocking a second referendum that we are now on the verge of Ms Sturgeon introducing a new Referendum Bill to the Scottish Parliament.”
Ouch.
WATCH: Davidson can’t name ONE thing she’s delivered for Scotland
But there was plenty of sympathetic coverage, and from one journalist in particular.
“Two years out from polling day, I can’t tell you whether she will pull it off. I can tell you this: she has what it takes,” he wrote about the Colonel’s ambition to become the next first minister.
“She has that magic alloy of compassion and steely determination, of confidence and humility.
“She believes in herself and her cause and when you are in the fight of your political life, that is what counts most of all.”
Can anyone guess the writer?
READ MORE: Davidson accused of ‘rewriting history’ over Section 30 stance
Of course you can. Step forward please Stephen Daisley of the Daily Mail.
“Her speech struck the opening bars of a lilting lullaby to hush the country’s fears of her party and to soothe them into the idea of a Tory government running Scotland,” Daisley gushed.
Jings. Luckily that’s all there was from him ... oh no wait ... there was also this: “That smile — the grin that can light up a thousand cybernat accounts.”
And this: “There is a lot of old sexist rot about motherhood softening women politicians. Davidson remains just as fierce.”
Fierce? It really is enough to give you the boke.
That’s not the worst of it, however.
“In the hall, they gurgled with delight just to have her back,” he purred. “Mummy’s home.”
Jeezo. Rest assured, if a National columnist ever calls Nicola Sturgeon “mummy” The Jouker will burn this paper to the ground.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel