Indeed and Ruth could at times be quite agressive without being nasty with it.

Which is the big difference between them.

I agree with your summary.

I also think that SA has the same soft spot for her in saving her as he has for Michael which would be fine if she really has changed her ways.

All I see is a very sly and conniving game player who now knows that SA favours her, but her undermining of others to get further in the game hasn't changed an iota.

Ruth Badger - even though she was a tough operator - had charm and likeability in a way that Claire does not. It was very telling that when Ruth and Michelle were competing to be the Apprentice in the final episode of that series nearly all of the other fired candidates wanted Ruth to win. She was obviously both liked and respected by them, which was no mean feat when you think about it.

The only reason Claire appears more likeable (to some) is that she had a strong warning from SAS in the photoshoot task. She realised then that she was a lot more vulnerable than she thought, so she's just quietened down a bit, but I still find her mouthy.

The Badger was a different sort altogether, and SAS never had any personal crticism of her other than to suggest towards the end of the series she might be a one trick pony as she shone in the sales tasks.

Claire is nothing more than a chavvy, spiteful, selfish, self-indulgent, stupid, ugly, charmless, graceless, slobby holiday rep.

The Badger rocks!
She was pushy at times, but she was never nasty or agressive - plus she was such a hard worked - my favourite apprentice EVER!

Winning does not necessaryily make you a good team leader. In her first win the boys completely screwed up and in the second lucinda was a far superior leader the whole way through whereas Claire's team made mistake after mistake. Claire only won due to a very fortunate sale right at the end of the task.

Very lucky imo

Fortunate, lucky, headless chicken - we keep hearing these words thrown into the mix whenever somebody who doesn't like Claire's abrasive style hates to admit that she is (by far) the best team leader. It doesn't wash.

She is the best team leader because she gets her team (and let's face it, the second time she won she had both Alex and Michael on her team doing their best to screw it up) to do what she tells them to do. And there have been a lot of team leaders who haven't been able to achieve that - or who falls out with the people under their command from the minute they are set as team leader (I'm thinking of Jenny Celerier, Helene and Alex in particular here).

The only downside to Claire (up until last night) was that when she wasn't team leader, she seemed to be lining up for an argument with whoever was her team leader. Not to try and make them lose, she's always tried to win, just because she didn't seem to like being told what to do. And yet last night she was the complete opposite - she did exactly what was asked of her, and the team won by a mile. And the fact that she has been able to see this, that the team is actually more productive when she pulls in the same direction as the leader rather than coming into conflict with them if she doesn't agree, suggests that she can only get better.

Kevins presenting skills - she should have done the presentations with her background but ducked out of it knowing it would let Kevin hang himself.

jennifer - again very happy to let the PM hang themselves.

Won as team leader twice - week one was up against Alex who was rubbish, 2nd time was very very lucky as IMHO she was rubbish.

Sold 3 dresses in the last task - first week when she hasnt PM when she has actually applied herself, hence the comments made by Nick.

Too little too late IMO

Claire has a touch of the Badger about her.

In my opinion she is not. She is just a loud mouth who has a very aggressive personality.

Actually, the first time Kevin brought up presentations she said she was happy to present (but thought Jenny may be better). It was Kevin who insisted on presenting and then tried to palm it off onto her 2 hrs before it was due. No wonder she then ducked out of it. She was trying to help him beforehand by saying what she'd expect him to answer in it, then when he didn't perform well she tried to give him a few pointers. Helpful.

Secondly, how was Claire happy to let her hang herself? She TOLD Jennifer they bought the wrong items (wrong colour Mosque clock etc) so Jennifer could correct them herself.

As team leader, she can't be faulted in the first task. In the other task didnt she secure the order herself? Despite Alex walking around whinging with a face like a slapped arse.

I'm not convinced you're actually watching the show TBH.

I didn't see her put anyone off buying a dress, just saw people going off to decide whether or not they wanted to spend over £2k on a dress.

And whilst she is a bit abbrasive, I don't think she is a bully, a lot of the bad things she says about people are to camera (not that is a good thing) rather than in an attempt to relentlessly break down their spirit in the manner of someone like Jenny C's or Helene's performance with Lucinda.

Its unfortunate to see this forum, descending into the exact behaviour you all seem to see in another human being. You all accuse Claire of being a bully, yet in here safe from your tormented victim you can call her a bully without repercussions.

I blame the BBC myself, for misleading you all with their graphically edited highlights; portraying someone in only their best (worst moments) for the titillation of your all. It seems they have done their job well, especially if they can make some of you blind to the subliminal conditioning.

Some of us are willing or able to see past the sound bites and judge the person on what we might not see in the show. Others are just unwilling to give anyone the benefit of the doubt; to the point of making their points nasty, derogatory or bringing unfounded accusations against them.

I'd say one thing, look not at others flaws in disgust. Because you probably have just as many flaws, we would find disgusting.

Oh and I have always liked Claire, flaws, warts and all.

Did you watch the show last night? Lee sold thongs and flip flops, and brought in £600. Claire sold wedding dresses, and brought in over five thousand quid. Do get your facts right. Alex (on the other team) sold wedding dresses - but they must have been cheap as chips, cos he only brought in £1400. Not his fault, that's why he wasn't brought back into the boardroom. It could be best for both Alex and Claire separating them. Cos she's been carrying him since week 3, so he's sat back, done nothing, just bad mouthed people and pulled faces. Now she's not there to hold his hand he's actually pulled his finger out and at least tried.

Others like you keep saying this - a talentless, two-faced, manipulative bully - you missed out the word that other people who take the same stance as you keep saying - lucky. That's the one. She's won more tasks than any other team leader, but each time she was lucky. Not good, or clever, or intelligent. Not better than her opponents at making money. Just lucky. It's getting boring...

Both Lee and Claire did well in sales. However, it was a team effort put together by Lucinda as PM. So I think Lucinda deserves some credit here too for getting the best out of her team.

Not to mention that it was 3 dresses, from a known designer at about £1500 a shot. Not very many women are able to just wander along, open their purse and shout 'I want that one' in their very best Little Britain voice.

If you think she did poorly, then they must must think the other team did brilliantly selling 5 dresses for about £300 - £400 a dress. I personally call that appalling sales, as they should have at least sold double that amount. The average price for a wedding dress is £500, which is about what Renaissance were selling.

Absolutely - can't argue with you there. The whole team were great. Lee and Claire sold stuff and made a lot of money. Raef advised her to go with the designer dresses (and even dressed up as a teddy cos he had nothing else to do on the day). Lucinda spotted what each team member's strengths were and gave them a role that suited them. There was no way in hell they could have lost last night.

They were by far the stronger team from the outset. I think the difference is that Lucinda seems to plan better and takes on her team's POV's before making a decision. Helene on the otherhand didn't listen to anyone and decided what she thought best and then wrangled out of it in the BR. There was no way those cakes were complimentary to the dresses that Helene decided on. That's why she was so gutted in losing out on the accessories.

So she ensured that she and Alex would be spared in the BR by choosing Sara and Michael to take on that task knowing full well the cakes weren't in the least complimentary to the tacky dresses she chose.

Yes but if Cliare had had her way, they'd have been flogging similarly cheap Bhs dresses.

Ruth was always being nasty in the way she talked with other people. She was always under the impression that if you objected to anything she said, you were being argumentative, she thought saying "Fact" or "end of" after what she said should signal the end of the discussion. She wasnt professional enough to have a debate with someone if they disagreed, instead she resorted to the above tactics over and over.

I thought Ruth Badger was a thoroughly nasty person who steamrollered her way through the series.

I beg to differ. I feel it was because she knew she could pin the blame on him if they lost.

On the contrary, I think Clare is a watered-down version of the Badger, in the same way as Michael is a limp shadow of Syed, etc.

I think we are, difference is Im not watching it through Claire tinted spectacles.

There is no way I would let her run a company of mine. I doubt Id even let her answer the phones to be honest