Next Mayor of London

sketchley

rjsterry wrote:

Sketchley wrote:

Seriously my problem with Ken is having made an astute observation that if a politician spend too long in office (in his case he suggested two terms as mayor) that politician would have issues with cronyism, then he decided to stand for third term. He then followed this up by spectacular proving the point http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Living ... llegations

I don't, trust him to do anything other than further his own agenda. He just doesn't seem sincere at all ever. I just cannot bring myself to vote for him. Boris for all his faults, genuinely seems sincere, at least to me.

Not that I think you are wrong about Ken, but which politicians do you think don't pursue their own agenda? Who elese's agenda would they pursue? If they didn't one could reasonably criticise them for not believing in their own policies. So long as they are up front with what their agenda is, I don't see how it is a problem.

Fair point well made. The difference is that i feel ken hides his agenda behind amongst other things being a man of the people.....

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

MBC, thanks for making my point. Very few of my ilk will ever forget the things Boris has said. The fact that they would consider or are willing to vote for him over Ken, says something.

What does it say? That they value traffic light phasing and double decker buses are more important issues than institutional racism and police injustice?

No, that in terms of surface layer headline politics (because that's about as deeply as the regular joe research into it) they'd rather vote Boris than Ken.

If the regular joe researched into politics a lot more of my ilk would vote Tory (it's like the Obama phenom, it was unthinkable to even consider not voting for him but when you actually start explaining he wanted to raise taxes and other stuff, those things were largely unpopular to his electorate. They'd still vote for him though).

This might be the Chimay talking, but I think thats a hugely patronising thing to say about your "ilk". I can't believe you're *actually* suggesting that people voted for Obama just because he's mixed race... That if only your "ilk" would get over their political ignorance they could go ahead and vote tory...

Good god man.

Kerguelen

The Beginner wrote:

...acknowledging that the extreme left as represented by Stalin (allegedly) and the extreme right as represented by Hitler (allegedly) seem to loop round and just about join each other...

That's the thing, though.

They do.

Not much difference between the extreme authoritarians. If Hitler & Stalin could have got together over some nice bratwurst / borscht they would have found a lot of common ground. Don't forget the Nazis started out as the National Socialist Workers' Party (NSDAP).

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

MBC, thanks for making my point. Very few of my ilk will ever forget the things Boris has said. The fact that they would consider or are willing to vote for him over Ken, says something.

What does it say? That they value traffic light phasing and double decker buses are more important issues than institutional racism and police injustice?

No, that in terms of surface layer headline politics (because that's about as deeply as the regular joe research into it) they'd rather vote Boris than Ken.

If the regular joe researched into politics a lot more of my ilk would vote Tory (it's like the Obama phenom, it was unthinkable to even consider not voting for him but when you actually start explaining he wanted to raise taxes and other stuff, those things were largely unpopular to his electorate. They'd still vote for him though).

This might be the Chimay talking, but I think thats a hugely patronising thing to say about your "ilk". I can't believe you're *actually* suggesting that people voted for Obama just because he's mixed race... That if only your "ilk" would get over their political ignorance they could go ahead and vote tory...

Good god man.

There are those who voted and will vote for Obama purely because of his colour. To some his policies won't matter, to others they won't even be sure what his policies are.

It has long since been acknowledged that the Tories have taken for granted the 'ethnic minority vote' partly because from an ideological stand point conservatives don't make an emphasis on acknowledging every single possible ethnic minority in the same way liberals do. That said many ethnic minorites are fundamentally conservative, however as the Tory party doesn't traditionally represent them or cater for them (ethnic minorities usually being amongst the lower/working classes in this country and the Tories cutting benefits for example) the default position is to vote Labour/Liberal.