|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Feb 28, 2024 8:25:13 GMT
He isn't. That's in your head. If he was, he wouldn't remain popular with the electorate. He won the election because he gets the muslim bloc vote. When all the muslims in London vote for you it makes you hard to beat - especially if the non-muslim vote is split between other candidates. And it looks like he's leading in the polls again. He'll win again unless the non-muslims use the same tactics and select one candidate and all vote for him/her. What the muslims are doing is basically "ballot stuffing" where the local imams collect up the signed ballots and fill in the name of the selected muslim candidate. This is illegal. It was what Lutfur Rahman did to win the Tower Hamlets election. You make it sound like all the muslims vote for one candidate and all the non Muslims vote for the other parties. Muslims only make up 10% of Londoners, so what you say is patently untrue. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Feb 28, 2024 8:29:23 GMT
I've already created a thread on the London Mayoral race in the English politics section. I linked this morning's poll in there too. Not really related to Westminster though. But you have steered well clear of the "welcome to Lndonistan" thread! I wonder why? As id we didn't know,, I'd rather have a serious debate in the correct section rather than just reply to your constant discrimination. 🙄 |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 28, 2024 8:39:14 GMT
But you have steered well clear of the "welcome to Lndonistan" thread! I wonder why? As id we didn't know,, I'd rather have a serious debate in the correct section rather than just reply to your constant discrimination. 🙄 So in otherwords you would rather hide away from the truth. I asked you a while back to name just one single good thing that Khan has done for londonistan I am still waiting. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 28, 2024 9:00:16 GMT
He won the election because he gets the muslim bloc vote. When all the muslims in London vote for you it makes you hard to beat - especially if the non-muslim vote is split between other candidates. And it looks like he's leading in the polls again. He'll win again unless the non-muslims use the same tactics and select one candidate and all vote for him/her. What the muslims are doing is basically "ballot stuffing" where the local imams collect up the signed ballots and fill in the name of the selected muslim candidate. This is illegal. It was what Lutfur Rahman did to win the Tower Hamlets election. You make it sound like all the muslims vote for one candidate and all the non Muslims vote for the other parties. Muslims only make up 10% of Londoners, so what you say is patently untrue. You're very naive. The muslim population of London is 15% now. In the last election Khan got 1 miillon votes, Sean Bailey got 900,000, Sian Berry got 200,000 and Lisa Porrit got 100,000. The muslim population of London is about 1.2 million, the total population of London is about 9 million. So look at those figures. The 15% of muslims will almost certainly all have voted (and a few more probably). But the turnout for the non-muslims was about 1 in 8 - and it was split. If it hadn't been split the non-muslim vote might just have won. But only just. And that's 85% of the London population against a 15% block vote. That's the power of a group who all vote the same way and all turn out to vote. They're very hard to beat. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Feb 28, 2024 9:09:41 GMT
You make it sound like all the muslims vote for one candidate and all the non Muslims vote for the other parties. Muslims only make up 10% of Londoners, so what you say is patently untrue. You're very naive. The muslim population of London is 15% now. In the last election Khan got 1 miillon votes, Sean Bailey got 900,000, Sian Berry got 200,000 and Lisa Porrit got 100,000. The muslim population of London is about 1.2 million, the total population of London is about 9 million. So look at those figures. The 15% of muslims will almost certainly all have voted (and a few more probably). But the turnout for the non-muslims was about 1 in 8 - and it was split. If it hadn't been split the non-muslim vote might just have won. But only just. And that's 85% of the London population against a 15% block vote. That's the power of a group who all vote the same way and all turn out to vote. They're very hard to beat. It's probably the Russians fault, after all they are the root cause of everything else, I am sure somebody will think so. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 28, 2024 10:06:23 GMT
He isn't. That's in your head. If he was, he wouldn't remain popular with the electorate. He won the election because he gets the muslim bloc vote. When all the muslims in London vote for you it makes you hard to beat - especially if the non-muslim vote is split between other candidates. And it looks like he's leading in the polls again. He'll win again unless the non-muslims use the same tactics and select one candidate and all vote for him/her. What the muslims are doing is basically "ballot stuffing" where the local imams collect up the signed ballots and fill in the name of the selected muslim candidate. This is illegal. It was what Lutfur Rahman did to win the Tower Hamlets election. Yes. This 'community' is not really engaging in democracy in good faith - they are using democratic institutions to further interests and domain of islam - which is itself counter-democratic. This is what was predicted by the wise and it is what is happening. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Feb 28, 2024 11:12:05 GMT
He isn't. That's in your head. If he was, he wouldn't remain popular with the electorate. He won the election because he gets the muslim bloc vote. When all the muslims in London vote for you it makes you hard to beat - especially if the non-muslim vote is split between other candidates. And it looks like he's leading in the polls again. He'll win again unless the non-muslims use the same tactics and select one candidate and all vote for him/her. What the muslims are doing is basically "ballot stuffing" where the local imams collect up the signed ballots and fill in the name of the selected muslim candidate. This is illegal. It was what Lutfur Rahman did to win the Tower Hamlets election. This post is nonsense, why should anyone vote for a particular candidate based purely upon their faith ? Even if it were true, he would still require a SIGNIFICANT percentage of non-Muslim votes to (A) get elected, and (B) to be so far ahead in the polls as he is. 85% of the electorate are not Muslims, also, as reported widely in todays press, there are those Muslims who do not support him, and wont vote for him, in particular the more Conservative and orthodox Muslims who do not support his views on such things as LGBT Rights and equality. People who vote Labour in the London Mayoral contest are a cross section of the electorate, many educated middle class people vote Labour, many working class, probably MOST Muslims, and MOST people of ethnic minority. You cannot get away from the fact that the conclusions of the far Right nutters on these boards simply dont make any sense. They say that Khan is a terrible Mayor, that he has made London into a "shithole", yet he remains extremely popular. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 28, 2024 12:23:16 GMT
He won the election because he gets the muslim bloc vote. When all the muslims in London vote for you it makes you hard to beat - especially if the non-muslim vote is split between other candidates. And it looks like he's leading in the polls again. He'll win again unless the non-muslims use the same tactics and select one candidate and all vote for him/her. What the muslims are doing is basically "ballot stuffing" where the local imams collect up the signed ballots and fill in the name of the selected muslim candidate. This is illegal. It was what Lutfur Rahman did to win the Tower Hamlets election. This post is nonsense, why should anyone vote for a particular candidate based purely upon their faith ? Even if it were true, he would still require a SIGNIFICANT percentage of non-Muslim votes to (A) get elected, and (B) to be so far ahead in the polls as he is. 85% of the electorate are not Muslims, also, as reported widely in todays press, there are those Muslims who do not support him, and wont vote for him, in particular the more Conservative and orthodox Muslims who do not support his views on such things as LGBT Rights and equality. People who vote Labour in the London Mayoral contest are a cross section of the electorate, many educated middle class people vote Labour, many working class, probably MOST Muslims, and MOST people of ethnic minority. You cannot get away from the fact that the conclusions of the far Right nutters on these boards simply dont make any sense. They say that Khan is a terrible Mayor, that he has made London into a "shithole", yet he remains extremely popular. Khan wasn't even voted in fiddles during the pandemic. The arsehole is just there by default.. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 28, 2024 13:13:50 GMT
He won the election because he gets the muslim bloc vote. When all the muslims in London vote for you it makes you hard to beat - especially if the non-muslim vote is split between other candidates. And it looks like he's leading in the polls again. He'll win again unless the non-muslims use the same tactics and select one candidate and all vote for him/her. What the muslims are doing is basically "ballot stuffing" where the local imams collect up the signed ballots and fill in the name of the selected muslim candidate. This is illegal. It was what Lutfur Rahman did to win the Tower Hamlets election. This post is nonsense, why should anyone vote for a particular candidate based purely upon their faith ? Even if it were true, he would still require a SIGNIFICANT percentage of non-Muslim votes to (A) get elected, and (B) to be so far ahead in the polls as he is. 85% of the electorate are not Muslims, also, as reported widely in todays press, there are those Muslims who do not support him, and wont vote for him, in particular the more Conservative and orthodox Muslims who do not support his views on such things as LGBT Rights and equality. People who vote Labour in the London Mayoral contest are a cross section of the electorate, many educated middle class people vote Labour, many working class, probably MOST Muslims, and MOST people of ethnic minority. You cannot get away from the fact that the conclusions of the far Right nutters on these boards simply dont make any sense. They say that Khan is a terrible Mayor, that he has made London into a "shithole", yet he remains extremely popular. Why would Khan refer to his faith in his election pamphlets. I have no idea what faith almost every other political figure is but we all know when a Muslim seeks election becasue that is always mentioned by himself. It is either important or not important, if it is important why, if it is not important why mention it. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 28, 2024 13:22:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 28, 2024 13:30:47 GMT
He won the election because he gets the muslim bloc vote. When all the muslims in London vote for you it makes you hard to beat - especially if the non-muslim vote is split between other candidates. And it looks like he's leading in the polls again. He'll win again unless the non-muslims use the same tactics and select one candidate and all vote for him/her. What the muslims are doing is basically "ballot stuffing" where the local imams collect up the signed ballots and fill in the name of the selected muslim candidate. This is illegal. It was what Lutfur Rahman did to win the Tower Hamlets election. This post is nonsense, why should anyone vote for a particular candidate based purely upon their faith ? Even if it were true, he would still require a SIGNIFICANT percentage of non-Muslim votes to (A) get elected, and (B) to be so far ahead in the polls as he is. 85% of the electorate are not Muslims, also, as reported widely in todays press, there are those Muslims who do not support him, and wont vote for him, in particular the more Conservative and orthodox Muslims who do not support his views on such things as LGBT Rights and equality. People who vote Labour in the London Mayoral contest are a cross section of the electorate, many educated middle class people vote Labour, many working class, probably MOST Muslims, and MOST people of ethnic minority. You cannot get away from the fact that the conclusions of the far Right nutters on these boards simply dont make any sense. They say that Khan is a terrible Mayor, that he has made London into a "shithole", yet he remains extremely popular. It actually doesn't require a significant percentage of non-muslim votes to get elected - in fact it doesn't need ANY. As I tried to explain a 15% of voters who all vote for the same candidate and also ALL vote can easily beat the 85% of non-muslim voters who split their vote between candidates and do NOT all vote - in mayoral elections the turn out is typically very low. The last election which Khan won is a perfect example. Even if Khan gets ONLY the muslim vote he will be very hard to beat when the non-muslim vote is split 12 ways. That's why the TMV (The Muslim Vote) group is so dangerous. They intend to target marginals (where a small number of votes can swing the decision) and constituencies where the MP is not muslim-friendly. They can easily decide the outcome of an election with the first past the post system. As for why the muslims tend to vote for other muslims, it's because muslims stick together in their tight isolated communities and don't regard non-mulims (the kuffar) very highly. It probably doesn't apply to any other religious group. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Feb 28, 2024 13:34:20 GMT
This post is nonsense, why should anyone vote for a particular candidate based purely upon their faith ? Even if it were true, he would still require a SIGNIFICANT percentage of non-Muslim votes to (A) get elected, and (B) to be so far ahead in the polls as he is. 85% of the electorate are not Muslims, also, as reported widely in todays press, there are those Muslims who do not support him, and wont vote for him, in particular the more Conservative and orthodox Muslims who do not support his views on such things as LGBT Rights and equality. People who vote Labour in the London Mayoral contest are a cross section of the electorate, many educated middle class people vote Labour, many working class, probably MOST Muslims, and MOST people of ethnic minority. You cannot get away from the fact that the conclusions of the far Right nutters on these boards simply dont make any sense. They say that Khan is a terrible Mayor, that he has made London into a "shithole", yet he remains extremely popular. Why would Khan refer to his faith in his election pamphlets. I have no idea what faith almost every other political figure is but we all know when a Muslim seeks election becasue that is always mentioned by himself. It is either important or not important, if it is important why, if it is not important why mention it. Sadiq Khan's faith IS important to him, he is a practicing Muslim It is not he who continually points out the fact that he is a Muslim, it is people like you, and others on these boards, who constantly feel the need to point out that someone is Muslim, especially if they happen to have done anything wrong, a criminal or a terrorist or a child abuser, the VERY FIRST THING you point out is their faith. Anything to vilify the Muslims Which is probably why Sadiq Khan has repeatedly gone out of his way to preach tolerance towards others, towards other faiths and peoples, and tolerance towards other minorities such as the LGBT community. Its probably why he constantly reminds people of his views on equality and women for example. The world needs more people like Sadiq Khan who accept people for what they are and treats them equally We need LESS people like Lee Anderson and Nigel Farage, who spend too much time attempting to divide society, and create a toxic atmosphere. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 28, 2024 13:44:34 GMT
Why would Khan refer to his faith in his election pamphlets. I have no idea what faith almost every other political figure is but we all know when a Muslim seeks election becasue that is always mentioned by himself. It is either important or not important, if it is important why, if it is not important why mention it. Sadiq Khan's faith IS important to him, he is a practicing Muslim It is not he who continually points out the fact that he is a Muslim, it is people like you, and others on these boards, who constantly feel the need to point out that someone is Muslim, especially if they happen to have done anything wrong, a criminal or a terrorist or a child abuser, the VERY FIRST THING you point out is their faith. Anything to vilify the Muslims Which is probably why Sadiq Khan has repeatedly gone out of his way to preach tolerance towards others, towards other faiths and peoples, and tolerance towards other minorities such as the LGBT community. Its probably why he constantly reminds people of his views on equality and women for example. The world needs more people like Sadiq Khan who accept people for what they are and treats them equally We need LESS people like Lee Anderson and Nigel Farage, who spend too much time attempting to divide society, and create a toxic atmosphere. So if his faith is important to him can we look at his faith, assess what it says and make judgements about him based on what we find? Or is how he views the faith a secret that only he knows. As a basic assumption we can be sure he believe that there is no other God but Allah and Mohammad is his prophet. Why can people not question his faith his beliefs in the same way Tim Farron was interrogated and that Jacob Rees Mogg is viewed for his Catholicism? |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Feb 28, 2024 13:46:30 GMT
This post is nonsense, why should anyone vote for a particular candidate based purely upon their faith ? Even if it were true, he would still require a SIGNIFICANT percentage of non-Muslim votes to (A) get elected, and (B) to be so far ahead in the polls as he is. 85% of the electorate are not Muslims, also, as reported widely in todays press, there are those Muslims who do not support him, and wont vote for him, in particular the more Conservative and orthodox Muslims who do not support his views on such things as LGBT Rights and equality. People who vote Labour in the London Mayoral contest are a cross section of the electorate, many educated middle class people vote Labour, many working class, probably MOST Muslims, and MOST people of ethnic minority. You cannot get away from the fact that the conclusions of the far Right nutters on these boards simply dont make any sense. They say that Khan is a terrible Mayor, that he has made London into a "shithole", yet he remains extremely popular. It actually doesn't require a significant percentage of non-muslim votes to get elected - in fact it doesn't need ANY. As I tried to explain a 15% of voters who all vote for the same candidate and also ALL vote can easily beat the 85% of non-muslim voters who split their vote between candidates and do NOT all vote - in mayoral elections the turn out is typically very low. The last election which Khan won is a perfect example. Even if Khan gets ONLY the muslim vote he will be very hard to beat when the non-muslim vote is split 12 ways. That's why the TMV (The Muslim Vote) group is so dangerous. They intend to target marginals (where a small number of votes can swing the decision) and constituencies where the MP is not muslim-friendly. They can easily decide the outcome of an election with the first past the post system. As for why the muslims tend to vote for other muslims, it's because muslims stick together in their tight isolated communities and don't regard non-mulims (the kuffar) very highly. It probably doesn't apply to any other religious group. Except that Sadiq Khan won his last Mayoral election with 40% of the voters voting for him, and in the second round 55% of the vote. The Muslim vote in itself is splintered, with most Muslims opposed to radical Islam or Islamic policies, most British Muslims want to practice and celebrate their faith and culture within the framework of an open and free democratic society where Freedom Of Religion is respected. The numbers of British Muslims who want this kind of society is growing, particularly amongst younger Muslims, who wish to respect their culture, but also want to go to nightclubs and indulge in a Western lifestyle. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 28, 2024 14:09:37 GMT
Why would Khan refer to his faith in his election pamphlets. I have no idea what faith almost every other political figure is but we all know when a Muslim seeks election becasue that is always mentioned by himself. It is either important or not important, if it is important why, if it is not important why mention it. Sadiq Khan's faith IS important to him, he is a practicing Muslim It is not he who continually points out the fact that he is a Muslim, it is people like you, and others on these boards, who constantly feel the need to point out that someone is Muslim, especially if they happen to have done anything wrong, a criminal or a terrorist or a child abuser, the VERY FIRST THING you point out is their faith. Anything to vilify the Muslims Which is probably why Sadiq Khan has repeatedly gone out of his way to preach tolerance towards others, towards other faiths and peoples, and tolerance towards other minorities such as the LGBT community. Its probably why he constantly reminds people of his views on equality and women for example. The world needs more people like Sadiq Khan who accept people for what they are and treats them equally We need LESS people like Lee Anderson and Nigel Farage, who spend too much time attempting to divide society, and create a toxic atmosphere. No we don't: We have spent decades listening to people like you preaching diversity and tolerance to people who don't share our values, and this is where we've ended up - with democracy under threat from the very people whose rights we've been so keen to defend. So we need more people like Lee Anderson and Nigel Farage who are prepared to speak out and much, much less of your increasingly threadbare bullshit. |
|
