Former BNP man says he intends to vote for Rabina Khan to be Tower Hamlets Mayor

http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/news/politics/10_candidates_running_for_tower_hamlets_mayor_to_replace_deposed_lutfur_rahman_1_4075822

Rabina Khan - eloquently praising Lutfur Rahman who endorsed her candidacy while declaring that she is very much her own woman.

Nicholas McQueen the UKIP Tower Hamlets Mayoral Candidate

A former member of the BNP, no less, says:

Here is the choice.

Elaine BAGSHAW (Liberal Democrats)
John BIGGS (Labour)
Andy ERLAM (Red Flag–Anti-Corruption)
John FOSTER (Green)
Peter GOLDS (Conservative)
Vanessa Helen HUDSON (Animal Welfare)
Hafiz Abdul KADIR (independent)
Rabina KHAN (independent)
Nicholas MCQUEEN (UKIP)
Md Motiur RAHMAN NANU (independent)

I suppose I should say Nicholas MCQUEEN (UKIP). However, this time I think I would like to vote for someone who might actually win. 

I remember Peter GOLDS (Conservative) screaming at police officers near a polling station in an local election once that I was passing out 'seditious literature' (i.e BNP leaflets) and that I ought to be stopped. The police responded by asking me to move about 3 feet. I think it would be difficult to give such a man my vote. 

John BIGGS (Labour) is a boring Labour machine politician, forever burnishing his 'anti-fascist' credentials whenever necessary. And there is no point in voting for any of the others except - Rabina Khan. 

Why? 

(1) I have already had two leaflets from Khan's team, whereas the others have delivered none to me whatsoever. The Rahman/Khan team do seem to be the most serious about winning. 

(2) I don't think on reflection that Rahman received a fair trial, for a number of reasons, one of which is that criminal matters should not be tried in a civil court. 

(3) Even if Rahman is as corrupt as they say, his management of the Muslim vote is in many ways no worse than the manipulation of the Muslim vote practiced in the past by Labour. Labour are, of course, annoyed that they can no longer rely on this automatic caucus. 

The tribal and divided state of race relations in Tower Hamlets is largely the creation of the Labour Party, not of Lutfur Rahman. It was Labour that alienated the white vote, especially in the 1990s when they wanted to defeat the BNP as well as the Liberals. 

So I shall vote for Rabina Khan on the basis that her victory will weaken the Labour Party - a thoroughly anti-British party which supports unlimited immigration and is thus far more dangerous than Rahman's Tower Hamlets First group could ever be. 

The best way to stick it to Labour is to vote for Khan.

A political system that is not dysfunctional would allow its participants to vote positively for what they do want, not voting to to stick it to the party they hate most.

Unfortunately, we are all reduced to this. If we cannot decide whom we like most then we will decide on whom we hate most.

It is only the smaller parties that can be used to tell all the big parties who created all the problems in the first place that they got it wrong.

If I lived in TH it would be a toss up between the UKIP candidate and Rabina Khan - an attractive, eloquent, passionate and apparently sincere woman who is clearly very competent - against a middle aged man who is not attractive, not eloquent, not charismatic and who does not inspire confidence.

This does highlight the kind of power an attractive woman has over "mere" men. If the candidate Lutfur Rahman endorsed candidate had been middle-aged, Muslim and male, voters would be more likely to vote for the candidate who best represented their political principles, rather than be distracted by the candidate they would rather be having sex with ....

This is probably the real reason why it is said most women should not be allowed the vote (they would vote for the most handsome male candidate or a female candidate) and why most women should not be allowed to stand for election (because beta males would much rather vote for a woman they find attractive than another beta male).

There is a rule that candidates and activists who visit polling stations must always remove their rosettes, which I discovered when I was shadowing Tim Rait in 2008.
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2008/06/26-june-2008-henley-by-election.html

At first I thought this rule unnecessarily strict and then revised my opinion. All it takes is a beautiful and silent woman wearing a rosette to influence the choice of most voters in a polling station.

Out of rational self-interest you would choose the most able candidate to be your mayor. Khan would put TH on the political map while it is impossible to imagine McQueen as mayor.