| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:An interesting little debate | |
| Posted by: | Phil Andrews | |
| Date/Time: | 08/05/14 13:19:00 |
| Perhaps. Or then perhaps you haven't bothered to read the blog article which explains this all in great detail, or the subsequent comments made publicly by both the candidate Kelly Males/Root/Adams and the local UKIP leader Councillor Colin Botterill which confirm that all three candidates stood with an agenda which had nothing to do with advancing the cause of UKIP. With respect, I know the difference between a former supporter of a political party who has switched over to another and a current drinking buddy of a serving councillor who has been injected into a contest in an attempt to distort the outcome. You clearly know nothing of the people involved and yet still assume yourself to be in a position to educate us. Why? In actual fact I don't believe the three UKIP candidates have any significant political leanings to speak of. They are just pawns in a game, but from where I'm standing anybody who wishes to vote for any political party, even UKIP, is entitled to expect that the candidate is a genuine representative of that organisation. In my view Councillors Botterill and Sampson, and the three candidates, are attempting to pull a confidence trick on Isleworth voters. There is no conspiracy to speak of. Just two politicians, ostensibly at opposite ends of the political spectrum but united in their total lack of anything resembling a moral compass, both acting in what they believe to be their own short-term interests. |