Not Very Good At Choosing A Candidate

[SueEllen]

The Tories seem to not background check their London Mayoral candidates. The first had allegations of sexual harassment made against him causing him to withdraw, and the second one is being outed for holding racist views and being Islamophobic.

https://hopenothate.org.uk/2023/09/1...media-exposed/

HOPE not hate has exposed Susan Hall’s hateful social media conduct, including liking posts about Enoch Powell.
The Conservative Party’s pick for London Mayor’s social media conduct on X/Twitter includes endorsing Enoch Powell, Islamophobic tropes about Sadiq Khan, disdain for the press and supporting the myth that the 2020 American election was stolen from Donald Trump.

HOPE not hate has written to Greg Hands, Chairman of the Conservative Party, to suspend Susan Hall and investigate.

Susan Hall’s social media conduct includes:

1. Liking a tweet saying ‘It’s never too late to get London Back !’. The picture is an image of Enoch Powell with the quote “It’s never too late to save your country”.This is not a quote from Enoch Powell, rather a slogan that was once on the BNP website.
2. Liking a tweet from a user suggesting Enoch Powell should have been Prime Minister, saying they’d like Enoch Powell to be an addition to a pack of Prime Minister playing cards.
3. Quote-tweeted an article from the notorious right-wing misinformation site The Gateway Pundit alleging a conspiracy to steal the 2020 US presidential election from Trump.
4. Replying to a tweet from Katie Hopkins calling Sadiq Khan “our nipple height mayor of Londonistan” with the endorsement “Thank you Katie!”. Katie Hopkins is a far-right provocateur and “Londonistan” is the term used to convey the idea that Muslims are taking over London.
5. Liking a reply to a tweet about Sadiq Khan’s VAWG strategy that said “Well said Susan, that Labour Traitor RAT Likes that sort of thing” – being female genital mutilation and violence against women and girls. This is racially charged implying that Muslims support FGM and violence.
6. Liking a tweet saying that Sadiq is “begging for londoners to do a tower hamlets postal vote for May next year and we all know how that works. #fraud”. This is accusing Sadiq Khan of electoral corruption and promotes the idea that Muslims in electoral politics subvert democratic principles.
7. Liking a tweet saying that Sky’s Matthew Thompson, then at LBC, is a “virus”.
8. Liking a tweet calling Sky’s Sam Coates an “ugly mouthed journalist” and part of the “#ScumMedia”.
9. Liking a tweet saying that Sky’s Beth Rigby has a “sickly deep voice” and that “She shouldn’t be anywhere near my TV.

[vetran]

Honestly if you can't keep your mouth shut don't go into politics.

At least she would give an alternative to Sadiq or the Abbopotomus's unpleasant views. Now if she had shaken hands with active terrorists the left would love her!

[tazdevil]

If someone did a detailed trawl through all your media interaction (and anyone else's) they'd find nothing to complain about? Try looking into the other candidates and I think you'll find some questionable stuff too BTW, Enoch was a clever man and did some right on stuff but was probably too clever for his own good and a man of his times

[JustKeepSwimming]

I use twitter on my phone. I can't count how many times I have accidentally hit the heart without realising as scrolling past. Every so often I have to check my liked page and make sure there is nothing dodgy.

I surely can't be the only one?

As for why parties keep getting caught out with this is beyond me. How hard is it to hire some young unpaid interns just to check a candidates social media, there are tools that can do most of the heavy lifting too.

Also not really a fan of HNH doing the whole 'This is racist because of XYZ', it should be self evident, if you need to explain it then you start to imply there are alterative explanations.

[SueEllen]

If someone did a detailed trawl through all your media interaction (and anyone else's) they'd find nothing to complain about?

I have one questionable tweet. All my tweets were and are scrutinised by people I know.

I
Try looking into the other candidates and I think you'll find some questionable stuff too

if you are a political candidate and do an interview where you sprout racist, Islamophobic and/or any other bigoted view them don't be surprised if your social media is looked through.

In fact Labour has gone through all their potential parliamentary candidates social media and refused to select people if they didn't like anything.

BTW, Enoch was a clever man and did some right on stuff but was probably too clever for his own good and a man of his times

There is always someone who will defend a racist.

[SueEllen]

I use twitter on my phone. I can't count how many times I have accidentally hit the heart without realising as scrolling past. Every so often I have to check my liked page and make sure there is nothing dodgy.

I surely can't be the only one?

When you put yourself forward for police and crime commissioner or whatever, you will go through your SM and remove stuff before campaigning.

Though you won't be able to prevent allegations of sexual harassment.

As for why parties keep getting caught out with this is beyond me. How hard is it to hire some young unpaid interns just to check a candidates social media, there are tools that can do most of the heavy lifting too.

Yep but that would require them to hire some interns from a wide variety of backgrounds.

Also not really a fan of HNH doing the whole 'This is racist because of XYZ', it should be self evident, if you need to explain it then you start to imply there are alterative explanations.

The explanations are for people who will say that isn't racism.including antisemitism, sexism, homophobia etc. Remember that Guardian cartoonist that got caught after he had done an antisemitic cartoon? He had to have it explained to him.

[JustKeepSwimming]

Yep but that would require them to hire some interns from a wide variety of backgrounds.

Young non-straight-white-rich Tories do exist... This has happened to all parties mind.

The explanations are for people who will say that isn't racism.including antisemitism, sexism, homophobia etc. Remember that Guardian cartoonist that got caught after he had done an antisemitic cartoon? He had to have it explained to him.

I think bigotry requires intention. Do you not see any issue in effectively labelling someone a bigot because they did/said something and someone else did some English Literature exam nonsense to 'interpret' into something else?

It's the old Rorschach test. Someone who is not bigoted is not going to make those connections as naturally as someone who is constantly on the hunt.

[SueEllen]

I think bigotry requires intention. Do you not see any issue in effectively labelling someone a bigot because they did/said something and someone else did some English Literature exam nonsense to 'interpret' into something else?

It's the old Rorschach test. Someone who is not bigoted is not going to make those connections as naturally as someone who is constantly on the hunt.

So you thought it was OK to allow a cartoon with common antisemitic images to be allowed to stay up as the cartoonist didn't intent to air antisemitic views?

[vetran]

If someone did a detailed trawl through all your media interaction (and anyone else's) they'd find nothing to complain about? Try looking into the other candidates and I think you'll find some questionable stuff too BTW, Enoch was a clever man and did some right on stuff but was probably too clever for his own good and a man of his times

Indeed Enoch Powell identified many preventable consequences of failing to manage migration. He spoke of them and was denounced.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandp...ifty-years-on/

We have no go areas based on religion & race, we have open machete fights & rioting in the streets based on the actions of police officers overseas or when scum want to go for a five fingered discount, we have police unwilling to pursue crime because of the race/religion of the perpetrators and the government unable to deport criminals.

He also pointed out that it wasn't just the quantity it was the integration. The annual numbers (50,000) he was countering are 10-20 times higher now (1 million), is our country a better place?

[JustKeepSwimming]

So you thought it was OK to allow a cartoon with common antisemitic images to be allowed to stay up as the cartoonist didn't intent to air antisemitic views?

Yes because they weren't common antisemitic images unless you intentionally and disingenuously interpret that as such.

What you seem to be saying is 'You can't mock Goldman Sachs because to do so is antisemitism'. Which is absurd.

Only racists weaponise racism.