London may elect first Muslim mayor, after ugly, 'dog-whistling' campaign

[SoiBiker]

He was elected by 56% of those who voted, from a turn out of 45%. Resulting in him being elected by approximately 25% of those eligible to vote.

So what does this show. Could it be that most of the electorate were more concerned with voting for "Britain's got talent" or could it have been the

"Gt British bake off" Any way as far as I'm concerned,who would vote for another Eton toff in Zac Goldsmith,is't Cameron one too many.

Beleive a muslim lady win the great Britsh bake off as well.

She did. And then baked the Queen's birthday cake.

[samran]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Any idea of how the different groups voted in this election?For instance did all those in Tower Hamlet who have a tendency to vote in block, place their vote for the new mayor. Again is there any truth in the accusation that postal voting in this election tended to benefit any particular candidate.

I used to live in Tower Hamlets and voted there. It is a pretty safe labour seat.

[arjunadawn]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

[SoiBiker]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

A 'majority muslim region'?

You know we're talking about London, right?

[Jingthing]

He's had some dodgy associations in the past but I reckon he'll do better now. Good luck to the new mayor.

[samran]

He was elected by 56% of those who voted, from a turn out of 45%. Resulting in him being elected by approximately 25% of those eligible to vote.

So what does this show. Could it be that most of the electorate were more concerned with voting for "Britain's got talent" or could it have been the

"Gt British bake off" Any way as far as I'm concerned,who would vote for another Eton toff in Zac Goldsmith,is't Cameron one too many.

Beleive a muslim lady win the great Britsh bake off as well.

She did. And then baked the Queen's birthday cake.

But was it a Halal cake the keyboard warriors cry??

[samran]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

The same tired argument rears its head - usually by those who feel their dominance threatened. Can't you fellas be at least a little more original?

The same baseless arguments were used by evangelicals in the US against Kennedy running for president - that he'd defer to a foreign power in the form of the Pope and his Catholic doctrine would supercede US values.

All of it was hysterical fluff of course.

Now 50 years down the track these same people are falling all over themselves to subordinate secular law to their faith.

Funny though, I don't see you typing furiously on TV arguing against that...

[nontabury]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics

Well! I'll go the foot of our stairs

You learn something new every day!

I'll be damned, the cheeky bugger!

Ah reckon nowt ter that,'tha' knows.

[nontabury]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

The same tired argument rears its head - usually by those who feel their dominance threatened. Can't you fellas be at least a little more original?

The same baseless arguments were used by evangelicals in the US against Kennedy running for president - that he'd defer to a foreign power in the form of the Pope and his Catholic doctrine would supercede US values.

All of it was hysterical fluff of course.

Now 50 years down the track these same people are falling all over themselves to subordinate secular law to their faith.

Funny though, I don't see you typing furiously on TV arguing against that...

////. ///////::

Have, and do the Roman Catholics integrate with people of other religions?

Have, and do the Muslims integrate with people of other religions?

Edited May 7, 2016 by nontabury

[arjunadawn]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

A 'majority muslim region'?

You know we're talking about London, right?

Ah, yes! Lets try this again since its hard to recover from such a glaring error! (Before coffee).

I intended majority other than white, and I lost myself in mixed thoughts, edit, and not reviewing the post. (Apologize)

I contrast this man with the Ruler of Dubai (whom I admire, and his father), another muslim who is effectively the leader of a city/state (in scope/scale similar). With that as my standard, I judge. However, the context supplies the reasons why people should not be surprised there is fear. Of course they should be concerned. This is an opportunity to prove the fearmongers wrong (me). I hope he does.

[SoiBiker]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

A 'majority muslim region'?

You know we're talking about London, right?

Ah, yes! Lets try this again since its hard to recover from such a glaring error! (Before coffee).

I intended majority other than white, and I lost myself in mixed thoughts, edit, and not reviewing the post. (Apologize)

I contrast this man with the Ruler of Dubai (whom I admire, and his father), another muslim who is effectively the leader of a city/state (in scope/scale similar). With that as my standard, I judge. However, the context supplies the reasons why people should not be surprised there is fear. Of course they should be concerned. This is an opportunity to prove the fearmongers wrong (me). I hope he does.

Majority other than white?

Again, this is London we're talking about here.

[arjunadawn]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

The same tired argument rears its head - usually by those who feel their dominance threatened. Can't you fellas be at least a little more original?

The same baseless arguments were used by evangelicals in the US against Kennedy running for president - that he'd defer to a foreign power in the form of the Pope and his Catholic doctrine would supercede US values.

All of it was hysterical fluff of course.

Now 50 years down the track these same people are falling all over themselves to subordinate secular law to their faith.

Funny though, I don't see you typing furiously on TV arguing against that...

I have no dominance. I do not live in the west. I have lived nearly 50% of my life entirely in muslim countries. Dominance is defined by me as something very different from your assertion.

I am not for or against the silly Kennedy analogy you posit above but one thing is clear, you never offer why the concerns where baseless and hysterical fluff. Mentioning it as pejorative somehow equally disproves it in your argument? Hardly the stuff of worthy rebuttal.

If you assert I have the same baseless tired argument why would you conclude in surprise that I am not on TV arguing against it (against myself?)

I made an error in my included post above mixing numbers and such from the vote in London and wrote "majority" when I meant something else. However, your post above has pretty much sealed any further value in this exchange. We do not agree, on probably everything. Ok.

However, the western world is filled with "people falling all over themselves to subordinate secular law to their faith." The suggestion that this is false is detached from reality. Not even on the same planet.

[samran]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

The same tired argument rears its head - usually by those who feel their dominance threatened. Can't you fellas be at least a little more original?

The same baseless arguments were used by evangelicals in the US against Kennedy running for president - that he'd defer to a foreign power in the form of the Pope and his Catholic doctrine would supercede US values.

All of it was hysterical fluff of course.

Now 50 years down the track these same people are falling all over themselves to subordinate secular law to their faith.

Funny though, I don't see you typing furiously on TV arguing against that...

////. ///////::

Have, and do the Roman Catholics integrate with people of other religions?

Have, and do the Muslims integrate with people of other religions?

If you haven't noticed, a bloke of the muslim faith has just been ELECTED by the citizens of London. Id say there was a good level of integration. In a city as diverse as London, clearly enough people thought they had enough in common with him to give him the job.

What you write is the common red herring thrown out by those who want to muddy the waters.

Same with catholics. They were the old whipping boys. Later replaced by be jews now replaced by muslims.

So fearful you are of catholics, they are expressly forbidden by law to be monarch. Go figure.

Edited May 7, 2016 by samran

[arjunadawn]

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

A 'majority muslim region'?

You know we're talking about London, right?

Ah, yes! Lets try this again since its hard to recover from such a glaring error! (Before coffee).

I intended majority other than white, and I lost myself in mixed thoughts, edit, and not reviewing the post. (Apologize)

I contrast this man with the Ruler of Dubai (whom I admire, and his father), another muslim who is effectively the leader of a city/state (in scope/scale similar). With that as my standard, I judge. However, the context supplies the reasons why people should not be surprised there is fear. Of course they should be concerned. This is an opportunity to prove the fearmongers wrong (me). I hope he does.

Majority other than white?

Again, this is London we're talking about here.

I do not want to get lost on this point as it is not the OP, it was my mistake. But this is what I was referring to as I confused my post with another thought. White Britons are a minority and this confounded my edit. I've tried hard to clean up my error. -out-

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/census-reveals-white-britons-as-minority-in-capital-for-first-time-8405998.html

Posts deleted for space.

[SoiBiker]

You think non-British white people and those of other ethnicities are more likely to vote for a muslim?

Why?

[jayboy]

He was elected by 56% of those who voted, from a turn out of 45%. Resulting in him being elected by approximately 25% of those eligible to vote.

So what does this show. Could it be that most of the electorate were more concerned with voting for "Britain's got talent" or could it have been the

"Gt British bake off" Any way as far as I'm concerned,who would vote for another Eton toff in Zac Goldsmith,is't Cameron one too many.

What does it show? It shows he easily won the election.Electoral democracy has its rules and it's pointless and in my view slightly thick to suggest that because a victor has a modest % of those eligible to vote , that the lowish figure somehow devalues the legitimacy of victory at the polls.I have the same contempt for those who trot out this kind of lazy argument in Thailand.

Once again incidentally we seem to get confirmation of my theory that hatred of toffs in political life is apparently the main motivator of the British lower and lower middle classes - or their many representatives on this forum - and it indeed trumps (no pun intended) political differences.Good thing these people weren't consulted in 1940 when Britain was in mortal peril.They don't get much toffier than Winston Spencer Churchill.

[thai3]

The first, and if he acts as I suspect he will, probably the last for a long time

[arjunadawn]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

The same tired argument rears its head - usually by those who feel their dominance threatened. Can't you fellas be at least a little more original?

The same baseless arguments were used by evangelicals in the US against Kennedy running for president - that he'd defer to a foreign power in the form of the Pope and his Catholic doctrine would supercede US values.

All of it was hysterical fluff of course.

Now 50 years down the track these same people are falling all over themselves to subordinate secular law to their faith.

Funny though, I don't see you typing furiously on TV arguing against that...

After reading your post again I realize you are how disjointed this post is above. I now see your innuendo. However, this is pure math. You are wrong.

"foreign power in the form of the Pope and his Catholic doctrine"

"I don't see you typing furiously on TV arguing against that."

I have numerous posts on TV "typing furiously... arguing against" this very point you offer! ...arguing against this very specific thing! You could actually not be more incorrect.

See Bedlam.

[samran]

You think non-British white people and those of other ethnicities are more likely to vote for a muslim?

Why?

Funny how some people can't help but view things through the prism of race.

Funny how he ignored the stat in the same article that Londoners are better educated.

He's also oblivious the normal electoral cycle. Tories are on the nose and they put up a <deleted> of a candidate. The figurative drovers dog could have won this race against Zac.

But noooo, the same electorate which elected Boris twice now is racially stacked....

[arjunadawn]

You think non-British white people and those of other ethnicities are more likely to vote for a muslim?

Why?

I am not convinced he won because he is muslim. I think he won, and he is also muslim. I think for a large bloc this played a role based entirely on his faith, but it was unrelated for a larger number of voters. I think him being non-white was relevant, not entirely unlike Obama phenomena (hope this turns out better for London). I think many want, are ready, and frankly feel its time to have someone other than a white male represent them (at least in perception). I think this man arrived at a juncture in time where he was in place, ready, able, and the stars colluded with him.

I think his faith was a primary issue for many voters, though not all. Sadly, this is evidenced in nearly all elections- everywhere (especially with the christian right in the US). People vote for leaders/opinion leaders, who they feel are like them, and can be trusted to take the time to do the homework to vote and lead, reflecting the things the voter believes in; leaving the voter to attend to work, babies, benefits, drugs, school, yoga or whatever. Most do not get into the weeds of policy- they vote for someone they hope represents their interests.

It is no surprise that a muslim man would be elected to lead London, now, today, 2016 (and less a surprise that he is Pakistani ethnicity). I am not sure why people are surprised. However, in the current global climate, its disingenuous to blame or ignorant for people to say they 'do not understand' why others are worried, or quicken to pejorative to label those who are worried. There is plenty of reason to be concerned with regard to islamic issues (and yes, plenty to also be concerned regarding the other religious leaders meddling in politics lately).

Caught in rapture and wonder (some honestly appropriate) that this muslim man won it is not lost on those like me, who understand islam, that there is a very specific role secular government plays in islam- zero! Unlike other religions who had to develop in a subordinate role in the social space and allow for them secondary status, islam has zero relationship to such a role. Zero. It never needed to. It was seeded into the social space in epoch of war, through epochs of war. This is not interpretive islam, this is basic first day of school concepts. So, the assertion that there is no reason to fear a muslim being the mayor of one of the largest cities on earth, one of the richest, with a newly burgeoning muslim population, in an age of aggressive islamism throughout the world... is just pure BS. Of course there is reason to be circumspect. There is just no reason today to indict this man now. He should be afforded every chance to prove this fear incorrect.

It is certainly no surprise he was elected. It is certainly no wonder people are concerned if there are tea leaves here.

(PS. I have never posted with you before. I appreciate the manner you post back. Thx.)

[nontabury]

You think non-British white people and those of other ethnicities are more likely to vote for a muslim?

Why?

Funny how some people can't help but view things through the prism of race.

Funny how he ignored the stat in the same article that Londoners are better educated.

He's also oblivious the normal electoral cycle. Tories are on the nose and they put up a <deleted> of a candidate. The figurative drovers dog could have won this race against Zac.

But noooo, the same electorate which elected Boris twice now is racially stacked....

He gained 25% of the eligible votes. The Muslim population of London is approximately 15%, So if ALL of the Muslims did vote for him,he must have gained votes from many non-Muslims,from what section of the community they came from I've no idea.

For your information Samrun, the country has been divided for Many years, some saying it's a north/south decide, other saying it's a London/ the rest of the country divide.

[jayboy]

You think non-British white people and those of other ethnicities are more likely to vote for a muslim?

Why?

Funny how some people can't help but view things through the prism of race.

Funny how he ignored the stat in the same article that Londoners are better educated.

He's also oblivious the normal electoral cycle. Tories are on the nose and they put up a <deleted> of a candidate. The figurative drovers dog could have won this race against Zac.

But noooo, the same electorate which elected Boris twice now is racially stacked....

I think you are being a little unfair on Zac though I agree he was a poor candidate and badly advised to boot.In his own field he is someone of substance and I know him to be a brilliant constituency MP.He is certainly no racist nor an Islamaphobe.Some reports say his heart wasn't in it which rings true, a strangely diffident man.Still no doubt defeat is less bitter when one has movie star good looks and is as rich as Croesus.Someone once said politics is showbusiness for ugly people.Perhaps Zac is just too handsome for that game.

Reflecting on my earlier comments on toffishness, I think the British electorate can sniff out a toff when he is trying to pretend to be something else.It's the subterfuge (Call me Dave) they dislike.

Boris and Winston Chuchill never pretended to be anything other than what they are.

Funnily enough Toff hatred doesn't really exist in Thailand - or to anything the same degree.

[NeverSure]

i want to know his stance on brexit.

i also want to know what trump has to say lol

is trump going to ban him from america because the new mayor is muslim?

Trump made a statement in favor of Brexit.

Under Trump, all Muslims would be banned from entering the USA.

Yes, craziness.

This just isn't correct. The current administration is setting up for a mass influx of "refugees." What Trump said was that he wanted to stall admitting Muslims until they could be individually vetted.

What country doesn't vet its immigrants? Oh yeah. A lot of them now.

The paradox is - just try to get a Thai into the US for a 30 day vacation and see what happens. I really want to and can't, according to the experts in the visa forum here. No one is called racist or bigoted for that.

What's wrong or unusual about vetting immigrants instead of admitting them en mass without knowing who or what they are? It seems smart to me.

Cheers.

[ilostmypassword]

i want to know his stance on brexit.

i also want to know what trump has to say lol

is trump going to ban him from america because the new mayor is muslim?

Trump made a statement in favor of Brexit.

Under Trump, all Muslims would be banned from entering the USA.

Yes, craziness.

This just isn't correct. The current administration is setting up for a mass influx of "refugees." What Trump said was that he wanted to stall admitting Muslims until they could be individually vetted.

What country doesn't vet its immigrants? Oh yeah. A lot of them now.

The paradox is - just try to get a Thai into the US for a 30 day vacation and see what happens. I really want to and can't, according to the experts in the visa forum here. No one is called racist or bigoted for that.

What's wrong or unusual about vetting immigrants instead of admitting them en mass without knowing who or what they are? It seems smart to me.

Cheers.

Except for the fact that refugees from the Middle East are extensively vetted before being allowed into the USA, you make an excellent point.

[Jingthing]

Under Trump, the new mayor of London would be banned the same as any Muslim from any country. That is insane. The U.K. should have passed that law banning Trump. That would help the effort to stop that American fascist from ever being elected president.

How is U.S. immigration supposed to know who is a Muslim for sure? Just ask them? Check the male organs? Ask to eat bacon? The new mayor of London ought to make this an issue. A U.K. citizen, mayor of one the most important world cities, banned just because of his religion. Outrageous! Un-American! Americans need international help to stop a hostile takeover from this xenophobic, racist, psychopath (Trump).

Edited May 7, 2016 by Jingthing

[samran]

You think non-British white people and those of other ethnicities are more likely to vote for a muslim?

Why?

Funny how some people can't help but view things through the prism of race.

Funny how he ignored the stat in the same article that Londoners are better educated.

He's also oblivious the normal electoral cycle. Tories are on the nose and they put up a <deleted> of a candidate. The figurative drovers dog could have won this race against Zac.

But noooo, the same electorate which elected Boris twice now is racially stacked....

He gained 25% of the eligible votes. The Muslim population of London is approximately 15%, So if ALL of the Muslims did vote for him,he must have gained votes from many non-Muslims,from what section of the community they came from I've no idea.

For your information Samrun, the country has been divided for Many years, some saying it's a north/south decide, other saying it's a London/ the rest of the country divide.

It was a swing to labour across the board, not just at the mayoral level but in seats on the council itself.

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2016-36206505

The swing to the choice of mayor was replicated in the swing in individual constituencies.

This is just a normal shift of the pendulum in he electoral cycle. And clearly, it was across the board.

People can bang on all they want about a muslim surge to support this bloke, the consitutency results suggest otherwise...

Edited May 7, 2016 by samran

[samran]

i want to know his stance on brexit.

i also want to know what trump has to say lol

is trump going to ban him from america because the new mayor is muslim?

Trump made a statement in favor of Brexit.

Under Trump, all Muslims would be banned from entering the USA.

Yes, craziness.

This just isn't correct. The current administration is setting up for a mass influx of "refugees." What Trump said was that he wanted to stall admitting Muslims until they could be individually vetted.

What country doesn't vet its immigrants? Oh yeah. A lot of them now.

The paradox is - just try to get a Thai into the US for a 30 day vacation and see what happens. I really want to and can't, according to the experts in the visa forum here. No one is called racist or bigoted for that.

What's wrong or unusual about vetting immigrants instead of admitting them en mass without knowing who or what they are? It seems smart to me.

Cheers.

Thailand cleadly doesn't. Chuck $25k in the bank, stay as long as you want.

[Jingthing]

Trump meant anyone entering. Not just long stayers. Muslims not allowed. Most Americans are embarrassed the nominee of a major party even thinks such garbage much less promises it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3573632/Trump-doubles-non-citizen-Muslim-ban-destroying-Europe-m-not-going-let-happen-United-States.html

Presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump doubled down on his call to ban non-American Muslims from entering the United States even if the stance causes problems going forward in the general election.

[samran]

You think non-British white people and those of other ethnicities are more likely to vote for a muslim?

Why?

Funny how some people can't help but view things through the prism of race.

Funny how he ignored the stat in the same article that Londoners are better educated.

He's also oblivious the normal electoral cycle. Tories are on the nose and they put up a <deleted> of a candidate. The figurative drovers dog could have won this race against Zac.

But noooo, the same electorate which elected Boris twice now is racially stacked....

I think you are being a little unfair on Zac though I agree he was a poor candidate and badly advised to boot.In his own field he is someone of substance and I know him to be a brilliant constituency MP.He is certainly no racist nor an Islamaphobe.Some reports say his heart wasn't in it which rings true, a strangely diffident man.Still no doubt defeat is less bitter when one has movie star good looks and is as rich as Croesus.Someone once said politics is showbusiness for ugly people.Perhaps Zac is just too handsome for that game.

Reflecting on my earlier comments on toffishness, I think the British electorate can sniff out a toff when he is trying to pretend to be something else.It's the subterfuge (Call me Dave) they dislike.

Boris and Winston Chuchill never pretended to be anything other than what they are.

Funnily enough Toff hatred doesn't really exist in Thailand - or to anything the same degree.

I think you are pretty spot on.

My main point was that electorally, this was a poor candidate against a much more popular one, overplayed in the context of a general swing against the conservatives.

The keyboard warriors are trying to dress this up as a Muslim takeover. The election results drilled down suggests otherwise I would say.

Edited May 7, 2016 by samran

[rgs2001uk]

So proud of my friends back home right now.

Those of you who fear Islam - seems you're the minority, huh?

Ah, no! A majority muslim region voting for a muslim mayor who called moderate muslims 'Uncle Toms' does not make the argument you offer.

Its too soon to tar and feather the guy but suggesting there is no reason for concern is ludicrous. Of course there is. Taken in context it is a very curious development. If the man can govern secular and represent the laws and all people, great. There is little global experience with people seeing muslims subordinating their faith to secular law, however... so, lets see. If this guy is what people fear/allege, it will be apparent in the first 13 months. There should be zero islamic/preferential issues.

One thing is apparent is that those who fear religious domination are most certainly not a minority. Throughout the world there is only one thing feared more than religion domination insinuating into secular government, the existing government's inability to protect them from religion domination insinuating into secular government.

The same tired argument rears its head - usually by those who feel their dominance threatened. Can't you fellas be at least a little more original?

The same baseless arguments were used by evangelicals in the US against Kennedy running for president - that he'd defer to a foreign power in the form of the Pope and his Catholic doctrine would supercede US values.

All of it was hysterical fluff of course.

Now 50 years down the track these same people are falling all over themselves to subordinate secular law to their faith.

Funny though, I don't see you typing furiously on TV arguing against that...

////. ///////::

Have, and do the Roman Catholics integrate with people of other religions?

Have, and do the Muslims integrate with people of other religions?

If you haven't noticed, a bloke of the muslim faith has just been ELECTED by the citizens of London. Id say there was a good level of integration. In a city as diverse as London, clearly enough people thought they had enough in common with him to give him the job.

What you write is the common red herring thrown out by those who want to muddy the waters.

Same with catholics. They were the old whipping boys. Later replaced by be jews now replaced by muslims.

So fearful you are of catholics, they are expressly forbidden by law to be monarch. Go figure.

Same with catholics. They were the old whipping boys.

From what I remember of my history, it was the church of rome doing the whipping.

Spanish Inquistition anyone.

So fearful you are of catholics, they are expressly forbidden by law to be monarch. Go figure.

Not fearful of catholics, more FEARFUL of the church of rome.

The people of England threw off the yoke of oppression and hopefully will never again be under its facist dictatorship.

God bless Martin Luther and all the other Protestant Martyrs.