No confidence in UKIP’s Henry Bolton – should we be surprised? Should we even care?

Henry Bolton, Leader of UKIP and “former” boyfriend of  the alleged racist and Meghan-Markle-hating Jo Marney, has received a unanimous vote of no-confidence by his party.

https://news.sky.com/story/ukip-leader-henry-bolton-loses-no-confidence-vote-11217393

I’m not too sure how to feel about this one.henry bolton

I really couldn’t give a damn about Henry Bolton; he comes across as a sleazy little rat who’d sell his own Granny in order to get ahead in life. You just have to look at his choice of girlfriend to know what kind of guy he is.

But hey – you can’t judge him by his partner’s actions, or the people he associates himself with though, can you?

I say yes, you can to a degree – if you associate yourself with racists and altogether shitty people, then you’re pretty much going to be a shitty person yourself. You might not be racist, but you know that the people you call friends are and, by not disavowing them, you become guilty by association.

Unless you’re Hilary Clinton that is, and God knows if you say something along the lines of “enabled her husband by standing by him” the Left will have you for it…

I think the fact that UKIP’s ruling body have put in a no-confidence vote is a step in the right direction for the party; the less it’s associated with racism, the better.

To be honest though, it’s probably too little too late.

I’ve never been a UKIP voter, and probably never will. The party did have some ideals that I agreed with, and still do to this day: Brexit, self-government and common-sense policies regarding immigration. I seriously considered voting for them when Nigel Farage was the Gaffer, but ultimately, let my vote fall with the Tories to act out the will of the people.

The least said about that, the better eh?

For me, and probably a lot of people in this country, UKIP would have been a lot more credible as a party if not for the “guilty by association”  position it put itself in.

So now that the vote is in for Bolton, what now? He’s so far refusing to budge as Leader, but I think we all know he and UKIP are probably toast. Bolton was never going to be able to live up to Farage in the eyes of UKIP voters; (Paul Nuttall found this out the hard way) and certainly never stood a chance with the rest of the country. The party itself however, have never been able to shake themselves free of the tag of being “slightly racist” or “not as racist as the BNP, but still: racist”. 

What little chance UKIP had of being taken seriously as a party, evaporated when Nigel Farage stepped down.

So, Henry Bolton, I have some advice for you:

Step down.

Do it now and you’ll have time to nab yourself a new girlfriend, just in time to see the party ultimately disintegrate into nothing more than a distant memory.

I’m sure Hitler will have some long-lost 25 year old relatives around somewhere?

RANT OVER

 

 

 

Advertisements

A lack of transparency – Politicians Ignoring the electorate

Angela Rayner, Labour MP for Ashton-under-Lyne has blocked me on Twitter.

 

220px-Official_portrait_of_Angela_Rayner_crop_2

 

No, I didn’t harass her. I didn’t use foul-language. I didn’t threaten or abuse her in anyway shape or form.

I simply asked her a question. This one:

@AngelaRayner blocking @rantsen_things on @Twitter

Hardly what you would call an abusive Tweet?

My question was in response to her blocking another Twitter user; someone who simply asked if Ms. Rayner sympathised with Ester McVey, the new Secretary of State for the DWP, who was branded a “stain on humanity” and someone who “should be lynched” by Labour Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer John McDonnell.

Johnmcdonnellmp

Just so you all know; I’m fully aware that everyone has the right to block anyone they want, for any reason, on Twitter. Any abuse including threats of physical harm, death threats and so on shouldn’t be tolerated, whether the recipient is a man or a woman.

But blocking people for asking a question?

Come on Angela, you’re an MP after all. You’re job is to be asked questions by the public. Just because a question might show up some partisan hypocrisy in you, doesn’t mean you should run away from it.

It’s got to the point now with MPs that they can have an opinion on a matter; state it; and then simply ignore or block out completely, any sort of discerning voice. Nobody is allowed to question or disagree with anything that a politician says anymore, and that’s just wrong.

ignore

You’re elected by the people. For the people.

It’s your duty to be held accountable for the things you say and the opinions you hold. It’s not your job as a “voice of the people” to ignore the voters, for fear of looking bad in their eyes.

What kind of example does it set for people; especially young voters, when the very people they elect into positions of authority, can’t even answer a simple question about a subject involving abuse and ridicule?

It’s Orwellian at best.

Should you be asked to put up with abuse? Absolutely not.

As a Politician, should you be able to answer a reasonable and polite question with regards to your refusal to condemn someone who has made horrifically abusive comments?

The “Ayes” have it.

RANT OVER