The politics writer who doesn't understand elections


By Stephen Pollard
April 29, 2010
Share

The hilariously awful Mehdi Hasan of the New Statesman has a go at me today and in doing so reveals much about his mindset:

 


Stephen Pollard,
the Brown-hating, Kaminski-supporting editor of the Jewish Chronicle, on
his blog, 9 October,
2009:

Ona couple of blogs today I've been described as
a Tory, as if that somehow undemines my arguments because I am parti
pris in Kaminski's favour.

Problem is, it's nonsense...James
Macintyre of the New Statesman, however, has behaved rather
differently. In two posts at 13.14 he called me a "Tory supporter" and a
"Tory sympathiser".

I emailed him to point out that I am not a
Tory supporter.

Stephen Pollard, the Brown-hating,
Kaminski-supporting editor of the Jewish Chronicle, in the Times, 27
April, 2010:

Next week I will vote Conservative for
the first time...It's strange looking at the election campaign and
hoping for a Tory victory. But since Tony Blair went, Labour offers only
tax-and-spend big government. I've encountered far worse racism from
Labour supporters than Conservatives. And only one party offers to
transform opportunities for the poor and the struggling middle classes.
It's not Labour.

Surprise, surprise!

Hasan is clearly unable to comprehend the concept that someone might vote for more than one party in their lifetime. I have always voted Labour. Were Brown not leader and the party instead had a leader who did not disgrace the office of Prime Minister, I would probably have carried on doing so. But for reasons I outlined in my piece, I've decided now that I'll be voting Tory. 

You might not agree with my reasoning, but I'm sure most people understand the idea that you can make up your mind about which party to vote for based on the evidence available to you. Hasan clearly doesn't. Maybe it's not such a great idea for the New Statesman to have someone who doesn't understand what happens at elections writing about politics.

Then again, nor is it so brilliant having a man who believes this about 'the kaffar':

The kaffar, the disbelievers, the atheists who remain deaf and stubborn to the teachings
of Islam, the rational message of the Quran; they are described in the
Quran as, quote, “a people of no intelligence”, Allah describes them as;
not of no morality, not as people of no belief – people of “no
intelligence” – because they’re incapable of the intellectual effort it
requires to shake off those blind prejudices, to shake off those easy
assumptions about this world, about the existence of God. In this
respect, the Quran describes the atheists as “cattle”, as cattle of
those who grow the crops and do not stop and wonder about this world.

COMMENTS

Joshua18

Fri, 04/30/2010 - 16:39

Rate this:

0 points

Julie Burchill has it just about right:

Repelled by the lot of them

http://tinyurl.com/36ejudb

Her best line:

"Peter Mandelson (whose father was advertising manager of the Jewish Chronicle), forever living it up on the yachts of plutocrats and busying around at Biderberg – a sort of cross between Machiavelli and Liberace"

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

STEPHEN POLLARD ON TWITTER

    LATEST COMMENTS