Rochdale By-election: George Galloway elected as new MP

He is not a groomer. Danczuk never broke any British laws. As long as he doesn't go below 16, he's all good

He is not a groomer. Danczuk never broke any British laws. As long as he doesn't go below 16, he's all good

[Garbage opinion removed to save the mods a job.]

The relatively rational Galloway voters often do so as a form of protest vote or as an alternative to spoiling their ballot.
With most of the rest of his fan club either of an extremely irrational nature or they are likeminded opportunists keen to leap onto Galloway's bandwagon and fund him.
With many of the opportunistists sharing a few of his most unpleasant habits including the foul ideology and some of his cranky revolutionary leanings.

A lot of people seem to dislike the fact that he has been elected. I don't really see the issue though. Voters in Rochdale clearly care a lot about the UK's stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and they feel that Galloway will represent their views in parliament better than the candidates from other parties. He got the most votes, so he won. That's is how democracy is supposed to work isn't it...?

he's a bad person. sure a win is a win. but how did he win and who is he?
he is inconsistent with a lot of his beliefs. he has backed dictators who have practically committed genocide, ie Sadam. then the war criminal Bashar, while some may want to point out the hypocrisy of the fact some leaders responsible for the deaths of many are scot-free and garner support. he's still inconsistent.
while it is respectable on how he opposed Iraq given that 99% of the justification was just lies. he probably did it for his own benefit ie media publicity. apart from this what else is there? sure he is a good speaker, charismatic compared to the current leaders, and kinda funny with the insults on both parties. he doesn't provide much domestically. he exploited one foreign situation to get his votes mainly if not all.
how is his domestic policies ( very few) , his behaviour, his big brother appearance. its clear that most of the time, he is for the media.
showing a small snippet you can see why people don't like him plus the fact he has met sadam, Hezbollah, hamas , while also meeting nigel garage and endorsing him. you get the point. to say he's a grifter is a bit unfair as he does have very strong views. he has always opposed Scottish independence from what I've seen ( more inconsistency I guess if some want to put it).but people have to admit he has been consistent on the "Palestinian cause." he has been in my opinion antisemitic. but what is true he has been consistent on Palestine, he can also claim to care much more about them, then let's say Starmer. he's a populist basically a mix of nigel and boris but on the "left".

I'm sure a lot of people don't like him for various reasons. But the point is that in Rochdale, more people like him than any other candidate. Regardless of what inconsistencies he's had in his earlier positions, what he's lacking in policies etc. it's clear enough that he's about as pro-Palestine as it gets, and that's a high priority for a lot of people these days.

sadly, it should be about fixing the country not a foreign issue.

Surely it should just be about whatever voters actually care about the most...?

I'd say no, you're being asked to vote for local government so making that choice on the basis of a single polarising foreign issue (that the person you're voting for will never be in a position to directly change) seems short sighted - how far do you think you or anyone else would get trying to enlist his assistance as MP about something he doesn't care about? It's basically a protest vote that everyone is stuck with for years long after the passion for this has passed.

But you're not being asked why you're voting for a particular candidate, you're just being asked to vote for the candidate you want. Even if it's a protest vote, the people of Rochdale probably just care more about making that protest than anything else at the moment.

They're not spelling it out but I feel the very context and engagement of a local election tells you what's expected

People can ultimately vote for whatever reason they want, but I somewhat bitterly don't want to hear a single peep out of these voters when they realise their protest vote has likely cost them any effective representation for years (Nadine Dorries comes to mind)

I dunno about you but I'm damn glad I don't live in Rochdale, If I did, I'd move. How about you?

He is not a groomer. Danczuk never broke any British laws. As long as he doesn't go below 16, he's all good

I'm sure a lot of people don't like him for various reasons. But the point is that in Rochdale, more people like him than any other candidate. Regardless of what inconsistencies he's had in his earlier positions, what he's lacking in policies etc. it's clear enough that he's about as pro-Palestine as it gets, and that's a high priority for a lot of people these days.

I don’t know really, it remains to be seen what impact his election actually has on people’s day to day lives Rochdale itself.
I suspect that the people voting for him are doing so based on far bigger concerns than Rochdale though. Perhaps it’s a small price to pay, to get their voices heard on a more critical issue.