SINCE his favoured candidate was elected to serve as member for the Stroud constituency in the election, one has to wonder why Howard Price bothered to write to the SNJ ( June 28).

Not content with this however he has to fire a cheap shot at the defeated Conservative MP belittling his efforts on behalf of the constituency.

Having attended a husting my impression of both the Labour and Conservative candidates was that they were both honourable men committed to serving the people to the best of their ability according to the policies of the party each represented.

We should remember politicians, like us, are human and subject to human frailties.

This in my view makes Mr Price’s gibes appear all the more shabby, although I doubt they will perturb Mr Carmichael who as a politician will be used to such spiteful sneers.

What is worse is Mr Price’s arrogance in questioning why 29,000 voters did not vote the way he did, while insulting their intelligence for so doing.

He needs to be reminded that it is the democratic right of every member of the electorate to vote for whichever candidate they please and that it is nobody’s business but their own.

Perhaps, he would be happier living in a totalitarian state where everyone holds the same opinions as he does and at election time there is only one candidate.

On a wider level this was a General Election and went beyond the consideration of which candidate was best suited to represent Stroud.

Therefore it was necessary for the electorate to consider the qualities of the party leaders which might make them suitable to become the next Prime Minister.

As Mr Price points out, Jeremy Corbyn isn’t in charge and therefore cannot be blamed for all the ills of the country that he cited.

It’s worth noting, however, that Mrs May seems to be fair game to be the ‘Aunt Sally’ for complaints about every problem under the sun that besets society, most of which existed long before she became PM.

Nevertheless, one of the matters the electorate had to consider was Mr Corbyn’s suitability to lead the country, not only based upon his party’s manifesto but also his perceived leadership qualities and past performance as a parliamentarian.

Clearly from the number of votes cast for the two major parties, most of the electorate were unconvinced by his performance and that of his party to wish him to be PM.

Only time will tell if he will live up to the hopes of his supporters or whether he will prove to be a Pied Piper who having beguiled the youth of this country will lead it into a cul-de-sac of unfulfilled promises and disappointment.

Susan Davis

Thrupp