Originally Posted by
marble
In the article it is clear her constituents wanted her to vote against it at the time the bill was being put forward. I would doubt this was an issue she was necessarily expressing any views to her constituents about when running for MP, (I could be wrong on that), but according to her, at the point when the issue became bigger she realised her constituents were mainly opposed to the idea of gay marriage.
She says she has changed her mind.
I personally don't see that as strange or abnormal though clearly it would have been better if she'd recognised her final considered view at the time. It doesn't make a blind bit of difference as the bill went through anyway. IMO politicians are voted by the people to represent the people but when they are elected they need to exercise their own judgement. Maybe if she had done that a bit more at the time and not got carried away listening to her constituents this might not have happened?
Trying to exercise judgement as a politician surely means you can also exercise the right to change your mind? As for Boris Johnson, I've long suspected his views didn't add up but Londoners got what they voted for.