# London Mayoral election



## Sue (Apr 21, 2012)

Has anyone received any leaflets from the political parties yet? So far, one from the Greens, one from the Lib Dems and nothing from anyone else. Seen a couple of Ken Livingston posters and that's it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

It's tweedledum or tweedledee to win the electoral farce


----------



## Sue (Apr 21, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> It's tweedledum or tweedledee to win the electoral farce


 
Not disputing that. Just interested that neither of the two main parties seems to be making much of an effort.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 21, 2012)

Sue said:


> Has anyone received any leaflets from the political parties yet? So far, one from the Greens, one from the Lib Dems and nothing from anyone else. Seen a couple of Ken Livingston posters and that's it.


 
Had two for the GLA "constituency" seats - 1 from Labour and 1 from the Greens. Nowt for the Mayoralty, though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

Sue said:


> Not disputing that. Just interested that neither of the two main parties seems to be making much of an effort.


one of them's driving round here making a fucking nuisance of themselves. If the sound wasn't so distorted i'd know who has just lost my vote


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

I've just voted - by post.  Just got a million and one phone calls from Ken's campaign and a direct mail from Paddick.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> I've just voted - by post. Just got a million and one phone calls from Ken's campaign and a direct mail from Paddick.


 
Presumably both of their campaigns would have your details as a possible supporter?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> I've just voted - by post.  Just got a million and one phone calls from Ken's campaign and a direct mail from Paddick.


everyone knows which way you voted, from the postman to paddick to ploughmen in southern sudan


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

> Presumably both of their campaigns would have your details as a possible supporter?


fuck off


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> everyone knows which way you voted, from the postman to paddick to ploughmen in southern sudan


why did Paddick's campaign send me a letter if he knew I'd vote for Ken


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> fuck off


But it's true. Your ballot was hardly secret


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

I wasn't talking to you - see clarification above


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> why did Paddick's campaign send me a letter if he knew I'd vote for Ken


Because they share the general low opinion people have of you


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> I wasn't talking to you - see clarification above


The nonexistent clarification?


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

or because they just sent them to all voting households.  I think I know which


----------



## Red Storm (Apr 21, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> Because they share the general low opinion people have of you


 
Ouch.


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> The nonexistent clarification?


or you a bit simple or having difficulty reading today?  The clarification that I was responding to Spanky, and telling you that you were wrong in assuming I'd vote Lib Dem (why would I?)


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

Red Storm said:


> Ouch.


He's a sexually frustrated (ex-?)Librarian.  I make allowances.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> I wasn't talking to you - see clarification above


You do know it's rude to edit posts after they've been replied to, right? I'd hardly have replied to your post 9 if you'd put a quote from someone else in the first place.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> or you a bit simple or having difficulty reading today? The clarification that I was responding to Spanky, and telling you that you were wrong in assuming I'd vote Lib Dem (why would I?)


 
It's obvious why the Ken campaign would have your details, but I reckon the Libdems might have your's from the Yes to AV campaign, someone you worked with on that team is probably now working for him, or could it have come via Compass?


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

I told you I'd edited it - hence "see the clarification" - which you then went on to miss again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> or you a bit simple or having difficulty reading today?  The clarification that I was responding to Spanky, and telling you that you were wrong in assuming I'd vote Lib Dem (why would I?)


you mean the discourteous edit above? I think you'd vote lib dem because you're thick as pigshit: as continued support of livingstone would confirm.


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> It's obvious why the Ken campaign would have your details, but I reckon the Libdems might have your's from the Yes to AV campaign, someone you worked with on that team is probably now working for him, or could it have come via Compass?


No, I think they'll have done a mailing to all voters on the electoral register.


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> you mean the discourteous edit above? I think you'd vote lib dem because you're thick as pigshit: as continued support of livingstone would confirm.


No I meant the edit to post #9.  Which I told you about before you posted about a non-existent clarification.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> He's a sexually frustrated (ex-?)Librarian.  I make allowances.


Pls post your evidence for the frustrated bit


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

Sorry it was a tautology


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> No I meant the edit to post #9.  Which I told you about before you posted about a non-existent clarification.


I've pointed out it's rude to edit a post after it's been replied to. Why did you edit it instead of simply saying it wasn't a reply to me?


----------



## articul8 (Apr 21, 2012)

I told you I'd edited it, which I did to clarify who I _was_ responding to.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 21, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> everyone knows which way you voted, from the postman to paddick to ploughmen in southern sudan


 
"From Milan to Yucatan, every woman, every man", even.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 21, 2012)

articul8 said:


> why did Paddick's campaign send me a letter if he knew I'd vote for Ken


 
They can smell a fellow liberal from a mile off?


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 22, 2012)

Will Paddick get third or will Benita spring a surprise?


----------



## newbie (Apr 22, 2012)

stuff from Jenny Jones through the door and from Livingstone being handed out at the tube.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 23, 2012)

Is this the only Mayoral election thread? Looks like it

Come on with the predictions folks, will Livingstone nick it or will Johnson retain it, as seems (?) more likely?


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 23, 2012)

Overwhelming victory for Johnson


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Apr 23, 2012)

Seems to be a quite heavy Boris campaign around my way, nobody else seems to be bothering yet.
I had to chuck a leaflet back in some tory bellends face twice now.


----------



## articul8 (Apr 23, 2012)

Losing London (and Glasgow) could spell trouble for Mr Ed


----------



## Balbi (Apr 23, 2012)

I suspect it would, although I also think there's a way of presenting it. Ken had good ideas, but embodied the distrust people have of politicians who, through inaction, got us into this mess in the first place. A plague on Ken's house for his tax, and Boris' for his campaign. It'll be a hue and cry for fresh candidates, a binning off of the older guard. New candidates to establish trust and a relationship with the electorate, etc etc. Thinking of standing yourself arty?


----------



## articul8 (Apr 23, 2012)

I have no plans in that direction  (seriously)


----------



## Jean-Luc (Apr 23, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Will Paddick get third or will Benita spring a surprise?


She's insufferable. I wonder who is financing her and why.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 25, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Overwhelming victory for Johnson


 
How overwhelming? --  and do you really think that anyway?

Most recent poll (YouGov I think?) put Johnson only 2% ahead of Livingstone which (if accurate) represents a significant narrowing of his lead from previous polls ...


----------



## shagnasty (Apr 25, 2012)

I think livingstone will nick it,the tory stock is very low at the moment


----------



## Sue (Apr 25, 2012)

Got my election booklet thing through the post today. Someone standing in my GLA area for the Fresh Choice for London party, whoever they are. And of course in the London-wide thing could vote for the Christian People's Alliance -- Supporting Traditional Marriage, or the English Democrats -- Putting England First! or the National Front -- Putting Londoners First, as well as the usual suspects. The choice is overwhelming...


----------



## bamalama (Apr 25, 2012)

Jean-Luc said:


> She's insufferable. I wonder who is financing her and why.


 I read that as "who is fancying her"
sorry to drag it down...


----------



## joustmaster (Apr 26, 2012)

so.. what do i have to vote for?
mayor, and anything else?


----------



## Crispy (Apr 26, 2012)

Buggered up registering to vote at our new address. Typical - the one election that I actually give a shit about and I can't vote in it


----------



## ddraig (Apr 26, 2012)

maybe you can vote from your old one if not sorted at new one


----------



## Crispy (Apr 26, 2012)

Yeah, I think we're still registered there, but I remember throwing the polling cards away.
Actually, you don't need them do you? Dur.


----------



## ymu (Apr 26, 2012)

You can turn up with proof that you pay council tax, I *think*.


----------



## articul8 (Apr 26, 2012)

You don't need polling cards, no.


----------



## articul8 (Apr 26, 2012)

corrected


Jean-Luc said:


> She's insufferable. I wonder who is fancying her and why.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Apr 26, 2012)

shagnasty said:


> I think livingstone will nick it,the tory stock is very low at the moment


 
No chance, Livingstone is drastically less popular than Johnson.


----------



## ymu (Apr 26, 2012)

Thing is, last Mayoral election, all the polls bar the Evening Standard/YouGov gave Ken the win. ES/YG got it right because they were skewing their polling towards suburbia, which turned out in force.

I think the same will happen here. The polls can't tell us anything without knowing who is more motivated to actually turn out and vote. I can't begin to call it because both are exceptions to their party (Ken beat Labour hands down 4 years ago), but I suspect it will be a lot closer than they think, especially if they are using turnouts from 4 years ago to weight their results.


----------



## joustmaster (Apr 26, 2012)

i was talking to a friend, who is a lawyer, the other day.
she said she might vote for boris.
i said that i was supprised that she would vote tory.
then she asked "oh, is boris a tory?"

The office manager at work, had no idea that the libdems had formed a coalition with the conservatives either. And she considers her self to be a bit political.

people should have to pass an exam to vote.


----------



## Greebo (Apr 26, 2012)

ymu said:


> You can turn up with proof that you pay council tax, I *think*.


You don't even need that, just be able to give the full address of where you're registered to vote, and show either a utility bill, CT bill, full driving licence, passport, or letter from the DWP.


----------



## Greebo (Apr 26, 2012)

joustmaster said:


> i was talking to a friend, who is a lawyer, the other day.
> she said she might vote for boris.
> i said that i was supprised that she would vote tory.
> then she asked "oh, is boris a tory?"<snip>


FFS, why is she even allowed to work as a lawyer?


joustmaster said:


> <snip>people should have to pass an exam to vote.


While I agree in principle, a test would disenfranchise a lot of people who are reasonably politically aware but just no good at tests.


----------



## peterkro (Apr 26, 2012)

Greebo said:


> You don't even need that, just be able to give the full address of where you're registered to vote, and show either a utility bill, CT bill, full driving licence, passport, or letter from the DWP.


You don't need ID just turn up tell them who you are and you can vote.


----------



## joustmaster (Apr 26, 2012)

peterkro said:


> You don't need ID just turn up tell them who you are and you can vote.


this is how i voted last.
no id, no card. just turned up knowing my name and address


----------



## joustmaster (Apr 26, 2012)

oh yeah, and when at uni I know people who were registered to vote in more than one place.
a great system.


----------



## ymu (Apr 26, 2012)

Greebo said:


> You don't even need that, just be able to give the full address of where you're registered to vote, and show either a utility bill, CT bill, full driving licence, passport, or letter from the DWP.


I mean if you're not registered. I came across it because I am of no fixed abode, which means I can't vote anywhere without registering a local connection. If I was paying council tax somewhere, I would just be able to turn up with the proof and be able to vote without being registered. IIRC (which I may not).

If Crispy is in the same ward as before, or can get to the old one to vote, it shouldn't be an issue at all, I agree.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 26, 2012)

vote early vote often


----------



## Balbi (Apr 26, 2012)

Latest ICM polling puts Ken as 100% of vote in Kensington and Chelsea, with an 8pt Boris lead overall. Methinks its flawed.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 26, 2012)

That's because they ask 20-40 people in each borough, and often less than 20 even have a voting intention. Why this doesn't necessarily invalidate the overall survey is touched on here.


----------



## JHE (Apr 26, 2012)

Polls reported tonight are interesting in a couple of ways.




> Tonight’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 31%, LAB 43%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 9%. The twelve point lead is becoming fairly typical of the sort of figure we’re seeing from YouGov, but it’s worth noting that the 31% is the lowest that YouGov have shown for the Conservatives since the general election.


​


> There is also a Survation poll on the London mayoral election in tomorrow’s Telegraph. It has first preference figures of JOHNSON 42%, LIVINGSTONE 31%, PADDICK 10%, WEBB 5%, JONES 4%, CORTIGLIA 4%, BENITA 3%. With second preferences re-allocated, the final round works out at JOHNSON 54%, LIVINGSTONE 46% – the same as ComRes showed this morning.​


http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/​​​1. The Survation poll shows higher figures for Paddick and some of the other minor candidates than other polls have shown.​​2. Assuming that both the YouGov national poll and the Survation London Mayoral poll are more or less right, the effect of (the perceived personalities of) both main London mayoral candidates is very large. Livingstone's support is way below his party's and Johnson's support is way above his party's.​


----------



## sunny jim (Apr 26, 2012)

Please, not that foppy haired fuckwit from Eton. He's a part of that cuntish millionaires group who reside in Whitehall.


----------



## sunny jim (Apr 27, 2012)

I havent read all of this thread but I imagine the reason the foppy haired fuckwit will get in is because many people wont vote at all. Not that I blame them in anyway but bus fares might be £5 pretty soon if he does get in.


----------



## where to (Apr 27, 2012)

JHE said:


> Polls reported tonight are interesting in a couple of ways.
> 
> ​http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/​​​1. The Survation poll shows higher figures for Paddick and some of the other minor candidates than other polls have shown.​​2. Assuming that both the YouGov national poll and the Survation London Mayoral poll are more or less right, the effect of (the perceived personalities of) both main London mayoral candidates is very large. Livingstone's support is way below his party's and Johnson's support is way above his party's.​


 
this is doubly interesting, because for most of the past 15 years, Livingstone has polled much better than Labour have.


----------



## where to (Apr 27, 2012)

sunny jim said:


> I havent read all of this thread but I imagine the reason the foppy haired fuckwit will get in is because many people wont vote at all. Not that I blame them in anyway but bus fares might be £5 pretty soon if he does get in.


 
more likely because there are lots of rich people in London I would have thought.


----------



## where to (Apr 27, 2012)

JHE said:


> 1. The Survation poll shows higher figures for Paddick and some of the other minor candidates than other polls have shown.


 
i'm guessing, but perhaps this poll identified the parties of all candidates in questioning, and the others did not.


----------



## sunny jim (Apr 27, 2012)

where to said:


> more likely because there are lots of rich people in London I would have thought.


 
Dont reckon thats true 
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/


----------



## ymu (Apr 27, 2012)

Poor people are less likely to vote. London has the highest concentration of rich and relatively rich people in the country.


----------



## sunny jim (Apr 27, 2012)

ymu said:


> Poor people are less likely to vote. London has the highest concentration of rich and relatively rich people in the country.


Exactly my point, but the poor outnumber the rich in London. Thats a fact, not my opinion.


----------



## ymu (Apr 27, 2012)

The observation that there are lots of rich people in London is true, regardless of how many poor people there are too. Just have to hope that Ken's co-op will bring inner London out in force, and a few cunted off Tories don't bother.


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 27, 2012)

latest odds


Boris Johnson (Conservative) 1/4
Ken Livingstone (Labour) 5/2
Siobhan Benita (Ind) 25/1
Jenny Jones (Green) 100/1
Brian Paddick (Lib Dem) 100/1
Lawrence Webb (UKIP) 250/1
Carlos Cortiglia (BNP)  500/1


----------



## articul8 (Apr 27, 2012)

So they reckon Benita will beat both Greens and LDs?  I'd be surprised.  Afraid that Livingstone will probably be done by turnout in core areas.


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 27, 2012)

articul8 said:


> So they reckon Benita will beat both Greens and LDs? I'd be surprised. Afraid that Livingstone will probably be done by turnout in core areas.


 
No. There are separate odds for 'without the big two' and odds for both Lib Dem and Benita's share of the vote.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 29, 2012)

Really failing to get why Boris Johnson doesn't seem to be suffering *at all* from the Tories' recent general decline in the polls.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Apr 29, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Really failing to get why Boris Johnson doesn't seem to be suffering *at all* from the Tories' recent general decline in the polls.


 
He gets away with a lot on his persona - I'm not saying that's a good thing, but people might not necessarily see him as a conservative, they just see him as Boris?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Apr 29, 2012)

Because the campaign has been about personality not policy...


----------



## JHE (Apr 29, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Really failing to get why Boris Johnson doesn't seem to be suffering *at all* from the Tories' recent general decline in the polls.


 
The divergence is extraordinary. Assuming that both lots of polls are more or less accurate and Johnson is on his way to reelection, I think it just shows how much this election is seen as being about two personalities, rather than about parties or policies. 'Boris' is relatively popular and 'Ken' is relatively unpopular. In today's media, Johnson has again been going out of his way to distance himself from the unpopular government: calling for tax cuts, being mildly rude about Osborne and boasting of how he fights for London interests, having rows with the Chancellor when necessary.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Apr 29, 2012)

Anyone get the feeling that the electorate aren't that interested ?  Does anyone see the genuine causality implied with voting for either Boris or Ken ?


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 30, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Really failing to get why Boris Johnson doesn't seem to be suffering *at all* from the Tories' recent general decline in the polls.


 
Will look good on his CV when he challenges for Tory leadership


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 30, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Really failing to get why Boris Johnson doesn't seem to be suffering *at all* from the Tories' recent general decline in the polls.


 
Because his PR people are on the ball and canny. Hence, for example, the lightning-fast comments about Kosovo-style social cleansing when the housing minister opened his yap last week.


----------



## co-op (Apr 30, 2012)

JHE said:


> The divergence is extraordinary. Assuming that both lots of polls are more or less accurate and Johnson is on his way to reelection, I think it just shows how much this election is seen as being about two personalities, rather than about parties or policies. 'Boris' is relatively popular and 'Ken' is relatively unpopular. In today's media, Johnson has again been going out of his way to distance himself from the unpopular government: calling for tax cuts, being mildly rude about Osborne and boasting of how he fights for London interests, having rows with the Chancellor when necessary.


 
Got to say that Ken sounds tired now. He's lost his mojo.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 30, 2012)

co-op said:


> Got to say that Ken sounds tired now. He's lost his mojo.


 
He is looking and sounding like yesterday's man, isn't he?

I'm getting resigned to a Boris victory, sadly.  I really don't want it to happen because a) Boris is a shit mayor, and b) him being booted out would be a blow for Cameron, but I think it's going to.


----------



## co-op (Apr 30, 2012)

Roadkill said:


> He is looking and sounding like yesterday's man, isn't he?
> 
> I'm getting resigned to a Boris victory, sadly. I really don't want it to happen because a) Boris is a shit mayor, and b) him being booted out would be a blow for Cameron, but I think it's going to.


 
I dunno what's happened with KL, he just looks clapped out. I've been resigned to BJ for a while, that's what the polls have been saying. More to the point where is the younger interesting Labour candidate? There's just no one, just hopeless, bland new Labour lite clones. Utter wankers.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 30, 2012)

I blame (large chunks of) the electorate. 'Personality'/'celebrity' obsessed twats!


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 30, 2012)

How can people be *so bloody stupid* as not to be _perfectly well aware_ that Boris Johnson is just as much of Tory as George Osborne is? Cretins!


----------



## JHE (Apr 30, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> I blame (large chunks of) the electorate. 'Personality'/'celebrity' obsessed twats!


 
Fair enough, though I doubt many people are _obsessed_ by 'Boris' or 'Ken'.

I also suggest that the candidates must take some of the blame/credit.

One notable thing about Livingstone's campaign is that he is offering at least two things that should be very very popular:  a London replacement for the EMA and cheaper tube fares.  I think the reason these promises are not working well for him must be that people *do not believe* him.  (If I were in London, I would want to know more about what is being proposed, but my gut feeling - and I think the gut feeling of many - is that Livingstone is not to be trusted an inch.)


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Apr 30, 2012)

Johnson loses it 

Swearing on television


----------



## JHE (Apr 30, 2012)

If you think that's 'losing it', I don't think you've ever seen anyone 'lose it'.


----------



## killer b (Apr 30, 2012)

it's all over for ken anyway. the guardian endorsement is in...


----------



## JHE (Apr 30, 2012)

A YouGov/Evening Standard poll published today gives Johnson a 4% lead, but a Populous/Times poll gives him a 12% lead!

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/category/london


----------



## co-op (Apr 30, 2012)

JHE said:


> A YouGov/Evening Standard poll published today gives Johnson a 4% lead, but a Populous/Times poll gives him a 12% lead!
> 
> http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/category/london


 
The thing I don't understand is what has happened to those second preference votes for the Lib dems and the Greens in 2008 - there were nearly a million 'stupid' second pref votes for those two (640000 or so LD, 330000 or so Green) - why aren't those going over to Ken? I'd have thought a serious number would and that'd make the final result very close. But apparently not. What's going on?

Dammit.


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 30, 2012)

hate to say told you so. I will go for a 3-4 percentage point win for Boris in the second round


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2012)

imo it's worth voting for ken just to stop those foul boris buses


----------



## Jean-Luc (May 1, 2012)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Does anyone see the genuine causality implied with voting for either Boris or Ken ?


Apparently, someone does


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 1, 2012)

Swearing on television

It was most likely deliberate - to show that 'hES onE of US' - the sort of stunt that impresses the repellent and thick garbage that vote for and like Johnson.


----------



## marty21 (May 1, 2012)

Sue said:


> Has anyone received any leaflets from the political parties yet? So far, one from the Greens, one from the Lib Dems and nothing from anyone else. Seen a couple of Ken Livingston posters and that's it.


 got something from the Greens, and a few things from Ken - no one else - I don't think Boris bothers with Hackney


----------



## Santino (May 1, 2012)

> One thing I think few commentators are doubting is that turnout will be down this time on 2008. The temperature of the contest is a lot cooler this time around: none of the candidates has shined and although the Evening Standard came out today in support of Johnson, there has been no where near the level of anti-Ken vitriol on its front pages that disfigured the 2008 contest.
> 
> That lower turnout would look to harm Johnson more. Polls of course measure the intentions of voters, not whether they actually get to vote – the turnout work of parties will be critical, and the Conservatives are not in a good place to do that in the current climate.
> 
> ...


 
From here: http://www.allthatsleft.co.uk/2012/04/is-boris-really-coasting-to-victory/


----------



## Jean-Luc (May 1, 2012)

> This is not just guesswork: we have heard reports from well-informed sources that the early postal votes opened in one inner-London borough looked surprisingly good for Livingstone and certainly at odds with what the polls are showing.


Don't know who these "well-informed sources" are (presumably counting agents present when the postal votes were opened for verification) nor how they can tell how many votes have been cast for who (normally the votes are verified face down). Sounds like a bit of whistling in the dark.


----------



## Spymaster (May 1, 2012)

We need a poll.

Here.


----------



## ymu (May 1, 2012)

Jean-Luc said:


> Don't know who these "well-informed sources" are (presumably counting agents present when the postal votes were opened for verification) nor how they can tell how many votes have been cast for who (normally the votes are verified face down). Sounds like a bit of whistling in the dark.


The sample size is too small, and the source too doubtful, to be able to draw any firm conclusions. But turnout in the inner city compared to the suburbs makes a huge difference in an election like this. London is a lot less homogeneous than the typical constituency, so quite small effects can have a massive impact, and it's a very different situation from four years ago. I think differences in turnout will favour Livingstone more (by comparison to the polls) this time around, but by how much is very difficult to say.

You might be able to do some nerdery by comparing the different polling methods plus other evidence, but I think the accuracy of the outcome would probably have more to do with luck than judgement in an election like this. We just haven't had enough elections for London Mayor to know how to interpret the polls properly yet.


----------



## youngian (May 1, 2012)

Boris Johnson is one politician I just don't get even at my most objective.
Possibly because I loathe him personally, distrust his competence and dislike his politics which is pretty good going.

Out of his depth as a municipal leader, he has achieved nothing in a stepping stone job he doesn't want anyway.
And as for his his convivial charms, they are as transparent as a washed-up alcholic childrens entertainer. A vile individual.


----------



## Sue (May 1, 2012)

marty21 said:


> got something from the Greens, and a few things from Ken - no one else - I don't think Boris bothers with Hackney


 
I'm in Hackney too but looks like Ken isn't bothering with my bit of it either.


----------



## The39thStep (May 1, 2012)

youngian said:


> Boris Johnson is one politician I just don't get even at my most objective.
> Possibly because I loathe him personally, distrust his competence and dislike his politics which is pretty good going.
> 
> Out of his depth as a municipal leader, he has achieved nothing in a stepping stone job he doesn't want anyway.
> And as for his his convivial charms, they are as transparent as *a washed-up alcholic childrens entertainer.* A vile individual.


 
Genius. This could well be the missing link. That sounds exactly  the sort of candidate that a lot of us would vote for , a sort of Barry Mainwaring/Sir Les Patterson type , no doubt with sympathies for PD, standing on a platform of the sort of socialism that you can talk about in a pub after four pints.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 1, 2012)

youngian said:


> Boris Johnson is one politician I just don't get even at my most objective.
> Possibly because I loathe him personally, distrust his competence and dislike his politics which is pretty good going.
> 
> Out of his depth as a municipal leader, he has achieved nothing in a stepping stone job he doesn't want anyway.
> And as for his his convivial charms, they are as transparent as a washed-up alcholic childrens entertainer. A vile individual.


 
We are as one on this youngian ...


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 1, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Genius. This could well be the missing link. That sounds exactly the sort of candidate that a lot of us would vote for , a sort of Barry Mainwaring/Sir Les Patterson type , no doubt with sympathies for PD, standing on a platform of the sort of socialism that you can talk about in a pub after four pints.


 
The taller of the Chuckle Brothers, he's a socialist as well.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 1, 2012)

Trying my best not to place too much hope in the possible inaccuracy (discussed above) of current polls. Because they're probably not inaccurate enough ...

(saying that, that Times '12% lead for Boris' poll really does look bonkers)

The weather's likely, on the latest forecasts, to be pretty wet again on Thursday across the South, which is hardly likely to encourage the doubtful turner-outers to vote ...

On the other hand could a turnout boosting factor be provided by the Assembly elections and Mayoral ones happening simultaneously??


----------



## The39thStep (May 1, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Trying my best not to place too much hope in the possible inaccuracy (discussed above) of current polls. Because they're probably not inaccurate enough ...
> 
> (saying that, that Times '12% lead for Boris' poll looks bonkers)
> 
> ...


 
Lets face it; the weather will be shit Thursday and Boris will have the result in the bag by Friday


----------



## William of Walworth (May 1, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Lets face it; the weather will be shit Thursday and Boris will have the result in the bag by Friday


 
You've been strongly suggesting this all along, so forgive me wondering whether a clear Boris Johnson win is the outcome you favour? 

Sorry if I've missed anything you've posted that might contradict this.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 1, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> You've been strongly suggesting this all along, so forgive me wondering whether a clear Boris Johnson win is the outcome you favour?
> 
> Sorry if I've missed anything you've posted that might contradict this.


 
Why would a strong belief Boris is going to get back in indicate support for said outcome???


----------



## William of Walworth (May 1, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Why would a strong belief Boris is going to get back in indicate support for said outcome???


 
Did I say it necesaarly did? I specifically allowed for wanting Boris to win  _not_ being the case in my question. Just wondering where The38thStep is coming from, is all. As I say I may well have missed something ...


----------



## ymu (May 1, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> Did I say it necesaarly did? I specifically allowed for wanting Boris to win _not_ being the case in my question. Just wondering where The38thStep is coming from, is all. As I say I may well have missed something ...


You haven't missed anything, you've managed to read something that isn't there at all AFAICS. I don't see how you would read it as anything other than a pessimistic observation on how the weather affects turnout, even if you didn't know anything about the poster.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 1, 2012)

I possibly? misunderstood a couple of his earlier posts, and may missed some others maybe. Was questioning a number of posts where he's offered the same prediction, not just that latest one. But let him answer for himself if he wants ...

As I also said, sorry if I got it wrong ... was just wondering is all ...


----------



## JHE (May 1, 2012)

It's just as Gramsci recommended:  pessimism of the internet, optimism of the William


----------



## The39thStep (May 1, 2012)

William of Walworth said:


> I possibly? misunderstood a couple of his earlier posts, and may missed some others maybe. Was questioning a number of posts where he's offered the same prediction, not just that latest one. But let him answer for himself if he wants ...
> 
> As I also said, sorry if I got it wrong ... was just wondering is all ...


 
I am very hurt


----------



## Balbi (May 2, 2012)

God, i'd avoided the Stannar' for ages...

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/mayor/business-leaders-back-boris-to-drive-recovery-7703818.html

It's like a bad habit.



> JD Wetherspoon chairman Tim Martin added: “When I first moved to London, Ken was in charge and he opened this huge library near where I lived in Wood Green. It was my first taste of his extravagance and that’s always stuck with me. So I’m backing Boris — I hope he’ll spend money more wisely than Ken has done.”


----------



## Onket (May 2, 2012)

joustmaster said:


> so.. what do i have to vote for?
> mayor, and anything else?


 
Has anyone answered this yet?

You vote for your 1st and 2nd choice for mayor.
One vote for your constituency's London Assembly member.
And one for the London-wide member.


----------



## where to (May 2, 2012)

JHE said:


> One notable thing about Livingstone's campaign is that he is offering at least two things that should be very very popular: a London replacement for the EMA and cheaper tube fares. I think the reason these promises are not working well for him must be that people *do not believe* him.


 
i think you've hit the nail on the head there.


----------



## co-op (May 2, 2012)

Jean-Luc said:


> Don't know who these "well-informed sources" are (presumably counting agents present when the postal votes were opened for verification) nor how they can tell how many votes have been cast for who (normally the votes are verified face down). Sounds like a bit of whistling in the dark.


 
You can normally see what the votes are for even if they are face down - it shows through the paper -and depending on how obsessive the council guy is, they are often face up for a second or two. You can certainly count them. Obviously there are loads of other problems with this - postals are probably unrepresentative but not in particularly obvious ways and they are very small samples anyway. But they can certainly give an indication, they've tipped off a couple of results I have been involved with.


----------



## co-op (May 2, 2012)

Mind you I can also remember letting the 'encouraging postals' story out to galvanise the activists even when there was nothing in it.


----------



## Jean-Luc (May 2, 2012)

co-op said:


> You can normally see what the votes are for even if they are face down - it shows through the paper -and depending on how obsessive the council guy is, they are often face up for a second or two. You can certainly count them.


I see, but it's still against the law to say what you've seen, isn't it? I don't know what happened in the end in this case where someone did this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ele...blishes-election-vote-results-on-Twitter.html


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 2, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Lets face it; the weather will be shit Thursday and Boris will have the result in the bag by Friday


 
So, how much did you put on Boris down at Paddy Power, then?


----------



## ymu (May 2, 2012)

> Political scientist David Wearing said: "It's not unusual to have an election based on who people hate the least, and those are characterised by very low turnouts. But it's quite unusual to see an election fought on who you hate the most."
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2012/apr/27/boris-ken-london-unpopularity-contest


----------



## shagnasty (May 2, 2012)

Don't forget london also votes on the london reps a chance to get rid of brian coleman,our constituency is made up of barnet and camden


----------



## shagnasty (May 2, 2012)

It seems in london you will have three  ballot papers of different colours.This a guide from the morning star

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/118510


----------



## Onket (May 2, 2012)

shagnasty said:


> It seems in london you will have three have ballot papers of different colours.This a guide from the morning star
> 
> http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/118510


 
Post #118.


----------



## shagnasty (May 2, 2012)

Onket said:


> Post #118.


Sorry didn't see your post.I posted up link because i was a bit confused about the procedure myself


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> So, how much did you put on Boris down at Paddy Power, then?


 
Couldn't bring my self to do it. Mainly because of the thought of putting £50 anywhere near a Tory


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

Final poll:

YouGov’s final London elections poll for the Evening Standard shows Boris Johnson defeating Ken Livingstone in the run-off vote for Mayor by 53-47% - the same margin by which he won four years ago.
The survey also finds….

In the first-choice vote, Boris leads Ken by 43-38% - again similar to last time.

Brian Paddick is a distant third, on 7%, down from 10% last time

44% of voters think Boris has run a ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ campaign, compared with 29% for Ken and 11% for Paddick

However, by a narrow 39-36% margin, Ken is thought to have achieved more as Mayor

Labour enjoys a 10 point lead over the Conservatives in the election to the Assembly – an  8.5% swing since 2004, when the Tories enjoyed a 7 point lead.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (May 3, 2012)

Jesus, what is wrong with people. Why are they so stupid and mean?


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Final poll:
> 
> YouGov’s final London elections poll for the Evening Standard shows Boris Johnson defeating Ken Livingstone in the run-off vote for Mayor by 53-47% - the same margin by which he won four years ago.
> The survey also finds….
> ...


 
my bet on Benita might hold out.


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2012)

> Labour is expected to pick up eleven seats (+3), while the Tories could go down to eight (-3), the Lib Dems two (-1),* UKIP two (+2)* and the Greens two seats (no change).


 
Vote UKIP to keep out the BNP


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

Was just going to post on this elsewhere - if the UKIP 8-10% polls translate into winning candidates this would be very serious for all the other far-right parties and put an (continuing entrenched) electoral block on the BNP even if they do manage to stabilise. Was it rebel warrior who argued on  behalf of UAF that the UKIP vote was a conscious far-right vote?


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 3, 2012)

I remember ten years ago UKIP won two seats and then both candidates left to form their own party


----------



## magneze (May 3, 2012)

Just had a Labour canvasser round. Making sure people get out to vote.


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2012)

RESPECT supporters giving it to the Greens apparently

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/...r-hamlets-polling-station-fracas-7711502.html


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> RESPECT supporters giving it to the Greens apparently
> 
> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/...r-hamlets-polling-station-fracas-7711502.html


Only cos the RUC know the miserable greens will turn the other cheek and accept a slap that side too


----------



## co-op (May 3, 2012)

Jean-Luc said:


> I see, but it's still against the law to say what you've seen, isn't it? I don't know what happened in the end in this case where someone did this:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ele...blishes-election-vote-results-on-Twitter.html


 
It is illegal but you know how it is, it comes under the heading of People Talk. I can't believe that Kerry McCarthy story though, what a twonk, that really is stupid.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

Nothing happened at all.


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Vote UKIP to keep out the BNP


 
i actually had a guy say that to me a few years ago.


----------



## Crispy (May 3, 2012)

Can't remember how quick the count was last time. When can we expect the results?


----------



## stethoscope (May 3, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Can't remember how quick the count was last time. When can we expect the results?


 
Iirc, counting doesn't actually begin until Friday morning - so not until late Friday evening.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

Yep london stuff is friday aft/evening


----------



## Crispy (May 3, 2012)

ta


----------



## Citizen66 (May 3, 2012)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Jesus, what is wrong with people. Why are they so stupid and mean?



Cos it's BoJo the bumbling clown, off the telly.


----------



## _angel_ (May 3, 2012)

Why don't labour field someone new in the London elections, someone preferably less slappable than Ken?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Why don't labour field someone new in the London elections, someone preferably less slappable than Ken?


They have no one - 30 years of shit keep your head down means there is no one. NO one at all. And part of that is ken'ken' kens fault.


----------



## Teaboy (May 3, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Why don't labour field someone new in the London elections, someone preferably less slappable than Ken?


 
Livingstone is a very well known candidate who has had success in the past, look what happend when they fielded that chap with the beard whos name escapes me now.  Its all about individuals and Livingston is one of the biggest they have at the moment, if they fielded anyone from the shadow bench they'd get slaughtered and they know it.


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> They have no one - 30 years of shit keep your head down means there is no one. NO one at all. And part of that is ken'ken' kens fault.


 
i don't disbelieve you but i'm not very familiar with what ken did back in the 80s? what did he do?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> i don't disbelieve you but i'm not very familiar with what ken did back in the 80s? what did he do?


He as then head of the GLC where councillors ran up expenses on chauffeurs and there was a fucking disgusting sleaze thing going on.

He made what we owned by the council listed as public once more - rooms in the council house that we could hire rather than being shut off to people who owned them


----------



## Balbi (May 3, 2012)

Trying to get elected by the same electorate who told you to fuck off is hard though. Ken loses, and all the M.P's that got binned in 2010 and are trying to become the PPC's for the same constituencies should actually fucking think about the prospect of their faded hopes of glory ensuring a ten year Tory govt.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

Balbi said:


> Trying to get elected by the same electorate who told you to fuck off is hard though. Ken loses, and all the M.P's that got binned in 2010 and are trying to become the PPC's for the same constituencies should actually fucking think about the prospect of their faded hopes of glory ensuring a ten year Tory govt.


I'm not suggesting that people will or should vote on that basis, I was just answering a specific question.

Age is interesting here  - get ready for tory rule forever.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

Balbi said:


> Trying to get elected by the same electorate who told you to fuck off is hard though. Ken loses, and all the M.P's that got binned in 2010 and are trying to become the PPC's for the same constituencies should actually fucking think about the prospect of their faded hopes of glory ensuring a ten year Tory govt.


They didn't tell him to fuck off though. He increased his vote in 2008 compared to 2004, even as the Labour vote was collapsing everywhere else. It was the doughnut turning out for Johnson that lost that election.

This time around, differential turnout will favour Livingstone. In the absence of quality polling on the turnout question (AFAIK), it's very difficult to predict what will happen. This is only the fourth election of this type that we have had - the pollsters don't have enough information to tell us very much about what their raw results mean.

Most had Livingstone winning last time - YouGov/Evening Standard were the only ones consistently calling it for Johnson. This may be why Betfair has lost its collective mind - because they're assuming that the YouGov polls will be solid, when it was probably pure chance that their in-built biases happened to match the turnout pretty well.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> I'm not suggesting that people will or should vote on that basis, I was just answering a specific question.
> 
> *Age is interesting here - get ready for tory rule forever.*


Can't be sure what this is supposed to mean - can you clarify before I type up an irrelevant response?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 3, 2012)

I think ymu's analysis is about right. I suspect the vast majority of people will vote the same way as they did last time, so it's just a question of who turns out. Not going to call it against Johnson, though. I think he will win.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 3, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> i don't disbelieve you but i'm not very familiar with what ken did back in the 80s? what did he do?


 
Also he has relished being King Red Ken with no one in his shadow, rather than developing a pool of future leaders and representatives who could replace him over time - he has just build the Ken brand and that brand is now tarnished.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Can't be sure what this is supposed to mean - can you clarify before I type up an irrelevant response?


That more 18-24 year olds will be voting for Johnson than livingstone


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That more 18-24 year olds will be voting for Johnson than livingstone


Because their attention spans are too short to remember EMA, tuition fees, extra cuts to their housing benefit and forced labour?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Because their attention spans are too short to remember EMA, tuition fees, extra cuts to their housing benefit and forced labour?


A fair number of those hit by the cuts you mention simply won't vote. Their middle class counterparts might well vote and are unlikely to be enthused by an old green woman or an old labour man.


----------



## Plumdaff (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That more 18-24 year olds will be voting for Johnson than livingstone


 
I take it you mean that only Tory youngsters will bother, rather than that that age group would be overall pro-Johnson?


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> A fair number of those hit by the cuts you mention simply won't vote. Their middle class counterparts might well vote and are unlikely to be enthused by an old green woman or an old labour man.


It's BA's reasoning I'm interested in here. He's usually right about these things, but I'm not understanding where this one comes from.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2012)

lagtbd said:


> I take it you mean that only Tory youngsters will bother, rather than that that age group would be overall pro-Johnson?


It's really rather disappointing that the candidate with most energy also represents the nasty party


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> It's BA's reasoning I'm interested in here. He's usually right about these things, but I'm not understanding where this one comes from.


I'm quite interested in your suggestion that young people hit by the cuts and issues you mention would turn out in their droves to unseat the toff johnson


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

lagtbd said:


> I take it you mean that only Tory youngsters will bother, rather than that that age group would be overall pro-Johnson?


No, i don't mean that.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> It's BA's reasoning I'm interested in here. He's usually right about these things, but I'm not understanding where this one comes from.


This is not a prediction, it's reporting the last pre-election poll (pdf)


----------



## YouSir (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> No, i don't mean that.


 
What're your reasons for thinking that age group is likely to be especially pro-Johnson?


----------



## peterkro (May 3, 2012)

Totally irrelevant but I was in the cafe in Granville arcade this morning with a selection of builders et al all giving it "they're all bastards whoever you vote for will be a cunt".When the older woman left one of them said "ooh you"re off to vote for Boris then" older woman said in a loud and steady voice"I've never voted for those fuckers in my life and I'm not about to start now".


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> This is not a prediction, it's reporting the last pre-election poll (pdf)


18-24 year olds: 27% Tory, 51% Labour

Those numbers don't seem to say what you say they do, and they barely change across age groups, except for pensioners being more likely to vote other or Tory and a bit less likely to vote Labour (relative to the other age groups).


----------



## _angel_ (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> Because their attention spans are too short to remember EMA, tuition fees, extra cuts to their housing benefit and forced labour?


does a mayor have any say over these things?


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> 18-24 year olds: 27% Tory, 51% Labour
> 
> Those numbers don't seem to say what you say they do, and they barely change across age groups, except for pensioners being more likely to vote other or Tory and a bit less likely to vote Labour (relative to the other age groups).


 
1% more for Boris than Ken amongst 18-24 year olds. It's the over 60s who are going for Boris in a big way.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> does a mayor have any say over these things?


BA is referring to party voting intention, not the Mayoral election. But even then, the candidate's parties are in the public domain.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

36% Johnson 35% Livingstone. That's what it says. You've misread nationl vote as mayoral vote.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> BA is referring to party voting intention, not the Mayoral election. But even then, the candidate's parties are in the public domain.


No. I explicitly referred to the mayoral election.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 3, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> 1% more for Boris than Ken amongst 18-24 year olds. It's the over 60s who are going for Boris in a big way.


53-47 to Livingstone among 18-24.


----------



## Crispy (May 3, 2012)

ymu said:


> 18-24 year olds: 27% Tory, 51% Labour


This isn't a tory/labour election, it's a boris/ken one.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> 1% more for Boris than Ken amongst 18-24 year olds. It's the over 60s who are going for Boris in a big way.


Ah, shit - sorry BA. Crap .pdf reader on this machine doesn't give me page counts, they just look like single pagers - didn't see the age/Mayor breakdown.

It's 36:35 to Johnson on 1st prefs (nothing at all in it) and 47:53 for Livingstone after 2nd prefs. So, I'm still not seeing the same numbers you are.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 53-47 to Livingstone among 18-24.


Where?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 3, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> 36% Johnson 35% Livingstone. That's what it says. You've misread nationl vote as mayoral vote.


That's before 2nd prefs. It's 53-47 to Livingstone after second prefs.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

Crispy said:


> This isn't a tory/labour election, it's a boris/ken one.


There is more than one election happening.

Fuckin' Londoners.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 3, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 53-47 to Livingstone among 18-24.


 
Not in the mayoral election. As ba said, it's 36% for Boris, 35% for Ken.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 3, 2012)

Oh yeah, didn't notice the second preference bit. Still, young people. Pah.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's before 2nd prefs. It's 53-47 to Livingstone after second prefs.


Fair does, which tells us what though - 50% of the people under 25 prepared to be vote far right.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> Not in the mayoral election. As ba said, it's 36% for Boris, 35% for Ken.


On first prefs only. With second round in, Livingstone is 6% ahead, 53 to 47.

More protest options for left of centre types. First round means nothing.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

goldenecitrone said:


> Not in the mayoral election. As ba said, it's 36% for Boris, 35% for Ken.


Nah , on 2nd pref it changes. MY fault for saying that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 3, 2012)

Those poll results reinforce the idea for me that Johnson needs to get the doughnut out again. I'll bet the breakdown by borough will be pretty much exactly the same as last time.

If the reports of a low turnout are true, that should count against Johnson, I would think.


----------



## quimcunx (May 3, 2012)

Do I need to vote for Ken?


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 3, 2012)

I've just realised the "Fresh Choice For London" is UKIP. I wonder who they were. That's them fucked, nobody's going to put two and two together and realise they are UKIP. Why not call themselves "UKIP: Fresh Choice For London"?


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 3, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> Do I need to vote for Ken?


 
Every little helps to stop that grinning buffoon getting back in.


----------



## sunny jim (May 3, 2012)

It amazes me that so many people vote for BJ because he's a 'funny man'. If he doesnt get in he'll be on HIGNFY more, rather than laying his "jokes" on Londoners.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

Looking at the 2nd prefs by age group again (page 2), it really does show how turnout amongst pensioners is going to decide the result:

18-24: 47 to 53 (Livingstone)
25-39: 44 to 56 (Livingstone)
40-59: 50 to 50
60+: 62 to 38 (Johnson)

If the Tories lose this, Osborne will be under serious fire, as will Cameron for being dim enough not to veto that budget.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2012)

Also, it's 53:47 to Johnson on "certain to vote" people, and 50:50 on the full sample. So it depends hugely on how many "not sure I can be arsed to turn out for the cunt" types on each side decide they have to turn out to block the other candidate.

Some bookies might well lose their shirts on this one. Always a bonus.


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2012)

when does the polls close?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2012)

10


----------



## Greebo (May 3, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> when does the polls close?


9pm?


butchersapron said:


> 10


Oh.  Not that I leave it that late anyway.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 3, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> I've just realised the "Fresh Choice For London" is UKIP. I wonder who they were. That's them fucked, nobody's going to put two and two together and realise they are UKIP. Why not call themselves "UKIP: Fresh Choice For London"?


 
They did. Did you not read the ballot paper?


----------



## sunny jim (May 3, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> when does the polls close?


10pm


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 3, 2012)

10pm


----------



## Jean-Luc (May 3, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> I've just realised the "Fresh Choice For London" is UKIP. I wonder who they were. That's them fucked, nobody's going to put two and two together and realise they are UKIP. Why not call themselves "UKIP: Fresh Choice For London"?


Afraid it's not. They're "UK Independence Party" on the all-London list paper (where the results determine which parties gets how many seats proportionately) and that's the only vote that counts for them - in fact for all the parties except the ConLabs.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 4, 2012)

Here's a not very precise live progress of the mayoral electoral votes:

http://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/results-and-past-elections/live-results-2012?contest=23

Johnson ahead on the first preference votes.


----------



## ExtraRefined (May 4, 2012)

http://beta.betfair.com/politics/market?id=1.101463644

Current betting
Boris 97%
Ken 3%


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 4, 2012)

So, how are they likely to fare on the second preference votes? We can safely assume that most green second preferences will go to Livingstone and most 'Fresh Choice' and Argentinian Nationalist second preference votes will go to Johnson. God only knows how the fuckwits who vote for Brian Paddick will choose and I have no idea what this Siobhan Benita character is about...


----------



## marty21 (May 4, 2012)

I read that Miliband was going to spin a Boris victory as a 'personality contest' would he say the same in an unlikely (it seems) Ken victory?


----------



## magneze (May 4, 2012)

Well, the assembly members voting is entirely the other way around (Labour beating Conservative), so he may have a point.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

Seems about right.

From what I can tell overall he is going for the 'this was a vote against the coalition, Labour still have more work to do' sort of approach, which is exactly what he should be doing right now, I think. I might start a thread on this article, as it doesn't really belong here, but I think it's plausible that Miliband might be going for the strategy it outlines (which is good news, in that it is the best we can reasonably hope for from Labour).


----------



## stethoscope (May 4, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> I've just realised the "Fresh Choice For London" is UKIP. I wonder who they were. That's them fucked, nobody's going to put two and two together and realise they are UKIP. Why not call themselves "UKIP: Fresh Choice For London"?


 
And now Farage is moaning about it  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/may/04/local-elections-2012-localgovernment



> 2.50pm: BBC political correspondent Carole Walker says UKIP leader Nigel Farage is furious that his party's candidate for mayor of London, Lawrence Webb, was listed on the ballot paper as Fresh Choice for London. He says it was a cockup which undoubtedly cost Ukip votes and could have helped Boris Johnson's bid for four more years at City Hall.


----------



## The39thStep (May 4, 2012)

Here are the latest figures from the London mayoral count. Boris Johnson is on 45% and Ken Livingstone is on 40%. The Lib Dem Brian Paddick, the Green candidate Jenny Jones and the independent candidate Siobhan Benita are all level pegging on 4%.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 4, 2012)

steph said:


> And now Farage is moaning about it
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/may/04/local-elections-2012-localgovernment


 
Did anybody notice as well that the "The House Party - Homes for Londoners" was listed as the Mouse Party?


----------



## marty21 (May 4, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Here are the latest figures from the London mayoral count. Boris Johnson is on 45% and Ken Livingstone is on 40%. The Lib Dem Brian Paddick, the Green candidate Jenny Jones and the independent candidate Siobhan Benita are all level pegging on 4%.


 Benita has done very well for an independent - if we discount that Ken originally won as an independent


----------



## nagapie (May 4, 2012)

The39thStep said:


> Here are the latest figures from the London mayoral count. Boris Johnson is on 45% and Ken Livingstone is on 40%. The Lib Dem Brian Paddick, the Green candidate Jenny Jones and the independent candidate Siobhan Benita are all level pegging on 4%.


 
How do I find out which boroughs are still to come in?


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

Paddick has got a horrible kicking if he has only got 4% of the vote.


----------



## London_Calling (May 4, 2012)

"Ken's team privately concede defeat"

I think we also need to concede Johnson is an election beast: Parliament in 2015, and then all points upwards.


----------



## nagapie (May 4, 2012)

London_Calling said:


> "Ken's team privately concede defeat"


 
NOOOOO!!!! (even though I knew this would be the outcome)

I still can't imagine how 2 out 10 Labour supporters in London voted for Boris. Londoners are dead to me, they're a bunch of morons. I will walk around and make contact or speak to no one. I will shield my poor child's eyes from their idiocy.


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

Oh well. We kind of knew it was a long shot. Still  if the last hope is fading.


----------



## The39thStep (May 4, 2012)

> 3.05pm: Ken Livingstone's team are privately conceding defeat in the London mayoral contest. My colleague Hélène Mulholland has been talking to them, and she says they are resigned to Boris Johnson winning. They even think that Johnson will increase his majority. In 2008 Johnson had 53% of the vote when second preferences were included, and Livingstone was on 47%.


 
nagapie: http://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/results-and-past-elections/live-results-2012?contest=23


----------



## _angel_ (May 4, 2012)

nagapie said:


> NOOOOO!!!! (even though I knew this would be the outcome)
> 
> I still can't imagine how 2 out 10 Labour supporters in London voted for Boris. Londoners are dead to me, they're a bunch of morons. I will walk around and make contact or speak to no one. I will shield my poor child's eyes from their idiocy.


They should have had someone less punchable as their candidate if they were serious about winning. I'm surprised someone like David Miliband didn't decide to stand.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> They should have had someone less punchable as their candidate if they were serious about winning. I'm surprised someone like David Miliband didn't decide to stand.


 
_Less_ punchable?


----------



## JHE (May 4, 2012)

The Labour Party had the chance to select the very personable Oona King - but, no, by a margin of 2 to 1 (IIRC) Labourites in London chose Qaradawi's candidate Kenneth.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

JHE said:


> The Labour Party had the chance to select the very personable Oona King - but, no, by a margin of 2 to 1 (IIRC) Labourites in London chose Qaradawi's candidate Kenneth.


Warmonger King? The one who still thinks the Iraq War was right? That King?


----------



## London_Calling (May 4, 2012)

tbf, at this point I'm not sure Nelson Mandela could beat Johnson in an election.

/slightly facetious


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 4, 2012)

Johnson voters are human excrement.


----------



## butchersapron (May 4, 2012)

JHE said:


> The Labour Party had the chance to select the very personable Oona King - but, no, by a margin of 2 to 1 (IIRC) Labourites in London chose Qaradawi's candidate Kenneth.


You old fool.


----------



## Plumdaff (May 4, 2012)

I'm not convinced the Labour Party has a better candidate than Ken. You need a reasonably heavyweight politician with some charisma. Modern politics in any party doesn't exactly encourage that type. Oona Uber Blairite King would have been completely out of her depth to Paddick proportions.


----------



## marty21 (May 4, 2012)

JHE said:


> The Labour Party had the chance to select the very personable Oona King - but, no, by a margin of 2 to 1 (IIRC) Labourites in London chose Qaradawi's candidate Kenneth.


 I don't think it helped when labour mps were slagging him off -


----------



## joustmaster (May 4, 2012)

i have talked to loads of people who voted/intended to vote for boris just because he is funny. some weren't even aware he was a tory.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

lagtbd said:


> I'm not convinced the Labour Party has a better candidate than Ken. You need a reasonably heavyweight politician with some charisma. Modern politics in any party doesn't exactly encourage that type. Oona Uber Blairite King would have been completely out of her depth to Paddick proportions.


 
TBH Ken's biggest mistake was getting let back in to the Labour Party, if he had stayed outside he would never have lost in 2008.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

agricola said:


> TBH Ken's biggest mistake was getting let back in to the Labour Party, if he had stayed outside he would never have lost in 2008.


It's not just that. He has an ego the size of a planet, and he's become increasingly erratic over the years. Livingstone ran a shite campaign. For a politician who's always been known to be a master of his brief, he was naive, imo, in the way he lashed out when he was poked.

That said, he appears to have made up a little ground...


----------



## Crispy (May 4, 2012)

I'd put more money on an independent candidate winning than the labour one next time round. Although it'd probably end being Alan bloody Sugar


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Crispy said:


> I'd put more money on an independent candidate winning than the labour one next time round. Although it'd probably end being Alan bloody Sugar


Oh fuck no.  What a horrible thought.

I console myself with the fact that for an elected mayor, the mayor of London has relatively few powers. No doubt we'll see transport costs continue to drift upwards, but hopefully Johnson won't do any other damage.


----------



## Crispy (May 4, 2012)

Standing still _is _doing damage, when the city is growing beyond the comfortable capacity of its infrastructure, I'd say.


----------



## Plumdaff (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I console myself with the fact that for an elected mayor, the mayor of London has relatively few powers. No doubt we'll see transport costs continue to drift upwards, but hopefully Johnson won't do any other damage.


 
Increasing transport costs and the lack of affordable/social housing are for me the key issues for London right now. So I'm fucking miserable.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Standing still _is _doing damage, when the city is growing beyond the comfortable capacity of its infrastructure, I'd say.


True. tbh I'd like to give the people who voted for Johnson a bit of a shake. What, exactly, can they point to that he's _actually done_?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

lagtbd said:


> Increasing transport costs and the lack of affordable/social housing are for me the key issues for London right now. So I'm fucking miserable.


They are the two biggies, I agree.


----------



## Roadkill (May 4, 2012)

agricola said:


> Paddick has got a horrible kicking if he has only got 4% of the vote.


 
Yup, and a good thing too.  I've nothing against the bloke personally, but he did stand for the Lib Dems, and therefore he deserves everything he gets.

However, judging from the bar charts on London Elects he's on roughly level pegging with the independent, Benita, and the Greens' Jenny Jones. Shame if he beats either of them IMO.


----------



## nagapie (May 4, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> They should have had someone less punchable as their candidate if they were serious about winning. I'm surprised someone like David Miliband didn't decide to stand.


 
Sorry, but only a non Londoner could say that when Boris is standing. You won't have to put up with the fallout.


----------



## Roadkill (May 4, 2012)

Guardian's live ticker now has Bojo on 44% and Ken on 40, by first preference - that's 1% closer than when I last looked.  not good, though.

Jenny Jones is ahead of Paddick atm now though - 5% to 4%.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Roadkill said:


> Guardian's live ticker now has Bojo on 44% and Ken on 40, by first preference - that's 1% closer than when I last looked. not good, though.
> 
> Jenny Jones is ahead of Paddick atm now though - 5% to 4%.


Just the delayed north London counting left. Livingstone will probably close to within 3, and I reckon he'll close a bit more with 2nd preferences. It's going to be closer than last time, I think, but something a bit remarkable would have to happen to 2nd preferences for Livingstone to win. If UKIP have suffered from a collapse in their vote due to the naming fuck-up, might that mean that Johnson can count on fewer 2nd preferences? Clutching at straws now.


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

Paddick will be licking his wounds later. We knew it was a two horse race but 4% is lower than I expected.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

YouGov poll had:

43:38 1st round and 53:47 second round for those who were definitely voting.
41:39 1st round and 50:50 second round for the whole sample

Johnson probably does have it in the bag, if the 4% first round lead holds up once they're done. Livingstone should catch up a lot in the second round - the BNP/UKIP (likely to go Johnson) vote is much, much smaller than the Green/Independent vote (likely to go LIvingstone), but I would think most Lib Dems still voting Lib Dem will vote Johnson second, which wipes out a lot of that advantage.

Plus, I've seen conflicting stuff about the Independent - is she a Blairite, an ex-Trot or both? If she's New Labour, quite a lot of her support will go to Johnson instead of Livingstone.

I don't think there's enough first round leftish protest votes in there for Livingstone to catch up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

ymu said:


> I would think most Lib Dems still voting Lib Dem will vote Johnson second, which wipes out a lot of that advantage.


 
I agree with you that it's Johnson's now barring a miracle, but I'm not so sure about this bit. I suspect one or even both of the libdem voters may put Livingstone second.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I agree with you that it's Johnson's now barring a miracle, but I'm not so sure about this bit. I suspect one or even both of the libdem voters may put Livingstone second.


I can't see that. In 2008, yes. In 2012, no. There aren't many Lib Dem voters who would prefer Livingstone as Mayor that are still voting Lib Dem. Paddick might have persuaded some with his "London Lib Dems are different" schtick, but I his 4% doesn't suggest that he did. I think his votes will split strongly in favour of Johnson.

(Oh, and  at "one, or even both")


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

The BBC2 election program is currently trying to make it sound like the race may be closer than has been suggested. True or not?


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

That is definitely true. Look at the massive difference in the YouGov poll between those who are definitely voting and the whole sample. There are lots of people on both sides who might hold their nose and vote. Johnson's reluctant voters will be much less motivated than Livingstone's, this time around.

London Mayoral elections are still a bit of an unknown quantity for the pollsters. Differential turnout is a huge factor, but London doesn't quite follow the same rules on turnout as the rest of the country: more of those on low incomes have relatively decent transport/access to the polls, and the only thing the Mayor can really do is improve transport, the cost of which is a huge factor for those on low incomes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

It is true. It's a bad bad result for Livingstone personally, though. Labour are romping home in the GLA elections.

He's losing Camden and Barnet, I suspect because of his various Jewish comments. Alienating rich liberal-leaning north London Jews was a crass thing to do, tactically.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

ymu said:


> the only thing the Mayor can really do is improve transport, the cost of which is a huge factor for those on low incomes.


 
It's a huge factor for those on low and middle incomes, which is why I'm a bit  at all the people voting Johnson because he makes them laugh.


----------



## butchersapron (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is true. It's a bad bad result for Livingstone personally, though. Labour are romping home in the GLA elections.
> 
> He's losing Camden and Barnet, I suspect because of his various Jewish comments. Alienating rich liberal-leaning north London Jews was a crass thing to do, tactically.


What is their weight?


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's a huge factor for those on low and middle incomes, which is why I'm a bit  at all the people voting Johnson because he makes them laugh.


But you're facepalming at completely the wrong constituency. People who rely on and care about public transport were not those switching from Labour to Johnson. Those who stayed at home because none of the fuckers deserved their vote had a good argument for doing so.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What is their weight?


According to the 2001 census, there's a corridor up from Camden northwards - Golder's Green and around there - where it's 15-38 percent Jewish population.

tbf, it probably wouldn't have been enough to swing it for him, but he's going to lose Camden/Barnet when he probably should have won it.


----------



## butchersapron (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> According to the 2001 census, there's a corridor up from Camden northwards - Golder's Green and around there - where it's 15-38 percent Jewish population.
> 
> tbf, it probably wouldn't have been enough to swing it for him, but he's going to lose Camden/Barnet when he probably should have won it.


That sounds pretty irrelevant.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That sounds pretty irrelevant.


Depends how tight it is. But yes, it probably will be irrelevant.


----------



## Red Storm (May 4, 2012)

Looks like Ken could lose badly.


----------



## sleaterkinney (May 4, 2012)

Red Storm said:


> Looks like Ken could lose badly.


Once the 2nd prefs are in?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

Red Storm said:


> Looks like Ken could lose badly.


 
Er what it's suddenly looking tighter???


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 4, 2012)

It's amazing more people didn't vote for Paddick when he came up with gems like this:



(taken, i kid you not, from his offical youtube campiagn channel)


----------



## Red Storm (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Er what it's suddenly looking tighter???


 
I thought it had gotten to the second preference stage for some reason


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

The BBC are not updating all their pages simultaneously.

This page has a 45k lead for Johnson after 8/14 declared.
This page has a 92k lead for Johnson after 9/14 declared.

Late constituencies are apparently likely to split for Livingstone, but it ain't looking good.


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> I agree with you that it's Johnson's now barring a miracle, but I'm not so sure about this bit. I suspect one or even both of the libdem voters may put Livingstone second.



Yup. Blaming the Cons for ruining Cleggy and gang.


----------



## manny-p (May 4, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's amazing more people didn't vote for Paddick when he came up with gems like this:
> 
> 
> 
> (taken, i kid you not, from his offical youtube campiagn channel)



Are you cheerleading the ex cop?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 4, 2012)

manny-p said:


> Are you cheerleading the ex cop?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 4, 2012)

so paddick is currently on a 2-3% drop on his last attempt at this?

lol


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 4, 2012)

They are now talking about just a few thousand votes in it but with Johnson still favourite to win


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 4, 2012)

it's now "too close to call"


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> so paddick is currently on a 2-3% drop on his last attempt at this?
> 
> lol



He ran a far better campaign than last time but got kicked in the teeth by bad national polls for the LibDems...


----------



## Roadkill (May 4, 2012)

This has probably been posted several times already, but in case not ... 15 Orang Utans that look like Boris Johnson.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Hmmm the media narrative now seems to be lagging behind the results declared so far.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

four left to declare. three will go to Livingstone, one to Johnson. Johnson will be maybe 80,000 ahead on first preferences.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 4, 2012)

Roadkill said:


> This has probably been posted several times already, but in case not ... 15 Orang Utans that look like Boris Johnson.


 
My client, the orangutan, wishes to institute proceedings for defamation of character


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> four left to declare. three will go to Livingstone, one to Johnson. Johnson will be maybe 80,000 ahead on first preferences.


 
I've been toting up 2nd preference votes and the 9 results I could find gave Ken a total of about 45000 more 2nd pref votes than Boris.


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

Think Ken, what would George Bush have done?


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

When will the final result be known?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> I've been toting up 2nd preference votes and the 9 results I could find gave Ken a total of about 45000 more 2nd pref votes than Boris.


Sounds about right. It'll be Johnson's by a very narrow margin.

You're as sad as me about this.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> When will the final result be known?


11pm was the original ETA, but I don't know how much the power cut will have affected that, if at all.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sounds about right. It'll be Johnson's by a very narrow margin.
> 
> You're as sad as me about this.


Still, close enough to give the idiots on Betfair who were offering 33:1 on Ken a few very nasty moments over the next few hours. I cannot fathom what they were thinking.


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

is 200,000+ votes a lot by london standards then? Also when will the final GLA results be known?


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sounds about right. It'll be Johnson's by a very narrow margin.
> 
> You're as sad as me about this.


 
Im probably worse since not only do I not live there but I've probably only been there 3 times since they setup the elected mayoral system, and one of those times was for the rage against the machine concert.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> is 200,000+ votes a lot by london standards then? Also when will the final GLA results be known?


Biggest personal mandate in Europe. Probably one of the reasons it is such a personality contest - it is the only high profile UK political job that is directly elected.

It's looking like over 2 million votes were cast on a low turnout. The 200k gave Johnson nearly 10% over Livingstone - but it jumps around lot depending on how rich the latest constituency to come in is, on average.


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

So could livingstone still win potentially?


----------



## Roadkill (May 4, 2012)

Badgers said:


> Think Ken, what would George Bush have done?


----------



## Belushi (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> So could livingstone still win potentially?


 
I think it will be a lot closer than predicted. but Boris will get in again.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> So could livingstone still win potentially?


Theoretically, yes. But realistically, I don't think so. Something odd will have to happen, such as all the independent's second preferences going to Livingstone, which I don't think is very likely.


----------



## Roadkill (May 4, 2012)

Belushi said:


> I think it will be a lot closer than predicted. but Boris will get in again.


 
Yup.


----------



## quimcunx (May 4, 2012)

Blah.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 4, 2012)

Boris 3% ahead. Still strong Labour heartlands to count. Final result in 30 minutes. Labour saying they have done much better than expected.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Boris 3% ahead. Still strong Labour heartlands to count. Final result in 30 minutes. Labour saying they have done much better than expected.


That 3% takes into account the undeclared Labour heartlands, I think. After 10 declared, Johnson was 8 points up.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

The bloody pdf of results for Croydon & Sutton is missing the page on the mayor so my 2nd pref counting exercise is being hampered.

( pdfs at bottom of http://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/results-and-past-elections/results-2012 )


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Boris 3% ahead. Still strong Labour heartlands to count. Final result in 30 minutes. Labour saying they have done much better than expected.


That makes it very close indeed. The whole sample YouGov poll (everyone they asked, not just those who would definitely vote) had a 2% lead for Johnson going to a dead heat on second prefs.

Livingstone still in with a shout. Slim chance though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

ymu said:


> Livingstone still in with a shout. Slim chance though.


The flimsiest of straws to clutch at, but Farage might have a point about his candidate being fucked by the mistake on the ballot paper. UKIP is only on 2 percent. So... the likely result of that is that Johnson got more first preferences than he might have done, and now cannot count on much from the UKIP second prefs.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

It doesn't look terribly close to me when I look at the 2008 results for the areas that haven't declared yet, and the last BBC numbers that showed after 11 results Boris was more than 150000 1st pref votes ahead.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

All three undeclared will be going to Labour, North East heavily so. I'm sticking to my 80,000 ahead prediction. Johnson to win by maybe 20-30,000 after second prefs.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 4, 2012)

It looks like Boris will win as Ken never took the 2nd pref he needed


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

When do they count 2nd prefs? And when are the rest of the GLA results in?


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> All three undeclared will be going to Labour, North East heavily so.


 
Oops, I forgot to look at the 2008 results for that one! OK that makes it closer, including Ken having almost 49000 more 2nd pref votes than Boris according to results from 10 areas.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> When do they count 2nd prefs? And when are the rest of the GLA results in?


 
I can already see 2nd pref vote numbers in the pdfs I mentioned couple of posts ago. Unless I've made a silly error.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 4, 2012)

Perhaps Ken and Boris will get exactly the same number of votes. Then they will have the Mayoralty as a job share.  Sadly this cannot be allowed so we would have to go through the whole sorry business again with another election.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

North East numbers any time now


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The flimsiest of straws to clutch at, but Farage might have a point about his candidate being fucked by the mistake on the ballot paper.


What mistake? I've missed summat haven't I?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> What mistake? I've missed summat haven't I?


They forgot to put UKIP before the 'fresh start for London' tagline. It didn't say UKIP anywhere on the ballot paper.


----------



## claphamboy (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They forgot to put UKIP before the 'fresh start for London' tagline. It didn't say UKIP anywhere on the ballot paper.


 
That wasn't a mistake, that was a major fucking cock-up.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Class conscious election workers


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 4, 2012)

Ta. I don't even know who their candidate was. Was it Farrago the wing walker himself?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Ta. I don't even know who their candidate was. Was it Farrago the wing walker himself?


It wasn't Faridge, no. No idea who it was. And, I'm guessing, neither did many potential UKIP voters.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It wasn't Faridge, no. No idea who it was. And, I'm guessing, neither did many potential UKIP voters.


When you say many potential UKIP voters, I can only think of Kilroy-Silk and Joan Collins, and I think she left the country some decades ago.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 4, 2012)

that benito woman. or benita


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

Is Rusty Lee not running for UKIP this time?


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

for some reason i did think benita was a ukip type thing at first she has that kind of feel about her.


----------



## Belushi (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Is Rusty Lee not running for UKIP this time?


 
Isn't she banged up? Or was that just one of my weird dreams


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

Why are they interviewing Mark Stone/Kennedy about the mayoral elections on BBC news24?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> When you say many potential UKIP voters, I can only think of Kilroy-Silk and Joan Collins, and I think she left the country some decades ago.


TBF they came nowhere last time too. It probably didn't make much difference. I did say I was clutching at straws.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

OK from 11 results I've got Ken with 50000 more 2nd pref votes than Boris, although some Tory has told the BBC they think Boris will have more 2nd pref votes than Ken.

At this point Ken could end up with perhaps somewhere between 2000 and 30000 votes short of beating Boris, but this is far from a proper calculation and I've been staring at numbers for too long now.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Isn't she banged up? Or was that just one of my weird dreams


 
Sounds like one of your weird dreams we don't want to hear about.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 4, 2012)

wait, no, google says siobhan is the indy candidate


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Why are they interviewing Mark Stone/Kennedy about the mayoral elections on BBC news24?


 
They are probably asking him why Paddick's effort to infiltrate a political group was much less successful than his was.


----------



## nagapie (May 4, 2012)

Channel 4 news is saying Ken's done better than last election but not enough to win


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> OK from 11 results I've got Ken with 50000 more 2nd pref votes than Boris, although some Tory has told the BBC they think Boris will have more 2nd pref votes than Ken.
> 
> At this point Ken could end up with perhaps somewhere between 2000 and 30000 votes short of beating Boris, but this is far from a proper calculation and I've been staring at numbers for too long now.


If he does lose by 30,000 or fewer, I would say that his alienation of North London Jews _was_ a significant factor, possibly a crucial factor.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If he does lose by 30,000 or fewer, I would say that his alienation of North London Jews _was_ a significant factor, possibly a crucial factor.


 
Why do you keep going on about a mysterious cabal of jews that are controlling the election?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Why do you keep going on about a mysterious cabal of jews that are controlling the election?


They're not. It's nothing to do with a cabal, everything to do with Livingstone making a bad error in judgement. And I'll shut up about it, but it cost him votes.


----------



## claphamboy (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They forgot to put UKIP before the 'fresh start for London' tagline. It didn't say UKIP anywhere on the ballot paper.


 
I heard the 'fresh start for London' tagline came about as a result of sponsorship from 'Oust', but as Oust is so good at the elimination of shitty smells, UKIP got totally eliminated from the ballot paper.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They're not. It's nothing to do with a cabal, everything to do with Livingstone making a bad error in judgement. And I'll shut up about it, but it cost him votes.


 
Do you think they have some protocols maybe?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Do you think they have some protocols maybe?


Don't be an arse. I'm talking about Livingstone making an error in judgement that may well have cost him votes in a particular section of the electorate. Characterising me as some kind of antisemite is pretty low.


----------



## Plumdaff (May 4, 2012)

The UKIP (or more accurately, the Fresh Choice for London) candidate was called Lawrence Webb. No, I hadn't either.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> It doesn't look terribly close to me when I look at the 2008 results for the areas that haven't declared yet, and the last BBC numbers that showed after 11 results Boris was more than 150000 1st pref votes ahead.


2008 can't tell you much about 2012. It's the Tories with less incentive to turn out this time.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

My latest mucking around in my head with numbers after seeing some of the north east result is Ken losing by some tens of thousands of votes, but I'm less sure than ever of the margin. Could be a bit more than I suggested in my previous post, but Im just babbling really.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

ymu said:


> 2008 can't tell you much about 2012. It's the Tories with less incentive to turn out this time.


 
It tells me what sorts of total numbers of votes we are looking at, how many tens of thousands. Gave a reasonable idea of the North East result.


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

Betfair has BJ at 1/100 on now


----------



## DotCommunist (May 4, 2012)

I believe the leaflet from the UKIP front was offering all kinds of things way outside of mayoral power to grant.I had it read to me last week.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Don't be an arse. I'm talking about Livingstone making an error in judgement that may well have cost him votes in a particular section of the electorate. Characterising me as some kind of antisemite is pretty low.


 
I'm just kidding


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> It tells me what sorts of total numbers of votes we are looking at, how many tens of thousands. Gave a reasonable idea of the North East result.


I suppose the independent's second prefs is the only real wild card now. It's Johnson's.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I'm just kidding


oh ok.  irony antenna's on the blink again.

tbf I don't know what difference it made, except that relatively speaking he did particularly badly in Camden/Barnet. Alan Sugar came out telling people not to vote for Livingstone, which might have won him a few votes, tbh.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> .I had it read to me last week.


 
Can't you read?


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

Badgers said:
			
		

> Betfair has BJ at 1/100 on now



Now 1/50???


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

Badgers said:
			
		

> Now 1/50???



Back to 1/100 again?

Stop me when this is boring


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

1st and 2nd pref results for north east have helped ken. 2nd pref totals for 12 results have 66425 more votes for Ken than Boris (unless I messed up this calc), and the 1st pref votes from 12 results have Boris at 861,367 and Ken on 753,436.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> 1st and 2nd pref results for north east have helped ken. 2nd pref totals for 12 results have 66425 more votes for Ken than Boris (unless I messed up this calc), and the 1st pref votes from 12 results have Boris at 861,367 and Ken on 753,436.


Too little. Livingstone can't win now.  It's close, though. 

I say that, but the last two will go to Ken. He needs a 40,000 more swing. But I think the last two will be pretty evenly split.


----------



## JimW (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I'm just kidding


Thought the thread needed jazzzing up a bit?


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Too little. Livingstone can't win now.  It's close, though.
> 
> I say that, but the last two will go to Ken. He needs a 40,000 more swing. But I think the last two will be pretty evenly split.


 
Yeah. Should get confirmation in the next 20 minutes.


----------



## claphamboy (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> 1st and 2nd pref results for north east have helped ken. 2nd pref totals for 12 results have 66425 more votes for Ken than Boris (unless I messed up this calc), and the 1st pref votes from 12 results have Boris at 861,367 and Ken on 753,436.


 
Sorry, but can you link to where you are getting this info?

The BBC site doesn't seem to be getting updated.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 4, 2012)

Every five minutes on BBC24 they keep repeating the clip of the labour woman with a big chest waving her happy arms in the air

it's quite nice actually in a cheap thrill type of way


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

claphamboy said:


> Sorry, but can you link to where you are getting this info?
> 
> The BBC site doesn't seem to be getting updated.


 
The pdfs at the bottom of http://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/results-and-past-elections/results-2012

I had to resort to twitter for the 2nd pref numbers for Croydon & Sutton due to the pdf lacking the mayoral results when I looked.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Enfield/Haringey and Brent/Harlow the last two to come in. Both going to Livingstone, but Brent/Harlow only narrowly so. It could be very, very close - fewer than 10,000.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

They fixed the Croydon& Sutton pdf and my totals for the 2nd pref votes stay as previously mentioned.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

even if boris wins he's only really mayor of half of london.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> even if boris wins he's only really mayor of half of london.


 
Not even that due to turnout.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Not even that due to turnout.


Turnout wasn't quite low enough for Livingstone, tbf.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Turnout wasn't quite low enough for Livingstone, tbf.


the last two constituencies and the transfers could yet do it for ken.


----------



## claphamboy (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> even if boris wins he's only really mayor of half of london.


 
You could say exactly the same if Ken wins.


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> the last two constituencies and the transfers could yet do it for ken.



You are a beacon of hope as ever sir


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> the last two constituencies and the transfers could yet do it for ken.


I'd love to believe. But he's going to come up a tiny bit short. The London Elects website's been spot-on all day.

That said, I would not be betting my house on that just yet.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Someone else's calculations, which is everything except the last 2 area results we are waiting for:

Boris (1st & 2nd Pref) 1080079
Ken (1st & 2nd Pref) 1037822

From http://www.londoner.so/guides/33/london-elections---the-picture-begins-to-emerge


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 4, 2012)

If it's less than 10,000 I would ask for a recount.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'd love to believe. But he's going to come up a tiny bit short. The London Elects website's been spot-on all day.
> 
> That said, I would not be betting my house on that just yet.


doesn't this concern you somewhat, that they've been so accurate? are the votes conforming to their predictions or their predictions what's replaced the votes? [/jazzz]


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Same as yours, then, elbows. 

I'm trying to work out how those last two could make up that difference. But I can't quite. If North East were still left, I'd be calling it for Livingstone.


----------



## articul8 (May 4, 2012)

Brent is ken's patch.  Think Boris has it but still close


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Brent is ken's patch. Think Boris has it but still close


Yeah, but it's twinned with Harrow. London Elects has Livingstone just edging it there, but it won't help him much.

These are funny constituencies. Lots of them incorporate inner Labour areas and outer Tory areas. Camden/Barnet is a case in point. One firmly Labour, the other firmly Tory.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Same as yours, then, elbows.
> 
> I'm trying to work out how those last two could make up that difference. But I can't quite. If North East were still left, I'd be calling it for Livingstone.


 
I've got a very slightly lower number for Boris but I may have made a typo when entering the 2nd pref results into a spreadsheet.

Yeah if the North East was still left now then the excitement the BBC whipped up about the closeness hours ago would have been well justified.

 Im bored by the coverage, they don't bother showing the detailed numbers on the telly then, and they quaintly pretend the 2nd pref results don't exist until the 1st pref results are completely in and confirm that the 2nd stage is required.


----------



## claphamboy (May 4, 2012)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> If it's less than 10,000 I would ask for a recount.


 
Please God, no!

I've been up since 5am & can't wait much longer.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Typically the timetable for a final result appears to have slipped closer to 10pm than 9.30.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Im bored by the coverage, they don't bother showing the detailed numbers on the telly then, and they quaintly pretend the 2nd pref results don't exist until the 1st pref results are completely in and confirm that the 2nd stage is required.


 
I''m combining my statto sadness with watching the snooker.


----------



## articul8 (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, but it's twinned with Harrow. London Elects has Livingstone just edging it there, but it won't help him much.
> 
> These are funny constituencies. Lots of them incorporate inner Labour areas and outer Tory areas. Camden/Barnet is a case in point. One firmly Labour, the other firmly Tory.


Labour held the Brent/harrow seat last time.  Harrow won't be bad for ken


----------



## Badgers (May 4, 2012)

http://m.guardian.co.uk/politics/bl...yor-election-result?cat=politics&type=article


----------



## maldwyn (May 4, 2012)

Gilligan just joked it'll probably hinge on Tower Hamlets postal votes.


----------



## HST (May 4, 2012)

There's a ray of hope (I think). If the London Assembly get two thirds Labour/Green they can apparently stop Boris doing anything they don't like. We all got to vote for an assembly member for our area and there's not a two thirds majority there but we've also voted for the assembly in general so fingers crossed. I think if any party gets 5% they get a member. If it happens Boris will be a mayor without power - a figurehead only. That would be the best result.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Labour held the Brent/harrow seat last time. Harrow won't be bad for ken


Well unfortunately in this case, the London Elects website has been very accurate. It has Brent/Harrow going to Livingstone but only by maybe 4-5 percentage points, which only translates into a few thousand votes.

There's more hope in the other one left, Enfield/Haringey, which includes tory Enfield, but the very solidly Labour heartland of Haringey. Almost nobody in Tottenham will be voting for Johnson.


----------



## claphamboy (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Typically the timetable for a final result appears to have slipped closer to 10pm than 9.30.


 
The BBC was banging on earlier about the final result being due at 8.30pm.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

claphamboy said:


> The BBC was banging on earlier about the final result being due at 8.30pm.


 
Could be worse. Yesterday they gave me the impression the result could be as late as 11pm!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

claphamboy said:


> The BBC was banging on earlier about the final result being due at 8.30pm.


and you believed them


----------



## youngian (May 4, 2012)

maldwyn said:


> Gilligan just joked it'll probably hinge on Tower Hamlets postal votes.


When it comes to Ken that man is like Herbert Lom in the Pink Panther films. He will probably reach for his assault rifle if Boris loses.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Given the relative closeness of the results, extra doh! at Ken for making mistakes during the campaign, he could have won despite all this 'people like Boris as a character'.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

youngian said:


> When it comes to Ken that man is like Herbert Lom in the Pink Panther films. He will probably reach for his assault rifle if Boris loses.


i'm not so sure, it will be more like manna from heaven for him


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Given the relative closeness of the results, extra doh! at Ken for making mistakes during the campaign, he could have won despite all this 'people like Boris as a character'.


Yep. There have been a few things he's done wrong, tbf. But I don't think he ran a good campaign. He came across as aloof, which is the very thing he used not to be.


----------



## articul8 (May 4, 2012)

Combination of boris's comic persona, effective negative campaigning and ken having alienated Jewish voters


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Combination of boris's comic persona, effective negative campaigning and ken having alienated Jewish voters


it's traditional to wait until the result's in before analysing the defeat


----------



## articul8 (May 4, 2012)

Being called for Boris now


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 4, 2012)

I don't think it's just the Jewish voters that have been alienated.  Ken does seem to have an ability to piss people off that's his weak point.

Ken's gay vote (not that 'the gays' vote en bloc) was harmed before the last election by his sharing platforms with some rather homophobic muslim leaders, and the recent comment about the conservative party won't have helped if people were already wavering.

And there seems to be a general negativity towards Ken that doesn't (from what I have heard people say) seem to have any rational or identifiable cause - and not just among people who read the evening boris every day.  Mum-Tat (who is something of a floating voter, and more often than not ends up going with what turns out to be the majority) seriously didn't want Boris 4 years ago, and now can't stand the thought of Ken - without any clear reason for either preference.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Combination of boris's comic persona, effective negative campaigning and ken having alienated Jewish voters



I'd say Evading Standard partisan coverage was a bigger factor than all three.


----------



## articul8 (May 4, 2012)

Yes another huge factor


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> I'd say Evading Standard partisan coverage was a bigger factor than all three.


Maybe. They've been at it for years and years and years, though. I know you get on the train and _everyone_'s reading the bloody thing now that it's free, but everyone knows they have it in for Livingstone too.

I'd have fucking loved it if Johnson had lost by, say, 100 votes.


----------



## youngian (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. There have been a few things he's done wrong, tbf. But I don't think he ran a good campaign. He came across as aloof, which is the very thing he used not to be.


Not convinced his heart was in it and he looked lack lustre but he could still out debate a clown like Boris Johnson. And people mock Italians for electing Berlusconi.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Maybe. They've been at it for years and years and years, though. I know you get on the train and _everyone_'s reading the bloody thing now that it's free, but everyone knows they have it in for Livingstone too.
> 
> I'd have fucking loved it if Johnson had lost by, say, 100 votes.



And enough of them just go along with it...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Being called for Boris now


it's been being called for fucking boris all fucking day. it's a bit late for you to announce that like it's fucking news.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> Being called for Boris now


By whom?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> By whom?


perhaps he means he's been summoned by boris, who's sent an underling to collect him


----------



## articul8 (May 4, 2012)

By Boris press team apparently


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

Boris is standing for mayor


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> By Boris press team apparently


 
They havent finished fucking counting.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

articul8 said:


> By Boris press team apparently


Well, he's 90,000 ahead on first preferences with one constituency to report. But he's trailing in second preferences by perhaps 60,000. Brent/Harrow appears to be very close, so it should deliver a very narrow overall Johnson victory, but they have not reported yet.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> it's traditional to wait until the result's in before analysing the defeat





Balbi said:


> They havent finished fucking counting.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Wahey its close, Enfield & Haringay results are out, only 1 to go.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Wahey its close, Enfield & Haringay results are out, only 1 to go.


What's the second preference count now?


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What's the second preference count now?


 
Well I need to figure out why my numbers for Boris were a bit lower than someone else's but I've got it at:

2nd pref boris 233243
2nd pref ken 308437

total boris 1146397
total ken 1131272


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Well I need to figure out why my numbers for Boris were a bit lower than someone else's but I've got it at:
> 
> 2nd pref boris 233243
> 2nd pref ken 308437
> ...


if yer right then boris will make all the right noises about working with everyone which will be forgotten about in a week's time.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Well I need to figure out why my numbers for Boris were a bit lower than someone else's but I've got it at:
> 
> 2nd pref boris 233243
> 2nd pref ken 308437
> ...


Wow! I'm not calling this just yet.  Still, 15,000. Ach. Johnson's going to win by a tiny tiny margin.


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

when's the final one out?


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Wow! I'm not calling this just yet.  Still, 15,000. Ach. Johnson's going to win by a tiny tiny margin.


 
It's fucking close.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> when's the final one out?


shortly


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


> It's fucking close.


This was the last report.

I can't see a 15,000 swing in there. It'll be 5,000 tops.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This was the last report.
> 
> I can't see a 15,000 swing in there. It'll be 5,000 tops.


 
Looking at the 2008 results for there it could be a little more than that including 2nd prefs, but I do struggle a bit to imagine it getting beyond a 8000 narrowing. Not impossible though.

Sorry keep editing this post at my thoughts on the tiny details wobble


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


>


----------



## Stay Beautiful (May 4, 2012)

Noticeable that the bulk of rejected ballot papers are in areas where Livingstone was in front. I make it about 40,000 across the 14 seats in total where papers were rejected for: "voting for too many (1st preference only), unmarked uncertain and writing identifying voter"


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 4, 2012)

The Telegraph a few minutes ago were talking about a photo finish. That is no good for Ken - or for that matter Boris. It seems that there had been power cuts at the counting stations and had to resort to hand counting. Also another two boxes of uncounted votes had turned up somewhere.

I give up I am going out.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The Telegraph a few minutes ago were talking about a photo finish. That is no good for Ken - or for that matter Boris. It seems that there had been power cuts at the counting stations and had to resort to hand counting. Also another two boxes of uncounted votes had turned up somewhere.
> 
> I give up I am going out.


you may be gone some time?


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

I can see myself getting quite pissed off if the media stick with the 'magic of Boris' if he only wins by a very narrow margin.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

8 to 10k would be good.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> I can see myself getting quite pissed off if the media stick with the 'magic of Boris' if he only wins by a very narrow margin.


i'd have to laugh if any investigation into electoral fraud in tower hamlets turns up that all the votes were for boris


----------



## miktheword (May 4, 2012)

Stay Beautiful said:


> Noticeable that the bulk of rejected ballot papers are in areas where Livingstone was in front. I make it about 40,000 across the 14 seats in total where papers were rejected for: "voting for too many (1st preference only), unmarked uncertain and writing identifying voter"


 


how many voting papers in a box? 5 Live saying they're hand counting two boxes of papers that couldn't be read electronically


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

I am now whipping myself up into a pointless frenzy by looking at 2008 and 2012 results and noting how much of Paddicks 2nd preference votes have evaporated this time. Or rather how large the number of votes he often got as 2nd pref were in 2008, and where these may end up in the yet to be declared final result in Brent & Harrow.


----------



## Stay Beautiful (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Well I need to figure out why my numbers for Boris were a bit lower than someone else's but I've got it at:
> 
> 2nd pref boris 233243
> 2nd pref ken 308437
> ...


 
Are you missing the fact that 2nd choices aren't counted where they've already voted for the other candidate as 1st pref in the run off? There will be some that voted for both Livingstone AND Johnson.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

For reference, Brent & Harrow 2008 results:

1st pref:
Livingstone 65,862
Johnson 61,825
Paddick 14502

2nd pref:
Livingstone 22,122
Johnson 18,454
Paddick 42,328


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Stay Beautiful said:


> Are you missing the fact that 2nd choices aren't counted where they've already voted for the other candidate as 1st pref in the run off? There will be some that voted for both Livingstone AND Johnson.


 
Probably! Knew there would be something wrong with what I've done this evening. Never mind, fun anyway!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Stay Beautiful said:


> Are you missing the fact that 2nd choices aren't counted where they've already voted for the other candidate as 1st pref in the run off? There will be some that voted for both Livingstone AND Johnson.


no, i don't think anyone's missing that. everyone's always known that any second preferences from people putting boris or ken first wouldn't count.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> no, i don't think anyone's missing that. everyone's always known that any second preferences from people putting boris or ken first wouldn't count.


 
But are they removed from the results I've been using? It would have been presumptuous of the 1st round result to do so, even if everyone knows who the top two will be.

Bah.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> But are they removed from the results I've been using? It would have been presumptuous of the 1st round result to do so, even if everyone knows who the top two will be.
> 
> Bah.


back to the drawing board


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Probably! Knew there would be something wrong with what I've done this evening. Never mind, fun anyway!


See I like this. It builds a small margin of error into your calculations, thus leaving some doubt as to whether or not they really do point to a very narrow Johnson victory!

Although, tbh, the number of people putting Ken first/Boris second or vice versa is bound to be tiny.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 4, 2012)

miktheword said:


> how many voting papers in a box? 5 Live saying they're hand counting two boxes of papers that couldn't be read electronically


 
As many as several thousand.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

All up in the air.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> As many as several thousand.


 
It's the hope that kills you. Hah.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> As many as several thousand.


Here's another straw to clutch at! There's bound to be a massive difference between areas inside the constituency, so if the two boxes they're counting by hand are from a _Labour_ area, that could make a big difference.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

Ken wins, he wins. Boris loses by a little bit, Cameron's tories battered his lead into submission.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here's another straw to clutch at! There's bound to be a massive difference between areas inside the constituency, so if the two boxes they're counting by hand are from a _Labour_ area, that could make a big difference.


they should be, i filled them myself.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Ah well, the Tories were at least robbed of the opportunity to wave some good news around on any of the main news programs on the telly today


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 4, 2012)

Elbows please stop wittering on about 2008. The 2012 results are live now. You just have to wait and see what happens.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

And deadlines for papers will have passed soonish.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here's another straw to clutch at! There's bound to be a massive difference between areas inside the constituency, so if the two boxes they're counting by hand are from a _Labour_ area, that could make a big difference.


 
They're apparently two boxes of *assorted* votes that couldn't be read electronically. They can be from all over.


----------



## Belushi (May 4, 2012)

Kirsty Wark at Simon Hughes on Newsnight 

'you lost to a Penguin in Edinburgh'


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


> It's the hope that kills you. Hah.


 

It is indeed.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Kirsty Wark at Simon Hughes on Newsnight
> 
> 'you lost to a Penguin in Edinburgh'


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Elbows please stop wittering on about 2008. The 2012 results are live now. You just have to wait and see what happens.


 
No regrets here, sorry, would carry on wittering if I had anything left to say! Been waiting for those last results for hours, was having stat fun with a few others whilst waiting, but my 2nd pref methodology appears to have sucked so that game is dead.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


>


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


>


 
"You are cordially invited to the electoral count for Harrow and Brent"


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Kirsty Wark at Simon Hughes on Newsnight
> 
> 'you lost to a Penguin in Edinburgh'


 
Actually just laughed out loud at that!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Warsi's been promoted since last night.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 4, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Kirsty Wark at Simon Hughes on Newsnight
> 
> 'you lost to a Penguin in Edinburgh'


 
She might as well have danced round him singing "you're shit, and you know you are" to the tune of "Go West".


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> She might as well have danced round him singing "you're shit, and you know you are" to the tune of "Go West".


or, for more of a challenge, to the tune of 'she wore a yellow ribbon'


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

Im starting to hate Carole Walker. Her 'ive talked to boris' people and they say they've won' stuff has been constant for four hours now.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> She might as well have danced round him singing "you're shit, and you know you are" to the tune of "Go West".


or to the chorus of chicory tip's 'son of my father', like so many football chants do


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> She might as well have danced round him singing "you're shit, and you know you are" to the tune of "Go West".


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


> Im starting to hate Carole Walker.


Who?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Warsi's been promoted since last night.


 
She has?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


> Im starting to hate Carole Walker. Her 'ive talked to boris' people and they say they've won' stuff has been constant for four hours now.


 
It's a bit "Fox News in 2002", isn't it?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> She has?


Co-chairman of the Tory party last night. Chairman tonight.


----------



## bluestreak (May 4, 2012)

and still it drags on..


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Who?


like carol decker out of t'pau only different


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Co-chairman of the Tory party last night. Chairman tonight.


 
Ah I think that's just her off the cuff comment, she's still co-chair afaik


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

Shah gets 70k votes, tories 40k.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

*Keith M. O' Brien* ‏ @*keithmobrien* 
Results for Brent & Harrow: Shah (Lab) 70400, Rajput (Con) 40604. Navin Shah deemed elected to GLA. Majority: 29,796 #*London2012*


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Warsi's been promoted since last night.


What has she done to deserve that?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> What has she done to deserve that?


That question has been asked for years.

To be fair to her, she's a competent politician.


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

*Brent*&*Harrow*: 46% Ken v 41% Boris. #*LondonElects*


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

5% lead, 2.6% in 2008.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That question has been asked for years.
> 
> To be fair to her, she's a competent politician.


 
I'll say - she has managed to get a peerage despite losing the one election she fought.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


> 5% lead, 2.6% in 2008.


That is close. That's what 8,000 votes? Add in the second prefs...


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That is close. That's what 8,000 votes? Add in the second prefs...


 
Depends on turnout etc - but, CLOSE.


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

so when's it due to be announced? will they have a recount if it's too close?


----------



## Lock&Light (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> so when's it due to be announced? will they have a recount if it's too close?


 
No-one knows and yes.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> so when's it due to be announced? will they have a recount if it's too close?


 
A RESULT IS DUE IN SEVEN MINUTES ACCORDING TO THE BBC

though no mention of what that result is for


----------



## colacubes (May 4, 2012)

BBC News are saying in about 7 mins


----------



## Belushi (May 4, 2012)

Sky is saying 30 minutes


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> so when's it due to be announced? will they have a recount if it's too close?


I don't know, but I would doubt it. You'd have to recount the whole lot everywhere. I think they have to take whatever comes, even if it's a win by one vote.

I might be wrong. But the thing about recounts is that there's no guarantee the second count will be more accurate than the first.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

If percentages are flying round on twitter than we probably can expect a result within that timeframe.


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)




----------



## Lock&Light (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't know, but I would doubt it. You'd have to recount the whole lot everywhere. I think they have to take whatever comes, even if it's a win by one vote.


 
It's up to the presiding officer but if it's very close then a recount would be held.


----------



## trashpony (May 4, 2012)

This has probably been posted before on the thread but:


> BBC London political editor Tim Donovan said that the delays this time had been prompted by the discovery of two ballot boxes full of votes in Brent and Harrow - which were now being counted by hand.


----------



## colacubes (May 4, 2012)

Labour hold for Brent and Harrow apparently.  Which means counting should be all done...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Lock&Light said:


> It's up to the presiding officer but if it's very close then a recount would be held.


Fair enough. I stand by my point, though. There's no reason to believe that a second count will be more accurate than the first.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Result in mere minutes if not sooner.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

nipsla said:


> BBC News are saying in about 7 mins


 
I think I've actually stopped caring now...seriously at this point they could install Nick Griffin as Mayor and I'd be 'Meh'...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Lock&Light said:


> It's up to the presiding officer but if it's very close then a recount would be held.


i'm glad to see stating the bleeding obvious is within your repertoire.


----------



## Santino (May 4, 2012)

I'd demand a recount just to annoy people.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> I think I've actually stopped caring now...seriously at this point they could install Nick Griffin as Mayor and I'd be 'Mayor'...


*corrected for you*


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm glad to see stating the bleeding obvious is within your repertoire.


But a recount of all 2 million votes? Really?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But a recount of all 2 million votes? Really?


why not?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> *corrected for you*


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

> The result is either due in seven minutes,10 minutes or half an hour (Sky), depending on who you believe.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> why not?


Well, if I was winning on the first count and losing on the second, I'd be demanding a third. As I said, there's no guarantee a second count will be more accurate than a first, especially in a massive vote like this.


----------



## youngian (May 4, 2012)

Not sure if Al Gore is going to clinch this.


----------



## Voley (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


>


Yeah, that one was lost on me, too.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


>


jokes aren't so funny when you have to explain them 

meh sounds a lot like mayor


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

NVP said:


> Yeah, that one was lost on me, too.


 
PM can be weird at the best of times but that was a new level...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

youngian said:


> Not sure if Al Gore is going to clinch this.


that's an inconvenient truth


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> PM can be weird at the best of times but that was a new level...


yeh and you and nvp can be, er, rather slow at times.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> jokes aren't so funny when you have to explain them
> 
> meh sounds a lot like mayor


 
Technically a joke has to be funny to be a joke. Otherwise it's just a weird comment with no apparent point.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Technically a joke has to be funny to be a joke. Otherwise it's just a weird comment with no apparent point.


and obviously you're the judge of what is funny to everyone and at all times.


----------



## Voley (May 4, 2012)

It's our fault for being slow.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

This is a heroic effort at dragging things out by Jon Sopel on BBC News.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

NVP said:


> It's our fault for being slow.


 
Heh the last refuge of the unfunny idiot...


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> and obviously you're the judge of what is funny to everyone and at all times.


 
Clearly I'm a better judge than you.


----------



## Fez909 (May 4, 2012)

I don't even live in London but I've got my fingers crossed for Ken.  Come on!  Another Tory needs to go down to cap off a good day....


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

No UKIP assembly members.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

NVP said:


> It's our fault for being slow.


if it's any comfort i don't think it's deliberate


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Clearly I'm a better judge than you.


no, i don't think you are. otherwise some of your posts might contain some humour.


----------



## Voley (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> no, i don't think you are. otherwise some of your posts might contain some humour.


Yours are containing a fair bit now tbf.


----------



## shagnasty (May 4, 2012)

Is it ken or is it bo it's twenty to twelve and we don't


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

lol sounds a bit like not all the agents/candidates have turned up to the room where they find out the results slightly in advance yet


----------



## colacubes (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No UKIP assembly members.


 
0.2% out


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

NVP said:


> Yours are containing a fair bit now tbf.


 
Yup. It's now officially comedic genius. PM is the new Mr Bean!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

nipsla said:


> 0.2% out


Makes it even sweeter.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Yup. It's now officially comedic genius. PM is the new Mr Bean!


popular all round the world and with all sorts of different groups sounds about right.


----------



## Lock&Light (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm glad to see stating the bleeding obvious is within your repertoire.


 
I was answering someone's question, you tedious prick.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Lock&Light said:


> I was answering someone's question, you tedious prick.


yes, i know. you were answering it by stating the bleeding obvious.


----------



## colacubes (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Makes it even sweeter.


 
I'll be interested to see if they kick off re the apparent cock-up about the party name on their mayoral candidate's ballot.  There's been only vague mutterings which make me think it's their fault   Lol


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

John Sopel and Carole Borisfan are making this an endurance sport. Im losing the will to live.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

Yeah I think UKIP filled in some forms wrong


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Balbi said:


> John Sopel and Carole Borisfan are making this an endurance sport. Im losing the will to live.


you can't give in now


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

They should just replay the news that Brian Coleman has lost, tbh.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

nipsla said:


> I'll be interested to see if they kick off re the apparent cock-up about the party name on their mayoral candidate's ballot. There's been only vague mutterings which make me think it's their fault  Lol


Excellent.  Mad _and_ incompetent.


----------



## Lock&Light (May 4, 2012)

nipsla said:


> I'll be interested to see if they kick off re the apparent cock-up about the party name on their mayoral candidate's ballot. There's been only vague mutterings which make me think it's their fault  Lol


 
Farage was saying that he was going to find out who was responsible, then stopped and said,"Of course, as leader, I'm responsible."


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Excellent.  Mad _and_ incompetent.


 
It was an 'internal error' 

http://www.itv.com/news/london/update/2012-05-04/ukip-complain-of-internal-error-on-ballot-paper/




> The UK Independence Party is blaming an "internal error" today for keeping its party's name off ballot papers in London, potentially losing them the chance of representation on the London assembly.
> After nomination papers were filled in incorrectly, the party's contender for Mayor, Lawrence Webb, and candidates for the London Assembly were listed as "Fresh Choice for London", rather than Ukip.


----------



## colacubes (May 4, 2012)

Lock&Light said:


> Farage was saying that he was going to find out who was responsible, then stopped and said,"Of course, as leader, I'm reponsble."


 
Bless him.  He's like the shitter, less funny version of Boris.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> It was an 'internal error'
> 
> http://www.itv.com/news/london/update/2012-05-04/ukip-complain-of-internal-error-on-ballot-paper/


it'll be the night of the penknives as they whittle out the culprit


----------



## Lock&Light (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> yes, i know. you were answering it by stating the bleeding obvious.


 
Bugger off, would you. Your tediousness is sending me to sleep.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

Here we go...


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

ITS ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111one


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

See you on the other side!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> It was an 'internal error'
> 
> http://www.itv.com/news/london/update/2012-05-04/ukip-complain-of-internal-error-on-ballot-paper/


I'd love to have been the one processing the form. Hmmm. They appear to have made a mistake there. Hmmm. What to do?


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

What an ugly stage.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> What an ugly stage.


 
Lol I thought that.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

Lock&Light said:


> Bugger off, would you. Your tediousness is sending me to sleep.


i'm surprised you're up so far past your bedtime


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

bloody hell the suspense


----------



## marty21 (May 4, 2012)

about fucking time


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Elbows please stop wittering on about 2008. The 2012 results are live now. You just have to wait and see what happens.


Elbows, please ignore this curmudgeon and carry on. I am enjoying your work immensely.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

lol at cameras randomly scanning the seated.

I want a closeup on the plant next.


----------



## Lock&Light (May 4, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm surprised you're up so far past your bedtime


 
Where I live it's nearly 1.00. Still early, really.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

ymu said:


> Elbows, please ignore this curmudgeon and carry on. I am enjoying your work immensely.


not much point now


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2012)

ymu said:


> Elbows, please ignore this curmudgeon and carry on. I am enjoying your work immensely.


 
Cheers, but nothing left for me to do apart from wait and see just how bad my 2nd pref cockup was compared to the actual result.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

the fucking commentators must get paid by the word


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

Come on come on !!


----------



## Fez909 (May 4, 2012)

Would be funny if Ken won as the Graun have changed the title of their live blog coverage to "Boris wins London mayoral election' already.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 4, 2012)

Boris has won, hasn't he? The foppish cunt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

Boris looks like a smug 'I've just won' git.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

Ken has a bit of a smirk on him?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

STILL no UKIP mentioned.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

lol @ "Lawrence Webb, Fresh Choice for London"


----------



## JimW (May 4, 2012)

Still not calling UKIP UKIP


----------



## Fez909 (May 4, 2012)

"Fresh choice for London" lolz


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

CUnt.


----------



## agricola (May 4, 2012)

Boris wins.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2012)

the fucking cunt


----------



## Balbi (May 4, 2012)

62k


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 4, 2012)




----------



## marty21 (May 4, 2012)

fucksticks


----------



## bluestreak (May 4, 2012)

so near?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 4, 2012)

for fucks sake


----------



## JimW (May 4, 2012)

neo-Victorian for more reasons than he reckons, the flop-haired cunt


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)




----------



## bluestreak (May 4, 2012)

so far.


----------



## stethoscope (May 4, 2012)

Cocks.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 4, 2012)

elbows said:


> Cheers, but nothing left for me to do apart from wait and see just how bad my 2nd pref cockup was compared to the actual result.


Not as close as we thought.


----------



## magneze (May 4, 2012)

Pretty close.


----------



## colacubes (May 4, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


>


 
Innit


----------



## QueenOfGoths (May 4, 2012)

Bollocks


----------



## youngian (May 4, 2012)

The eyes of the world are on this city in a few weeks and that clown is the face of it.


----------



## magneze (May 4, 2012)

Boris Johnson? Who votes for this twat?


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2012)

bloody hell.


----------



## quimcunx (May 4, 2012)

BUGGERINGFUCKETYCUNT


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

Amazing vote given how much Evening Standard backing he got, only 62k majority...not much of a emphatic victory.


----------



## twentythreedom (May 4, 2012)

Boris is a fucking cunt


----------



## JimW (May 4, 2012)

Laughter for Coleman


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 4, 2012)

His victory speech is as boring as this election has been.


----------



## twentythreedom (May 4, 2012)

Brian Coleman is a fucking dirty freeloading nonce cunt, he's ruined Barnet, and he sodomises rent boys.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 5, 2012)

agricola said:


> I'll say - she has managed to get a peerage despite losing the one election she fought.


Not despite but because. It was their way of getting her in in the face of her electoral failure.


----------



## gosub (May 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Amazing vote given how much Evening Standard backing he got, only 62k majority...not much of a emphatic victory.


Enough to finish Livingstone for good


----------



## Belushi (May 5, 2012)

Ha! Great bit of shit stirring in Kens speech


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

May the fourth be with you, oh blimey.


----------



## killer b (May 5, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Ha! Great bit of shit stirring in Kens speech


what did he say? i turned it off after the results.


----------



## Roadkill (May 5, 2012)

gosub said:


> Enough to finish Livingstone for good


 
He's just said, 'this is my last election.'


----------



## Smokeandsteam (May 5, 2012)

He's just announced its his last election


----------



## DJ Squelch (May 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> May the fourth be with you, oh blimey.


 
that's a nod to Thatcher rather than Star Wars


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

And now he can snipe at the media as he doesn't need them anymore


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

Good stuff.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 5, 2012)

Ken's speech is a little more poignant.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2012)

Bonus points for several mentions of council housing.


----------



## agricola (May 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Ken's speech is a little more poignant.


 
Yes, apart from the Labour / Ed Miliband references he had to put in it.


----------



## magneze (May 5, 2012)

killer b said:


> what did he say? i turned it off after the results.


"Boris will be next Conservative leader. Congratulations to Jenny Jones for coming third. Oh I don't mean to denigrate the LibDems (lol)."


----------



## Fez909 (May 5, 2012)

Ken's was a 'proper' speech.


----------



## Belushi (May 5, 2012)

Like Jenny Jones speech, glad I gave her my second preference vote now.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

Dig against Boris from the Greens too.

I _really_ hope the BNP bloke praises him.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2012)

Not heard the Green speak before - she's middle classness distilled isn't she? Shouldn't be a surprise. Oh, but a late mention of the leveller overton, perhaps I forgive her.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2012)

"*many* other liberal democrats" contradiction in terms shurely?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 5, 2012)

JimW said:


> Not heard the Green speak before - she's middle classness distilled isn't she? Shouldn't be a surprise. Oh, but a late mention of the leveller overton, perhaps I forgive her.


 
She doesn't come across as well on TV but she's lovely in real life.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 5, 2012)

I think the penguin party should put up a candidate for London Mayor next time.

And as for the result, bollocks.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> She doesn't come across as well on TV but she's lovely in real life.


I thought she came across just fine.


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

I will bear the size of my cockup in mind for next time, as it appears about two thirds of 2nd preference votes were irrelevant due to those peoples 1st pref being one of the top 2 candidates.

Of course next time the dynamic could be very different as we will be dealing with new characters and god knows what state the country will be in by then. But maybe in a clear 2 horse race its still a ratio worth remembering when playing silly number games as I did earlier.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2012)

Interesting to hear kelner confirming that people aren't in fact daft dupes of the papers.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 5, 2012)

agricola said:


> Yes, apart from the Labour / Ed Miliband references he had to put in it.


 
Yeah that did feel a little shoehorned in...


----------



## DotCommunist (May 5, 2012)

'Post ideological politics'


----------



## Pickman's model (May 5, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> 'Post ideological politics'


not at today's prices, cheaper to email them


----------



## Belushi (May 5, 2012)

Hmmm, I wonder if Boris will see out a full term.  I'd be surprised if he didn't try and seize the Tory crown if the opportunity arose.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 5, 2012)

Just goes to show what a weak cunt Milliband was in not telling Newt-Boy to sling his hook.

ffs this was Labour's for the taking, they fucked it.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 5, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Hmmm, I wonder if Boris will see out a full term. I'd be surprised if he didn't try and seize the Tory crown if the opportunity arose.


 
If that buffoon ever ensconces himself in the sofa at number 10 I'll give up and move to south america


----------



## frogwoman (May 5, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Hmmm, I wonder if Boris will see out a full term. I'd be surprised if he didn't try and seize the Tory crown if the opportunity arose.


 
You're right. I think cameron hates him.


----------



## marty21 (May 5, 2012)

fucksticks


----------



## Pickman's model (May 5, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> You're right. I think cameron hates him.


there's a strange networks of hates going on in this election.


----------



## frogwoman (May 5, 2012)

would you say that assessment is right PM?


----------



## gosub (May 5, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Hmmm, I wonder if Boris will see out a full term.  I'd be surprised if he didn't try and seize the Tory crown if the opportunity arose.


Given how well etonians are placed at the top table its the non etonians that will wield the knife. 




Next tory leader will probably be from Harrow


----------



## JHE (May 5, 2012)

The defeated candidate is consoled by his Hitler-praising chum.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 5, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> would you say that assessment is right PM?


yes, most people hate boris


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> You're right. I think cameron hates him.


He might do. They're certainly not mates, despite having known each other for decades. They are rivals, for sure. Don't know if that extends to hatred.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (May 5, 2012)

tbh: is there that much of a difference? The civil service still run the show.....


----------



## Roadkill (May 5, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Hmmm, I wonder if Boris will see out a full term. I'd be surprised if he didn't try and seize the Tory crown if the opportunity arose.


 
He did say he would. But whether that would still apply in the event of something happening to remove Cameron from No.10 is perhaps another matter. He's the obvious successor, now that George Osborne's star has waned.

In the shorter term the media generally seem to regard Bojo's win as taking the heat off the PM a bit. That might be so, and Boris as Mayor of London is probably a safer beast to have about than an unemployed Boris throwing his weight around. On the other hand, a Boris sitting in London trying to build a power base is also an unappealing prospect. IMO the relationship between Downing Street and City Hall is going to be more important in the next couple of years than it's ever been before.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 5, 2012)

AKA pseudonym said:


> tbh: is there that much of a difference? The civil service still run the show.....


one side wanted hundreds of boris buses, the other side didn't. there's quite a difference there.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

Roadkill said:


> He did say he would. But whether that would still apply in the event of something happening to remove Cameron from No.10 is perhaps another matter. He's the obvious successor, now that George Osborne's star has waned..


I think it would be very difficult for Johnson to bail out early from the mayor's job. For starters, to become Tory leader, he'd first have to become an MP again, presumably. I don't see how he could do that - he's agreed to do this job for four years. _He's asked to do it._ He'll have to do it, I'd think.


----------



## frogwoman (May 5, 2012)

How long till the LA results are in?


----------



## Roadkill (May 5, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think it would be very difficult for Johnson to bail out early from the mayor's job. For starters, to become Tory leader, he'd first have to become an MP again, presumably. I don't see how he could do that - he's agreed to do this job for four years. _He's asked to do it._ He'll have to do it, I'd think.


 
Yes, I agree.  Anything else is unlikely.  Possible, but unlikely.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 5, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Hmmm, I wonder if Boris will see out a full term. I'd be surprised if he didn't try and seize the Tory crown if the opportunity arose.


 
Yep, it's a question of how he gets back in to the commons given the electoral cycles of Parliament and Mayor are out of sync...


----------



## AKA pseudonym (May 5, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> one side wanted hundreds of boris buses, the other side didn't. there's quite a difference there.


and Boris came up with that idea?


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Yep, it's a question of how he gets back in to the commons given the electoral cycles of Parliament and Mayor are out of sync...


 
Its not that hard if the party decide they need you desperately. A by-election opportunity can be created.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Its not that hard if the party decide they need you desperately. A by-election opportunity can be created.


 
But then they risk losing London, and Cameron hates him and doesn't want him back.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 5, 2012)

Well, I had hoped to have the hatrick of seeing the libs slaughtered, the tories wounded and a return to Keningrad. His speech was ok.

two outta three ain't bad /loaf


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> But then they risk losing London, and Cameron hates him and doesn't want him back.


 
Different issues to the cycle/timing one. I mentioned the ease of getting round pure election timing issues to a great extent by use of by-elections because in my own town this happened back in the 1960s. Wilson appointed Frank Cousins as Minister of Technology and needed a seat for him, so they made the sitting MP in this seat (which was pretty darn safe back) then a lord to trigger a by-election. 

Cameron can't keep Boris away forever, and anyway one of the scenarios for Boris's return would be in the context of support for Cameron collapsing.  Im not predicting it will happen this way or soon, and party leaders are not something I'd predict with much confidence on many occasions, so many potential swerves and internal politics to deal with.


----------



## frogwoman (May 5, 2012)

gla seats all declared now - bnp lost theirs.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Different issues to the cycle/timing one. I mentioned the ease of getting round pure election timing issues to a great extent by use of by-elections because in my own town this happened back in the 1960s. Wilson appointed Frank Cousins as Minister of Technology and needed a seat for him, so they made the sitting MP in this seat (which was pretty darn safe back) then a lord to trigger a by-election.
> 
> Cameron can't keep Boris away forever, and anyway one of the scenarios for Boris's return would be in the context of support for Cameron collapsing. Im not predicting it will happen this way or soon, and party leaders are not something I'd predict with much confidence on many occasions, so many potential swerves and internal politics to deal with.


Boris has an elected post, though. It's politically difficult for him to give that post up to try to get a different elected post.


----------



## Lock&Light (May 5, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Boris has an elected post, though. It's politically difficult for him to give that post up to try to get a different elected post.


 
A sacrificial MP is also in an elected post. That wouldn't stop one being 'retired' to make room for Boris.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 5, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> How long till the LA results are in?


 
from BBC

Labour : 12 seats (+4)
Con : 9 (-2)
Green : 2 (no change)
LD 2 (-1)
BNP 0 (-1)


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Boris has an elected post, though. It's politically difficult for him to give that post up to try to get a different elected post.


 
Yeah Im not suggesting that is very likely. I was mostly talking about getting the timing in sync without having boris completely out of office for several years, so for example what could happen when his new mayoral term is up.

Personally if I wanted to be PM I'd be happy to wait a while anyway, the next general election can easily shape up to be a tricky nightmare for all concerned.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 5, 2012)

Puddy_Tat said:


> from BBC
> 
> Labour : 12 seats (+4)
> Con : 9 (-2)
> ...



Ohh that's interesting, there's a possibility the Assembly could effectively spend four years blocking Boris' budgets!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 5, 2012)

I'm sure I have read somewhere that the London Mayor is allowed to be an MP as well for up to 12 months (and didn't Ken stay an MP until 2001?)

Which means Boris could become an MP at the 2015 election (assuming the coalition carries on that long) and stand down at the end of his 4 year term as Mayor in 2016.




ETA



Kid_Eternity said:


> Ohh that's interesting, there's a possibility the Assembly could effectively spend four years blocking Boris' budgets!


 

It's late, I don't live in London, and I'm losing the plot.  What's the deal on the GLA and the Mayor's budgets etc?  What proportion have to approve / can veto stuff?


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

Now if only this coalition would do the right thing and demonstrate the ability of coalitions to fall apart and not to last a full term, we could play further with the timing possibilities.

Its a shame that when commentators wring their hands about peoples lack of connection with politics today, lack of credibility of politicians and the system, they don't suggest that a government collapsing after just a few years might slightly reawaken peoples political imagination and sense that anything could happen. Its all too predictable these days.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 5, 2012)

Has Ken been silenced or is it just my computer?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17965825


----------



## Lock&Light (May 5, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Has Ken been silenced or is it just my computer?
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17965825


 
It's not just your computer.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 5, 2012)

Turnout down to just 35%


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 5, 2012)

Lock&Light said:


> It's not just your computer.


Ta


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Has Ken been silenced or is it just my computer?
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17965825


 
Mute newt indeed.


----------



## ymu (May 5, 2012)

They can just give him a peerage can't they? I don't think he _has_ to be an MP to become PM, although it is a convention that is rarely broken. Or have the rules changed?


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 5, 2012)

Belushi said:


> Hmmm, I wonder if Boris will see out a full term. I'd be surprised if he didn't try and seize the Tory crown if the opportunity arose.


I don't think so. Boris is a real lightweight. The thought of him having to deal with the problems of the whole of Britain and also its foreign relations - (the Prime Minister is the support behind the foreign secretary)  is terrifying, and probably more so to a jokey press article-writer with  no grasp on the real world. Boris would know that he was out of his depth.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> I don't think so. Boris is a real lightweight. The thought of him having to deal with the problems of the whole of Britain and also its foreign relations - (the Prime Minister is the support behind the foreign secretary) is terrifying, and probably more so to a jokey press article-writer with no grasp on the real world. Boris would know that he was out of his depth.


Yes, I think I agree with this. I also think Ken Livingstone thinks this too, which gives an extra layer of irony to his comment about the future leader of the Tory party tonight.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 5, 2012)

ymu said:


> They can just give him a peerage can't they? I don't think he _has_ to be an MP to become PM, although it is a convention that is rarely broken. Or have the rules changed?


 
Technically you don't have to have any position, the Queen could make you or I PM if she wanted.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Technically you don't have to have any position, the Queen could make you or I PM if she wanted.


Politically, though, this is not the case. Politically, I would say that, outside of a state of national emergency, it is impossible to be prime minister without being a member of the house of commons.


----------



## DownwardDog (May 5, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> I don't think so. Boris is a real lightweight. The thought of him having to deal with the problems of the whole of Britain and also its foreign relations - (the Prime Minister is the support behind the foreign secretary) is terrifying, and probably more so to a jokey press article-writer with no grasp on the real world. Boris would know that he was out of his depth.


 
People said pretty much the same thing about DC.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (May 5, 2012)

DownwardDog said:


> People said pretty much the same thing about DC.


 
 dotcommunist is not talked about like that


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 5, 2012)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Ohh that's interesting, there's a possibility the Assembly could effectively spend four years blocking Boris' budgets!


 
unfortunately not

there still aren't enough to block his budgets


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 5, 2012)

look what a Guardian journalist tweeted:



> *Aditya Chakrabortty* ‏ @*chakrabortty*
> There goes one of Labour's last working class street fighting politicians. I'll miss him.


 
do people believe this crap?!


----------



## maldwyn (May 5, 2012)

Not entirely crap, in the olden days labour had MPs who'd come up through the Trade Unions having had proper jobs before politics.


----------



## Badgers (May 5, 2012)

Fell asleep before the result. Not a good start to the day to find Boris elected 

Glad that Ken took him to second preference as I expected Boris to win outright given the polls.


----------



## Mr Blob (May 5, 2012)

Who heard the BNP hit lowest vote count

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17959612


----------



## Divisive Cotton (May 5, 2012)

How many councillors do the BNP have left now?


----------



## Badgers (May 5, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> How many councillors do the BNP have left now?


 
2?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just goes to show what a weak cunt Milliband was in not telling Newt-Boy to sling his hook.
> 
> ffs this was Labour's for the taking, they fucked it.


 
Bag of arse.
Who could they have stood in London who'd have had a hope of winning?
Trevor "useless wanker" Philips?
Some former MP, like Oona King?
David "beat the children" Lammy?

Do me a fucking favour.


----------



## Badgers (May 5, 2012)

I like Ken and agree with the ViolentPanda here. Ken pushed Boris really close, I doubt many Londoners could identify a photo or name an achievement of the other possible candidates.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Boris has an elected post, though. It's politically difficult for him to give that post up to try to get a different elected post.


 
It's also not unknown for politicians to hold several elected posts simultaneously.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2012)

Any other labour candidate would have needed to poll 3 or 4% higher than the labour party did across london for the assembly results. There is no candidate who could have done that. Livingstone did pretty much all a labour candidate could in a two horse race in a city with a well established and conscious conservative bloc.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> I don't think so. Boris is a real lightweight. The thought of him having to deal with the problems of the whole of Britain and also its foreign relations - (the Prime Minister is the support behind the foreign secretary) is terrifying, and probably more so to a jokey press article-writer with no grasp on the real world. Boris would know that he was out of his depth.


 
Boris's last four years have proven, if nothing else, that he chooses his deputies as much for ideology as for competence, and that he's a delegator who's not too scrupulous about who he delegates to. That would rather bode for a Prime Minister, even given the wealth of talent a PM can draw from.
Plus, Boris has more skeletons in his closet than Highgate cemetery has in it's crypts.


----------



## nagapie (May 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Any other labour candidate would have needed to poll 3 or 4% higher than the labour party did across london for the assembly results. There is no candidate who could have done that. Livingstone did pretty much all a labour candidate could in a two horse race in a city with a well established and conscious conservative bloc.


 
I think this is true because when I looked at how individual areas had voted, even where Labour had won the Conservative vote was big. London has become a lot more Conservative, or maybe it always was and I just didn't realise living in an area that is strong Labour, although now even Lambeth has some pockets of Conservative support.


----------



## Spymaster (May 5, 2012)

Badgers said:


> Glad that Ken took him to second preference as I expected Boris to win outright given the polls.


 
 It was always going to come down to 2nd preference votes.

Nobody seriously expected either to poll 50%+


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> Any other labour candidate would have needed to poll 3 or 4% higher than the labour party did across london for the assembly results. There is no candidate who could have done that. Livingstone did pretty much all a labour candidate could in a two horse race in a city with a well established and conscious conservative bloc.


How come? Livingstone polled quite significantly lower than Labour across pretty much the whole city. Looking at the results, there simply had to have been a fair few people voting Labour/Johnson. Had to have been. But I'd wager virtually nobody voted Conservative/Livingstone.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2012)

He ended up polling less then 1% behind labours votes across the city in the assembly elections. The gap between the labour vote and his didn't really materialise.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> He ended up polling less then 1% behind labours votes across the city in the assembly elections. The gap between the labour vote and his didn't really materialise.


I stand corrected. I thought the gap was a lot wider than that. However, that does show that a lot of people must have voted Johnson/another party other than Conservative. I'd still be a bit concerned by that - the Greens polled far higher in the assembly election, for instance. If the assembly vote had been replicated in the mayoral vote, there's little doubt that Livingstone would have won. Livingstone may have polled nearly the same as his party in the first preferences, but Johnson outperformed his party by 12 percentage points - a huge margin.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2012)




----------



## youngian (May 5, 2012)

elbows said:


> Different issues to the cycle/timing one. I mentioned the ease of getting round pure election timing issues to a great extent by use of by-elections because in my own town this happened back in the 1960s. Wilson appointed Frank Cousins as Minister of Technology and needed a seat for him, so they made the sitting MP in this seat (which was pretty darn safe back) then a lord to trigger a by-election.
> 
> Cameron can't keep Boris away forever, and anyway one of the scenarios for Boris's return would be in the context of support for Cameron collapsing. Im not predicting it will happen this way or soon, and party leaders are not something I'd predict with much confidence on many occasions, so many potential swerves and internal politics to deal with.


 
Boris has been very shielded during this election and his first term. But as an MP he never made much impact with his colleagues in any shadow portfolio.

It's struck me how much Boris gives me the same vibe as Ken's original Tory Mayoral challenger Jeffrey Archer. Many people, including myself, found him repellent and untrustworthy but he had a well tested box of cliched charm tricks that the punters warmed to and made him popular. But you get found out eventually


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

nagapie said:


> I think this is true because when I looked at how individual areas had voted, even where Labour had won the Conservative vote was big. London has become a lot more Conservative, or maybe it always was and I just didn't realise living in an area that is strong Labour, although now even Lambeth has some pockets of Conservative support.


 
If you look at the history of the GLC (RIP), that too bounced between Labour and Conservative, so I'm not sure that Londoners have become more *C*onservative. They may have become slightly more *socially conservative*, but even then, it's hard to discern (as yet) whether that's an artifact of the ongoing economic situation, or a genuine social shift towards social conservatism.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> If you look at the history of the GLC (RIP), that too bounced between Labour and Conservative, so I'm not sure that Londoners have become more *C*onservative. They may have become slightly more *socially conservative*, but even then, it's hard to discern (as yet) whether that's an artifact of the ongoing economic situation, or a genuine social shift towards social conservatism.


I don't think London is a socially conservative place at all. A bit in the suburbs maybe, but Johnson has had to realign himself away from social conservatism since becoming mayor.


----------



## nagapie (May 5, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think London is a socially conservative place at all. A bit in the suburbs maybe, but Johnson has had to realign himself away from social conservatism since becoming mayor.


 
I do think that mostly Ken lost because of people not liking him. But when I think of what Lambeth used to be and what it is now, it's much wealthier and conservative (Clapham anyone?). Camden has had the same thing happen to it, even having a Conservative council for a while. Ealing?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think London is a socially conservative place at all. A bit in the suburbs maybe, but Johnson has had to realign himself away from social conservatism since becoming mayor.


 
I didn't say that London is a socially-conservative place, I said that *Londoners* MAY have become more socially conservative.

See the difference?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I didn't say that London is a socially-conservative place, I said that *Londoners* MAY have become more socially conservative.
> 
> See the difference?


I think the opposite is true, tbh. Britain as a whole has become far less socially conservative in the last 50 years. London has pretty much been at the forefront of that change, and remains so.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think the opposite is true, tbh. Britain as a whole has become far less socially conservative in the last 50 years. London has pretty much been at the forefront of that change, and remains so.


 
You're missing one of my points, which is that any shift toward it is possibly an artifact of the economic situation. London is very obviously a very liberal city, but that doesn't mean that the people of London don't act in reaction to hard times by hunkering down.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 5, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> You're missing one of my points, which is that any shift toward it is possibly an artifact of the economic situation. London is very obviously a very liberal city, but that doesn't mean that the people of London don't act in reaction to hard times by hunkering down.


Yes, fair enough. During recessions people tend to dress more smartly to go to work, etc.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 5, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Bag of arse.
> Who could they have stood in London who'd have had a hope of winning?
> Trevor "useless wanker" Philips?
> Some former MP, like Oona King?
> ...


 
If out of the entire membership of the Labour party they couldn't find someone who could oust the clown when his party was on the ropes, I think Labour needs to have a long, hard look at itself.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2012)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If out of the entire membership of the Labour party they couldn't find someone who could oust the clown when his party was on the ropes, I think Labour needs to have a long, hard look at itself.


 
Well, that seems to be pretty much the case for the Labour party, but they don't do long hard looks at themselves, they only do "what'll get us back in power the quickest?".


----------



## elbows (May 5, 2012)

youngian said:


> It's struck me how much Boris gives me the same vibe as Ken's original Tory Mayoral challenger Jeffrey Archer. Many people, including myself, found him repellent and untrustworthy but he had a well tested box of cliched charm tricks that the punters warmed to and made him popular. But you get found out eventually


 
I'll try to be brief so Im just going to use the word charisma here rather than a more long-winded explanation of what I mean but anyways...

Archer's charisma was not in the same league as that of Boris in my opinion. Archer came to the school I was at to plant a tree (dont ask) around 1990. He didn't bother trying to charm the kids much at all, but I got to eavesdrop on his slimy attempts to charm a couple of the female teachers to whom he directed the majority of his attention. It was naff and it was delivered in a rather cold and 'forced charm' sort of way, that would have a much narrower appeal than boris's bluster and buffoonery routine. If I transplant Boris into the scene then he'd have come across a lot better, even if I force him to use the same words as Archer used. When Archer shouted 'stamp it down boy' and then made an unamusing observation about getting the chunkiest boys to do certain tasks in contrast to the tasks a pretty girl would be given, he sounded like a Nazi drill instructor. If Boris had shouted 'stamp it down boy' then just the way he delivered those lines would have gotten things off to a better start. And funnily enough perhaps his chunkiness helps with this and many other scenarios. Thin Nazi's give off a different kind of sinister to fat ones in films.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 7, 2012)

Just heard the full version of Ken Livingstone's speech after being defeated. Came across as very dignified I thought.


----------



## ymu (May 7, 2012)

Divisive Cotton said:


> look what a Guardian journalist tweeted:
> 
> 
> 
> do people believe this crap?!


To be fair to Chakrabortty, he is one of the Guardian's better hacks. I meant to find one of his drum-bangers to post here before, but I forgot - and he's obliged me with a pretty decent one today: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/07/academics-cant-answer-criticism-analysis


----------



## William of Walworth (May 8, 2012)

Agreeing, Chkrabortty is (generally) far better than many on that paper. He often contributes some pretty good stuff.


----------



## southside (May 8, 2012)

There is a nutcase running London 










The disadvantages of dressing in the dark. Boris said they were the last shorts in his drawer, no reason as to why he is wearing them arse about face?  He looks insane.  This nutter will end up replacing Cameron, sneaky loon for in ya face nutter, a fair swap prolly.


----------

