London Mayor

clivex

Banned member
Joined
Jul 20, 2006
Messages
12,720
12 points behind now. A thats 12 points behind a berk too.... :D

The sudden drop in his rating has coincided with the excllent work carried out by the Standard and the subsequent developments involving the ridciulous Lee Jasper. Also, many interested parties from left and right, have been reminding the world of Kens adoration of islamic fundamentalists. No a vote winner....

He remains a real conundrum though. When talking about the commercial world and when implementing real change (whether you agree or not) hes first class. But the darker side of bigotry, cronyism and laughable alliances keeps seeping out

Im not keen on Johnson. Hes "funny" by the standards of politicians. Just as denis healey was considered "funny". But the flippancy and somewhat elitist background does not appeal

Paddick would be agood choice. but no real chance
 
Labour got landed with Ken but could have dumped him for his racist remarks and cosying up to lunatics

Tories havent a clue and think whats good for a nice country seat full of coffin dodging old bags is good enough for london

not londoners fault...although they should vote against both i believe
 
What, and get Paddick? you gotta be jokin'

Boris is a lot cleverer than he lets on, and at least he will see the point of getting people moving again around the city, and will listen to business. I've hardly set foot in London since they extended the Congestion Charge to to the RBK&C where I lived for many years - entirely against the wishes of the elected Council, local businesses, and the residents. I need to drive through it or into it for almost everything I'd want to do.

The need for the Congestion Charge was manufactured by Red Ken anyway - he and his acolytes in Socialist boroughs like Camden and Islington steadily removed the parking spaces and blocked off routes, made one way systems and bus lanes etc etc for several years before it was brought in, making it more and more difficult to move around. They then cited 'necessity'!

I used to work in Bloomsbury and in W1 for more than one publisher - and I'd take my car up as I had a lot of heavy stuff to shift about, and the dog. I never had any problems.

Eg: There was always parking behind the BM - all removed c8/10 years ago - which led to cars endlessly circling round the new one way systems of WC1 trying to park. Then a lot of roads in the area were blocked off meaning you couldn't get across from Gower St to the area west of Tottenham Court road without going right down to Picadilly! - madness. And traffic lights were re-phased right across the city to mean only c3/4 cars could get across on a green, slowing down the traffic only too effectively. Now you frequently wait for several minutes at an empty crossing... Endless humps have been put in, pedestrian islands, roads pinched to single file, etc etc etc

Tory boroughs resisted it so far as they could, but it was [and still is] a nightmare to get across London even WITH the Congestion charge, as they have left so little room for vehicles - the available road space has continued to shrink. That's almost entirely due to parking restrictions and traffic management, NOT traffic volume, and it impacts badly on anyone with deliveries to make, and work to do. London has a huge self-employed workforce which carries around the tools of its trades - it's just not possible to use the tube all the time.

"Red Ken" is still advised, and his office and campaigns run, by a hard core of long-standing dirigiste lefties with whom he's been associated since his early days, before the 'Palace Coups' when he first out-manoeuvred Illtyd Harrington for leadership of the left wing of the Labour group in London in the late 1970s then ousted the elected Labour Leader of the GLC Andrew McIntosh in 1981. It's all still very vivid in my mind.
See http://www.election.demon.co.uk/glc/glccomment.html

He's a very ruthless guy indeed - and utterly hypocritical too as he sucks up to the rich and enjoys their lifestyle, while adopting policies which make it hard for small businesses to flourish. It's people like him who turned me against the left wing political movement for good. Imo he's a very dangerous man who has greatly exacerbated the gulf between the haves and have-nots in London [as have New Labour in the rest of the country], and the sooner he's deposed the better

I did support entirely his 'Fares Fair' policy of the early 80s btw, but that was an 'enabling' policy not a restrictive one, unlike many of his since he became Mayor. He also seems to forget that London is the capital city which belongs to *all* of us, not just those who happen to be living there at any one time - esp since such a huge number of those resident now are foreigners anyway. I resent extremely being disadvantaged in so many ways esp re transport policies in a city which was my home for a total of over 25 years
 
he and his acolytes in Socialist boroughs like Camden and Islington steadily removed the parking spaces and blocked off routes

*Looks out the window of Islington flat*

*Sees road full of parking spaces*

*Scratches head*

*Moves on to Other Sports*
 
Good stuff headstrong

The westward extension of the charge (which doesnt affect me BTW) was simply class driven.

As anyone knows, the traffic streams through kensington and chelsea are not ideal but certainly better than Islington and Lambeth. It was apure tax on the supposedly rich and suprised it wasnt challenged legally (in some form)

Also i would suggest that its not just on the basis of income hes divisive.. Race too
 
Your are indeed lucky Gareth! I suppose a good many people of small means have indeed given up their cars as a hopeless job, leaving more space for the well-off ... :P
I spent a lot of the last 10 years in Camden, and lived before that in RBK&C. I can only tell as I find.

A fun 2 page piece on the election by pal-of-Boris Charles Moore in the DT today -
I have to admit I share his take on Ken:

Boris for Mayor?

Esp: << ...But surely what makes people uncomfortable about Ken Livingstone's brand of progressive politics is that he prefers appeasing particular gangs to forging a common identity for London. ...... Ken has taken the classic Left-wing strategy of binding minorities together round victimhood. He prefers group rights to individual ones.

He builds up a client state of dubious bodies run by ideological or communal chums living off public money. First, bad ideas; then, bad faith and bad debts. I wonder how many documents are being shredded and emails erased at City Hall as the prospect of defeat looms.>>
 
Mr Livingstone condemned the attacks because they were aimed at "working-class Londoners", and had nothing to do, he said, with ideology or faith. He left a sour taste. Would it have been all right to target middle-class Londoners, or to blow people up if you did have the right ideology? People know that the bombers were anti-Britain and anti-London


I liked this para. Spot on and Ken let slip his prejudices..... remember thinking that at the time

Very good article all round.


this is a good piece too

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...ticalcolumnists
 
I live in the less socialist (apparently) borough of Newham but I'm voting for Brian Paddick. It's not a difficult choice given that the other two main candidates are a bully and a buffoon.

If Londoners are stupid enough to vote for Boris, they'll have four years to regret it and I reckon the honeymoon will be pretty short especially if the tube unions pick a fight in the Autumn.

I'm no fan of Ken either - he's become arrogant with power and the stench of corruption hangs around his administration.

With the Green backing Ken, I don't know what I will do with my second preference. Most of the other candidates are dimwits halfwits, nitwits and/or racists (delete as appropriate).

Winston Mackenzie looks a model of snaity by comparison though his Veritas past is a concern.
 
Originally posted by ovverbruv@Mar 30 2008, 07:31 AM
Heads - do you work on Boris' campaign?
Ha ha, certainly nort

But he is at least a human being, which might have something to do with never having been a full time politician - if I were in politics there'd be a law against them :P
 
It's a shocking choice for Londoners that's for sure.

Read a mildly amusing article from a well known conservative stalwart and former Editor of a national paper recently that implored people to vote for Boris provided he was able to surround himself with good leiutenants!!! The message was clear. The man's accident prone, has poor judgement, lacks depth of knowledge and is fundamentally not up to the complexities of the job, as well as very little experience or track record in management.

That the Olympics will fall under this term is even more frightening. I fera a national humiliation coming on.
 
Well given that it's an election that directly impacts on so many of the BBC's editorial staff and management, plus the medias self-regard for their own importance and what affects them is somehow of paramount importance to the nation, I'd say there's no chance. My God, the worst offender (Radio5) even ran a phone in for a few hours not so long ago when a significant number of their jobs were being moved to Manchester. Luckily, quite a few listeners got peed off with them and rang in and told them so. It always amuses me slightly when ever they run a Zimbabwe story that they always have to underline that they're banned from reporting there. We know. And in truth, what difference does it make?
 
You don't think that the image of the border control gate adds journalistic merit to the story?
 
Originally posted by Warbler@Apr 4 2008, 12:01 AM
It always amuses me slightly when ever they run a Zimbabwe story that they always have to underline that they're banned from reporting there.
Mugabe only banned the Beeb from his country because someone told him they were sending Rishi Persad over to interview him.
 
No. And nor should it

Doubt it will bother too many (except his fundamentalist Muslim supporters who might just stone him now...)
 
Back
Top