Next Mayor of London

greg66_tri_v2.0

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

When it suited Livingstone to pull it out of the long grass and implement the changes, they were implemented.

Got any evidence for that?

A b-r-a-i-n.

And there we shall have to leave it. Either you can see the point, or you cant. You can't.

notsoblue

Greg66 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Does it really matter about the traffic lights?

A mayorial candidate is attempting to win votes by claiming that he will rephase lights in favour of cyclists.

He's not a cyclist, he doesn't like cyclists particularly, it's unclear whether it would improve safety for cyclists, and he's got form for using lights to deter motorists, who, in a particularly chippy way, he hates.

So one might conclude that a mayorial candidate is on this occasion being particularly disingenuous.

Not that he was ever in any danger of getting my vote, mind.

Fair enough, I just meant in the context of this thread though. I mean, the 5-second head start idea is pretty ill conceived in it's own right. Its a pretty half-hearted attempt to jump on the cycling bandwagon.

mybreakfastconsisted

Greg66 wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

When it suited Livingstone to pull it out of the long grass and implement the changes, they were implemented.

Got any evidence for that?

A b-r-a-i-n.

And there we shall have to leave it. Either you can see the point, or you cant. You can't.

Personal abuse doesn't add anything old darling.
You are rather gullible, clinging to a myth that's been comprehensively debunked just looks desperate. Wadley was a disgrace as an editor, if she printed stories about Ken eating babies you'd swallow it.

notsoblue

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

A b-r-a-i-n.

And there we shall have to leave it. Either you can see the point, or you cant. You can't.

Personal abuse doesn't add anything old darling.
You are rather gullible, clinging to a myth that's been comprehensively debunked just looks desperate. Wadley was a disgrace as an editor, if she printed stories about Ken eating babies you'd swallow it.

mybreakfastconsisted

This was the clibre of the press response to Ken's Congestion Charge:

The Sun's Richard Littlejohn described it as

"dreamed up by Red Ken and his sexually inadequate, Lycra-clad, Guardian-reading, cycle-mad, control freaks at Transport for London".

But pride of place must go to the Observer, of all papers, which found a rabbi whose synagogue fell inside the charge zone and was willing to be quoted as saying that:

"This building was bombed in the war, but Livingstone is going to cause more damage than the Germans."

Nice to see people not losing a sense of proportion.

Ibid.

greg66_tri_v2.0

notsoblue wrote:

Greg T

Ken Livingstone is an awful kock though - we all agree on that - yes?

Stevo_666

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Lycra-clad, Guardian-reading, cycle-mad, control freaks

Sounds a bit like a few people on this forum ;-) (Don't worry MBC, not having a go at you...)

notsoblue

Stevo 666 wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Lycra-clad, Guardian-reading, cycle-mad, control freaks

Sounds a bit like a few people on this forum ;-) (Don't worry MBC, not having a go at you...)

Hey! I'm not sexually inadequate!

notsoblue

Greg66 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Stevo_666

notsoblue wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Lycra-clad, Guardian-reading, cycle-mad, control freaks

Sounds a bit like a few people on this forum ;-) (Don't worry MBC, not having a go at you...)

Hey! I'm not sexually inadequate!

I didn't quote that bit ! Sorry if I accidentally touched a raw nerve though :-D

notsoblue

Stevo 666 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

Lycra-clad, Guardian-reading, cycle-mad, control freaks

Sounds a bit like a few people on this forum ;-) (Don't worry MBC, not having a go at you...)

Hey! I'm not sexually inadequate!

I didn't quote that bit ! Sorry if I accidentally touched a raw nerve though :-D

:oops:

Seriously though, I'm not.

rjsterry

You'd have to ask Mrs RSJ about the first bit, and I don't think there are many like us at TfL given their fingers-in-the-ears approach to Blackfriars and Bow, but otherwise, it's pretty accurate.

NGale

And in other news. The rest of the world continues to revolve around the sun while London revolves around it's own arsehole :roll:

greg66_tri_v2.0

notsoblue wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Greg T

NGale wrote:

And in other news. The rest of the world continues to revolve around the sun while London revolves around it's own arsehole :roll:

Start your own thread about turnips or the local library opening hours...

Stevo_666

NGale wrote:

And in other news. The rest of the world continues to revolve around the sun while London revolves around it's own arsehole :roll:

What, London revolves around Ken Livingstone? That's quite a revelation.

DonDaddyD

I bet you Ken Livingston loses.

I will never forget the image of my Dad running to the voting booth to vote against Ken simply because me and my Mum weren't voting and he couldn't bare for anymore of Ken's "You must take public transport or else" policies.

My Dad won't talk about who he voted for that day, to the ethnic community to be a minority and not vote labour is nearly unthinkable, to support Tory is near insanity. That Boris (everyone I know remembers his defence of the police during the first Stephen Lawrence trial amongst other things) is looking like a better alternative to that demographic, then, wow.

I think the only thing Ken did that was both good and bad was make buses free for under 16's.

sketchley

What we need is candidate can stick two fingers up to government and make life difficult for them. Like Ken did against the Labour government that tried to stop him first time around, and Boris clearly did in 2008 (I doubt for one moment he expected or conservative central office expected a win). I think both were elected for comedy value more than anything, and in the comedy stakes Boris still has it by a nose as Ken is taken it far too seriously for my liking. If he got elected this time he might do some real damage, rather than just self promotion. I'd love to see a strong independent give it a go, maybe a celebrity would do it someone who is "London" through and through but wouldn't take any crap from Westminster.

Does it matter who is mayor? Isn't it just a figure head position and therefore simply need a character in the job?

notsoblue

Sketchley wrote:

Does it matter who is mayor? Isn't it just a figure head position and therefore simply need a character in the job?

Don't make that mistake
http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.com/201 ... ms-to.html

Specifically http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H9SINEWUqY

mybreakfastconsisted

DonDaddyD wrote:

That Boris (everyone I know remembers his defence of the police during the first Stephen Lawrence trial amongst other things

You mean this?

In a series of articles for the Telegraph and Spectator from 1999 to 2002, Johnson casts the Lawrence case and the Macpherson report as a left-wing witchhunt against the establishment and police:

“It is an article of faith on the Left that those five, seen on video engaging in racist rants, were guilty, and that only police incompetence failed to nab them. I am not sure how far Macpherson shares that assumption.”

In January 2010, Boris Johnson quit as chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority despite his election manifesto pledge to chair the body which oversees the police in London. The fact of his ambivalence towards difficult policing issues was brought into painful relief last March when he went on a bike-riding photo call with Arnold Schwarzenegger instead of chairing a meeting about the controversial death of a black singer in police custody.

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/01/b ... on-report/

And this is Boris speaking about the police bugging Acourt and Norris talking about chopping black men's arms and legs off:

"Using the cloak of sanctity provided by the martyrdom of Stephen Lawrence, it may be that the state is being given an important and potentially aggressive new power over the citizen."

Or the bit in the Spectator, lamenting the "cowing of the police" by Macpherson.

Or the reference in the Telegraph to police as the "victims of Macpherson".

Who wouldn't want to keep it all? So much to file, so little time.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012 ... is-johnson

mybreakfastconsisted

Sketchley wrote:

What we need is candidate can stick two fingers up to government and make life difficult for them. I'd love to see a strong independent give it a go, maybe a celebrity would do it someone who is "London" through and through but wouldn't take any crap from Westminster.

notsoblue

I loved that movie. So many awesome shots of east London docklands before it was all levelled and made shiney. Also, Helen Mirren was a hotty.

sketchley

Oh Bob Hoskins for Mayor... I'd vote for him. That'll be a laugh....

sketchley

notsoblue wrote:

I loved that movie. So many awesome shots of east London docklands before it was all levelled and made shiney. Also, Helen Mirren was a hotty.

What do you mean was. :oops:

DonDaddyD

MBC, thanks for making my point. Very few of my ilk will ever forget the things Boris has said. The fact that they would consider or are willing to vote for him over Ken, says something.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

MBC, thanks for making my point. Very few of my ilk will ever forget the things Boris has said. The fact that they would consider or are willing to vote for him over Ken, says something.

What does it say? That they value traffic light phasing and double decker buses are more important issues than institutional racism and police injustice?

sketchley

Seriously my problem with Ken is having made an astute observation that if a politician spend too long in office (in his case he suggested two terms as mayor) that politician would have issues with cronyism, then he decided to stand for third term. He then followed this up by spectacular proving the point http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Living ... llegations

I don't, trust him to do anything other than further his own agenda. He just doesn't seem sincere at all ever. I just cannot bring myself to vote for him. Boris for all his faults, genuinely seems sincere, at least to me.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

MBC, thanks for making my point. Very few of my ilk will ever forget the things Boris has said. The fact that they would consider or are willing to vote for him over Ken, says something.

What does it say? That they value traffic light phasing and double decker buses are more important issues than institutional racism and police injustice?

No, that in terms of surface layer headline politics (because that's about as deeply as the regular joe research into it) they'd rather vote Boris than Ken.

If the regular joe researched into politics a lot more of my ilk would vote Tory (it's like the Obama phenom, it was unthinkable to even consider not voting for him but when you actually start explaining he wanted to raise taxes and other stuff, those things were largely unpopular to his electorate. They'd still vote for him though).

rjsterry

Sketchley wrote:

Seriously my problem with Ken is having made an astute observation that if a politician spend too long in office (in his case he suggested two terms as mayor) that politician would have issues with cronyism, then he decided to stand for third term. He then followed this up by spectacular proving the point http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Living ... llegations

I don't, trust him to do anything other than further his own agenda. He just doesn't seem sincere at all ever. I just cannot bring myself to vote for him. Boris for all his faults, genuinely seems sincere, at least to me.

Not that I think you are wrong about Ken, but which politicians do you think don't pursue their own agenda? Who elese's agenda would they pursue? If they didn't one could reasonably criticise them for not believing in their own policies. So long as they are up front with what their agenda is, I don't see how it is a problem.