This London Mayor business...

Canny Jock

50% Jones.
30% Paddick.
20% Livingstone.

I think the voting system is interesting - I would normally see green as a wasted vote, but will probably vote green first and Labour second this time.

Filling in the questions did highlight though how similar a lot of the policy statements are. I'd be interested to know how they could be held to account if they aren't actually implemented.

sketchley

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

I'm not gonna wade into a debate over who to vote for, but I just wanted to point something out thats getting overlooked.

The vote for London Mayor uses the single transferable vote system which is a form of proportional representation. This means that unless a single candidate polls a majority (of 50% I think) then the votes of the top two candidates (so Boris and Ken) are topped up with the second preferences votes of those who put someone else as their first preference.

What this means in practice is that you can vote both with your heart and your head. Obviously if you want to vote Boris or Ken then that's fine and the end of the matter. But if your heart says, say, Jenny Jones you can vote for her as first preference and then still influence the outcome of the election by putting Boris or Ken as your second preference.

So for everyone saying that they would like to vote for the Greens, Lib Dems, independents or whoever, please do. Just make sure you put either Ken or Boris depending on your preference as your second choice and you still have a say.

Unfortunately, we don't yet have a more proportional voting system in a general election as we still use the draconian first past the post system. But yeah anyway. Vote wisely!

Not getting overlooked here, it's just pointless and irrelevant. Every election so far for London mayor the first preference hasn't reach 50% so second preference was counted, however the candidate with majority of first presence votes was elected each time..... This time it's between boris and ken, sticking someone else down as first preference does nothing other than increase the time taken to count the votes. But if it works for you.....

Applespider

The biggest problem with the Guardian picker - and most political manifestos - is that it's all talk and no action. Sure, I'd love an extra 5000 police officers, reduced fares on public transport, reduced council tax, more houses, 150,000 jobs for young people - but where exactly is the realism on how all this can happen and where the money is coming from to fund it?

I would have liked some new candidates or some new policies just to make it more interesting. It is once again the Boris and Ken show and based on personalities. I do quite like Paddick's idea of giving an 'hour pass' on buses so that you can change without paying again. Since you can do that on the Tube to interchange between lines, it seems a tad unfair that you can't do it on the bus - and with the Oyster card, it shouldn't be that complicated to implement. San Francisco does it, even with cash fares. Even the commuter train into the city comes with a free 90 minute in-city transit voucher. Saw quite a few people take their bikes off the train (lots of cycling provision), stick it on the front of a bus til they got out of the dense city centre traffic (or up a hill) and then hop off the bus and onto the bike again.

In terms of one of them opening the Olympics, can't we just give that job to the Queen and take whoever wins as Mayor out of the equation?

greg66_tri_v2.0

Has Jenny Jones said she will work for Ken were he to be elected?

veronese68

The problem with many of the policies (hollow promises)in the guardian thing is that they don't look like they could be made to work in the real world. They just seem a bit pie in the sky. Or, am I just a cycnic?

rebs

That guardian vote really didnt help me. Kind of told me what I already knew:
30% Brian Paddick
30% Jenny Jones
20% Boris Johnson
20% Ken Livingstone

I really don't know who to vote for

rjsterry

Sketchley wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

I'm not gonna wade into a debate over who to vote for, but I just wanted to point something out thats getting overlooked.

The vote for London Mayor uses the single transferable vote system which is a form of proportional representation. This means that unless a single candidate polls a majority (of 50% I think) then the votes of the top two candidates (so Boris and Ken) are topped up with the second preferences votes of those who put someone else as their first preference.

What this means in practice is that you can vote both with your heart and your head. Obviously if you want to vote Boris or Ken then that's fine and the end of the matter. But if your heart says, say, Jenny Jones you can vote for her as first preference and then still influence the outcome of the election by putting Boris or Ken as your second preference.

So for everyone saying that they would like to vote for the Greens, Lib Dems, independents or whoever, please do. Just make sure you put either Ken or Boris depending on your preference as your second choice and you still have a say.

Unfortunately, we don't yet have a more proportional voting system in a general election as we still use the draconian first past the post system. But yeah anyway. Vote wisely!

Not getting overlooked here, it's just pointless and irrelevant. Every election so far for London mayor the first preference hasn't reach 50% so second preference was counted, however the candidate with majority of first presence votes was elected each time..... This time it's between boris and ken, sticking someone else down as first preference does nothing other than increase the time taken to count the votes. But if it works for you.....

As posted previously on DDD's Taboo Thread, it's not STV, it's Supplementary Vote (SV), the poor relation of AV, which is itself a long way short of PR. Electoral Reform explains the pros and cons here

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/supplementary-vote/

The system very much reinforces the current Boris/Ken duopoly. PR doesn't really work for a single position like mayor. STV might reduce the 'wasting' of votes, but I don't really buy the idea that you only 'have a say' by voting for one of Ken or Boris anyway.

prj45

Canny Jock wrote:

I'd be interested to know how they could be held to account if they aren't actually implemented.

Only one way, and that's at the next election.

prj45

SimonAH wrote:

Are some of you seriously considering voting for the newt fancier? Good grief but memories are short!

What memories? 99% of the stuff that's pinned on Livingstone is made up/twisted crap shat by papers that people recall as if it's fact via the mechanism of partisan laziness...

cyclingprop

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

I'm not gonna wade into a debate over who to vote for, but I just wanted to point something out thats getting overlooked.

The vote for London Mayor uses the single transferable vote system which is a form of proportional representation. This means that unless a single candidate polls a majority (of 50% I think) then the votes of the top two candidates (so Boris and Ken) are topped up with the second preferences votes of those who put someone else as their first preference.

What this means in practice is that you can vote both with your heart and your head. Obviously if you want to vote Boris or Ken then that's fine and the end of the matter. But if your heart says, say, Jenny Jones you can vote for her as first preference and then still influence the outcome of the election by putting Boris or Ken as your second preference.

So for everyone saying that they would like to vote for the Greens, Lib Dems, independents or whoever, please do. Just make sure you put either Ken or Boris depending on your preference as your second choice and you still have a say.

Unfortunately, we don't yet have a more proportional voting system in a general election as we still use the draconian first past the post system. But yeah anyway. Vote wisely!

It's either PR or it isn't - and this isn't.

secretsam

Now, I've had some bizarre things happen to me on a bike, but being accosted by a cycling political campaigner at some traffic lights is a first!

However, his message was sound - vote for safer biking for London - vote Jenny Jones (Green) first then Ken (red ) second.

So there you go!!! I've spread the word! Fight the power!

Canny Jock

prj45 wrote:

Canny Jock wrote:

I'd be interested to know how they could be held to account if they aren't actually implemented.

Only one way, and that's at the next election.

It would be good to pull out Boris' election pledges from last time, and Ken's from before that to see how they did.

roger_merriman

prj45 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

Are some of you seriously considering voting for the newt fancier? Good grief but memories are short!

What memories? 99% of the stuff that's pinned on Livingstone is made up/twisted crap shat by papers that people recall as if it's fact via the mechanism of partisan laziness...

For myself the few interviews have hardly sold me on Ken, for all the world he gives the impression of man who is sore about loosing last time. And frankly he's giving every impression of someone not to trust.

estampida

if you are voting green why why why did you mention ken livingstone....... thats weird and maybe this was designed to get people to vote that way (check the forum rules)


boris is the winner, as he pays tax, and although he is a conservative, he has a better emotional connection with the city and he is not 1 of the new labour crowd - ie in murdochs pockets, he has daddies pockets......

Koncordski

I'll happily vote Jenny Jones as she's the only one that might improve things for us but voting for Ken means abandoning every principal I have. Even his own party hates him. Anyway I recommend closing this and continuing in the mayor of London thread.

bails87

roger merriman wrote:

And frankly he's giving every impression of someone not to trust.

That's politicians for you....

bigmat

prj45 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

Are some of you seriously considering voting for the newt fancier? Good grief but memories are short!

What memories? 99% of the stuff that's pinned on Livingstone is made up/twisted crap shat by papers that people recall as if it's fact via the mechanism of partisan laziness...

Probably in part true, but then even the 1% is quite offputting. I would have much preferred a new candidate.

roger_merriman

bails87 wrote:

roger merriman wrote:

And frankly he's giving every impression of someone not to trust.

That's politicians for you....

Ha true. To be honest as every one else has said fairly weak candiates.

Monkeypump

It'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for Ken.

I should swat you round the head with a rolled up magazine for even suggesting it.

rick_chasey

roger merriman wrote:

prj45 wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

Are some of you seriously considering voting for the newt fancier? Good grief but memories are short!

What memories? 99% of the stuff that's pinned on Livingstone is made up/twisted crap shat by papers that people recall as if it's fact via the mechanism of partisan laziness...

For myself the few interviews have hardly sold me on Ken, for all the world he gives the impression of man who is sore about loosing last time. And frankly he's giving every impression of someone not to trust.

I do think though that you can't really go how they come across re-trust worthiness (if you're interested in how trustworthy or not they are). How people come across in public is often barely correlated to how trustworthy or not they are.

Better to look at what they actually do.

Either way, Ken doesn't come out looking too good, which is a shame.

MaxwellBygraves

See below link for Boris/Ken ward majorities in 2008 compared to turnout. Quite interesting.

http://www.leftfootforward.org/images/2 ... t-2008.gif

rick_chasey

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

See below link for Boris/Ken ward majorities in 2008 compared to turnout. Quite interesting.

http://www.leftfootforward.org/images/2 ... t-2008.gif

Is dark on the B&W low or high turnout?

And is dark on the colour a big majority?

MaxwellBygraves

Rick Chasey wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

See below link for Boris/Ken ward majorities in 2008 compared to turnout. Quite interesting.

http://www.leftfootforward.org/images/2 ... t-2008.gif

Is dark on the B&W low or high turnout?

And is dark on the colour a big majority?

Yes. Dark is high turnout. The bolder the colour the higher the majority.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Not sure what one gets from that. Looks vaguely as if Boris wins in high turnout areas and Ken wins in low turnout areas. Which means?

Odder is the shape of "London". A small bit outside the M25 to the east. a fairly clear line to the southwest, but with a very odd spur between Claygate and Epsom. Chigwell and the area south of New Addington seem determined to stay outside London. Presumably the outer boundary is set along county lines.

rjsterry

Greg66 wrote:

Not sure what one gets from that. Looks vaguely as if Boris wins in high turnout areas and Ken wins in low turnout areas. Which means?

Odder is the shape of "London". A small bit outside the M25 to the east. a fairly clear line to the southwest, but with a very odd spur between Claygate and Epsom. Chigwell and the area south of New Addington seem determined to stay outside London. Presumably the outer boundary is set along county lines.

Hmm, Ken relies on loyal labour voters, whereas Boris picks up a lot of the floaters?

Yep, Local Authorities are either in or out of the GLA. Epsom & Ewell, and Banstead & Reigate for example, are both outside, hence the funny shape.

roger_merriman

Greg66 wrote:

Not sure what one gets from that. Looks vaguely as if Boris wins in high turnout areas and Ken wins in low turnout areas. Which means?

Odder is the shape of "London". A small bit outside the M25 to the east. a fairly clear line to the southwest, but with a very odd spur between Claygate and Epsom. Chigwell and the area south of New Addington seem determined to stay outside London. Presumably the outer boundary is set along county lines.

indeed so the folks just across the river, can't vote yet I can and will.

MaxwellBygraves

Here's a bold prediction for you. Eddie Izzard will run for mayor, and win, at the next London Mayor election in 2016. Boris Johnson and Chukka Umana will vie for Prime Minister in 2020. Not sure who will win.

rick_chasey

Merged 'vote bike' thread into this one.

MaxwellBygraves

You can do another policy picker test thingy at the link below.

http://www.votematch.org.uk/

wulfhound

Has Jenny Jones said she will work for Ken were he to be elected?

Yes. Specifically, she will be put in charge of all things cycling & walking.

LCC & Londoners On Bikes both recommend Jenny #1 Ken #2.

Greg - I share your fondness for blasting around the city at 20+mph where possible, but firstly - statutory speed limits don't apply to bikes; secondly, I do wonder whether that kind of speed is really appropriate or necessary for the middle of town anyway (apart from Embankment, of course).