NationStates Jolt Archive

In case anybody is interested (huh...native British people are known to be politically apathetic), the English local elections were held yesterday.

Results show that the ruling party Labour has suffered heavy defeats in the face of the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Some say that it is a sign of growing dissatisfaction with the general Labour governance in the past year since Gordon Brown took over, especially with many blunders over the economy, e.g. nationalising Northern Rock; abolishing the 10p tax rate etc.. Brown takes even more blame because before he was prime minister, he was in charge of the economy.

The most exciting election of the local elections is the London Mayoral election. Conservative Boris Johnson (aka the Clown) is hoping to unseat Labour incumbent Ken Livingstone (aka the Commie (Red Ken)), who in turn is seeking a third term in power. They say that the results are very close. We will know by tonight (BST), hopefully.

For more information see here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7372860.stm

In case anybody is interested (huh...native British people are known to be politically apathetic), the English local elections were held yesterday.

whoops! :eek:

I would of voted Green anyway so no worries

I was to vote. But on my way to the polling station I realised I didn't actually want any of them in.

So I thought "sod it" and went back home.

It was fairly interesting this morning though.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Victory is ours!!! Red Ken and the lugubrious Scottish stalinist are doomed!!

Not to gloat. Much.:)

It was my first ever vote, actually, and I was a little disappointed at how simple it was...:( I thought it would be something really grand.

I shan't tell you what gave me the right to vote, but I can tell you the way it was given to me would make a BNP member froth up in the mouth and die. Hahaha.

BORIS MUST NOT WIN!

I voted Lib Dem and it's great to see they've forced Labour into third place (although they do tend to do better in local elections than they do in national ones). Hopefully this'll encourage more people to see them as a serious contender at the next election.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Victory is ours!!! Red Ken and the lugubrious Scottish stalinist are doomed!!

Not to gloat. Much.:)

I'm glad I don't live in London as I don't know who I despise more: Ken or Boris.

Hopefully this'll encourage more people to see them as a serious contender at the next election.

instead of the party too busy squabbling with itself and spamming my address?

I didn't really like any of the candidates for London yesterday so I didn't vote. That was one reason. The other reason.......

I forgot to.

I forgot to.

democracy in action :)

I'll still be surprised if Boris wins. The race is almost certain to go to second preference votes, and I doubt many people who voted for the other parties would pick a Tory as their second choice.

Just have to wait and see.

democracy in action :)

More like democracy INACTION.

Funny how the West keeps pushing other governments to give their citizens a vote when the Western citizens come back and say "we're not interested".:headbang:

Voting is a privilege, not a right. So treat it as one.

I'm glad I don't live in London as I don't know who I despise more: Ken or Boris.

I do. Red Ken.

More like democracy INACTION.

Funny how the West keeps pushing other governments to give their citizens a vote when the Western citizens come back and say "we're not interested".:headbang:

Voting is a privilege, not a right. So treat it as one.

There weren't any elections where I am this year so I didn't get much of a choice, but I've not bothered voting in the past. For all the 'people died for your vote'/'if you don't vote you're not allowed to comment' blah blah blah arguments, the bottom line is that voting is a completely pointless activity. Your vote will never make a difference.

There weren't any elections where I am this year so I didn't get much of a choice, but I've not bothered voting in the past. For all the 'people died for your vote'/'if you don't vote you're not allowed to comment' blah blah blah arguments, the bottom line is that voting is a completely pointless activity. Your vote will never make a difference.

I don't argue for "people died for your vote" because that's just holding you ransom over somebody else's death, which is...radical.

I don't argue for "if you don't vote you're not allowed to comment" because that's against your freedom of expression.

However, I argue that voting makes a difference. If voting doesn't make a difference why are so many dictators so reluctant to give their people a vote? Exactly because it makes a difference!

I think it's both a privilege and a duty to vote.

However, I argue that voting makes a difference. If voting doesn't make a difference why are so many dictators so reluctant to give their people a vote? Exactly because it matters!

I think it's both a privilege and a duty to vote.

So if Londim had voted today, would the outcome be any different?

Voting is a privilege, not a right. So treat it as one.

No voting is a right. Granted the Nu-Labour fascists don't seem to care for traditional English rights and liberties very much, but I imagine even they would have a hard time doing away with this one.

So if Londim had voted today, would the outcome be any different?

Maybe. Who knows?

Every vote counts, or else where do they get the numbers from?

No voting is a right. Granted the Nu-Labour fascists don't seem to care for traditional English rights and liberties very much, but I imagine even they would have a hard time doing away with this one.

Voting is a right only in some developed countries in the West. For most people in the world it would be a privilege.

Maybe. Who knows?

Every vote counts, or else where do they get the numbers from?

No, that's the point; every vote doesn't count.

All the votes combined count, but I don't control those. As such, how I decide to cast my single vote is completely irrelevant.

I don't argue for "people died for your vote" because that's just holding you ransom over somebody else's death, which is...radical.

I don't argue for "if you don't vote you're not allowed to comment" because that's against your freedom of expression.

However, I argue that voting makes a difference. If voting doesn't make a difference why are so many dictators so reluctant to give their people a vote? Exactly because it makes a difference!

I think it's both a privilege and a duty to vote.

That is, if you'll forgive my profaning, a fucking stupid argument. A dictator does not permit franchise on two grounds; firstly, nobody would elect a dictator, and secondly, to do so would be a contradiction in terms. A dictator does not, by definition, share power.

Moreover, Philosophy is correct. One individual makes no difference, notably given that most people live in secure constituencies anyway. However, the sudden appearance of several million votes does make a difference.

I would of voted Green anyway so no worries

Personally I don't like one policy parties, especially when they pretend that they aren't. Ok that was a cheap shot, but come on, the green party are laaaaaaaaaame.

No, that's the point; every vote doesn't count.

All the votes combined count, but I don't control those. As such, how I decide to cast my single vote is completely irrelevant.

Well, they have to get the "combined" from "every", don't they? Hence every vote counts.


Bleh...why am I fighting to make you guys treasure what you have? Maybe because I come from a place where I am not allowed to vote.

The Government of Charlotte Ryberg is pleased with the local electoral results in the United Kingdom.

In other words, down with Brown, up with Cameron, abstain with Clegg.

-- Charlotte

That is, if you'll forgive my profaning, a fucking stupid argument. A dictator does not permit franchise on two grounds; firstly, nobody would elect a dictator, and secondly, to do so would be a contradiction in terms. A dictator does not, by definition, share power.

That proves my point exactly: voting makes a great difference. But voters do occasionally elect dictators. It depends on the maturity of the democracy.


Moreover, Philosophy is correct. One individual makes no difference, notably given that most people live in secure constituencies anyway. However, the sudden appearance of several million votes does make a difference.

If every individual starts to think that way then "individual" thinking becomes "collective" thinking. The blessed Chris starts thinking his vote doesn't count - so he doesn't vote. Philosophy starts thinking his vote doesn't count - so he doesn't vote. Dragons Bay starts thinking his vote doesn't count...

Eventually all of Nationstates stop voting because none of their individual votes count. But then without every individual vote there is no collective vote.

Don't forget that every individual is part of the collective, and hence your vote is part of the collective!

So it's kind of a paradox: your voting counts, and it doesn't count either. But it still counts!!!!

Voting is a right only in some developed countries in the West. For most people in the world it would be a privilege.

Most countries have elections these days.

Most countries have elections these days.

More than enough do not.

And for some that do, they are neither free nor fair, which is as good as not having the vote at all.

Anyway, I've made my point clear, I think. I shan't post further on the topic of vote or not vote. It's up to you to chosee. That's what a democracy is.

But I reiteratre:
MAY BORIS LOSE!

More than enough do not.

And for some that do, they are neither free nor fair, which is as good as not having the vote at all.

There's nothing particularly free or fair about elections in England either. Granted if you live in a marginal constituency then your political preference may be somewhat taken into account, but otherwise it's just a waste of time and effort.

Go look at how many seats the liberal democrats have in comparison to their share of the vote.

Anyway, I've made my point clear, I think. I shan't post further on the topic of vote or not vote. It's up to you to chosee. That's what a democracy is.

But I reiteratre:
MAY BORIS LOSE!

Which he's not going to. Because he and William Hague are the only decent British politicians still in the front benches.

Which he's not going to. Because he and William Hague are the only decent British politicians still in the front benches.

Yeah yeah, Boris doesn't seem take anything seriously enough to actually have any policies ("wait.. what's my stance on drugs again?"), so for that I don't even choose to call him a politician. Though he is quite funny.

Eventually all of Nationstates stop voting because none of their individual votes count. But then without every individual vote there is no collective vote.

Don't forget that every individual is part of the collective, and hence your vote is part of the collective!

So it's kind of a paradox: your voting counts, and it doesn't count either. But it still counts!!!!

Ah, but if you all stopped voting, then I would vote. If I'm the only voter, my vote makes a difference. Otherwise, it's just a voice lost in the crowd.

Which he's not going to. Because he and William Hague are the only decent British politicians still in the front benches.

The crazy farm called. They say that if you give yourself up now, they won't make you go back to the padded room.

Voting is a right only in some developed countries in the West. For most people in the world it would be a privilege.

We're privileged to have the right to vote.

Which he's not going to. Because he and William Hague are the only decent British politicians still in the front benches.
Boris is a moron. 'nuff said, no?

Yeah yeah, Boris doesn't seem take anything seriously enough to actually have any policies ("wait.. what's my stance on drugs again?"), so for that I don't even choose to call him a politician. Though he is quite funny.

Don't let his facade fool you: he has policies and they're on the hard-right of the conservative party spectrum.

Boris is a moron. 'nuff said, no?

I like him. He may be something of a buffoon, and a little irreverent, but in comparison to the platitude producing, terribly sombre and fairly grey modern politician, he is a welcome relief.

Don't let his facade fool you: he has policies and they're on the hard-right of the conservative party spectrum.

Really? From the vague references I have seen, it seems to be just the same old British 'conservative' shit, a.k.a no different from labour in a manner that one would care about unless you really know the economy. What sort of thing are you referring to?

Which he's not going to. Because he and William Hague are the only decent British politicians still in the front benches.

Evan Harris ain't too bad imo either.

Pity my platitude spouting, homeopathy support local Lib Dem MP isn't the same. Otherwise I might actually vote for them.

I like him. He may be something of a buffoon, and a little irreverent, but in comparison to the platitude producing, terribly sombre and fairly grey modern politician, he is a welcome relief.Are you talking about Ken or Boris?

I'd choose Ken over Boris any day. If I was going to have an idiotic nepotist, surrounded by his own cronies, in power I'd rather he at least have some vague semblance of competence.

At least this this elections the Tories will have to start talking about policy. Up until now it's been exactly like that Bremner, Bird and Fortune sketch where Cameron finally decides on a policy -- not to have any.

Bah, I don't have any faith the any of the parties. Especially now that I've seen all the student politicians at my university -- many of whom will go on to be just plain politicians.

Bah, I don't have any faith the any of the parties. Especially now that I've seen all the student politicians at my university -- many of whom will go on to be just plain politicians.

I'm sure that is why my disenchantment with politics started at university :(

Which he's not going to. Because he and William Hague are the only decent British politicians still in the front benches.

Reading this thread through was worth it to read this post. Well done, you could make a living as a comedian!

There weren't any elections where I am this year so I didn't get much of a choice, but I've not bothered voting in the past. For all the 'people died for your vote'/'if you don't vote you're not allowed to comment' blah blah blah arguments, the bottom line is that voting is a completely pointless activity. Your vote will never make a difference.

I don't understand how people are comfortable with thinking that way about their vote.

Sure, it's technically correct in almost every case. A single vote makes no difference. But you see all those fellow citizens voting, you see the count and you see the new government put in place ... and you opt out of it?

Opting in by voting has a tiny effect. Opting out by not voting has a tiny effect. Nonetheless, it's an act which has a symbolic value, and choosing one way or the other is part of a pattern across your whole life.

How can you be comfortable with an act that says "I don't matter. My life is insignificant. On the scale of a local council, let alone a nation, my role is so tiny I may as well not exist."

Self-respect, if not duty, should compel a person to vote.

Are you talking about Ken or Boris?

I'd choose Ken over Boris any day. If I was going to have an idiotic nepotist, surrounded by his own cronies, in power I'd rather he at least have some vague semblance of competence.

At least this this elections the Tories will have to start talking about policy. Up until now it's been exactly like that Bremner, Bird and Fortune sketch where Cameron finally decides on a policy -- not to have any.

Bah, I don't have any faith the any of the parties. Especially now that I've seen all the student politicians at my university -- many of whom will go on to be just plain politicians.

That is very true. I must confess I really just want to believe in politics a little.

That is very true. I must confess I really just want to believe in politics a little.

That's a positive. I despise your politics in so far as I know them, but at least you vote.

I exercised my right to vote by not voting: the reason being that I can't in all good conscience vote any of the candidates into office.

I'm what you'd call a Labour Back-bench rebel. In a very real sense, my position is best represented by my local Labour party. However, I absolutely detest what the national Labour party has become. Gordon Brown's attitude can be encapsulated within his fanatically religious devotion to the idea that everything in politics is secondary to the importance of balancing the books. He embodies the very kind of soulless, antagonistic bureaucracy that gives Big Government its bad reputation.

When my party is both the thing I want to vote for and the thing I want to see punished, my best move is to simply not vote.

All the same, I hope Ken stays in, but since I'm not a Londoner, that's not my choice to make.

I honestly can't believe Boris is getting voted in. He's just a complete disaster. London, you have failed me.

Hmm... A Boris win is seeming less likely. Earlier Boris was ahead in 9 out of 14 constituencies, and now it's only 8 of 14.

And that's still not counting the second preference votes. Also, seeing as how Lib Dem President and previous mayoral candidate, Simon Hughes, encouraged people to vote for Ken over Boris in their 2nd preference, this race is going to be pretty damn tight.

Looks like Boris 'Walking Gaffe' Johnson is actually gonna win it...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7378792.stm

Ken Livingstone's campaign manager Tessa Jowell has said she does not think he will win the mayoral race.

She told the BBC: "I think it's highly unlikely that Ken will be mayor of London after the end of this evening.

Will London survive?

I'm glad to see my actions had a big affect on thi thread. Anyway if I had voted I would have gone with Lib Dem'. Neither the Tories or Labour are that different from each other.

The most exciting election of the local elections is the London Mayoral election. Conservative Boris Johnson (aka the Clown) is hoping to unseat Labour incumbent Ken Livingstone (aka the Commie (Red Ken)), who in turn is seeking a third term in power. They say that the results are very close. We will know by tonight (BST), hopefully.

For more information see here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7372860.stm

I have been hearing some stuff about this election. I think Calvin Trillin wrote something about it in the New Yorker. I personally hope that Johnson wins, even if it is at the expense of the Londoners, only because his cartoony personality is better than Livingstone's cartoony personality.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Victory is ours!!! Red Ken and the lugubrious Scottish stalinist are doomed!!

Not to gloat. Much.:)
Oh no! Scotland? Because there's something wrong with that, right? :rolleyes:

Will London survive?
No. I hate Livingstone, but Johnson is a twat.

I love the way the Lib Dems are cheering that they're now, apparently, the second most popular party in government with 25% of the voteshare.

Sorry to burst the bubble guys, but it's nothing to do with your good deeds, but way more to do with Labour's misdeeds.

In fact - you've done nothing to show that the country has more faith in the Lib Dems... in actuality, you've fallen by 1% from 26% of the vote in the last local elections under Ming the Impaler to 25% this time; hardly cause for celebration (Nick Clegg who?).

Results are being announced... (or not...)

Votes cast first/second/total

Boris Jonhnson -- 1,043,761 / 124,977 / 1,168,738
Ken Livingstone -- 893,877 / 135,089 / 1,028,968
Brian Paddick -- 236,683
plus other candidates

So there it is. Boris won. Crap. And having just listened to Boris' acceptance speech I can say that it had absolutely nothing of substance -- except for going to have a drink with Ken tonight. Maybe the idea is to get Ken wankered and steal some policy ideas that he was secreting away.

Votes cast first/second/total

Boris Jonhnson -- 1,043,761 / 124,977 / 1,168,738
Ken Livingstone -- 893,877 / 135,089 / 1,028,968
Brian Paddick -- 236,683
plus other candidates

So there it is. Boris won. Crap.

Oh dear.:(

Both Boris and Brian basically saying Ken was a good mayor.

Is there anything suburbia can't ruin?

Goodbye Red Ken, and hello Boris!!

Boris Johnson has won the race to become the next mayor of London - ending Ken Livingstone's eight-year reign of terror at City Hall.

Boris Johnson has won the race to become the next mayor of London - ending Ken Livingstone's eight-year reign of terror at City Hall.

If massive improvements to transport terrify you then I really hope you never have to fight in a war.

If massive improvements to transport terrify you then I really hope you never have to fight in a war.

I object to paying money to sit in Ken Livingstone's traffic jams...

I object to paying money to sit in Ken Livingstone's traffic jams...

So take the tube. Happy to help :)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! BORIS WINS!!!

Why the hell am I so bothered by this? Right...I plan to live and work in this city for the next few years to come...

Well, now that it is finally settled, let's see if the baffoon has more to offer than comedy.

By the way, Boris, if he acts as he has pledged, now has to put the western expansion of the Congestion Charge zone to a local referendum. Interesting to see if he actually does it.

And I took the bendy-bus home tonight. A bit poignant as I know they'll be gone soon. Yes, they are dangerous for cyclists and clog up the streets, but the opportunity for fare dodging is unrivalled.

well hopefully this plays out into the national elections as well I would love to see the UK under another PM like Margaret Thatcher.

well hopefully this plays out into the national elections as well I would love to see the UK under another PM like Margaret Thatcher.

Thatcher is a nightmare, but Brown is so rapidly becoming one I wouldn't mind having Cameron in charge for a while.

BRING ON THE GENERAL ELECTION!

I object to paying money to sit in Ken Livingstone's traffic jams...
You ignorant fucking moron. The roads are less congested since Livingstone got in. You clearly never took a trip down Farringdon Street in the 1990's.

So we've elected the affable twat responsible for such enlightening descriptions of those from foreign parts as "piccaninnies" with "watermelon smiles". Worse still, some 70,000 cunts voted for the BNP. Conservatives I can tolerate; racist shitbags are another matter.

I love this city, I've come to realise this over the last couple of years. What the hell happened? Surely we're better than this?

Guess not.

I love this city, I've come to realise this over the last couple of years. What the hell happened? Surely we're better than this?

Guess not.

I read an article about how this result was an example of the inability of people to make connections with the way things are run and why they happen that way. People seem to have thought that the improvements to London would have happened anyway. I guess it's also an example of how when people don't like one aspect of something they often don't pause to think of the positive aspects that will be lost.

London is a wonderful city and part of that is due to good leadership. Boris Johnson might turn out to do an okay job but getting rid of one of the only successful office holders of the last ten years is crazy.

Oh, and blame the outskirts for both the BNP vote and the Johnson vote. Real London voted for Livingstone.

Damn it, you're being reasonable. I'm angry, mildly drunk and in need of someone to rant at. I think I'll go to my (North East, zone 2) bed, impotent. Like a good British voter.

It would be nice to go out clubbing, mind. BNPers, of course. I'm not into dancing.

Thatcher is a nightmare, but Brown is so rapidly becoming one I wouldn't mind having Cameron in charge for a while.

BRING ON THE GENERAL ELECTION!

whats was wrong with thatcher we Americans loved her.

whats was wrong with thatcher we Americans loved her.

Kind of the same way how half of America reelected Bush even the rest of the world hated his guts.

Oh, except Blair the poodle.

It's the English and Welsh local elections, not just the English ones.

I love the way the Lib Dems are cheering that they're now, apparently, the second most popular party in government with 25% of the voteshare.

Sorry to burst the bubble guys, but it's nothing to do with your good deeds, but way more to do with Labour's misdeeds.

In fact - you've done nothing to show that the country has more faith in the Lib Dems... in actuality, you've fallen by 1% from 26% of the vote in the last local elections under Ming the Impaler to 25% this time; hardly cause for celebration (Nick Clegg who?).

You've got to look at the context. In 2004 we had a longstanding leader who was quite popular, our opposition to the Iraq war fresh in people's minds etc.

Since then we've had leadership changes, party turmoil and a whole host of bad publicity. We were polling around 17% not so long ago.

Given those ratings, and the fact that despite 2004 being a great year for us, to have got into second place and solidified the position we attained last year with a net gain of councils and councillors (aswell as knocking many councils into no overall control) this has been a decent if not great set of elections for us.

I stood as a paper candidate, no real hope of winning but it was fun, we made gains and came within 30 votes or so of taking out the Labour Council Leader, and pushed the city into NOC. So things went well.

Kind of the same way how half of America reelected Bush even the rest of the world hated his guts.

Oh, except Blair the poodle.

but the rest of the world loved thatcher. sure she was a crazy old woman, but she reminded us of our old crazy auntie.

More like democracy INACTION.

Funny how the West keeps pushing other governments to give their citizens a vote when the Western citizens come back and say "we're not interested".:headbang:

Voting is a privilege, not a right. So treat it as one.

Actually in the UK, it is a males Duty to vote and not voting is still technically punishable by law (not that they would.)

As for voting, next time you dont want to vote for anyone, spoil the ballot.. Its counted as a vote of no confidence in all the parties rather than a non vote statistic.

As for voting, next time you dont want to vote for anyone, spoil the ballot.. Its counted as a vote of no confidence in all the parties rather than a non vote statistic.

They don't differentiate between spoiling through protest and spoiling through stupidity. If you don't like the big boys, vote for the smaller party that best represents the direction you'd like the parties to move toward.

They don't differentiate between spoiling through protest and spoiling through stupidity. If you don't like the big boys, vote for the smaller party that best represents the direction you'd like the parties to move toward.

I think if you had an 80% turnout with 45-65% spoilt theyd get the picture..

Considering turnout is so low at the moment... less than 40% ftw.. its mainly the 60% that complain when things don't go their way...

I think if you had an 80% turnout with 45-65% spoilt theyd get the picture..


Who is 'they'? If they means a current government then they aren't going to make changes because they got into power that way. And if they means the other big parties than they will be much more inclined to move in the direction a growing fringe party than into the abyss that is undirected discontent.

Considering turnout is so low at the moment... less than 40% ftw.. its mainly the 60% that complain when things don't go their way...

You've got to remember that a lot of people don't vote because under first past the post they know their votes won't count. Even in seats close between two parties voters who favour the other parties won't bother.

It's hardly shocking to hear me say this as a Lib Dem, but we desperately need some sort of proportional representation/transferrable vote/etc to raise people's interest in politics again.

It's hardly shocking to hear me say this as a Lib Dem, but we desperately need some sort of proportional representation/transferrable vote/etc to raise people's interest in politics again.

Presidential election with STV would be good. Gets rid of the monarchy and the annoying party leader/ prime minister duality and I think people engage with individuals more.

You've got to remember that a lot of people don't vote because under first past the post they know their votes won't count. Even in seats close between two parties voters who favour the other parties won't bother.

It's hardly shocking to hear me say this as a Lib Dem, but we desperately need some sort of proportional representation/transferrable vote/etc to raise people's interest in politics again.

It works well in other countries (most notably France) and would work well here to more than likely. It may not be shocking to hear you say that.. but it is the truth

Presidential election with STV would be good. Gets rid of the monarchy and the annoying party leader/ prime minister duality and I think people engage with individuals more.

You would remove a great tax burden that way BUT destroy a part of what makes Britain Britain! And at the same time dissolve the commonwealth. (last i checked the monarchy is the only reason the commonwealth still exists with some states such as Australia actually still haing The Queen as the head of state.

Actually in the UK, it is a males Duty to vote and not voting is still technically punishable by law (not that they would.)
Simply not true.

As for voting, next time you dont want to vote for anyone, spoil the ballot.. Its counted as a vote of no confidence in all the parties rather than a non vote statistic.
Ditto.

Well that was not a surprise...celebrity wins...

Can't wait to see Boris tackle the rather large budget for London....I mean there's not that much difference between 8 and 98 million....

Oh and I really am looking forward to seeing Boris deal with the Olympics and of course the new Heathrow runway that he pledged to oppose as Mayor...

To quote some talkinghead on the news...Boris is an ideas man. Not a numbers man.

So I think in about two years time the penny will drop and people realise what a horrific mistake they made. Comedy artists however might not be too happy to have a source of income removed.

Simply not true.

Just done some digging and you are correct. I got my wires crossed Though you really added nothing.. not even a counter point.

You must however sign the Electoral register each year. Failure to do so may lead to prosecution, a £1000 fine and possibly prison (unlikely given the current prison population number)


Ditto.

See the bit i posted below. If 80% of those eligible to vote went out and voted and we then had a 45%+ spoilt ballot.. it would have to be taken as more than just x million people are idiots and didn't vote propery..

Mainly due to the fact voting turnout is usually very low.

BUT destroy a part of what makes Britain Britain!

Good

And at the same time dissolve the commonwealth. (last i checked the monarchy is the only reason the commonwealth still exists with some states such as Australia actually still haing The Queen as the head of state.

She'd still be their Queen and they're free to do what they wish with her.

So there it is. Boris won. Crap.
I have to admit, I'm still surprised that he was actually elected, and by a bigger margin than the polls predicted. I wonder if Ken would have done better if he'd gone independent again, or if it was a vote against him personally?

GBoris Johnson has won the race to become the next mayor of London - ending Ken Livingstone's eight-year reign of terror at City Hall.
Somewhat OTT...

If massive improvements to transport terrify you then I really hope you never have to fight in a war.
Massive improvements?

Do you know how long it can take to get onto a tube in the morning? I frequently have to stand for 10-15 minutes outside Victoria station as they restrict the number of people going to the platforms. And then it's far from uncommon to have to wait for the 2nd or 3rd train before you can squeeze in. There are laws against transporting animals like that, but it's just another day on the tube.

Then you have the constant signal failures, points failures, defective trains, insufficient staff and so on that mean the automatic PA 'all London Underground services are operating a good service' is an extremely rare thing.

Oh, and on the PA point, I'm fed up with the nanny nature of the tube these days. I always think that if you wanted to know what Britain would be like under fascism/communism, look at the tube. Posters that scream 'do this!' 'Don't do that!' 'Don't eat that!' 'Don't sit there!' The constant announcements about nothing. I'M BEHIND THE YELLOW LINE! I KNOW THE EAST LONDON LINE IS CLOSED!

I'm not claiming that it's any worse than before, but 'massive improvements' simply isn't true. You can have 'marginally better', at best.


By the way, Boris, if he acts as he has pledged, now has to put the western expansion of the Congestion Charge zone to a local referendum. Interesting to see if he actually does it.

And I took the bendy-bus home tonight. A bit poignant as I know they'll be gone soon. Yes, they are dangerous for cyclists and clog up the streets, but the opportunity for fare dodging is unrivalled.

I hope the congestion charge goes, or at the very least he keeps the promise not to bring in the higher charges. As for bendy buses I won't be sorry to see the back of them, but I'm not sure a new generation of Routemasters is a sensible idea.

You ignorant fucking moron. The roads are less congested since Livingstone got in. You clearly never took a trip down Farringdon Street in the 1990's.

So we've elected the affable twat responsible for such enlightening descriptions of those from foreign parts as "piccaninnies" with "watermelon smiles". Worse still, some 70,000 cunts voted for the BNP. Conservatives I can tolerate; racist shitbags are another matter.

I love this city, I've come to realise this over the last couple of years. What the hell happened? Surely we're better than this?

Guess not.
Calm down, it's a vote for London Mayor, not leader of the world. When all is said and done, don't forget that they're essentially a glorified Managing Director of TfL.

Massive improvements?

Do you know how long it can take to get onto a tube in the morning? I frequently have to stand for 10-15 minutes outside Victoria station as they restrict the number of people going to the platforms. And then it's far from uncommon to have to wait for the 2nd or 3rd train before you can squeeze in. There are laws against transporting animals like that, but it's just another day on the tube.


There's pretty much nothing that can be done about that. In areas where there is room for improvement, buses are faster and more frequent, and the price has gone down in central London (despite feul bills rising so massively) and oyster cards have reduced waiting times at stations and bus stops immeasurably.

Oh, and on the PA point, I'm fed up with the nanny nature of the tube these days. I always think that if you wanted to know what Britain would be like under fascism/communism, look at the tube. Posters that scream 'do this!' 'Don't do that!' 'Don't eat that!' 'Don't sit there!' The constant announcements about nothing. I'M BEHIND THE YELLOW LINE! I KNOW THE EAST LONDON LINE IS CLOSED!


Maybe listen to your ipod and not get so worked up about unimportant little details?

There's pretty much nothing that can be done about that. In areas where there is room for improvement, buses are faster and more frequent, and the price has gone down in central London (despite feul bills rising so massively) and oyster cards have reduced waiting times at stations and bus stops immeasurably.
I don't like buses, but I accept that there have been improvements in that area of transport.

As for Oysters, they have definitely made transport cheaper IF, and only if, you have one. If not, the price of tickets is absurd; they say they're trying to encourage people to use Oyster, but I think it's more to do with making a killing out of the millions of tourists who visit the city and who aren't going to bother getting a card.

Maybe listen to your ipod and not get so worked up about unimportant little details?
Ah, but I'd get told off for using an iPod. That makes noise that might disturb others. Haven't you seen the posters?

In a world of problems, the fascist nature of the tube is undoubtedly down the list. But I dread the day when we reach the point where the solution to problems caused by the government, however minor, are solved by us 'not getting so worked up and looking the other way'.

I don't like buses, but I accept that there have been improvements in that area of transport.

As for Oysters, they have definitely made transport cheaper IF, and only if, you have one. If not, the price of tickets is absurd; they say they're trying to encourage people to use Oyster, but I think it's more to do with making a killing out of the millions of tourists who visit the city and who aren't going to bother getting a card.

It's not much of an if. Not only is the decision to get one simply the product of a functioning brain it's also basic politeness to all the people who don't want to be lining up behind you as you fumble around for change.

Ah, but I'd get told off for using an iPod. That makes noise that might disturb others. Haven't you seen the posters?

In a world of problems, the fascist nature of the tube is undoubtedly down the list. But I dread the day when we reach the point where the solution to problems caused by the government, however minor, are solved by us 'not getting so worked up and looking the other way'.

Yeah, but it's not a case of fascism, it's just a case of notices being a little more visible than you would prefer. Accept that they were put there to try and make the tube better for its users (and the please give up your seat for old people signs really aren't part of a conspiracy to make you conform) and there's no real reason for it to be a problem.

Ah, but I'd get told off for using an iPod. That makes noise that might disturb others. Haven't you seen the posters?


Your iPod, if put on too loud, won't "might" disturb others. It actually does disturb others.

What's the point of making it so loud anyway? :rolleyes:

Once I was on the bus home, and on the upper deck there was this girl who literally SCREAMED into her phone to her companion for half an hour. Being the gutless chicken I am I chose to relocated downstairs rather than ask her to pipe down. Don't know what teenagers can come up to these days...

But the point is, unless you're deaf, why the hell are people so loud?

I have to admit, I'm still surprised that he was actually elected, and by a bigger margin than the polls predicted. I wonder if Ken would have done better if he'd gone independent again, or if it was a vote against him personally?

I don't think it was really a vote against him personally. He trailed Boris by 6% as opposed to the country wide 20%.

This does appear to be death knell for the government though. Obliterated at the polls followed by promises to listen more. As I seem to remember that's how most governments tend to crumble.

Having Boris as Mayor isn't so bad though. The Mayor has a significantly higher profile than local councils and will show people just exactly what they can expect from a Tory government -- whatever that may be (how should I know, it's not as if they seem to know themselves).

Thatcher is a nightmare, but Brown is so rapidly becoming one I wouldn't mind having Cameron in charge for a while.

BRING ON THE GENERAL ELECTION!

Baronness Thatcher saved this country from the tyranny of union and melancholy, and altered London, the city you aspire to work in, into a capital of global commerce.

*Does a little dance re. end of Ken Livingstone*

Now I can actually imagine working in London.

You ignorant fucking moron.

Ahh, I love being insulted first... it means that what is to follow is sure to wow me!

The roads are less congested since Livingstone got in. You clearly never took a trip down Farringdon Street in the 1990's.

Traffic in the morning rush hour is now slower than before Ken Livingstone brought in the congestion charge.

Transport for London figures also show that journey times during the day and evening peak in central London have increased, after initially falling.

Latest figures show the average speed for driving to work in 2006-7 was 9.3mph, down from 9.9mph before the scheme began in 2003.

You ignorant fucking moron. The roads are less congested since Livingstone got in. You clearly never took a trip down Farringdon Street in the 1990's.

So we've elected the affable twat responsible for such enlightening descriptions of those from foreign parts as "piccaninnies" with "watermelon smiles". Worse still, some 70,000 cunts voted for the BNP. Conservatives I can tolerate; racist shitbags are another matter.

I love this city, I've come to realise this over the last couple of years. What the hell happened? Surely we're better than this?

Guess not.

Get over yourself you acerbic, bitter prole. A franchised electorate is entitled to vote for whom it pleases, and if immigration did exercise a great effect in the considerations of 70,000 voters, all the better. Thanks to vehemence of the likes of you, Britain has never fully and clearly discussed the benefits, disadvantages and idiosyncrasies of immigration.

Thanks to vehemence of the likes of you, Britain has never fully and clearly discussed the benefits, disadvantages and idiosyncrasies of immigration.

Probably more due to the racism of the BNP than other causes.

Enoch Powell probably did more to prevent debate on immigration than anyone else.

Probably more due to the racism of the BNP than other causes.

Enoch Powell probably did more to prevent debate on immigration than anyone else.

Agreed about Powell, which is a shame, given that the speech itself was not only a wonderful piece of oratory, but also a perfectly valid opinion posited well.

A majority of people back the British National Party's policies, according to a poll. But the YouGov survey found that many people disown the policies once they are associated with the BNP.

A majority of people back the British National Party's policies, according to a poll. But the YouGov survey found that many people disown the policies once they are associated with the BNP.

That's probably because the BNP are very skilled at dressing them up as respectable policies. Fortunately, people aren't fooled once they know who the author is.

That's probably because the BNP are very skilled at dressing them up as respectable policies. Fortunately, people aren't fooled once they know who the author is.

Or that people actually agree with the fundamental policies that are being set out, but the BNP have been victimised for so long by the far-left that noone can see anything apart from their perceived persona as right-wing nut jobs.

A majority of people back the British National Party's policies, according to a poll. But the YouGov survey found that many people disown the policies once they are associated with the BNP.

Which policies, their non-immigration ones (which can be quite reasonable) or the immigration ones?

Also, source?

Or that people actually agree with the fundamental policies that are being set out, but the BNP have been victimised for so long by the far-left that noone can see anything apart from their perceived persona as right-wing nut jobs.

In politics, perception is most that matters.

Which policies, their non-immigration ones (which can be quite reasonable) or the immigration ones?

Also, source?

Sourced from: http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/196

The survey found strong support for BNP policies on accepting fewer asylum seek; and giving priority to British families in allocating council housing. There was overwhelming support for making criminals serve their full sentences.

Or that people actually agree with the fundamental policies that are being set out, but the BNP have been victimised for so long by the far-left that noone can see anything apart from their perceived persona as right-wing nut jobs.

The far-left, the moderate left, the centrists, the moderate right, the far right. Actually, everyone perceives them as nut-jobs except the BNP.

The far-left, the moderate left, the centrists, the moderate right, the far right. Actually, everyone perceives them as nut-jobs except the BNP.

Have you, non-descript, insipid entity you are, ever actually studied their policies? I suspect, much like the rest of the uninformed political centre, that you have not.

Have you, non-descript, insipid entity you are, ever actually studied their policies? I suspect, much like the rest of the uninformed political centre, that you have not.

You mean the horribly mediocre policies they have to make them seem less of a one policy party?

You mean the horribly mediocre policies they have to make them seem less of a one policy party?

Damn! I was thinking the exact same thing....:D

Get over yourself you acerbic, bitter prole. A franchised electorate is entitled to vote for whom it pleases, and if immigration did exercise a great effect in the considerations of 70,000 voters, all the better. Thanks to vehemence of the likes of you, Britain has never fully and clearly discussed the benefits, disadvantages and idiosyncrasies of immigration.
Physician, heal thyself...

Have you, non-descript, insipid entity you are, ever actually studied their policies? I suspect, much like the rest of the uninformed political centre, that you have not.
He (or she) probably has. And, like most of the human race, has realised that he doesn't want a gang of racists, anti-semites, homophobes, islamophobes and nazi apologists anywhere near government, no matter how much verbal diarrhoea the BNP or their apologists dress it up in.

You mean the horribly mediocre policies they have to make them seem less of a one policy party?

To your perceptions, they may be "horribly mediocre". They strike me as more being, if a little opaque, traditionally "conservative" policies which the best part of Tory voters would support if wheeled out by the conservative party.

He (or she) probably has. And, like most of the human race, has realised that he doesn't want a gang of racists, anti-semites, homophobes, islamophobes and nazi apologists anywhere near government, no matter how much verbal diarrhoea the BNP or their apologists dress it up in.

I find that quite funny...a few years back in the last General Election (I believe) TBC decided that he was supporting UKip because they had no minority candidates. Which they did. So for TBC to decry people about reading websites is pretty amusing.

I find that quite funny...a few years back in the last General Election (I believe) TBC decided that he was supporting UKip because they had no minority candidates. Which they did. So for TBC to decry people about reading websites is pretty amusing.

Far be it from me to point out people can change...

Far be it from me to point out people can change...

Far be it from me to point out your past record...a legitimate debating technique.

Actually I did giggle a bit when I read your post and thought to myself all that expensive education and a memory like a sieve ;)

Good for BoJo (yes boris) :D

I live in Scotland and I have a prediction to make.

By 2010 David Cameron will be the first prime minister of England.

I WAS against independence because it will lead us to bankruptcy. However if the Tories get in you can kiss good by to a United Kingdom. I know nobody in Scotland who wants the South of England to dominate the political landscape any more. We want to be friendly with our English mates especially in the north. I have the felling however that we will abandon that if the eton chums get in.

Have you, non-descript, insipid entity you are, ever actually studied their policies? I suspect, much like the rest of the uninformed political centre, that you have not.

Yes I have, and found their policies wanting. Much like the conservative party's.

I live in Scotland and I have a prediction to make.

By 2010 David Cameron will be the first prime minister of England.

I WAS against independence because it will lead us to bankruptcy. However if the Tories get in you can kiss good by to a United Kingdom. I know nobody in Scotland who wants the South of England to dominate the political landscape any more. We want to be friendly with our English mates especially in the north. I have the felling however that we will abandon that if the eton chums get in.
If I were still living in Scotland, I'd get out before the Tories get in. North of England and Scotland > South East England.

I find that quite funny...a few years back in the last General Election (I believe) TBC decided that he was supporting UKip because they had no minority candidates. Which they did. So for TBC to decry people about reading websites is pretty amusing.
Is this the same time he said he'd emigrate of we got a black Prime Minister?

Is this the same time he said he'd emigrate of we got a black Prime Minister?

If he still thinks that, then we can't get a black Prime Minister fast enough.

Is this the same time he said he'd emigrate of we got a black Prime Minister?

I think I missed that one LOL

I think I missed that one LOL
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514992

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514992

Ah, yes, I remember that one. Hilarious it was.

What happened to The Nazz?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514992

oh my!

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12227818&postcount=3

yer right!

Far be it from me to point out people can change...
"Can" being the operative word there.

They strike me as more being, if a little opaque, traditionally "conservative" policies which the best part of Tory voters would support if wheeled out by the conservative party.

Indeed; this is supported by the fact that the general public tend to rally around BNP policies if they're not dressed up as being heralded by the BNP.

I know nobody in Scotland who wants the South of England to dominate the political landscape any more. We want to be friendly with our English mates especially in the north. I have the felling however that we will abandon that if the eton chums get in.

Fine, don't let us stop you. Here's to seeing Scotland running itself independently and not draining the resources of the Mother Kingdom.

Indeed; this is supported by the fact that the general public tend to rally around BNP policies if they're not dressed up as being heralded by the BNP.
No they don't. The source you linked to (which is only a blog anyway) above shows a degree of support for some BNP policies, but shows large levels of opposition to BNP policies based on race. Policies such as housing fewer asylum seekers and reducing immigration are by no means limited to the BNP. The source you linked to in no way suggests that the British people are closet BNP supporters, and the idea that people 'rally round' BNP policies can only be wishful thinking on your part.

Fine, don't let us stop you. Here's to seeing Scotland running itself independently and not draining the resources of the Mother Kingdom.
'Mother Kingdom'? That's a new one on me.

The source you linked to in no way suggests that the British people are closet BNP supporters

No, indeed. The people tend to support BNP policies without knowing they are BNP ideas; support drops by around 9% when people find out which party they have just agreed with.

'Mother Kingdom'? That's a new one on me.

England. Obviously.

It was my first ever vote, actually, and I was a little disappointed at how simple it was...:( I thought it would be something really grand.

I shan't tell you what gave me the right to vote, but I can tell you the way it was given to me would make a BNP member froth up in the mouth and die. Hahaha.

BORIS MUST NOT WIN!

Too late. On the plus side, he'll almost certainly mess up SO badly that it will cost the tories the next general election.

Then we can have them all shot :sniper:

Then we can have them all shot :sniper:

Like the Marketing Division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation, everyone who opposes the Tories can be described as 'a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes'.

No, indeed. The people tend to support BNP policies without knowing they are BNP ideas; support drops by around 9% when people find out which party they have just agreed with.
I'll consider the point conceded if the best you can come up is selective quoting.

England. Obviously.
Yes, I knew what you meant, but never seen anybody refer to England that way.

I'll consider the point conceded if the best you can come up is selective quoting.

Sweetie, you can consider whatever you like, don't let me stop you :)

Regardless of this BNP digression, it was a great night for the Conservatives :)

And an equally bad night for Labour!

Looks like Labour made a mistake somewhere. I wonder what it was.
I'd take a stab at the wars, increasing fuel prices, but that's only a guess. I'm sure there's more to it.
I'd thought the voters at least had the sense to avoid the Conservatives. oh well i think the change would show whether they can rule or not for me.