96 replies to this topic

[arwebb]

It's between Ken and Boris. Brian Paddick is a reasonable candidate for the Lib Dems, but I don't see him having any realistic chance of winning.

[SJD88]

Now i could be wrong but doesn't London have instant run off voting? So you could vote for your favorite candidate even if there was no chance of them winning as long as you used your second vote to vote for the lesser of two evils.

[RobH]

On Newsnight last night in their live debate Boris came across as a complete twit (which might not sound like a surprise but he's done a good job casting aside his HIGNFY persona up to now in this race). He didn't know his figures when pushed on them and everything he came out with was rhetoric. Most of his policies seem to sound great on paper but when asked about how he would cost them he didn't seem to know.

I hope people who saw it last night decided that, actually if we're talking about Boris Johnson the last thing "London could do with" is "a bit of eccentricity." Ken came across as 20 times more competent; he knew his figures and more than that, he seemed more genuine than Boris who spent most of the night huffing and puffing.

Paddick is an impressive figure, though he has no chance of getting in. He might well be my second choice.

Edited by Rob ♪, 09 April 2008 - 02:38 AM.

[arwebb]

Isn't the selection of Boris Johnson a perfect example of style over substance? Don't get me wrong, he seems like a decent enough bloke. But as a politician he leaves plenty to be desired.

[The Tower Bridge Fox]

arwebb, on Apr 9 2008, 05:03 PM, said:

Isn't the selection of Boris Johnson a perfect example of style over substance? Don't get me wrong, he seems like a decent enough bloke. But as a politician he leaves plenty to be desired.

I saw news night as weel and Ken livingston couldent say how much his bus would cost either
and Ken livngston has told to many lies in the past in the run up to elections for me.

[The Tower Bridge Fox]

The Tower Bridge Fox, on Apr 9 2008, 05:41 PM, said:

I saw news night as weel and Ken livingston couldent say how much his bus would cost either
and Ken livngston has told to many lies in the past in the run up to elections for me.

also it will be good for tht Olyimpics to have a mayer from a difrent party to the govenment,
as that will stop the Olyimpics being used as a politcal foot ball.

[RobH]

The Tower Bridge Fox, on Apr 9 2008, 06:41 PM, said:

I saw news night as weel and Ken livingston couldent say how much his bus would cost either
and Ken livngston has told to many lies in the past in the run up to elections for me.

Yes, but unlike Boris, Ken's campaign substance doesn't rest on the design of a bloody bus. I can't believe the mayoral debate has come to this tbh!

[MIKYSALT]

Brian Paddick and Borises campaigns aren’t based entirely around the design of a bus ,anyway
But.
Symbols of London are important.

[DarJoLe]

MIKYSALT, on Apr 9 2008, 08:58 PM, said:

Symbols of London are important.

Well bring back Jack The Ripper and a smog filled city then.

Times change. Routemasters are not suitable for London anymore.

[RobH]

Indeed. And if you ask the people who really have trouble with busses (the disabled, women with buggies etc.) which bus they prefer the answer is obvious.

Anyway, as I said, I think too much has been said about busses already!!