![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Another post about the London mayoral election
Londoners; when you vote for the Mayor on Thursday, please remember that this is not a first-past-the-post election. I've never liked the usual defeatist line about votes for third parties being wasted; here it simply isn't true, and anyone who says otherwise is either underinformed or has a covert agenda. Here's m'learned colleague's explanation of how the system works, but in summary: if you're just voting Ken To Stop Boris, or Boris To Stop Ken, then your second preference vote is perfectly adequate to that task. Give Brian Paddick a chance, or Sian Berry, with the first preference, if only to help erode the deeply unsatisfactory idea of the two party system; a little more each time and maybe next election, it could even be a real three way battle. Or four.
And no, I'm not saying this as part of some convoluted plan to get Boris in; it's just about really wanting Ken out. For his cronyism, appointing unqualified members of his old fringe socialist group to high power at our expense. For smearing Peter Tatchell when Tatchell dared to criticise one of Ken's fundamentalist associates. For endorsing the appalling George Galloway's bid for a London Assembly seat. For describing Boris as a "19th century liberal, with a small L", and yet somehow intending that great compliment as a criticism.
I voted for Ken last time, albeit with reservations; I still think he did a lot of good in his first term. But this last term, the balance has tipped. London is not his personal fiefdom, and I would like to see him reminded of that, at the very least by a shaky performance in the first round.
And no, I'm not saying this as part of some convoluted plan to get Boris in; it's just about really wanting Ken out. For his cronyism, appointing unqualified members of his old fringe socialist group to high power at our expense. For smearing Peter Tatchell when Tatchell dared to criticise one of Ken's fundamentalist associates. For endorsing the appalling George Galloway's bid for a London Assembly seat. For describing Boris as a "19th century liberal, with a small L", and yet somehow intending that great compliment as a criticism.
I voted for Ken last time, albeit with reservations; I still think he did a lot of good in his first term. But this last term, the balance has tipped. London is not his personal fiefdom, and I would like to see him reminded of that, at the very least by a shaky performance in the first round.
no subject
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/peter_tatchell/2008/04/pick_berry.html
no subject
While obviously the Assembly elections are important too, I don't think there's the same level of misinformation and obfuscation circulating around them as around the fight for the top job. Hence this post, more an attempt at clarification and passing on some details people may have missed than an endorsement or attempt at persuasion.
no subject
Still - tee hee!
no subject
no subject
Which said, I like the dual preference system in so far as it does enable people to cast an 'ideal world' vote, and then an 'OK, if we're running a two party system' vote, so theoretically removing some of that tension.
If you believed the LMHR rhetoric, you'd think the BNP were in with a chance in London too, whereas hysteria aside I'd be surprised if they make a bigger share of the vote than the UKIP. Hell, they'll probably even end up behind their moral equivalents in the rump of 'Respect'.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
After a rally in Whitechapel on Sunday, Livingstone wished Galloway 'good luck.'
He said: “I want George on the Assembly to keep the BNP out.”
He can see a difference between the two?
I am resolved that I cannot possibly bring myself to vote for Ken now, even as a second choice. I am not sure about giving my second choice to Johnson either though; I may yet leave it blank.
-x-
no subject
no subject
no subject