please empty your brain below
|
|
Don't vote here, vote in one of the six comments threads.
diamond geezer | Homepage | 27.04.16 - 7:08 a.m. | #
|
|
How to account for second preferences, though? What looks like a three-way contest right now would be a certain landslide for Sadiq in a run-off, I'd wager.
chz | 27.04.16 - 9:13 a.m. | #
|
|
People do realise that voting anything other than Zac or Sadiq as second (if you didn't vote for them as first) is a complete posturing cop-out? Choose, folk!
David | 27.04.16 - 11:23 a.m. | #
|
|
Khan will win
Agent Z | 27.04.16 - 12:51 p.m. | #
|
|
Surely there should be a option to state "Not voting"? For those who may decide got better things to do or perhaps feel none worth the bother or have another reason not to vote?
E | 27.04.16 - 1:03 p.m. | #
|
|
Be interesting to see how the demographic of DG readers matches up with the general London electorate.
Uncle Audrey | 27.04.16 - 1:12 p.m. | #
|
|
Be worth putting in votes for the assembly to compare. Certainly for me I will be voting for three different parties depending on what the vote is for
| 27.04.16 - 2:46 p.m. | #
|
|
interesting to compare these figures with the poll of 1,017 adults in Time Out this week; Sadiq 31%, Zac 20%, Sian/Pidgeon 4% each
amber | 27.04.16 - 4:44 p.m. | #
|
My poll is a self-selecting sample from a biased population, so is obviously wrong.
But I suspect DG readers are more likely than most to have read the candidates' prospectuses, or at least to have engaged with what their policies actually are, which helps explain the stronger showing for the 'minor' candidates.
diamond geezer | Homepage | 27.04.16 - 4:59 p.m. | #
|
Missing from the comment threads is 'None Of The Above'. If NOTA were included in a real ballot paper, it should be with the ruling that if NOTA got the majority vote, then the election must be run again, with none of the original candidates allowed to stand.
A nicely Darwinian solution to the problem of not finding any of the candidates suitable enough.
RayL | 27.04.16 - 6:11 p.m. | #
|
The fact the Greens have made a bare statement that they'd put motorised transport 'where it belongs' at the bottom of the pile in terms of priorities for road users, means they can whistle if they expect any vote from me.
With a conscience towards carbon footprint I only ever ride around London by motorbike but have already seen bikers being screwed in terms of "riding space" and a reduction in parking facilities. The Greens seem to want to do more of the same, but without any lube :(
RogerW | 27.04.16 - 6:24 p.m. | #
|
|
Motorbikes may be less carbon generating than cars, but they're hardly the solution....
Autolycus | 27.04.16 - 7:56 p.m. | #
|
Sorry, Autolycus, but they seem a perfectly adequate solution to [me and] people who have a commuter journey beyond the practical range of a bicycle. It's only a shift in the 'politik' that has persuaded some easily swayed people to perceiving "anything with an engine... particularly anything *privately owned*"... as a curse.
It's thanks to folks like us that folks like you a slightly less crowded public transport system, and even a marginally better chance of getting a seat on your chosen bus or train :)
RogerW | 27.04.16 - 7:57 p.m. | #
|
|
DG, thanks for impartial 'mediation' rather than plain deletion
RogerW | 27.04.16 - 8:07 p.m. | #
|
POLL IS NOW CLOSED
(so you can still add further comments, but the number of votes is now fixed)
diamond geezer | Homepage | 28.04.16 - 7:00 a.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|