In the news

look at those square fucking plates. yet another reason to despise the mendacious cunt.

regarding the earlier chat: https://www.lfgss.com/comments/12968651/

Did Profumo have some sort of verruca fetish? (that's what I get from lido and doctor).

Sadiq is ahead..

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2016/may/06/uk-elections-sadiq-khan-ahead-in-london-mayoral-race-live-updates

https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/election-results/live-count-progress-2016?contest=23

Pretty much smashing it. still will go to 2nd votes tho (I think).

Goldsmith should be pretty embarrassed, he has done real damage to what was a relatively good reputation.

Projected UK wide share of the vote:

Labour - 31%
Tory - 30%
Lib Dems - 15%
Ukip - 12%

I'm really glad that Sophie Walker is above George Galloway and Paul Golding, and that Lee Eli Harris is above David Furness

Nice to see London doesn't buy 'Sir' Lynton Crosby's particular brand of divisive, happy shopper enoch power politics. i hope.

top arsehole.

from that guardian thing

"There’s a lot of interest here at City Hall about the count in Barnet and Camden, which is looking like it could be a microcosm of Labour’s anti-semitism row. At the moment with 74% of the first preference votes counted, electors in the north London areas are voting against Sadiq Khan in favour of Zac Goldsmith.
Is this a reflection of the views of the large Jewish population in this constituency on Labour’s handling of the row that saw the suspension of Naz Shah MP and Ken Livingstone? Peter Kellner, the former president of YouGov who is pouring over the results here thinks so. Although I would add that when I was up at the Alexandra Palace counting centre where the Barnet and Camden votes were being processed, they appeared to be counting the Conservative-leaning Barnet votes before the Labour leaning Camden ones."

Isn't Camden/Barnet always conservative?

Other than being vindictive and arrogant, he also comes across as being as thick as pigshit.

Camden has generally been a Labour council since it was created in the 60's

I do wonder sometimes about the minority and independent candidates. I mean is it like xfactor levels of deluded-ness where they really think they've got talent?

to be a candidate you have to have supporters all over London (33 signatures from each borough) plus £10k deposit. the deposit is forfeit if you get under 5% of the first preference vote. While not impossible, it's equally not a light undertaking.

ah council. I was looking at general election results

https://www.change.org/p/david-attenborough-rename-david-attenborough-boaty-mcboatface

lel.

More importantly:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36227570

Tbh I thought the internet was the unfunny one in this.

It is like the annoyingly obvious humour you get from that kid at school.

No idea why they have used 'Boaty McBoatFace' for an ROV either.

Tbh I thought the internet was the unfunny one in this.

It is like the annoyingly obvious humour you get from that kid at school.

No idea why they have used 'Boaty McBoatFace' for an ROV either.

If there was a dictionary entry for "internet comment" a screen-cap of this would show up.

lel.

Matt Damon. Etc

You can basically break candidates down into four groups.

1) Major Party Candidates - for whom a) 5% of the 1st choice vote is a give and b) it would be politically damaging to not run
2) Exposure Candidates - running for political parties who want to use the campaigning process as a platform to promote their political party's agenda/ideology. This includes parties like Green, UKIP, BNP, Britain First, Respect
3) Single Issue Candidates - running to get discussion of their important issues included in the campaigning process as a platform to promote their viewpoint on that one subject. This includes parties like CISTA and WEP
4) Independent Candidates - usually a combination of 2 & 3 or standing to offer voters a protest vote or None of The Above alternative.

Some candidates can be assured of hitting that 5% mark such as UKIP or Green so will get their 10k back. However, that will probably pale compared to the cost and effort of campaigning. As minority parties they will consider the returns worth the cost. They don't reasonably expect to win but are putting up a candidate to make sure issues they find important are discussed and, in the event of a collapse of major party campaigns, they can stand to make significant gains that they can retain some of the next time round. More importantly, that campaign figurehead makes the AM candidates a lot more appealing/votable without having to do the groundwork of getting them recognised locally. For instance, support a particular party nationally, your AM vote will match your Mayoral vote where possible regardless of whether you actually know who any of the AM candidates are and how they reflect their party's policies. This mostly serves parties like Green and UKIP.

Depends on the bit of Camden I guess, It's a pretty big borough. I'm in the Holborn & St. Pancras constituency, which is seen as a very safe Labour seat. Current MP is Keir Starmer, and before him it was Frank Dobson since the 80's.

From a couple of pages back, the story about the Afghan Interpreter.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2016-05-05/debates/160505104000493/AfghanInterpreters

That's very interesting, thanks.

Looks like Kahn has won in london, which I expected but it's a relief. I think the Goldsmith campaign wasn't just offensive and wrong, but backfired and lost him what little chance he had.