April 26, 2014 by trialbyjeory
I’ve never tried this before so it is a bit of an experiment, but following the example of The Wharf, here’s your chance to ‘vote’ for the next Tower Hamlets Mayor.
I’ve listed the answers in the order they will appear on the May 22 ballot paper.
| mo ali on The funding cloud over Tower H… | |
| Facts on The funding cloud over Tower H… | |
| stepney_shaz on The funding cloud over Tower H… | |
| themadmullahofbrickl… on The funding cloud over Tower H… | |
| Jay Kay on The funding cloud over Tower H… | |
| madsvid on The funding cloud over Tower H… | |
| ManOnThe339 on The funding cloud over Tower H… | |
| Cllr Andrew Wood, Ca… on The funding cloud over Tower H… |
I’m glad to see you spotted the hint…… 😀
Oh – interesting – UKIP overtakes Lutfur!
One choice is missing
When I get time later this year, I’m going to write (programme actually) an online voting system that uses postcodes and some IP addresses to exclude people from all around the world casting their online vote, sometimes on multiple occasions.
No reason to let people in China or Chile or in Russia or Rwanda or even in Tunbridge Wells or Taunton to vote multiple times from the same IP address in a Tower Hamlets poll 🙂
Curious Cat
Polldaddy allows some tweaks which prevent polls being distorted. Not sure whether Ted implemented them though……
Looks like the trolls got to the Wharf survey..either that or the city boys are having a laugh…..my thoughts….the latter knowing those fellas
Lutfurites are pushing it v hard on social media
I guess that means UKIP hasn’t picked up on the Wharf one yet……
I wonder whether they’ll be pushing your poll hard as well – did you use the option to block more than one vote from each ISP?
Yes
Don’t you mean IP addresses and not Internet Service Provider (ISP) 🙂
Am banning them as well. The lot of them.!
I do indeed – well spotted! I always manage to mix those two up!
How about asking the Wharf whether they’ve got a block on more than one vote from an IP?
Or you could just save the Wharf’s time by testing it yourself and trying to cast a second vote from your own IP.
Guess what I did right after I’d written my comment – and yes the Wharf Poll is fatally flawed because they’ve not got it set up to overcome the usual hack
Which means that lead by Lutfur is totally fictitious…..
The Wharf poll can be easily hacked, just clear your browser’s cookie cache and refresh the page. So it cannot be taken seriously. initially though, before it had been more widely picked up, the results looked in line with the national polls, with UKIP a strong third.
Ted’s one measures the opinions of the readers of Ted’s blog, until it is broadcast to all party supporters that is. Shall I get it linked from our Facebook page to bump up Nick’s vote? Not sure I can be arsed.
UKIP ahead of Tory is correct though, and reflects what we are finding out on the campaign.
Did anyone hear me today with the megaphone poked out the window of our UKIP Tower Hamlets yellow taxi? That’s right, we are going old school.
Tories need to be very worried on the Isle of Dogs, we have strong support there.
Seems to me if Labour and UKIP did a reciprocal second vote there’s some considerable scope to shut out Lutfur from picking up the second votes.
Somehow I can’t quite see that happeningin terms of any sort of agreement – but it would be jolly interesting if that’s what in effect happened.
No, you don’t. You’re busy at your war Cabinet and shouting out of a taxi, while practically every Islander knows how hard Tim, Glo, Peter and Zara work for the Island.
UKIP is a protest vote – a protest against the national status quo.
Eventually protesters stop protesting, so where will UKIP get its future votes?
Curious Cat
Pro-EU 🙂
:-0
There is definitely a protest element to the UKIP vote, and we have now replaced the Lib Dems as the repository for that, which is why they are now permanently stuck behind us in the polls (and soon in party membership numbers too). It must be a disappointment for a party to realise that most of the people who voted for them did not do so because they actually supported anything that they stood for, but because they were not-Labour and not-Tory.
In addition to the protest element, UKIP is fusing something new; it is emerging as the main non-progressive party. David Cameron has taken the Tories into the crowded marketplace of progressivism and that is why Tories can now never form another majority government. The major shift has occurred.
I am a former Thatcherite Tory, my own views have developed over the years and I now describe myself as a minarchist libertarian. The younger members of UKIP (I am 41 – that is young for UKIP?!) are from the libertarian Right. The older members are social conservatives. And the big new unknown is the patriotic working class vote, former old-Labour, this is where the party is pushing hard for supporters – hence the heavy focus on immigration. Go to any UKIP branch meeting in London and you will see that it is largely lower-middle and working class, “blue collar” if you will. Affluent former Tories such as myself are the minority. And nor is it true that the former Tories are in the main the branch chairmen, pulling the strings.
But the very odd thing about UKIP is that people from these diverse political and socioeconomic backgrounds have come together to find common cause – libertarians, blue collar workers, old Labour, social conservatives. The resulting mix is not ideologically pure, but is generally small-state, low-tax, patriotic, anti-EU, pro-social-protection (understood as a safety net for the genuinely needy).
It is obviously not progressivism, and it is only 50% libertarianism (but if we could implement 50% of a libertarian agenda in Britain it would be transformative). As I said, I think it is something completely new.
I’ve got no insight whatsoever as to people at UKIP meetings but your analysis sounds pretty much what I had read into what was happening at the last election. There’s a lot of people with a vote who had been looking for a party which espoused their views – which I think I’d characterise as somewhere along the lines of “Little Englander” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Englander but with a more positive slant.
It seems to be becoming the repository of all the votes of people who don’t believe either of the big parties are listening to them.
I think all parties would do well to remember there’s an awfully big space around the middle ground when this includes people who are disaffected by existing parties. UKIP seems to have created something that will mean people get off their backsides and go down the polling station.
It’s my belief that the reason Lutfur got in last time wasn’t so much about the votes he generated so much as the people who didn’t vote at all – and he would do well to remember that.
Grow up little boy; politics in Tower Hamlets is not about childish ideas of “the state should wither away to nothing!” ‘libertarianism’ – it’s about the real loathsome waste of millions by Rahman on fascistic and Islamist groups. You’ve no idea about this; your platitudes mean nothing.
If it is true and Lutfur’s lot are pushing hard on social media then this poll is encouraging. I can’t understand how the TUSC, which is basically the Militant/Socialist Party are doing so well. Are you sure Stewart Madewell hasn’t found a way around your security Ted?
Rahman and his supporters must be desperate if they take the Wharf poll that seriously.
In true LBTH style – vote early and vote often!
Hey Snowman,
That’s a LABOUR PARTY copyright slogan. They use it as often as they can to try to win local elections. In my area Labour had a fleet of black cars bring fraudulent imposters to vote – but sadly Labour still didn’t win 🙂
Curious Cat.
Maybe Rahman’s supporters think The Wharf votes will be included in the official poll.
I think UKIP will come second.
Lib Dems have no chance and conservative is in turmoil with peter golds
Tell me, why did you choose the name Andy as your name for this blog?
Don’t you mean Conservatives ‘are’ in turmoil. And anyway “Andy” I don’t know why you think Peter Golds has put the Conservatives in “turmoil” because he is a well respected councillor who has done more than most to shine a light on the FILTH seeping through every layer at Tower Hamlets. I think you are working on the disinformation program…
PS – now answer Ted’s question
Ted
why dont you get a totally neutral third party to carry out a survey?
I mean Wharf isnt exactly neutral but that vote Lutfur won hands down. And you blog its the like of me (local politics involved) and mostly either with you or some Lutfur followers read…cant be exactly representative??
Would you like to pay for it? Maybe I should ask for a council grant.
Hi Ted
I’m not on any other blogs.
Why what’s wrong with the name Andy?
Nothing, just curious why a Lutfurite who has one of those fake twitter egg accounts picks that as a name, just like Dave Snow, Tommy Smith etc etc
Are you serious?
I’ll pay if it’s a genuine third party poll…
Maybe split between you and me what you say
You get me a quote.
Ok got a quote
I think this will be the real deal….a genuine third party agent
Look Let’s be frank wharf paper was a better reflection than your blog which is mainly labour/con cllrs
So I would say roughly 49 people voted on your poll. Not bad considering it’s a local blog
Which polling company and quote and sample size and method please?
You are an illiterate Bengali, and Bengalis aren’t called ‘Andy’. Now bugger off, you loathsome fascist.
Language, please, everyone.
Thank you Ted. I think no need for vulgar language. It only reflects one’s inability and insecurity. …whs
So are you calling yourself Andy to deliberately and calculatingly try to distort opinion… if you say weird things using the name “Andy” people will interpret your comments differently than if you just named yourself “Abdul” or something close to your real Bengali name. Your tactic would be get “Andy” to say how much he loves Lutfur and how little he thinks of John and then maybe people will think “omfg there is an actual non-Bengali supporter of the Mayor (who is not Carole Swords or William Joyce) perhaps I should ditch all my convictions and now follow the herd…” whereas if you were really called Abdul or Alibor or Ferdous or something closer to reality people might just consider you were another drone getting a kickback from saying what you’re saying… hard to know what is worse really.
@You couldn’t make it up
“[UKIP] […] which I think I’d characterise as somewhere along the lines of “Little Englander” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Englander but with a more positive slant.”
The problem with this description is that UKIP policy is not protectionist and is clearly pro-global-free-trade. We see EU/Single Market membership and the attendant restrictions and regulations as a barrier to the liberal economic agenda that we want to pursue. UKIP is the most “free market” of all the parties.
mwebberukip wrote
That is what is wrong with UKIP.
Free-market means slave wages, NHS abolished and replaced by expensive pay-in-advance with lots of cover exclusion clauses “medical care”.
No free fire service unless the likely damage threatens the interests of the super rich.
No pothole repairs in roads housing the less wealthy.
Free Market is entirely selfish and anti-community in all aspects. We live in societies that need people to work together for the community benefit. Free Market is so despised that in very poor countries the Fair Trade movement has sprung-up to protect the less wealthy from the greed, exploitation and arrogance of the Free Market pirates.
Free Market is against Social Justice. Just look at the financial disasters created by Free Market banks helped by Gordon Brown’s refusal to have proper regulation of the banks.
lacks a social conscious. Nein Danke !
Curious Cat
The “Free Market” is what human beings do naturally in the absence of state coercion in the economic sphere.
It is true that we need more than the Market though. In a free society there will also be families, cooperatives, charity, etc. It cannot all be a market and libertarians do not claim that. We just want to remove the coercion and maximise free choices.
Mark, who will your second preference vote go to?
We are not giving any instructions concerning second preference votes. We are just encouraging people to vote for Nicholas McQueen.
Personally, I will not use my second preference.
mwebberukip wrote
What you call “state coercion” is responsible for
* minimum wage
* banning the sale of tobacco and alcohol to the under fives, and older children
* banning the sending up chimney stacks of small children
* banning the commercial sex exploitation of children
* children to go to school and get an education
*
* banning animal growth hormones from meat products consumed by the public
* banning retailers selling dangerous fireworks to small children
* banning motorists using bald tires that can’t properly brake especially on wet roads
Oh Dear. UKIP can’t tolerate all this state coercion preventing free unregulated opportunities to exploit the public for the commercial gain of the rich and powerful.
The state is far from perfect but its all we got between the bad pirates and the public.
I thought the local election was about the incumbent mayor ?
Curious Cat : a silly caricature of libertarianism, not worth a serious reply.
A Rahman-Biggs troll-fest, then a tedious UKIP “libertarian” internet nerd fest to follow.
Thanks Ted for diverting these morons into click-bait!
How many votes so far Ted?
John Biggs got a shock this afternoon while he was rummaging in his car boot near to his house, and one of our UKIP vehicles drove past with Nicholas McQueen on the loudhailer. We weren’t quick enough to photograph the expression on his face . . .
Biggs is a bit hopeless. His main argument is ‘vote for me because I am not LUTFUR’. The guy is well past his sell by date, appearing completely out of depth in this mayoral election campaign.
He is a nice chap, but not fit for purpose. Labour should have picked a candidate who is competent enough to stand up to Lutfur and deal with the UKIP. He looks like the poor, little guy who is in the wrong place at the wrong time.
He probably had a good chuckle at the banality of you guys screaming for him to vote UKIP. You should have been at home eating a Sunday Beef Roast with Yorkshire pudding and all the [english] trimmings.
I voted UKIP in this pole deliberately knowing I will not vote for them in the election. Why? Because I want people to think they are a credible alternative so the anti Lutfur vote gets split. Am I sorry? Like hell I am. Why am I saying this? Because I don’t give a toss what people think and I want them to know that. And if I was commenting here for the first time, I’d call myself Andy too.
@grave maurice
Focus on the debate darling. .. Don’t get your knickers in a twist. You’ll get lost in the details.
i’m just doing what a lot of white right wing folks do here ie hide behind ‘Asian’ names to make comments so Lutfurites think ‘Oh no there is a bengali’ making a negative comment. …
Am not sure that happens actually; syntax is the biggest clue. Separately, curious why those who oppose Lutfur are assumed to be white and Right wing. It’s a bit lazy and a bit thick, really. If you look at a lot of the comments by Lutfurites on social media, they’re barmy Right wing.
They don’t have any coherent political philosophy.
I’m sat looking at the 67% who aren’t voting for Lutfur – should get interesting come the redistribution of second votes
Can anyone explain how the second votes work? I would like to know whether it is better to vote only once or twice (or more). Thanks
From Parliament website:
Supplementary Vote (SV)
The Supplementary Vote system is used to elect the Mayor of London and other elected mayors in England and Wales.
The SV system is very similar to the AV system. Under SV, voters are limited to a first and second preference choice. A voter marks a cross in one column for their first preference candidate and another cross in a second column for their second preference (if they wish to do so).
The ballot papers are counted and if a candidate received more than 50 per cent of the first preference votes on the first count, then they are elected.
If no candidate reaches the 50 per cent threshold, the two candidates with the highest number of votes are retained and the other candidates are eliminated. The second preferences on the ballot papers of the eliminated candidates are counted and any cast for the two remaining candidates are transferred. The candidate with the most votes at the end of this process is elected.
So, those Tory, Ukip and other non-Lutfur parties who want the mayor out are being urged to give John Biggs their second preference vote.
A Tory voter would never give Biggs second choice. UKIP would probably come third. It’ll be interesting to see where UKIP voters’ second choice go to. It will not be Labour or Tory, because they are protest votes against the establishment. Strangely, I can see UKIP voters giving Lutfur second choice, because Lutfur is the one who irks the establishment the most.
A very desperate Ted.
Yes keep the pressure up on your labour buddies Ted. They need all the help they can get.
When did you become their campaigner? I thought you were meant to be a respected Whitehall journalist?
Maybe they should include your contribution in their election expense.
I shall make a note of that.
Not sure how reporting how people will vote tactically counts as campaigning? Please explain.
That said, am more than happy to go out campaigning with any candidate! Just drop me a line. Alibor’s already declined my offer!
The real issue for voters is: “Do you just want to make a protest, or do you want to affect the outcome of the mayoral election?”.
The supplementary vote system enables you to do both.
Most observers accept that the only genuine possible victors are Rahman or Biggs..
If you think that both are as bad as one another, it may be rational to cast both votes for others. But I have spoken to supporters of various other parties who agree that it is important to remove Lutfur Rahman from office, and will therefore give their 2nd preference to Biggs.
Andrew Conway, second preference votes are only important if the top two are neck and neck.
This is the situation in TH – Lutfur’s voters have strengthened in their resolve following the Panorama shambles. They will come out in numbers.
Biggs’ traditional Labour voters will not come out. Labour voters have been disillusioned for quite sometime. They do not view Labour as the party of the working class anymore since Tony Blair destroyed the Labour party by moving it centre (adopting a populist agenda). Some working class white Eastenders will come out to vote UKIP because it is the protest party at this moment.
Biggs will not even poll enough for all the second preference to get him over the line.
But Lutfur’s opponents have also strengthened their resolve.
Massive subsidies for Muslim, Bangladeshi and Somali organisations, assets sold to political supporters at knock down prices or premises rented at well below market rates, lavish expenses for the mayor and his councillors, refusal to answer questions in the council chamber, competent officers paid large sums of redundancy money to be replaced by political placemen – not popular with everybody.