|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 11, 2013 8:44:19 GMT
You walked?  Funnily enough on Google maps directions it suggests a time of 2 hours and 12 minutes for walking that journey (based entirely on walking on the A23). This is obviously some kind of average as there must be a wide variation in the time it would take different people to walk that kind of distance |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 11, 2013 9:23:34 GMT
Clearly Google knows there is only one person loony enough to walk that distance, so it uses John's walking speed!
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 11, 2013 9:30:41 GMT
You walked? Funnily enough on Google maps directions it suggests a time of 2 hours and 12 minutes for walking that journey (based entirely on walking on the A23). This is obviously some kind of average as there must be a wide variation in the time it would take different people to walk that kind of distance Funnily enough when i looked it up on Google maps it said 2 hours 22 minutes. Presumably this is because I started from my home rather than the town centre. (I did indeed go along the A23 (London Road / Streatham Hight Road / Brixton Hill). You would not have written " " if you had remembered what I did last Saturday: I walked 11 miles from Croydon to Tate Modern (and another 11 miles back) in order to (a) buy a book I wanted (b) save money by not paying for a train ticket. The journey to walk to Brixton Hill is merely a shorter version of the journey to walk to Tate Modern (7 miles instead of 11). My journey to Tate Modern was along the same road (and Kennington Park Road) as far as Elephant & Castle, then London Road, then Blackfriars Road. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 14, 2013 8:55:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 15, 2013 12:55:18 GMT
I predict
Martin Tiedemann (Lab) 1400 (53.8%) (+11.2)
Andrew Child (Green) 500 (19.2%) (+2.3)
Liz Maffei (LD) 350 (13.5%) (-14.9)
Tim Briggs (Con) 250 (9.6%) (-2.5)
Elizabeth Jones (UKIP) 80 (1.9%)
Steve Nally (TUSC) 30 (1.1%)
Daniel Lambert (SPGB) 20 (0.8%)
|
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Jan 15, 2013 13:17:31 GMT
I think there should be a bird in that box Good Lord, they expect people to read that? |
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,589 
|
Post by cibwr on Jan 15, 2013 22:26:29 GMT
Actually I find it a bit refreshing, at least they try to say what they are about, even if its in tiny print (reminds me of the spartacists).
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 16, 2013 9:43:34 GMT
Pathetic bourgeois revisionist backsliders. Doesn't mention anything about the leadership of a vanguard party or the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
|
|
Adam
Non-Aligned
Posts: 82
|
Post by Adam on Jan 16, 2013 9:51:37 GMT
|
|
Adam
Non-Aligned
Posts: 82
|
Post by Adam on Jan 16, 2013 10:06:06 GMT
I predict Martin Tiedemann (Lab) 1400 (53.8%) (+11.2) Andrew Child (Green) 500 (19.2%) (+2.3) Liz Maffei (LD) 350 (13.5%) (-14.9) Tim Briggs (Con) 250 (9.6%) (-2.5) Elizabeth Jones (UKIP) 80 (1.9%) Steve Nally (TUSC) 30 (1.1%) Daniel Lambert (SPGB) 20 (0.8%) Youcould be (more or less right) except that TUSC are expecting to get 200 or so votes on the basis of the score of 292 that a Trotskyist candidate got in this ward in the 2002 local elections: www.lambeth.gov.uk/moderngov/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=75&RPID=17068017Incidentally, if you think that the SPGB is a Trotskyist vanguard party your knowledge of ultra-left politics is rather limited. But then not everybody is a leftwing train-spotter. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 16, 2013 10:36:23 GMT
Youcould be (more or less right) except that TUSC are expecting to get 200 or so votes on the basis of the score of 292 that a Trotskyist candidate got in this ward in the 2002 local elections: Small parties tend to get far fewer voted in single-vacancy by-elections than they do in three-vacancy main elections. Also, it is likely to be squeezed down by the low turnout and by the large number of candidates standing. Then it's a good thing that I don't think any such thing.  P.S. "Trotskyist vanguard party" is of course a contradiction. Trotsky was an individualist opportunist reactionary who had no skills in party leadership and who had no sense of adhering to Leninist discipline, and [continued on page 94] |
|
Adam
Non-Aligned
Posts: 82
|
Post by Adam on Jan 16, 2013 11:40:00 GMT
Small parties tend to get far fewer voted in single-vacancy by-elections than they do in three-vacancy main elections. Also, it is likely to be squeezed down by the low turnout and by the large number of candidates standing. I agree this analysis will be proved correct. ]Incidentally, if you think that the SPGB is a Trotskyist vanguard party your knowledge of ultra-left politics is rather limited. Then it's a good thing that I don't think any such thing. My apologies. I took this to be a reference to the SPGB but now realise you must have had TUSC in mind. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 17, 2013 10:58:01 GMT
My apologies. I took this to be a reference to the SPGB but now realise you must have had TUSC in mind. You are obviously getting confused. I wrote in response to the SPGB leaflet, specifically because it is obvious that the SPGB is *not* a Trotskyist vanguard party. You then wrote as if you somehow think that I think that the SPGB is a Trotskyist vanguard party, when I had just written that it clearly isn't. |
|
Adam
Non-Aligned
Posts: 82
|
Post by Adam on Jan 17, 2013 15:06:10 GMT
You are obviously getting confused. Yes I admit I was, but now I see clearly. You were posting what a Trotskyist might have posted about the SPGB leaflet. Fair enough, but what confused me was that the immediately preceding post had said it read like something from the Trotskyist Spartacist group. I suppose the lesson is that irony doesn't always work |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 17, 2013 15:19:45 GMT
You were posting what a Trotskyist might have posted about the SPGB leaflet. No I wasn't. I was posting what any normal objective person would think about the SPGB leaflet. A Trotskyist would fall into the trap of thinking that the SPGB *is* a vanguard revolutionary party, when everybody else realises it isn't. That comment was from cibwr, not me. |
|
Adam
Non-Aligned
Posts: 82
|
Post by Adam on Jan 17, 2013 16:19:23 GMT
I was posting what any normal objective person would think about the SPGB leaflet. A Trotskyist would fall into the trap of thinking that the SPGB *is* a vanguard revolutionary party, when everybody else realises it isn't. In which case the Trotskyist must be pretty thick as at one point the leaflet says: Anyway, we will know later tonight what the people of Brixton Hill think and whether it's the Trotskyists or the SPGB who get the wooden spoon. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jan 17, 2013 21:36:06 GMT
I think there should be a bird in that box Good Lord, they expect people to read that? I love the fact that paragraph 952 starts: "If you have read this far ....." ;D |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 18, 2013 0:14:53 GMT
Lab 1593 (62.6%) +20.0%
Green 344 (13.5%) -3.4%
LD 274 (10.8%) -17.6%
Con 164 (6.4%) -5.7%
TUSC 72 (2.8%)
UKIP 63 (2.5%)
SPGB 34 (1.3%)
|
|
Adam
Non-Aligned
Posts: 82
|
Post by Adam on Jan 18, 2013 10:16:27 GMT
I predict Martin Tiedemann (Lab) 1400 (53.8%) (+11.2) Andrew Child (Green) 500 (19.2%) (+2.3) Liz Maffei (LD) 350 (13.5%) (-14.9) Tim Briggs (Con) 250 (9.6%) (-2.5) Elizabeth Jones (UKIP) 80 (1.9%) Steve Nally (TUSC) 30 (1.1%) Daniel Lambert (SPGB) 20 (0.8%) Result:: Lab 1593 (62.6%) +20.0% Green 344 (13.5%) -3.4% LD 274 (10.8%) -17.6% Con 164 (6.5%) -5.6% TUSC 72 (2.8%) UKIP 63 (2.5%) SPGB 34 (1.3%) Turnout: 22.8% What went wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 18, 2013 11:14:41 GMT
I demand a full, independent, Judge-led inquiry into how someone living in one borough can submit predictions for a local byelection in another borough that turn out to be a few percentage points different from the way people actually voted in a secret ballot. |
|
