Richmond Park

[Deleted]

Nov 7, 2016 16:33:35 GMT Merseymike said:

Nov 7, 2016 14:57:13 GMT @benjamin said:

I think a lot of Greens basically expected Labour to win in 2015.

But why should that make any difference?

Or to put it another way, I suspect that many are a bit spooked by the aftermath of the EU referendum (perhaps moreso than by the actual result). I've also encountered very few Greens in the UK with anything positive to say about Jill Stein this time round, perhaps for similar reasons. I can at least argue that Scottish politics is tangential to all this, but would I stick with the GPEW if I went south? I genuinely don't know any more (though perversely, a big reason for doing so would be that I think Corbyn is hopeless).

[greenchristian]

Nov 6, 2016 12:25:53 GMT Adrian said:

Not an original thought, but there's irony here in the Greens standing down at an election being fought to a large extent on green issues, where all three main party candidates have co-opted the green message and where a Green candidate would help to differentiate the positions.

Have to say that the view on the Green forum here is pretty unanimous that we shouldn't have stood down here, and that the progressive alliance idea is not a good thing for Green politics. We should be standing here, and I am embarrassed that we aren't.

Nov 7, 2016 14:03:00 GMT finsobruce said:

Is there any particular reason that the greens seem to be having a complete crisis of confidence in their existence as a party at the moment?

It does seem to be the fashionable thing at the moment.

I think the fact that Caroline and Jonathan decided to fight their leadership campaign on the (completely unworkable) progressive alliance thing, and then won massively, is a big part of the problem here. Not sure why they decided to do that, but attempting to implement it is inevitably going to create a crisis of confidence in parts of the party. Especially when other "progressive" parties clearly show no sign of being willing to give us anything in return for officially throwing our support behind them in some places.

[gwynthegriff]

Nov 7, 2016 14:57:13 GMT @benjamin said:

Nov 7, 2016 14:03:00 GMT finsobruce said:

Is there any particular reason that the greens seem to be having a complete crisis of confidence in their existence as a party at the moment?

I think a lot of Greens basically expected Labour to win in 2015.

JFTFY

[maxque]

Nov 7, 2016 17:05:28 GMT @benjamin said:

Nov 7, 2016 16:33:35 GMT Merseymike said:

But why should that make any difference?

Or to put it another way, I suspect that many are a bit spooked by the aftermath of the EU referendum (perhaps moreso than by the actual result). I've also encountered very few Greens in the UK with anything positive to say about Jill Stein this time round, perhaps for similar reasons. I can at least argue that Scottish politics is tangential to all this, but would I stick with the GPEW if I went south? I genuinely don't know any more (though perversely, a big reason for doing so would be that I think Corbyn is hopeless).

They have nothing positive to say about Jill Stein because she is totally bonkers.

She is in the wifi causes cancer crowd, for example.

[greenchristian]

Nov 7, 2016 22:28:27 GMT maxque said:

Nov 7, 2016 17:05:28 GMT @benjamin said:

Or to put it another way, I suspect that many are a bit spooked by the aftermath of the EU referendum (perhaps moreso than by the actual result). I've also encountered very few Greens in the UK with anything positive to say about Jill Stein this time round, perhaps for similar reasons. I can at least argue that Scottish politics is tangential to all this, but would I stick with the GPEW if I went south? I genuinely don't know any more (though perversely, a big reason for doing so would be that I think Corbyn is hopeless).

They have nothing positive to say about Jill Stein because she is totally bonkers.

She is in the wifi causes cancer crowd, for example.

I have to say that if I was a US citizen, I don't think I'd vote for her.

[independentukip]

To be fair to Ms Stein (even though this is totally off topic):

www.jill2016.com/jill_stein_answers_science_questions

Dr. Stein said in response to a question about wireless internet in schools: “We should not be subjecting kids’ brains especially to that… We don’t follow that issue in this country, but in Europe, where they do, they have good precautions around wireless, maybe not good enough.” What precautions should be taken around wireless internet and why?

What actually happened is that a parent raised concerns about the possible health effects of WiFi radiation on developing children, and I agreed that more research is needed. It may surprise many people that over 200 scientific experts in the field have called for more research into the health effects of radiation from devices like cellphones and WiFi, especially on developing children, and a number of countries have banned or restricted these technologies in schools. These concerns were amplified by a recent National Institutes of Health study that provided “some of the strongest evidence to date that such exposure [to the type of radiation emitted from cell phones and wireless devices] is associated with the formation of rare cancers…”

Scientists don’t know for sure if these technologies are safe for children, and as a doctor, I’d rather take precautions until the research is more conclusive. Protecting children’s health and respecting the scientific process is more important to me than giving simple, politically correct answers.

[froome]

Nov 8, 2016 0:51:49 GMT independentukip said:

To be fair to Ms Stein (even though this is totally off topic):

www.jill2016.com/jill_stein_answers_science_questions

Dr. Stein said in response to a question about wireless internet in schools: “We should not be subjecting kids’ brains especially to that… We don’t follow that issue in this country, but in Europe, where they do, they have good precautions around wireless, maybe not good enough.” What precautions should be taken around wireless internet and why?

What actually happened is that a parent raised concerns about the possible health effects of WiFi radiation on developing children, and I agreed that more research is needed. It may surprise many people that over 200 scientific experts in the field have called for more research into the health effects of radiation from devices like cellphones and WiFi, especially on developing children, and a number of countries have banned or restricted these technologies in schools. These concerns were amplified by a recent National Institutes of Health study that provided “some of the strongest evidence to date that such exposure [to the type of radiation emitted from cell phones and wireless devices] is associated with the formation of rare cancers…”

Scientists don’t know for sure if these technologies are safe for children, and as a doctor, I’d rather take precautions until the research is more conclusive. Protecting children’s health and respecting the scientific process is more important to me than giving simple, politically correct answers.

Quite. The precautionary principle is important, especially when we are talking about imposing undue risks onto children.

[hedgehog]

You beat me to it froome the precautionary principe, a key part of Green policy, with both mobile phones and WIFI, these are new developments we just don't know if there could be potential health concerns longterm.

I was going to go on to another criticism of Jill Stein, that she's is accused of being an 'anti-vaxxer', www.jill2016.com/baseless_anti_vax_attacks_against_dr_jill_stein_distract_from_concerns , I consider her comments justified, where funding and regulation are so closely tired, there will be concerns.

I would vote for Jill over Hillary, without hesitating, the US Greens are broadly inline with Green parties worldwide, although in a tight state race, I would probably vote Hillary to keep out Trump.

[Deleted]

To be honest, the criticism I see of Jill Stein and the US Greens from many of my Green friends in the UK is more that she/they shouldn't really be bothering with the Presidency at all, and should instead focus on getting people elected to state legislatures and the like. Frankly, it's astonishing that they've only ever had four seats in state legislatures in the US, of whom two were defectors from the Democrats, and of whom two defected to the Democrats very shortly after getting elected, and yet they seem to view getting on the presidential ballot as a major victory. There are some parallels for here I think.

[hedgehog]

Nov 8, 2016 9:55:58 GMT @benjamin said:

To be honest, the criticism I see of Jill Stein and the US Greens from many of my Green friends in the UK is more that she/they shouldn't really be bothering with the Presidency at all, and should instead focus on getting people elected to state legislatures and the like. Frankly, it's astonishing that they've only ever had four seats in state legislatures in the US, of whom two were defectors from the Democrats, and of whom two defected to the Democrats very shortly after getting elected, and yet they seem to view getting on the presidential ballot as a major victory. There are some parallels for here I think.

Thats a valid point, be interesting to know how much time and effort we put into local council campaigns verses parliament seats where keeping the deposit is considered a victory.

[Tony Otim]

Nov 7, 2016 23:59:52 GMT greenchristian said:

Nov 7, 2016 22:28:27 GMT maxque said:

They have nothing positive to say about Jill Stein because she is totally bonkers.

She is in the wifi causes cancer crowd, for example.

I have to say that if I was a US citizen, I don't think I'd vote for her.

I would as long as I felt it was highly unlikely Trump was going to win in my state. I probably wouldn't if there was a decent Democratic candidate.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

SOPN: www.richmond.gov.uk/notice_of_poll_spn_sops_richmond_park_by_election_2016.pdf

[mboy]

Not that many candidates for a big by-election. And Zac at the top of the ballot too. He will be pleased.

[greenhert]

Only eight candidates....I wonder who David Powell is?

[froome]

Nov 8, 2016 17:09:53 GMT mboy said:

Not that many candidates for a big by-election. And Zac at the top of the ballot too. He will be pleased.

With a first name like Zac, he was at risk had someone else called Goldsmith stood as an Independent here and been just above him. That would have been interesting.

[Lord Twaddleford]

The One Love party seeking to lose another election deposit I see...

[timrollpickering]

Nov 8, 2016 17:32:33 GMT froome said:

Nov 8, 2016 17:09:53 GMT mboy said:

Not that many candidates for a big by-election. And Zac at the top of the ballot too. He will be pleased.

With a first name like Zac, he was at risk had someone else called Goldsmith stood as an Independent here and been just above him. That would have been interesting.

Zacharias is actually his second name. His first name is Frank.

[No Offence Alan]

Nov 8, 2016 9:14:41 GMT hedgehog said:

You beat me to it froome the precautionary principe, a key part of Green policy, with both mobile phones and WIFI, these are new developments we just don't know if there could be potential health concerns longterm.

Does your "precautionary principle" extend to immigration?

[iainbhx]

Nov 8, 2016 20:09:04 GMT @jamesdowden said:

Nov 8, 2016 17:44:44 GMT Lord Twaddleford said:

The One Love party seeking to lose another election deposit I see...

I dare say the Maharaja, if indeed he is a real maharaja, can afford it.

The pretender to Kashmir Karan Singh lives in Delhi and is a member of the indian upper house.

[Deleted]

Constituency Map