|
|
Post by akmd on Dec 4, 2016 13:01:52 GMT
It certainly is. Thank you very much for posting this.
Not surprised to see my local area (SW London) feature prominently in those lists. I am, however, surprised to see 2 of the Lewisham seats and Dulwich and West Norwood on the second list but not Vauxhall or Streatham. I'd have thought both of those would have pretty high numbers of young professionals as part of their demographics. There is now a critical mass of centre-left middle class professionals in that part of SE London who have been priced out of inner and outer SW London, in addition to the pre-existing traditional middle class areas of Dulwich Village and West Dulwich. The epicentre is the now gentrified Lordship Lane and the until recently 'reasonably' priced period housing in East Dulwich. Now that house prices have risen through the stratosphere and the East London Line has been extended the young professionals have spread further out into the adjacent areas of Forest Hill, Crofton Park, Honor Oak, Peckham Rye and Bellenden Village where there is plentiful period housing and gentrification is well underway. In time it has potential to become the south east London version of the Muswell Hill, Crouch End, Hornsey belt. In contrast Streatham has struggled to recover its 1950s heyday, the rail services are not as frequent as from Forest Hill or Peckham Rye and the traffic dominated High Road is not conducive to creating a 'villagey' hub with small businesses that attract the middle classes. I was aware of the gentrification going on in Forest Hill and East Dulwich but I hadn't thought that it had quite cut through yet. Obviously, it now has. Lordship Lane certainly looks very different from 20 years ago when I used to pass through on my way to school (for various reasons I won't go into, I was schooled outside my home borough during my secondary years). In those days, that thoroughfare was much more down at heel. I certainly think it will become a SE London equivalent to Crouch End just like nearby Crystal Palace seems to be becoming like a similar equivalent to Muswell Hill and is even geographically similar to it. Agreed about Streatham. Despite some nice period properties (especially towards Tooting Bec Common), the High Road really lets it down and the rail services as you say aren't brilliant to say the least. It might start to pick up if the Overground ever takes over the stations there but even if it does, the main thoroughfare will still be a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Dec 4, 2016 17:37:05 GMT
I was aware of the gentrification going on in Forest Hill and East Dulwich but I hadn't thought that it had quite cut through yet. Obviously, it now has. Lordship Lane certainly looks very different from 20 years ago when I used to pass through on my way to school (for various reasons I won't go into, I was schooled outside my home borough during my secondary years). In those days, that thoroughfare was much more down at heel. I certainly think it will become a SE London equivalent to Crouch End just like nearby Crystal Palace seems to be becoming like a similar equivalent to Muswell Hill and is even geographically similar to it. Agreed about Streatham. Despite some nice period properties (especially towards Tooting Bec Common), the High Road really lets it down and the rail services as you say aren't brilliant to say the least. It might start to pick up if the Overground ever takes over the stations there but even if it does, the main thoroughfare will still be a problem. You're from almost the same neck of the woods as I'm from, or am I misremembering? (I largely grew up in Balham) |
|
|
|
Post by akmd on Dec 4, 2016 18:37:35 GMT
You're from almost the same neck of the woods as I'm from, or am I misremembering? (I largely grew up in Balham) I'm from Battersea so same borough. I do know Balham very well as with the rest of Wandsworth. It's only really the Roehampton end that I don't know particularly well. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Dec 4, 2016 19:46:03 GMT
So Tofu-Latte Land was minding its pocket in 2015 and gave Zac a massive majority; then protected its tender EU feelings in the Referendum by 72%; and then discarded a tosser for a more seriously right-on anti-democrat to defeat Brexit. They might well revert to Conservative at the GE to protect their pockets. So, yes, 'They are Sophisticated'! In all senses of that abused word. At a general election most people are voting to elect a government. A by election is a completely different beast and people vote for all sorts of different reasons knowing that it isn't going change who governs the country, |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Dec 4, 2016 22:31:01 GMT
So Tofu-Latte Land was minding its pocket in 2015 and gave Zac a massive majority; then protected its tender EU feelings in the Referendum by 72%; and then discarded a tosser for a more seriously right-on anti-democrat to defeat Brexit. They might well revert to Conservative at the GE to protect their pockets. So, yes, 'They are Sophisticated'! In all senses of that abused word. At a general election most people are voting to elect a government. A by election is a completely different beast and people vote for all sorts of different reasons knowing that it isn't going change who governs the country, Quite so Richard. I'll just slip out for some more eggs to suck. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2016 23:34:16 GMT
Sarah Olney seems to be shaping up as a potential embarrassment to the Lib Dems.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Dec 4, 2016 23:49:13 GMT
Sarah Olney seems to be shaping up as a potential embarrassment to the Lib Dems. In two weeks time she will be just as anonymous as the rest the Lib Dem's parliamentary group. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 5, 2016 10:00:34 GMT
Sarah Olney seems to be shaping up as a potential embarrassment to the Lib Dems. Is this based on anything more than one sleep deprived interview with a confirmed troll? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2016 10:18:56 GMT
She has form in contradicting herself in successive sentences, attempting to delete embarrassing material from her blog and thereby creating more embarrassment, and generally showing herself up as pretty clueless. The Guido piece is characteristic - see articles in the "Evening Standard", Labour List etc.
She has only been a party member for a year, so I suppose may improve.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 5, 2016 11:13:10 GMT
Fair enough, I had forgotten the (later deleted) gushing praise of our new PM  But we are encouraged to think getting people into the HoC with relatively little experience of politics (rather than the 20-year SPADs/"researchers"/lobbyists both Labour and Tories seem a bit too fond of) is a good thing, in many ways it is but stuff like this is also then pretty inevitable. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2016 11:46:03 GMT
It certainly is. Thank you very much for posting this.
Not surprised to see my local area (SW London) feature prominently in those lists. I am, however, surprised to see 2 of the Lewisham seats and Dulwich and West Norwood on the second list but not Vauxhall or Streatham. I'd have thought both of those would have pretty high numbers of young professionals as part of their demographics. There is now a critical mass of centre-left middle class professionals in that part of SE London who have been priced out of inner and outer SW London, in addition to the pre-existing traditional middle class areas of Dulwich Village and West Dulwich. The epicentre is the now gentrified Lordship Lane and the until recently 'reasonably' priced period housing in East Dulwich. Now that house prices have risen through the stratosphere and the East London Line has been extended the young professionals have spread further out into the adjacent areas of Forest Hill, Crofton Park, Honor Oak, Peckham Rye and Bellenden Village where there is plentiful period housing and gentrification is well underway. In time it has potential to become the south east London version of the Muswell Hill, Crouch End, Hornsey belt. In contrast Streatham has struggled to recover its 1950s heyday, the rail services are not as frequent as from Forest Hill or Peckham Rye and the traffic dominated High Road is not conducive to creating a 'villagey' hub with small businesses that attract the middle classes. This is true (I am in this demographic and chose to live in Forest Hill for basically this reason i.e. it's a decent area, relatively affordable - though less so than when I moved - and well connected). I would say in fact that housing costs have pushed the wave of gentrification even further out now, to the likes of Penge, Catford and some parts of north Croydon - though the tendency of local businesses to trail the arrival of gentrifiers mean they don't "look" much like it yet. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,692
|
Post by mboy on Dec 5, 2016 11:53:38 GMT
Fair enough, I had forgotten the (later deleted) gushing praise of our new PM But we are encouraged to think getting people into the HoC with relatively little experience of politics (rather than the 20-year SPADs/"researchers"/lobbyists both Labour and Tories seem a bit too fond of) is a good thing, in many ways it is but stuff like this is also then pretty inevitable. This is one of the many contradicting demands the public puts on politicians isn't it? We demand that they are not career politicians, and then when they act with inexperience we tear them down. We demand that they have a sense of humour and then when they joke we slate them. We demand that they are like us but when they act like us we shout at them. Olney is fairly smart and very energetic. This already puts her in the top half of all MPs in Westminster. She is also very young for an MP, and so will grow substantially with experience, which will come. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Dec 5, 2016 20:23:37 GMT
Fair enough, I had forgotten the (later deleted) gushing praise of our new PM But we are encouraged to think getting people into the HoC with relatively little experience of politics (rather than the 20-year SPADs/"researchers"/lobbyists both Labour and Tories seem a bit too fond of) is a good thing, in many ways it is but stuff like this is also then pretty inevitable. This is one of the many contradicting demands the public puts on politicians isn't it? We demand that they are not career politicians, and then when they act with inexperience we tear them down. We demand that they have a sense of humour and then when they joke we slate them. We demand that they are like us but when they act like us we shout at them. Olney is fairly smart and very energetic. This already puts her in the top half of all MPs in Westminster. She is also very young for an MP, and so will grow substantially with experience, which will come. Also the praise for Theresa May has to be put in the context of the bullet of Andrea Leadsom just having been dodged! Deleting things from websites is just normal - Theresa did it with all her pro Heathrow comments, and Goldsmith removed his letter to constituents before the referendum while claiming he had not campaigned on Brexit... Sarah Olney seemed genuinely embarrassed that those comments had been deleted tbh |
|
|
|
Post by thirdchill on Dec 23, 2016 10:12:01 GMT
This is one of the many contradicting demands the public media puts on politicians isn't it? FTFY. It's driven by the media, they print contradictory headlines to this effect, castigating amateurish behaviour then complaining that it is all people who have been heavily involved in mainstream politics for years. And most papers are totally unashamed of the contradictions between what they publish. A lot of people tend to not get too exercised over this sort of thing, and when they do they usually hold either one opinion or the other, not both contradicting opinions at the same time (with a few exceptions of course). |
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Jan 12, 2017 12:00:17 GMT
Buzzfeed are reporting the following spend:
Zac: £95,000
LD: £98,970
Lab: £20,000
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 12, 2017 12:02:42 GMT
Surprised we spent that much - quite expensive on a £s per vote ratio!
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jan 12, 2017 12:28:15 GMT
Buzzfeed are reporting the following spend: Zac: £95,000 LD: £98,970 Lab: £20,000 We really need the by-election spending limit to be at the same limit as general elections i.e. approximately £30,000 per candidate. After all, given that by-elections generally occur by surprise, there is no need to spend £100,000 on a month-long campaign! |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 12, 2017 12:31:48 GMT
Buzzfeed are reporting the following spend: Zac: £95,000 LD: £98,970 Lab: £20,000 We really need the by-election spending limit to be at the same limit as general elections i.e. approximately £30,000 per candidate. After all, given that by-elections generally occur by surprise, there is no need to spend £100,000 on a month-long campaign! Why not? If it is important to you and you want to? It is part of our essential freedom of action and to use our own money as we see fit. Against all restrictions and regulations. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Jan 12, 2017 14:55:43 GMT
By-elections don't have the support of national campaigns or the economies of scale or even shared costs that can be split across both campaigns. It used to be an open secret that most parties freely spent far more than the old limits and so the £100,000 limit was introduced to recognise reality and bring some control.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 12, 2017 16:27:28 GMT
By-elections don't have the support of national campaigns or the economies of scale or even shared costs that can be split across both campaigns. It used to be an open secret that most parties freely spent far more than the old limits and so the £100,000 limit was introduced to recognise reality and bring some control. But why have any limit? |
|
