On Apr 17, 12:54*am, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
In article
,





(John B) wrote:
On 16 Apr, 14:37, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
(John B) wrote:
[I assume the reason for Gilligan's hatchet-job is primarily that
he's worried people will vote for left-wing parties first and Ken
second to punish Labour while keeping Boris out. In fact, this is
still a Very Sensible Thing To Do if you're left-wing and dislike
current Labour policies, but don't want a right-wing buffoon in
power...]

A possibly more effective tactic from that position would be
Paddick 1, Ken Livingstone 2.

It depends on what sort of "left-wing" you are. That's precisely the
voting strategy I'm going to use, since I'm a free-market liberal, but
if someone is actually a socialist then voting for one of the
socialist parties as first choice is worth doing.

The difference with the Brian Paddick 1, Ken Livingstone 2 tactic is that,
unlike the socialist fringe, there is a chance, even if small, that Brian
Paddick might even be elected.

Most people probably want to elect someone whose clear political
agenda they agree with, and will make do with someone who actually
knows about running London.

On that basis, the majority second preference votes would go to Ken
Livingstone (unless he got the majority of first preference). It's
not so clear for me how Brian Paddick meets the criteria for the first
preference votes, even if people think he's a nice chap.