The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:37 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message l
Chris Johns wrote:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Graeme Wall wrote:

Wow, it's like having our very own automatic Daily Mail Talking Point-
bot.

[snip]

Neither of which statements are true.

I don't think the Daily Mail ever let something minor like the truth get
in the way.

Given you snipped the lie (oops I meant line, typo honest!) I was referring
to...

Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:37 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message l
Chris Johns wrote:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Graeme Wall wrote:

Wow, it's like having our very own automatic Daily Mail Talking
Point- bot.

[snip]

Neither of which statements are true.

I don't think the Daily Mail ever let something minor like the truth get
in the way.

Given you snipped the lie (oops I meant line, typo honest!) I was
referring to...

Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

On 30 Apr, 18:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I think he means hsi point about "Labour introduced on-demand postal
voting, so it's all their fault, plus they do most of the cheating".

Now, given that the main focus of the Rowntree report is the lack of
ID verification for voting, which has been the case since we
introduced voting, the first criticism would seem a little misplaced.

And given that, should you actually read the linked report, it's clear
that councillors from all parties (including Labour, Conservatives,
Lib Dems, Respect, BNP and DUP) have been caught cheating, the second
criticism would seem to be utter nonsense.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:48:01 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:37 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message l
Chris Johns wrote:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Graeme Wall wrote:

Wow, it's like having our very own automatic Daily Mail Talking
Point- bot.

[snip]

Neither of which statements are true.

I don't think the Daily Mail ever let something minor like the truth get
in the way.

Given you snipped the lie (oops I meant line, typo honest!) I was
referring to...

Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I stated that the reference to "Labour's ballot rigging" by John
Rowland upthread was "because it is enabled by a measure brought in by
Labour and has predominantly been done by Labour".

You claimed: "Neither of which statements are true".

I then demonstrated in Message-ID:
that, in fact, both
statements are true.

And you had no comment. I wonder why.

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

In message
John B wrote:

On 30 Apr, 18:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I think he means hsi point about "Labour introduced on-demand postal
voting, so it's all their fault, plus they do most of the cheating".

Can't be, I did respond to that, or perhaps he didn't realise...


Now, given that the main focus of the Rowntree report is the lack of
ID verification for voting, which has been the case since we
introduced voting, the first criticism would seem a little misplaced.

And given that, should you actually read the linked report, it's clear
that councillors from all parties (including Labour, Conservatives,
Lib Dems, Respect, BNP and DUP) have been caught cheating, the second
criticism would seem to be utter nonsense.


Precisely my point.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:48:01 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:37 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message l
Chris Johns wrote:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Graeme Wall wrote:

Wow, it's like having our very own automatic Daily Mail Talking
Point- bot.

[snip]

Neither of which statements are true.

I don't think the Daily Mail ever let something minor like the truth get
in the way.

Given you snipped the lie (oops I meant line, typo honest!) I was
referring to...

Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I stated that the reference to "Labour's ballot rigging" by John
Rowland upthread was "because it is enabled by a measure brought in by
Labour and has predominantly been done by Labour".

You claimed: "Neither of which statements are true".

I then demonstrated in Message-ID:
that, in fact, both
statements are true.

And you had no comment. I wonder why.

Well you didn't actually demonstrate it and I didn't want to embarras you
further.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:30:26 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:48:01 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:37 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message l
Chris Johns wrote:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Graeme Wall wrote:

Wow, it's like having our very own automatic Daily Mail Talking
Point- bot.

[snip]

Neither of which statements are true.

I don't think the Daily Mail ever let something minor like the truth get
in the way.

Given you snipped the lie (oops I meant line, typo honest!) I was
referring to...

Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I stated that the reference to "Labour's ballot rigging" by John
Rowland upthread was "because it is enabled by a measure brought in by
Labour and has predominantly been done by Labour".

You claimed: "Neither of which statements are true".

I then demonstrated in Message-ID:
that, in fact, both
statements are true.

And you had no comment. I wonder why.

Well you didn't actually demonstrate it and I didn't want to embarras you
further.

I think it's rather more embarrassing to claim that a measure
introduced in 2000 was not introduced by Labour.

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, John B wrote:

On 30 Apr, 18:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I think he means hsi point about "Labour introduced on-demand postal
voting, so it's all their fault, plus they do most of the cheating".

Now, given that the main focus of the Rowntree report is the lack of ID
verification for voting, which has been the case since we introduced
voting, the first criticism would seem a little misplaced.

Perhaps, but it is nonetheless true that labour introduced on-demand
postal voting. Inferring from that that it's a giant labour plot to stuff
ballot boxes across the nation seems a little tinfoil-hat, though.

And given that, should you actually read the linked report, it's clear
that councillors from all parties (including Labour, Conservatives,
Lib Dems, Respect, BNP and DUP) have been caught cheating, the second
criticism would seem to be utter nonsense.

Well, not quite. He said "most of the cheating" - the fact that all
parties do some cheating doesn't tell is whether one particular party does
most of it or not. Just like saying "all countries have dropped bombs on
another country at some point since 1945" doesn't tell you that there's
one in particular that's contributed most of them.

I don't recall any evidence for any labour dominance of the vote-rigging
market being presented, though. If there is any, i'd certainly be
interested to see it (again, if necessary!).

tom

--
What were the skies like when you were young?

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

Tom Anderson wrote:

I don't recall any evidence for any labour dominance of the vote-rigging
market being presented, though. If there is any, i'd certainly be
interested to see it (again, if necessary!).

It would also be of interest to know whether what's being alleged is the
number of votes rigged, or the number of wards/constituencies whose
result was altered by rigged votes.
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p10907015.html
(45 135 at Wolverhampton, 1985)

The 'South London Overground' and the Mayoral election
 

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:30:26 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:48:01 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:37 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message l
Chris Johns wrote:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Graeme Wall wrote:

Wow, it's like having our very own automatic Daily Mail Talking
Point- bot.

[snip]

Neither of which statements are true.

I don't think the Daily Mail ever let something minor like the truth get
in the way.

Given you snipped the lie (oops I meant line, typo honest!) I was
referring to...

Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I stated that the reference to "Labour's ballot rigging" by John
Rowland upthread was "because it is enabled by a measure brought in by
Labour and has predominantly been done by Labour".

You claimed: "Neither of which statements are true".

I then demonstrated in Message-ID:
that, in fact, both
statements are true.

And you had no comment. I wonder why.

Well you didn't actually demonstrate it and I didn't want to embarras you
further.

I think it's rather more embarrassing to claim that a measure
introduced in 2000 was not introduced by Labour.

So why claim it?

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html