8 comments from readers

SD
10 June 2008 at 15:01

A foolish decision by Livingstone. Like many politicians on the way out, or who have just been around for too long, he does not seem to be able to admit that his day is over. The Labour Party would be ill-advised to let him run as their candidate. If he chooses to run independently, I'm not so sure that the London electorate would vote for him in the numbers they once did. The political conditions won't be the same a second time around - e.g. an unpopular Blair government being seen to pick on an individual politician. Therefore, he would only serve to split the left-wing vote and let Johnson back into power.

London is not a Labour city - it is a weathervain city and if we are 2 years into a Conservative government in 2012, then Labour should choose a credible local candidate who won't scare the children and the horses!

Martin Bright
10 June 2008 at 15:48

My goodness. A sensible, well-reasoned and clearly-expressed comment. Has the world gone mad?

knave
10 June 2008 at 18:37

Who would be your candidate Martin.

Well reasoned , you mean somebody who agrees with you.

Shows a authoritarian personality Brighty.

knave
10 June 2008 at 18:41

Actually it would be a mistake for Livingstone to run because it would be a mistake to let Hague run for the Tories.

They have had their day.

Although it would be fun for Livingstone to run as an independent, just to wind up Tory Nick and Brighty

Dave Hill
10 June 2008 at 20:42

Hello Martin.

http://davehill.typepad.com/london3ms/2008/06/ken-to-run-in-...

Linda
19 June 2008 at 15:36

London is Livingstone and Livingstone is London

Yo, Ken

TC
08 December 2009 at 21:53

oh no, not more Ken!

London doesn't need anymore Socialist Action and pro-ethnic policies.

Leave us alone Ken for God's sake!

swatantra nandanwar
08 December 2009 at 22:25

Give it a rest. Ken's done his bit. Let someone else have a go. A BAME woman candidate would be great to see off Boris 'Toff' Pffeffle Johnson.