DulwichResident

James - the implication in your last post is that the Conservatives were incorrect to suggest that the Liberal Democrats were being dishonest. This is utterly false and you should be ashamed of yourself as an elected representative to say this.

???? I'm not pretending to not have a bias. What I am saying though, is that politicians should be straight with us. At the moment the Liberals aren't being by telling the electorate that the Conservatives don't have a chance. Let me repeat: both the Lib Dems and the Conservatives could beat Tessa Jowell.

James, I will say again, I am not saying that the Lib Dems don't have a chance - even with the new boundaries. I am saying that it is disingenuous to say that ONLY the Lib Dems can win here.

Wasn't the Lib Dem share of the vote in 2005 22.1% rather than the 19% you mention? (BBC website) And isn't your polling support tonight 27% and 28%? (ukpollingreport) This represents a smaller swing than you suggest. Plus, while finding the sum of past local elections may be simplistic, it does use real, true, actual statistics, rather than trying to decieve the electorate into thinking that only the Lib Dems stand a chance. As I have written elsewhere: the Lib Dems do stand a chance, but so too do the Tories.

Hi James, Thanks for your reply to this and other posts. The BBC website has said for quite a while that the Tories notionally came second in 2005 (after boundary changes). It certainly does at the moment - I've just checked so that I'm not falsely accusing you of anything. (I also checked Ladbrooks last week and the odds on a Conservative victory in Dulwich and West Norwood were 5-1 I think, while a Lib Dem victory was 8-1). My point isn't really that the Liberals don't stand a chance - I think they do, and with Labour's vote seemingly collapsing, a fair one. But to say that the Conservatives don't stand a chance is not being honest; both parties have about an equal chance, really, don't they?

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi bil, > Electoral chances for the parliamentary seat. > I've explained to residents the Lib Dem chances in > the following way. > In 2005 Labour received 19,000 votes, Lib Dem > 10,250, Tory 9,000. > At that time Lib Dems in the national polls on 19% > and we're currently much higher. Labour nationally > much lower and Tories roughly the same (from > memory). Even with border changes we can expect > Labour to get fewer votes. In fact much fewer > votes. Lib Dem many many more votes and Tories > around the same. James, you present statistics of Lib Dems in second and Tories not standing a chance as fact. Here you say 'we can expect'. You may want to think that is the case, but please don't try to make it the case by misrepresentation. It's just not on - and your party tries to make us think you are different. Shame on you. Even in this post you have rounded both Labour and Conservatives down by quite a number of votes to make the Lib Dem result look better than it was.

My understanding of those hustings was that the local candidates were the only ones invited and it just so happens that Jonathan Mitchell, knowing he can't win the parliamentary seat, is still standing as a council candidate also?! I've also been to parliamentary hustings where Jonathan Mitchell was embarrassingly poor and it seemed that the only credible candidates were Tessa Jowell and Kemi Adegoke, the Conservative candidate.

Strikes me that it's a bit of a case of damned if you do (people on here complaining about so much stuff from the Lib Dems) and damned if you don't (complaints about lack of stuff from the Conservatives) Personally, I've found going on the party websites and the BBC much more informative than any of the leaflets!

Important to also realise that the Lib Dem leaflets contain a direct LIE when they claim that only they can beat Labour in Dulwich and West Norwood. At the last election the Lib Dems came 2nd with Tories close behind in 3rd. Since then there have been boundary changes which put the Tories in 2nd! I found this out on BBC.co.uk. Basically both Tories and Lib Dems could beat Labour!!!

Presumably that Tory was 'misguided' in the same way that the Lib Dems are, claiming that only they can beat Labour in Dulwich and West Norwood? FACT (according to the BBC Website): after the boundary changes Labour 1st, Conservative 2nd, Lib Dems 3rd in 2005 election. FACT (according to Southwark and Lambeth Council websites): Lib Dems in 4th places in 4 out of 8 wards in 2006 local elections.

I have seen the Tories about a number of times and have received a some leaflets from them.

Jonathan, How can you claim that you and the Liberal Democrats represent any form of 'New Politics' when you repeatedly say ONLY THE LIB DEMS CAN BEAT LABOUR HERE? After boundary changes the Lib Dems came THIRD BEHIND the Conservatives in Dulwich and West Norwood and in 2006 came 4th in 4 out of 8 wards in the constituency (details found on BBC.co.uk) Isn't the truth that the Lib Dems and Tories are neck and neck in second, quite a way back and will both struggle to beat Tessa Jowell?