Forum Topic

Conservative Friends of Cycling: a Tweet...

https://twitter.com/ToryCycling/status/1400048064744861696“in three wards in Chiswick, along the route of the new CS9 segregated track on Chiswick High Road, bitterly opposed by the local Tories and by Bailey personally, the Conservative vote dropped by between 10 and 12% points, while Labour’s vote in the wards rose by 4.4% points”

Ken Munn ● 1971d10 Comments

No proof at all of cause and effect, Ken, even you know that.

Claire Moran ● 1971d

Not sure even one-eyed Ken can see that!

Jeffrey Cope ● 1971d

Another Cyclops?

Russell Pearson ● 1971d

Apologies, Russell, but I thought reposting the link you provided on another thread might settle in on this one as well:https://www.onlondon.co.uk/paul-wheeler-last-rites-for-the-covid-ltns/It's over 100 words, but as a writer I think Ken can tough it out to get to the end of it.

David Lesniak ● 1971d

The Conservative party will be seriously underestimating the implications of the voting patterns in the Mayoral elections if they get distracted by attempts to link them to cycleways and LTNs.Chiswick could end up without a single ward councillor in next year's local elections if the trend remains the same. This has nothing to do with transport issues because the pattern has repeated itself across London wards with higher than average incomes. At the last election the Conservatives in London did not pay the full price of Brexit in Remainer areas because Jeremy Corbyn was in charge of the Labour party. Starmer may lack appeal in the Red Wall but the former Director of Public Prosecutions goes down well with professionals. Chiswick also has a substantial number of finance professionals who may have given the Conservatives the benefit of the doubt in 2018 over a trade deal but can't now.I'm not convinced that it will be a good thing for the part of Chiswick in Hounslow to be represented by councillors who are members of the ruling administration.

Paul Corcoran ● 1970d

I did some analysis of the posts on this thread. Without taking sides on the cycling issue.Ken’s post: presents some facts.Claire’s post: was initially factual, but sarcarstically uses ‘even’, as a form of aggressionJeffrey’s post: outright aggression. If he is one-eyed then it’s appalling to mock someone’s disability, and if he’s not, it’s appalling to insult someone by saying that they are disabled.Russell’s post: not sure how to interpret that. Just mucking around as far as I can tellDavid’s post: was initially factual, but the last line used aggressive and insulting sarcasmPaul’s post: entirely factualClaire, Jeffrey, David: could I politely encourage you to think about just posting straight factual posts, and avoid the aggression? You could google "Graham's hierarchy".Ken and Paul are towards the top of the hierarchy, in terms of how they present their arguments.Claire, Jeffrey and David are lower down.

Simon Pedley ● 1970d

Thanks for your analysis, Simon. I'm guessing your request for facts doesn't apply to you. Unless you're a licensed qualified surveyor of W4 threads with the bona fides to back that up. I'm sorry you're so sensitive to sarcasm.Tell me, Ken's usual presentation is TLTR. How does that figure into Graham's hierarchy?Personally, I prefer aggression over passive aggression as you've just demonstrated. But that's just me. I've been cancelled so many times surely you won't give a rat's ass what I just said.

David Lesniak ● 1970d

Simons analys of Jeffery's post had me in stitches.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Sorry Jeffrey I meant.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

The Conservative party at the local level does seem to be out of step with HQ which is where these Covid emergency traffic measures came from. The latest funding package for TfL requires them to invest a further £100million in active travel although it looks like the disastrous idea of using Experimental Traffic Orders has been abandoned and the next wave of schemes will be subject to a proper consultation.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1968d