Your opinion of Ken Livingstone

[Joe Republic]

Negative for me.

Everything I've read about him and everything he's been variously quoted as saying have shown him to be a completely delusional, hypocritical, terrorism-sympathizing asshole.  How the hell did he get elected, and how is he still in office?

[Gabu]

Dr. Livingstone, I presume?

Oh, wait, my mistake.  This one sucks.

[afleitch]

He's a hypocrite

[merseysider]

He has done some sensible things like introduce the congestion charge. However, like most people on the Labour left, he can't resist the opportunity to posture, bluster, say really stupid things, and suck up to any anti-American nutcase who happens to pass by.

I'll tolerate him as long as he manages to keep the Mayoralty of London in Labour hands.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Never liked some of the antics he's gotten up to over his (long; he was first elected as a counciller in Lambeth in, IIRC, 1972) career, but he was a suprisingly good leader of the GLC and has been a suprisingly good Mayor since he was first elected.
I would have voted for him in 2004, btw and would do next year as well (not 2000 though; would have gone with Dobson).

Everything I've read about him and everything he's been variously quoted as saying have shown him to be a completely delusional, hypocritical, terrorism-sympathizing asshole. 

Yep, all that is true. You missed out the bit about him being a drunk and a newt breeder, btw.
But, despite that, he's actually quite good at running London.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Him being a local boy and the '73 GLC elections being a Labour landslide is the reason why he was first elected to the GLC, and seat-hopping to a safer seat kept him on the body in the Tory landslide of '77. He came to prominance within London Labour as a result of the rise of the New Left within the party, and became leader of the GLC after a brilliant little internal coup just after the '81 election.
After the GLC was abolished, he was able to engineer the deselection of Brent East M.P Reg Freeson and, just about, held onto the seat in the '87 General Election due to his agressive courting of the Irish vote.
He was the frontrunner to be Labour's candidate for Mayor of London when the post was created, but the selection process was rigged to make sure that he couldn't win. Instead, he ran as an Independent (and won easily), before rejoining Labour before the 2004 election (which he won easily as well; despite polls indicating a close race).
The Tory candidate in 2000 and 2004 was Steven Norris; an "ethically challenged" former Tory M.P for a suburban seat just outside London proper.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because he's been a fairly good Mayor and is quite popular, basically. There was an attempt to remove him from office due to some stupid drunken remarks made to a journalist, but his suspension was later quashed.

[Michael Z]

Speaking as someone who lives in London, he has done some good things here. He's pretty much sorted out the public transport system - while there are glitches with the tube, it's nowhere near as bad as it was before he took office, and as someone who regularly takes the bus, the bus system here is impeccable, which it certainly wasn't before he was in charge (and the congestion charge also contributed to it; he kinda killed two birds with one stone there, sorting out congestion in central London whilst using the revenue made from it to fund public transport). That aside, a lot of overdue regeneration has taken place in the East and the South East - part of this is because of the impending Olympics, but also due to Livingstone's policies. Law and order are also slowly getting under control, thanks to the introduction of local forces for each London neighbourhood in dealing with anti-social behaviour and street crime. All in all, ignoring his drunken antics, he is actually quite a good Mayor.

[Democratic Hawk]

I'll tolerate him as long as he manages to keep the Mayoralty of London in Labour hands.

[Joe Republic]

Being a competent mayor is all well and good, but I could never support somebody who's said and done half the things he has.

[Cubby]

I have mixed feelings about him.

I heard that Mayor Bloomberg thinks London's Congestion charge may be a good idea for NYC.

[Serenity Now]

Positive, as a mayor.. Like many Labour leftists, he's a lot less radical than he sounds once he's actually in power..

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Somewhat Mixed overall opinions, but a Freedom fighter for introducing congestion charging - something which is bad needed in my own city (well, of the realistic options.)

[Rural Radical]

I like him because he stands up to the right wing smears.

[Michael Z]

I like him because he stands up to the right wing smears.

True. He doesn't cower to the Mail or the Express the way Blair does.

In fact, I suspect that a lot of his "radical" rhetoric is designed purely to get up the Mail's back, the same way Tebbit used to up the ante to annoy left-wingers and liberals.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In fact, I suspect that a lot of his "radical" rhetoric is designed purely to get up the Mail's back, the same way Tebbit used to up the ante to annoy left-wingers and liberals.

Of course he does; him and the company that own the Daily Hate Mail have been sworn enemies for decades now.

[Gustaf]

I guess it has to do with the conditions, but public transport in London sucks and your congestion charge seems very badly thought out. If you ask me. Ours is better, hah!

[Michael Z]

I guess it has to do with the conditions, but public transport in London sucks and your congestion charge seems very badly thought out. If you ask me. Ours is better, hah!

Meh. Which city in Sweden has seven million inhabitans?   But yeah, public transport in London does suck, but it's much MUCH better than it was, say, five or six years ago.

[Gustaf]

I guess it has to do with the conditions, but public transport in London sucks and your congestion charge seems very badly thought out. If you ask me. Ours is better, hah!

Meh. Which city in Sweden has seven million inhabitans?   But yeah, public transport in London does suck, but it's much MUCH better than it was, say, five or six years ago.

I guess that's it. But your congestion charge could be improved, I think. From what I've heard it sounds weird.