Positional Queen's gambit?

When I started playing chess I started with 1.e4 following with Ruy Lopez. Since I figured out I am more of strategic and slow play rather than tactical (and/or fast), I switched over to 1.d4. I've early figured out that jumping between openings in the beginning is useless and kind of harmful, so I promptly toked Q's gambit. Now to the point: One player in my club is playing London system, and told me since I asked, that it is a great strategical and slow opening, so I have tried it a few weeks, but I do not really like it. I was more found of the QG. Thought, I have to ask if it would be properly to slow play it and aim for good mid/end game, or do I have to play somewhat aggressive (Since it is a gambit (even if it is rly not)? Just want to make sure I'm playing it and then play it completely wrong. 

Catalan wins by force

The queens gambit is fine. Just play what is best in the position. You don't HAVE to play tactically in the opening but if that's what the position calls for then that's what you do.

(1) Forget the queen's gambit entirely, and stick with the Ruy Lopez, or even better yet, play the Italian game (e4,Nf3,Nc4). This will help you avoid hanging pieces, because you will be exposed to open, rather active positions. The Italian Game is what will bring your rating up. 

https://www.chess.com/live/game/1949983975?username=Storfiskarn52

(2) Since you said you dislike tactics, that's precisely what you need to work on, not doing "positional" play.

(3) If you hang pieces, then you will play everything "wrong". 

d4 openings tend to be more positional by nature, and especially since your friend is a london player (which a lot of people detest as passive and boring) he'd probably emphasize those qualities in his own games.

The london system is very slow

At the 1300 online chess level, none of these openings will ever reach the "Pianissimo" d3 variation that was played at Tata Steel, or the closed Ruy Lopez.

In the former case, the OP will probably try Bc4+Ng5, and in the latter, will probably do Bxc6, since he likes to take/exchange things, judging from his games. Both of these are far better tactical practice than the queen's gambit. 

BTW, any sound opening after 3 moves can be turned into a closed and quiet position with cooperation from both sides. 

BTW, this is specifically what I mean the OP should play. And yes, the OP should avoid the closed Ruy Lopez for now, and I guess he can play the quiet Italian, although I think the classical Italian is better for now:

Lol... well that prompted me to show exactly the lines the OP should play, so hopefully he considers them seriously. It's what I played when I started out, and got me pretty rapid improvement. 

That depends on the player...

Yes! Learn the Catalan!

"... The most important criterion in selecting a suitable opening is that one should feel comfortable playing it. ... the commonly made distinction between 1 e4 and 1 d4, that the former leads to a more tactical game and the latter to positional play, can hardly be maintained on close examination. What is true is that 1 e4 tends to bring about critical positions more quickly than in games begun with 1 d4. Perhaps for this reason 1 d4 might be recommended to the less impatient player, or one of slower emotions who wants time to settle down to the game before the real fighting has to start. ... In comparison with the King's Gambit, White takes considerably less risk [with 1 d4 d5 2 c4]. ..." - IM Bill Hartston (1981)

Well, you seem to just play the game for fun, in which case you can do whatever you want. The OP seems to care a lot about playing "correctly", and supposing he wants to improve, I believe the open games are the fastest way there. 

You have missunderstod me. 

1. I have little to absolutly 0 interest in getting my rating up (besides playing against stronger players ofc!) since I will improve my skill, not my rating. 

2. I did not say I dislike tactics. What I said was I feel I am more of positional player and tend to actually get less anxious in closed games. In that you posted however I was exploring a new variation and on the end I got stressed out due to time which is my biggest weakness (and thats why I have higher OTB). But to make it clear I am not one who likes and tends to exchange pieces like that (even though I am trying out playing Nimzowitch Indian (any suggestions for black repertoir against d4?)). 

I played Ruy Lopez when I first started. But I reallyl dislike the scicilian. But since I slavishly play the French, maybe I should try it again? I face d4 way way much more in my OTBs than Chess,com, where It is the opposite. That was also one factor that made me switching to d4; to feel more comfortable when I face it myself

However, I now started to do daily practice on chesstempo since I noticed I've gotten worse at it after having taken a break from chess for almost half a year

I really hate and am bad at playing with an isolani and try for my life to avoid it anytime it's possible. Though that means I really need to practice at it! But would it not be better if I play something that I feel is more fun/comfortable for me than playing general begginners recomendation openings? But yes, I am absolutly considering it. But could you elaborate your thoughts about this would do me good? Keep in mind I have 0 interest in getting better rating. I really do not want to jump between openings as I stated earlier, so if you could explain further It would be greatly appreciated!

Yes, I am very serious about the game. Since I have time to practice since I am home all days long, I want to try to get as best as possible. I want to get a teacher/coach/mentor, but does not know where to search for dito. Even pay for it. 

I've thought the more open (less pawns) the game is, the more drawish it tends to be? Like the exchange variaton of the French (althought in this case, it is not "drawish" opposite what many tends to belive. Black simply plays on the f-file and forget about the open e-file).