[Closed] What are we to make of the UKIP surge?

How does that quote from Harriet Harmann back up your absurd and quite ridiculous claim that Labour got a bloody nose from UKIP last Thursday teamhurtmore ?

Everything in that quote sounds like perfect commonsense to me.

Of course no one should be complacent about UKIP, and I have already very clearly said on the previous page to this one :[b] [i]"UKIP might well make significant inroads into working-class Labour heartlands in the future, and more importantly win seats"[/i][/b] I then added [b][i]"but last Thursday didn't prove that, and to suggest that it did is clearly false"[/i][/b]

Labour successfully beat off any potential threat from UKIP last thursday, the Tories, and even more so the LibDems, did not.

Your attempt to suggest otherwise is pure Tory spin.

Fascism? 😆 That's authoritarian large state dictatorship. Ukip is standing for small government anti-authoritarianism and democratic rule. Kind of the opposite of fascism.

You right they are libertarian nationalist rather than authoritarian ones hence the light tag 😉

Do you need "" explaining to you ?
Really ?

JY - happy to leave it there really. Of course there has not been a [u]major hit[/u] to Labour's vote. As I said much earlier, in terms of hit I would suggest that it went LD, Tories with Labour very much behind. My slightly inappropriate choice of "bloody nose" refers to analysis that Jeremy Vine did on Newsnight that showed how all parties had lost ground and I was referring to that. The additional point about Labour (confirmed by Harmann) is that UKIP has crossed the threshold where they are now [u]also[/u] a threat to Labour, IF, this week's elections have any bearing on general election voting patterns (apparently if the analysts are correct the 15% threshold).

My choice of words was poor as EL will keep reminding me. But the basic point still stands that [u]all parties [/u]got a wake up call if not an injury 😉 - that is what I read from Milliband and Harmann. And I credit them with enough political nouse to observe what is going on across the rest of Europe. Parties that chose to be complacent about populist opposition really have got bloody noses elsewhere!

CMD probably only has three possible jokers that could save him - the slightly surprising performance of the private sector may keep surprising on the upside (possible), he could pull the referendum card in some form (assuming the € hasn't gone by then 😉 - probable) and the Eurozone could recover producing a recovery in exports (hmmmm.....). But given that (rather than a failure of capitalism) we have a crisis essentially resulting from excessive levels of public and private sector (yes both!) debt, then CMD's outlook looks almost as grim as the unskilled workers who are/may be deserting his party - they winding down of leverage will see his term out. The only silly thing is the idea that UKIP (or Boris Johnson!) have the solution.

UKIP are in no way libertarian either, they're made up of classic fascists not libertarians. One of them the other week wanted votes to be taken off the unemployed and biased weighting given to those who earn a lot of money.

Reasonable summary THM ( B + ) but CMD will have to play the want a referenduum [ subtext to leave] then voting for us is the only way to go to ensure it hapens [ which will be true tbh] and also creates clear blue water between them and Lab/ Libs if not UKIP. He probably has no choice tbh but to do this. .

But given that (rather than a failure of capitalism) we have a crisis essentially resulting from excessive levels of public and private sector (yes both!) debt

Lets hope this time someone really have ended boom and bust eh

Fascism? That's authoritarian large state dictatorship. Ukip is standing for small government anti-authoritarianism and democratic rule. Kind of the opposite of fascism.

[img] [/img]

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/2574/ukip_is_not_the_home_for_true_libertarians

http://unholytrinityblog.com/2013/01/ukip-are-not-a-libertarian-party/

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/04/alexandra-swann-unemployed-voting/

JY wrote

Interesting no one is blaming capitalism in the UK and are blaming the EU and immigrants and voting for a party that is more of the same capitalism that caused it all - in fact it is even more of the same than nay other party.
Not really apolitical point more one about the human condition like we have a hair trigger in blaming folk for problems rather than looking at the true causes - ignoringmy hair trigger for hating capitlalsism no one can actually think the EU or immigration has caused the current crises or economic slump

shows how far 'political' discourse needs to travel in this insular little island-- huge global capitalist crisis, yet none of the westminster apologists want to even mention the fact.Since they spend all their time pandering to an exploitative system, that provides them with their 'careers' and looks after them when they take a back seat,not seen many brave/foolish enough to bite the hand that feeds them.

The manic obsession with 'growth' -or profit --in a world of decreasing resources, a mad scramble to shut the door on others whose needs are greater-- the selfish pandering to the already disgustingly wealthy, from an objective martian view, the world and its economic wastefulness must look a funny place....

I'm for revolutionary socialism......

Meh if UKIP start going proper anti-capitalist/liberal then we truly will have fascist party on our hands.

The manic obsession with 'growth' -or profit --in a world of decreasing resources, a mad scramble to shut the door on others whose needs are greater-- the selfish pandering to the already disgustingly wealthy

Oooh look a malthusian, you talk about rapidly decreasing resources as if it's a cut and dry settled issue and that we're not going to be able to R&D our way out of those problems.

**** me, we're so doomed, I mean fusion is never going to happen like ever, graphene didn't happen, GMO's aren't happening, solar panels are not going to increase in efficiency, space mining is never going to take off, global warming is going to destroy us all as opposed to being a boon to the global economy by making the far north more prosperous.

...on the radio this evening, the Tories are talking about a pact with UKIP to ensure electoral success.

Welcome to the future...

And with that I'll move to Norway.

Oooh look a malthusian, you talk about rapidly decreasing resources as if we're not able to R&D our way out of those problems.

who said 'rapid'--you, just making the point that an exploitative system will not consider consequences for others, but carry on with your intepretation, it has amused me..

And with that I'll move to Norway.

just as the french aristocrats fled to england when things got a bit hot for them at home.You may find that even norway will be affected-- since they import most of their food....

interfereswithbadgers - Member

you talk about rapidly decreasing resources as if it's a cut and dry settled issue and that we're not going to be able to R&D our way out of those problems.

Maybe we can. It'd be mental to assume we will, though, surely? It's like being a futures trader in a product that might never exist. Develop fix, act once we have it.

who said 'rapid'--you, just making the point that an exploitative system will not consider consequences for others, but carry on with your intepretation, it has amused me..

We can end scarcity and suffering for the human race through the use of technology.

No need to get rid of growth and capitalism, we just need socially and environmentally friendly regulated capitalism that is driven in a top down fashion in the same way that F1 drives technology through regulation.

Maybe we can. It'd be mental to assume we will, though, surely?

I've always had a do or die attitude, do we want to set our goals high and attempt to smash our natural limits or do we want to settle for a society that will always be unfair and full of suffering even with socialism.

In some ways I'm optimistic about humanity, I don't think we should be settling for anything less than our wildest dreams about where we can take ourselves and move forward in this universe.

interfereswithbadgers - Member

In some ways I'm optimistic about humanity, I don't think we should be settling for anything less than our wildest dreams about where we can take ourselves and move forward in this universe.

So jeaopardising that in the short term seems pretty silly. I have great faith in what we'll be able to do in a hundred or a thousand years. Not so sure about what we can do tomorrow.

i know your'e being flipant, but that is the answer you would expect off a rich twunt.

Nahhh I could be employed there but I'm poor, I'm pretty much going to be able to choose where I want to live over the next few years so I could care less for nationalism.

just as the french aristocrats fled to england when things got a bit hot for them at home.You may find that even norway will be affected-- since they import most of their food....

They wont have to when all the Tundra melts.

why this infatuated love affair with exploitation-- i know some kinky people like being dominated, but surely not all the time ,for ever and ever-- capitalism is a restrictive, wasteful , inefficient use of human resource-- if you can't see that, then you not dreaming ......

An interesting YouGov poll of what motivates UKIP voters. Apparently :

[i]More than three-quarters (76%) cite a desire to see immigration to Britain reduced, and 59% say a desire to see Britain leave the European Union – the primary objective of the party at its founding in 1991 – is what made them vote UKIP.

The opportunity to "protest" the main parties is the third most important factor for voters choosing UKIP. Almost half (47%) say dissatisfaction with the other main parties makes a vote for UKIP attractive, while a quarter (25%) cite disappointment with David Cameron and the government.[/i]

But what is quite staggering is that only 8% [u][b]of UKIP voters [/b][/u] say that their reason for voting for them is that "Ukip would run the country well". In fact it's the least reason given for voting UKIP.

Which doesn't bode well for their chances next general election. And pretty much confirms that they are still no more than a protest party.

What is also surprising is that UKIP's trump card - Nigel Farage's alleged voter appeal, is deeply flawed. Apparently he is less popular with the general population than Ed Miliband.

And more bad news for UKIP : [i]"36% of British adults say they would never consider voting UKIP – making UKIP least popular"[/i]

Only 23% would never consider voting Labour - making Labour somewhat more popular than the other 3 largest parties.

It seems that whilst no one should ever be complacent about the negative effect of an extreme right-wing party, no matter how small they are, the threat that UKIP poses should be kept in perspective, despite the wall-to-wall media coverage they've been receiving.

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/03/immigration-and-europe-give-ukip-appeal/

I'm pretty much going to be able to choose where I want to live over the next few years so I could care less for nationalism.

how nice for you.....

So jeaopardising that in the short term seems pretty silly. I have great faith in what we'll be able to do in a hundred or a thousand years. Not so sure about what we can do tomorrow.

I kind of agree but we're not going to convince everyone today to stop outputting massive amounts of CO2, I think the climate debate needs to move on from this kind of discourse. We as humans have made a mistake, what we need to do now is start preparing for the future climate.

Global warming is most likely not going to kill us, the alternative is to expand into the far north and open up migration from the equatorial regions. Technology and egalitarianism is the key to responding to this scenario, people with UKIPs outlook on life will have or should have no place in this future scenario. ****ing up the planet and then telling everyone you've displaced that they can't come in is a height of callousness I hope we will never come to.

capitalism is a restrictive, wasteful , inefficient use of human resource-- if you can't see that, then you not dreaming ......

Hah. Capitalism has it's faults but inefficient it is not.

As the Two Ronnies used to say, "and now for a late item of news."

Tomorrow's Torygraph running an article quoting the father of the €, Oskar Lafointaine, calling for an end to the "catastrophic currency." Not surprisingly the headline is misleading as he is really saying that forcing internal devaluations on weak currencies is a catastrophe, but nearly the same thing! This crises throws up more unlikely bedfellows. The German left saying the same as the UK right. The next thing will be a French socialist cutting corporation taxes. Oh, wait a minute....?

Till tomorrow!

Hah. Capitalism has it's faults but inefficient it is not.

all that human potential, hardly any is realised, that is what i call inefficient....... short term profit is a strange goal....

all that human potential, hardly any is realised, that is what i call inefficient....... short term profit is a strange goal....

Aye, on the other hand I don't think a pure socialist approach is very good for reaching long term goals but you can direct capitalism.

All you have to do to get capitalism to work in your favor is to nudge it in the right direction. For example increase tax on low mpg cars to ridiculous levels and push companies to research ways of producing cars that can do 100mpg. Or tax companies for not using recycled materials forcing them to develop more efficient methods of production.

This is why big government is a good thing, we need more visionary technocrats and less short termist oxford educated public relations types.

the father of the €, Oskar Lafointaine

No he isn't. You're just claiming that 'cause it fits nicely into that narrative that you keep banging on about, which claims there's no difference between left and right in politics.

The last gasp of little England?

PS - Mr Badgerman: Au contraire - capitalism is deeply inefficient! How could any system which reduces the majority of the world to collateral damage, and restricts most of the population of the world to necessary emmiseration be anything but inefficient? The creative and liberating power of capitalism (and even then, at enormous human cost) lies back 2 centuries ago, when capitalism was a dynamic and at times even progressive force. Can anyone honestly claim that now?

PS - Mr Badgerman: Au contraire - capitalism is deeply inefficient! How could any system which reduces the majority of the world to collateral damage, and restricts most of the population of the world to necessary emmiseration be anything but inefficient? The creative and liberating power of capitalism (and even then, at enormous human cost) lies back 2 centuries ago, when capitalism was a dynamic and at times even progressive force. Can anyone honestly claim that now?

Oh give me a break, what do you suppose we revert to? Communism? A pre-industrial agrarian utopia? Do you think we should revert back to time when human misery and happiness was purely in the hands of nature? How do you think the worlds poor are to be lifted out of poverty, no growth economics? By the very definition of lifting them out of poverty we are increasing growth. Or do you think we should just cull human numbers despite the fact that NASA predictions has human population massively crashing due to increasing economic prosperity and access to family planning?

Growth in the right direction is what is lacking, what is needed is huge government intervention into more sustainable greener technology.

Badgerman-- when has Communism as a worldwide 'system' been in place--pretty sure that i missed that lesson in history ?

From your cosy sett, life may appear pleasant and settled, but as dekadanse rightly points out-- at huge expense to most of the human race---- there is a very myopic tendency to see the world through ones own prism, not glance at some others,the worst offenders are Americans, no coincidence they are the biggest consumers, and little englanders are not far behind....

So no breaks for you Mr badger-- if you want to espouse the 'benefits' of an exploitative system, have the decency to be honest about its true cost-- otherwise you are just the same as any apologist politickcian..

Badgerman-- when has Communism as a worldwide 'system' been in place--pretty sure that i missed that lesson in history ?

From your cosy sett, life may appear pleasant and settled, but as dekadanse rightly points out-- at huge expense to most of the human race---- there is a very myopic tendency to see the world through ones own prism, not glance at some others,the worst offenders are Americans, no coincidence they are the biggest consumers, and little englanders are not far behind....

So no breaks for you Mr badger-- if you want to espouse the 'benefits' of an exploitative system, have the decency to be honest about its true cost-- otherwise you are just the same as any apologist politickcian..

Espousing the benefits of an exploitative system? What part of me calling for a more socially just and responsible version of capitalism did you not understand?

And how would a world wide communist government be any less exploitative than the USSR or North Korea?

Capitalism has many many faults but it's better than the alternatives you are proposing, reverting back to a tried model that failed smacks of a lack of imagination.

i think you are misguided mr badger-- stalinism, maoism or any other cronyism has as much relevance to Communism as a bald man does a comb.

Its late , and i have a welsh Cup Final to go to in the morning with my comrades from the Blue Army --The Mighty Bangor City--so its Nos Da as we say round ere ......

if you have digital tv--you can cop some of our banners--you might be surprised 3pm s4c

i think you are misguided mr badger-- stalinism, maoism or any other cronyism has as much relevance to Communism as a bald man does a comb.

That doesn't matter, what matters is what kind of agendas communist ideology historically and inadvertently ends up pushing.

It went so well last time, let's give a failed ideology another go and usher in a new environment ripe for political despots.

No, there's another way, not capitalism as we know it now but a variant of it. Why limit our imagination to historical paradigms.

No, there's another way, not capitalism as we know it now but a variant of it.

not the Third way-- caring capitalism-- oxymoron of the reformers

 

Badger man-- this will have to go on another thread, this is about The Pitchfork Party and their irrelevance to history

No, I don't mean the third way either. That didn't go far enough.

http://llandudnojetset.wordpress.com/ some light relief for you-- check out the flag section

More of a rugby kind of guy. 😛 Sorry mate

Nowadays the critical ilk of Townsend, Keane and Shearer have hegemonic control of football punditry.

I truly never knew people talked about sports in this way.

egg chasing badger fiddler -- 😯

matt johnson --has a passion for football, just comes at it from a perspective that is not heard on mainstream media-- same as politics though, its all very controlled, and not at all 'independant'--toe the line or your'e oot pal..

That's a play on something else...

I don't actually shag badgers.

I don't actually shag badgers.

i didn't think you did, but your 'handle' is a bit ambiguous to say the least...

It's meant to be. 😈

ernie_lynch - Member
the father of the €, Oskar Lafointaine
No he isn't. You're just claiming that 'cause it fits nicely into that narrative that you keep banging on about, which claims there's no difference between left and right in politics.

You're right of course, Ernie. But odd that I am joined in my political fantasy land by the [i]Frankfurter Allgemeine [/i](no less) who describe Lafointaine as, "he was one of the SPD's most ardent advocates of the Euro." Honestly, German broadsheets....as bad as ours in mis-informing us thickos.

But let's check the man himself:

So, "if real appreciations and depreciations are not possible in this way (eg [i]20-30% decrease on S European wages[/i]), it will be necessary to abandon the common currency and return to a system which allows for appreciations and depreciation."

"N S, Sherlock!" At least he is enjoying the smell of the coffee this morning! Why not join us? It's freshly brewed.

So he's gone from being "father of the €" to merely supporting its introduction.

I'm glad you agree with me teamhurtmore.

I found this interesting...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/06/ukip-5-things-people-get-wrong

... and it's a novel experience for me to quote the Grauniad. BTW the author is a lecturer from U Manch. Also -

[b]A good time to bury bad news?[/b]
There's a new old-Etonian at No 10: BoJo's bro just started work there.

And with that I'll move to Norway.

I appreciate that Lafontaine has made a career of U-turns and odd-bedfellows but you must have a very low opinion of him Ernie*. To be the German Finance Minister during the introduction of the Euro and yet only a mere supporter - how tame! I wonder why he didn't resign in process? I mean being FM and having such an important financial structure introduced under your watch, and replacing the beloved Deutsche Mark - and yet just a mild and passive "supporter". And then to have someone subsequently ghost write books under your name in which they/you (?) call for even greater global currency blocs. Really bizarre?

*But in one sense, you are yet again correct. Since in the run up to his party's failure in the 1995 Baden Wurttemburg elections he was staunchly anti-€. So like all good politicians, he swung with the wind and became pro-Euro to suit his political needs. Must have been strange as Finance Minister to watch the birth of a bastard** child that is/was the euro! European politics, would you credit it......I wonder if, in truth, all the euro's supporters felt the same?

(** in the true, not the swearing, sense of the word, mods 😉 ! )

..... you must have a very low opinion of him Ernie

Why is my opinion of Oskar Lafointaine, whatever it happens to be, relevant to this thread ?

I just think you should stick to facts rather than spin, Lafointaine isn't considered "father of the €", that accolade has been reserved for others.

Although I appreciate that as a right-wing economist spin will always for you take precedence over fact, as you have repeatedly shown on this thread with your false claims that Labour received a bloody nose last thursday, whilst simultaneously completely ignoring the devastating hammering that the LibDems got.

ernie_lynch - Member
I just think you should stick to facts

I agree....so my first point...

teamhurtmore - Member

Nonetheless, the main parties have been foolhardy to dismiss UKIP as clowns etc and have had [b]their[/b] noses suitably bloodied. [b]In order, the Lib Dems[/b], the Tories and [b]then[/b] Labour. They need to answer the question I posed before, how does a party led by NF ( almost a caricature of the nice but dim broker that died out after Big Bang), with dubious candidates and a shallow policy platform do so well?

...and later for clarity...

teamhurtmore - Member
As I said much earlier, in terms of hit I would suggest that it went LD, Tories with Labour very much behind.

The beauty of free speech, you can see the holes in arguments...

ernie_lynch - Member
...spin will always for you take precedence over fact, as you have repeatedly shown on this thread.... whilst simultaneously completely ignoring the devastating hammering that the LibDems got.

QED . Thanks Ernie, great to have a point proven. Let's not miss it...once again....

ernie_lynch - Member
I just think you should stick to facts

Time for a ride now....have a nice afternoon.

You have completely ignored the devastating hammering that the LibDems got last thursday, as you focused on Labour's alleged damage by UKIP. Despite the fact that Labour successfully and easily saw off a threat by UKIP in South Shields by pretty much maintaining their share of the vote and getting more than twice the votes that UKIP got, whilst at the same time receiving the largest share of the vote of any party in the unLabour-friendly county councils.

Making a vague comment that the LibDems didn't do well hardly compares with recognising that they received a devastating hammering.

You're long on spin and short on facts geezer.

I think I'd be a bit concerned if I woke up after the next election and found the country governed by a colation involving UKIP. Perhaps Boris as PM and NF as deputy, with the Ulster Unionists in the mix - they'd be the sensible rational ones keeping everyone else in check....

Boris and Farage? That would turn politics into a 5 year top gear special. 😆

What's annoying about this sort of statement is that so few people who make it actually do sod off, and so many seem like drama queens.

Patriotic sentiments all riled up?

The beauty of free speech, you can see the holes in arguments...

Ernie, you really do not have to keep labouring my point. Once is quite sufficient. Any more is simply trolling (or perhaps that was the original intention - shame, on a generally well mannered thread). But let me help you:

"Cleggs stuffed..." ([i]hmm, quite categoric?[/i])
"In order, the Lib Dems..." ([i]not much ambiguity there[/i])
"...in terms of hit, I would suggest that it went LD..." ([i]ditto[/i])

All said by someone who has, "completely ignored the devastating hammering that the LibDems got last thursday".

You can keep digging if you like but the point has probably been proven enough. The holes are gaping! But good proof also for why we should let UKIP have a say - once out in the open, the comments can be properly scrutinised and dismissed appropriately. Keep speech free.....QED.

THM, Ernie, just in case you're wondering right now this is a no-score draw. But only because it's impossible to get negative scores.

Ernie, you really do not have to keep labouring my point.

Well you seem to feel the need to.

No comment you have made concerning the LibDem's performance last Thursday reflects the magnitude of the electoral hammering they received, specially in South Shields.

"Cleggs stuffed" could just as easily refer to the LibDems coming a poor fourth after the Tories and UKIP. When in reality the LibDems came 7th, with less than half the vote that the BNP got, who as it happens did very badly themselves. The LibDem share of the vote went from 14.2% to 1.4%, which I believe is their worse parliamentary election result in their entire history.

And yet whilst you causally brush aside the LibDems devastating electoral hammering, you focus on Labour's performance, falsely claiming that they received a bloody nose.

The reason for this is quite clear imo, you want to draw attention away from the coalition government's (who's right-wing agenda you support) poor performance, and suggest instead that Labour didn't do much better. In other words put a bit of spin on a rather awkward situation.

I don't support the Labour Party, and if I had been a South Shields voter I would not have voted Labour, and probably urged others not to. But unlike you I prefer to base my political rationale on facts, not spin.

HTH

HTH? Yes, it proves N'winds point as well. Shame this was a nice thread until you started. Now this is just silly and rude and more importantly boring for others. For that reason, I will step off this thread as responding further to silliness/rudeness is not fair on others. (Apologies N'wind, I should have ignored the trolling).

I hope this gets back on topic.

Shame this was a nice thread until you started. Now this is just silly and rude and more importantly boring for others

You think it's "silly" and "rude" of me to challenge your false claims do you ?

You think I should just let you claim that Labour received a bloody nose last Thursday, despite all the evidence to the contrary, and that Oskar Lafointaine was "the father of the €", because you say so ?

I bet you do.

Perhaps a better solution for you would be if the Daily Mail allowed you to write a right-wing column in which you can freely air all your spin on current affairs without any fear that someone will contradict you, because on a forum like this there is always the chance that someone might be challenge you........terribly rude of them I know.

yawn 🙄

This thread was doing so well. No comment on who's right or wrong as I can't be bothered reading, but the big are certainly hitting.

Patriotic sentiments all riled up?

is it over? i was enjoying that.

is being accused of writting for the Daily Mail similar to the Hitler thing?