[quote=mefty ] Given that UKIP still have less representation overall than the Green Party
Depends how you weigh up different representatives, UKIP more councillors and alot more MEPS, Greens 1 more MP.
Fair enough - either way they are close in size so my point still stands.
UKIP are more important nationally because they fight seats now all over the country, the Greens have tended to concentrate their resources in far fewer areas so will have less influence on a national result. Based on yesterday, UKIP look on course to win next year's Euro elections, which they came second in 1999. The Greens came fifth.
The UKIP vote was dismissed as a protest vote, and remember 'fruitcakes and closet racists'. Lots of voters might once have regarded a protest vote as a wasted vote. Voters have seen the result of a 25% share. It wasn't wasted. Dave is worried. With this example, how many more might vote 'A plague on all their houses', or tactically?
We live in interesting times.
And UKIP are now talking of following the Greens' example in Brighton: building a name in local politics as a platform to gain support for potential MPs.
Based on yesterday, UKIP look on course to win next year's Euro elections
😯
Yes TM : that's a bit of a leap. It might have interesting repercussions for the Scottish Independence referendum though.
It's not my analysis. It is, I understand, the generally accepted view at Tory Central Office, presumably because they came second last time and they have been increased their popularity in the intervening 5 years.
Well the ukip surge helped the greens get in by splitting the tory vote back home im pleased to note sitting here on a sunny beach in Mauritius.
some cases, this has resulted in non-elected political beings imposing extreme economic conditions on the citizens with little accountability.
Poor mervyn King he gets such a bad press
UKIP has grown too quickly: it will fracture once all these guys who have been elected are required to take decisions and speak in public. They will disagree with each other because there won't be enough internal cohesion.
True they unite on a dislike of Europe and immigration and nothing else. On here we have THM and ernie agreeing broadly re anti EU- would you like to form a political party covering all issues these two would agree on? - nowt personal fellas just showing the breadth of the Church that Farage- anti EU has I am not claiming either of you would vote UKIP either.
Their policies [ Or Farage ] are to the right of the Tories on almost every issue as he is a very right wing individual. Once they are expected to explain economic policy - he likes Thatcher for example- it will harm them
They recently talked of buying off the shelf policies- ie they accept they have none. They described creating their own as like herding sheep it is a broad church over a single issue it is not really a political party though it may become one. I suspect it is mor elikely the mainstrem aprtied become anti EU then why would anyone vote for UKIP?
As for NF as a non establishment charachter that is laughable though he plays it as well as Boris or Clarkson to be fair,
Based on yesterday, UKIP look on course to win next year's Euro elections
What like we will all be Elvis impersonators bu 2023?
They probably will though but i will be surprised if they get one MP never mind a large number in a general election.
Junkyard - lazarusTrue they unite on a dislike of Europe and immigration and nothing else.
Those are their common grounds so perhaps those are good enough for the masses to understand.
Why on earth do you want to join EU? I do not know. Is UK being forced to join? I guess not, so it's like trying to stick the nose into others business (EU) thinking of it.
UKIP has grown too quickly: it will fracture once all these guys who have been elected are required to take decisions and speak in public. They will disagree with each other because there won't be enough internal cohesion.
Well, internal matters can be sorted out later without EU etc. All new govt has to go through those phase so I do not see a problem there. They will learn and learn it hard.
Unless UKIP hire many experts as advisers they are just short term political party. i.e short term may be one generation ...
What good is EU anyway? Really. With or without EU UK will still be trading anyway. No, try not to blame other low cost nations.
On here we have THM and ernie agreeing broadly re anti EU
Me too, me too. I wouldn't vote for a party which had that as their main policy (with other stuff to be worked out later) even if they were a lot more moderate than UKIP. Voting for them in local elections is frankly rather bizarre IMHO - I voted for the chap who sorts out local issues well (I suppose actually I'd still have voted for him if he'd defected to UKIP, but I'd have had to cross my fingers whilst doing so).
slowoldgit - MemberThe UKIP vote was dismissed as a protest vote, and remember 'fruitcakes and closet racists'.
Well there isn't any evidence that UKIP are anything other than a protest party. And "fruitcakes and closet racists" is imo a very apt description of UKIP candidates/membership.
For them not to have received votes on the basis that they are a protest party suggests that people were specifically drawn to UKIP because of their policies, there's no proof of that.
And not least because UKIP have very few clearly defined policies. Indeed senior UKIP politicians have even suggested that there is a need to buy "off the shelf" policies from think-tanks.
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-in-chaos-after-leaked-emails-threaten-to-derail-party-on-eve-of-election-8591797.html ]Private messages from the Ukip treasurer, Stuart Wheeler, and prominent MEP Godfrey Bloom, published in The Observer, suggested the party needed to buy policies “off the shelf” from think-tanks.[/url]
The attraction of UKIP to a minority of electorate appears to based on no more than the fact that they are neither the official Tory Party nor the LibDems. In other words they represent the new protest party.
And it would appear not a particularly good protest party at that. Normally "the third party" can expect to achieve stunning by-election victories in midterm of a parliament, ones which cause political earthquakes in otherwise safe seats which deeply upset the two main parties. Certainly the Liberals/SDP/LibDems have achieved that in the past, even Respect have.
But UKIP failed to win South Shields in the by-election on Thursday. In fact they didn't even come close - Labour got more than twice the votes that UKIP got.
Granted, the Tory vote collapsed in South Shields, and the LibDem vote was obliterated, but the Labour vote was pretty much unaffected - the 1.6% drop is well within accepted margin of errors for opinion polls, and represents no more than a typical daily variation, and could in fact pretty much disappear with a couple of recounts.
Which suggests that UKIP eats into the Tory and LibDem vote and not Labour. The reason UKIP did reasonably well on Thursday was because the elections were held primarily in English rural areas - in other words the Tory heartland.
But it was less than a quarter of the vote, of approximately a third of the electorate, in rural England. They have a hell of a way to go before they make inroads into solid Labour areas and achieve the necessary victories - as South Shields showed.
Which suggests that UKIP eats into the Tory and LibDem vote and not Labour.
Labour seem to have suffered the greatest swing according to [url= http://www.markpack.org.uk/40907/labour-are-the-big-losers-from-ukips-surge/ ]this analysis[/url]
So a Liberal Democrat claims that the Labour are the the biggest losers in UKIP's increased popularity, and the LibDems the least ?
Now that's what I call putting on a brave face after your candidate comes 7th and gets less than half the votes that the BNP got.
what a website from a politically motivated blogger that puts up a graph and cites itself as the source without any data ... it must be true
But it was less than a quarter of the vote, of approximately a third of the electorate
The latter being a very important point. Sorry I've not read the whole of this thread and the point has probably already been made, but I'd imagine those who wanted to make a protest by voting UKIP were over-represented in those who could be bothered to vote - the proportion of UKIP voters amongst those who didn't vote is likely to be a lot lower. Hence in an election with a higher turnout (ie a general election) they're unlikely to get anywhere near that share of the vote.
aracer is clearly part of the westminster establishment elite 😉
Will be interesting what happens when folk see their policies
Also interesting to see what a disprooportionate amount of coverage they get but I dont think thatis right wing bias I justthink thre is a massive anti EU vibe to the media - anyone remember a positive story on the EU in the press ever?
JY, tut, tut, please be fair. I am fundamentally against the concept of introducing fixed exchange rates in areas that do not fulfil the criteria for "optimum currency areas." That is different from being anti-EU and I doubt that (m)any UKIP candidates would understand the issue anyway. Most of the problems that I highlight on here stem directly or indirectly from the fact that Europe does not qualify as an OCA. Indeed, politically, I have great concerns that the ultimate breakdown of the € will have adverse effects on European harmony with a consequent and potentially dangerous rise in nationalism. Sadly I am not confident that there is a middle ground. I would like to see large parts of the € project remain, not least because it has removed the grotesque prospect of war from the region. But the absurd attachment to the fixed currency will make such an adjustment extremely difficult.
NF's immaturity when shown in his childlike and moronic attack of HvR illustrates clearly why UKIP is not the answer to Europe's problems. To be partisan here, DC is probably the closest to being correct IMO. We should desire to be members of a REFORMED Europe. Again not likely to be heard from UKIP.
But I do not agree with EL about there being no evidence of voters being attracted to UKIP policies. Now it's difficult to be precise on their policies once you get past two/three but I spent much of Friday driving and listening to the radio talk shows. Time after time, voters were stating their annoyance at the idea of protest votes and stated that there were specific reasons why they voted for UKIP. Their's were positive (sic) votes for the party whose polices most closely addressed their current concerns. They spanned quite a spectrum of society but with an undercurrent of social conservatism with very much a little "c". That is why Con and Lab need to take note. The Lib Dems were largely stuffed as they lost their traditional place as the home of the protest vote and (like the BNP before them?) they are shown to be very different beasts in power than merely in the relatively easy role of minority opposition.
As for media bias, that will be debated for hours. In the end, UKIP is a simply a story with a "character" at it's heart. Hence it sells headlines. Can anyone name (party's supporters apart) anyone from The Greens? Not quite front page stuff!
I spent much of Friday driving and listening to the radio talk shows. Time after time, voters were stating their annoyance at the idea of protest votes and stated that there were specific reasons why they voted for UKIP.
You genuinely think that your average UKIP voter is so motivated that they would phone a radio talk show and discuss politics ?
I can believe that UKIP members, candidates, and committed supporters, might feel strongly enough to phone talk shows, but I struggle to believe that they might be typical of last thursday's UKIP voters.
BTW, Mervyn King does deserve a bad press rather than hallowed status. His own departments were flagging the risks building up in the financial sector but he did not tackle them. Asleep at the watch. The forecasting record of the BoE has been poor hence their/his credibility needs to be questioned. They are also promoting a policy that is not have the desired effect because the one sector that he/they (should) understand remains broken or at least only in recovery stage given last week's 1Q results.
But as you know, I was not referring to Mervyn King! Think more Italy, Greece and Cyprus. 😉
Time after time, voters were stating their annoyance at the idea of protest votes and stated that there were specific reasons why they voted for UKIP
Did they state what those reasons were, other than that they weren't Lab/Con/LD?
Ernie, I am well aware of how BBC goes about dragging up volunteers. However, I do also credit them with some editorial standards and enough to indicate that, in this case, you are mistaken. There is evidence that people are drawn to UKIP (in addition to be driven from other parties). In addition to me, JY can point out that you have another unlikely ally in Ken Clarke 😉
Ernie, I am well aware of how BBC goes about dragging up volunteers.
Are you confusing me with someone else ?
I haven't mentioned anything about the BBC or volunteers. Whatever that means.
Good question Aracer, since the challenge for the main parties is the same ideas/desires exist win them as well despite officialy policy stances. So difficult to argue whether the ideas (EU, immigration, gay marriage, traditional (?) values/xenophobia) are unique to any party frankly.
[img] 
[/img]
JY, tut, tut, please be fair
Not sure how this could be considered unfair nor do i think you missed the point i made. He is not elected and doing economic actions that affect people ? Unlected folk is not an EU issue you can find them here easily. You got the point though so no idea why I had to do this
Can anyone name (party's supporters apart) anyone from The Greens? Not quite front page stuff!
I suspect if you gave them the wall to wall coverage we give UKIP and phone ins on the BBC then yes they would be able to. There is not much difference in terms of electoral success [ seats anyway] but can you name the last time they got coverage like this or front page media covrage like what UKIP get over and over again.
PS I doubt anyone can name anyone other than Farage as well but that is another issue
Luckily 45 percent of UKIP voters are over the age of 65 so they'll all be dead or senile soon. Although I'm sure they're senile already.
NSFW:
JY, my point was you claiming that I was anti EU (not for the first time by an means) That is not true. I am anti certain aspects of its current structure including the extension of the € too far. There are parts of Europe that could be common currency areas, but not the current lot. That (the € will not survive as it is) is one sure fire bet, the only question is timing and the severity of the shock that comes with the adjustment.
I agree that the coverage of UKIP is out-of-proportion especially pre-Thursday. So we have a fun challenge for newspaper editors. Fill the front pages with stories about the Green Party. That would address the balance but may well harm their circulation figures! Which will they chose/prioritise?
As an aside, given the oft-expressed dissatisfaction with the similarities between the major parties and the lack of genuine political debate in the UK, shouldn't the emergence of new political parties that capture genuine interest among the population be a cause for celebration. Or does that only count when their policies and ideology suits?
capture genuine interest among the population be a cause for celebration.
I don't think the reemergence of the far right (and I consider UKIP to be far right) across Europe in reaction to economic problems in the same manner as previous European political disasters is anything to be celebrating.
As for UKIP being an alternative for the masses disfranchised with the establishment as others have mentioned, UKIP couldn't be more public school establishment if they tried. They've just managed to hide it like the Tea Party.
Well I am celebrating for a very simple reason. The emergence of UKIP is exposing important questions to wider debate. I do not agree with their solutions, but I welcome the fact that their success now forces the mainstream parties to address these issues and especially the conflicts that exist within their own parties on issues such as Europe, sexuality, immigration etc. Then there is the important question of who represents the so-called, "working class social conservatives." Labour or the Tories? They are an example of sections of the UK that feel dis-enfranchised and it is important that we know just how the main parties (who despite all the hype will still form the next governments) intend to reconnect with them and address their challenges. If the "cost" of that debate and the answers (hopefully solutions) that it brings is a few extreme candidates on either side of the political specturm, then so be it. Blimey, I am a closet consequentialist!
As for UKIP being an alternative for the masses disfranchised with the establishment
i don't think ukip voters are disenfranchised from the establishment, i think they're just disenfranchised from the tory party which (rather worryingly) they imagine has moved too far to the centre.
Can anyone name (party's supporters apart) anyone from The Greens?
I can name their local councillors (not ones representing my area, but on my local council). Does that count?
Well I am celebrating for a very simple reason. The emergence of UKIP is exposing important questions to wider debate. I do not agree with their solutions, but I welcome the fact that their success now forces the mainstream parties to address these issues and especially the conflicts that exist within their own parties on issues such as Europe, sexuality, immigration etc. Then there is the important question of who represents the so-called, "working class social conservatives." Labour or the Tories? They are an example of sections of the UK that feel dis-enfranchised and it is important that we know just how the main parties (who despite all the hype will still form the next governments) intend to reconnect with them and address their challenges. If the "cost" of that debate and the answers (hopefully solutions) that it brings is a few extreme candidates on either side of the political specturm, then so be it. Blimey, I am a closet consequentialist!
So 45 percent of the voters are over the age of 65, these lot have a maximum of 20 years left and their numbers will decrease drastically over the next decade. That means (as UKIP got about...what was it...20-25 percent of the vote?) that adds up to around 13 percent of the vote that were of working age.
What I'm trying to get at is why should we legitimize the views of 13 percent of the working age nation and legitimize the views of a generation that no longer represents the future and direction of this country?
I agree that a referendum on the EU needs to be discussed but other than that this whole issue is giving political legitimacy to far right views and personally I take a German view about this - they should be sidelined and ridiculed, not discussed as if they were of a similar intellectual standing as the views of moderates.
IMO the media are driving a self-fulfilling prophecy in the way they seem to be constantly placing UKIP in the spotlight. It's almost like 650B wheels.
I dunno, I just finished reading "The True Believer: Thoughts On The Nature Of Mass Movements" consequently this whole saga is making me very very uneasy.
It's very quaint that ukip is considered right wing.
Check out golden dawn in Greece. That's a right wing party. Ukip is a centre liberal party.
Give it another couple of years and we'll see some proper right wing parties in Spain and Portugal. All thanks to the euro.
Sounds like one step away from Logan's Run?
The best way to sideline and ridicule is to allow them to expose themselves and put themselves up for scrutiny. Much better than censorship. It worked with the BNP and will, in time, work with UKIP unless they develop a wider, more credible political platform. Farage will become a mirage and we will see where the mainstream parties lie more clearly. That will be a positive outcome IMO.
It's very quaint that ukip is considered right wing.
Check old golden dawn in Greece. That's a right wing party. Ukip is a centre liberal party.
Not really, when you look at who the members are, who they are funded by and who they associate with they are far-right in all but name. They are Golden Dawn gentrified so the English can bring themselves to voting for them.
The best way to sideline and ridicule is to allow them to expose themselves and put themselves up for scrutiny. Much better than censorship.
Totally disagree once the media start engaging with them and holding their beliefs up as somehow as legitimate as rational well thought out political stances then the public get the idea that these views are perfectly reasonable and start to become attracted to them. You can't engage with UKIP voters rationally, it's a party that gains votes through emotion. The same goes for animal rights extremists, you can't argue with or change the supporters views but every time they get mass media attention they pull in more supporters.
It worked with the BNP and will
The British would never vote for an openly fascist party because of A) the cultural character of our nation and B) our history in fighting fascists. UKIP on the other hand are an entirely different matter, see my earlier point.
I'm afraid I can't share thm's enthusiasm. If it takes a party of people who think smoking in pubs is great and who don't like darkies or foreigners to revitalize politics in the UK, we are in a sorry state indeed.
Well, internal matters can be sorted out later without EU etc. All new govt has to go through those phase so I do not see a problem there. They will learn and learn it hard.
On the contrary - they have a shitload of people elected who are all under the UKIP brand but there has been not enough time to build a consensus on the policies the do have, or a set of policies that go beyond their vague platform. Farage is aware of this - hence the comment about not being able to screen all candidates. A few will turn out to be ex-Nazis or whatever, but a greater number will just turn out to be loopy or thick, and damage the brand.
More generally, as soon as an issue that comes along that doesn't fit into the foreigners/not-foreigners dichotomy, they won't have a freaking clue what to do, and will fracture. And in this they are just like the Greens.
are they bringing back smoking in pubs...!??
JY, my point was you claiming that I was anti EU (not for the first time by an means) That is not true
Well if you would like to state publicly that you would vote to stay in the EU then I will apologise. Farage also likes aspects of the EU like the free trade bit so no one is completely anti and no ones supports all aspects so no one is completely pro. I assumed you wished to leave us this wrong ?
Give it another couple of years and we'll see some proper right wing parties in Spain and Portugal. All thanks to [s]the euro[/s] capitalism.
are they bringing back smoking in pubs...!??
Yes, but not for foreigners.
English lung cancer for English people.
no ones supports all aspects
Which bits don't you like?
Yes, but not for foreigners.English lung cancer for English people.
oh.. 🙁
I'm quite exotic looking and my Dad was Scottish.. maybe I'll be allowed to smoke herbal tobacco, but only with my meal or something..
Loving all the lefty knicker twisting 🙂
So what is the 'Lefty' alternative?
The sensible 'lefty alternative' would be a functioning realistic media savvy Labour party.
I know... 🙄
