They're completely clueless about how to deal with the likes of Salmond and Farage - people who actually believe in something, and are also clever bastards.
i cant let this go. what does ukip believe in? someone please sum up what they stand for beyond populism.
mefty its cherry picking to use Euro elections as their "success"
How about general elections ?
2001 1.5 % 390,563
2006 2.2 % 605,973
2010 3.1% 919,471
Its a rich irony that they can only get votes to the one place they dont want to be ...always makes me chuckle - almost like we are taking the piss.
i cant let this go. what does ukip believe in? someone please sum up what they stand for beyond populism.
"UKIP is a patriotic party that promotes independence: from the EU, and from government interference. We believe in free trade, lower taxes, personal freedom and responsibility."
If recently deceased Labour MP for Middleton Jim Dobbin had been a UKIP or Tory candidate he would have been rightly flamed on here for his religious convictions that motivated his views and voting in parliament on same sex marriage,same sex adoption and Section 28.I find it hard to believe that Labour has such dinosaurs in it's ranks.
what does ukip believe in?
That's a tricky one. While no one quite knows what UKIP believes in we do know what they don't believe in ........ their own manifesto apparently.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25879302 ]Nigel Farage: 2010 UKIP manifesto was 'drivel'[/url]
So to sum up : UKIP [i]believes[/i] that their own manifesto was drivel. And that the UK should leave the EU, probably, because now they really quite like the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) being negotiated between the EU and the US, so who knows.
mefty its cherry picking to use Euro elections as their "success"
It showed their development over time, you were implying they hadn't been much of a factor, the general election results are not as pronounced but again they beat the greens in terms of number of votes in each of those elections by at least a factor of two.
😆not as pronounced
Newspeak phrase of the week to describe having no MP's and barely increasing their vote. However you wish to spin it nationally they are poor, very poor.
Thanks for that.
But we are looking at a relative comparison, not absolutes, because the suggestion was that the Greens do not get "fair" media coverage compared to UKIP. The Greens have never been a significant factor in any National Election whereas UKIP have and in the elections where UKIP don't perform well they still consistently out poll the Greens.
The Greens have never been a significant factor in any National Election whereas UKIP have
In the 2009 United Kingdom local elections the Greens ended up with more than twice as many councilors as UKIP.
In the 2008 United Kingdom local elections the Greens ended up with five times as many councilors as UKIP.
But they weren't a significant factor nationally (top 3) when you look at total seats compared to the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour, neither were UKIP. Although, and I must admit this surprised me, UKIP seem to have more Councillors than the Greens at the present by 470 to 170 - neither is significant when the Tories have more than 8,000, Labour have 7,000 and the Lib Dems have 2,000.
UKIP seem to have more Councillors than the Greens at the present
But there was a time not long ago when they had more councilors than UKIP. The Greens have never received the same sort of media attention as UKIP have, even when they had more councilors than UKIP.
I must admit this surprised me
What surprised you - that the Greens got five times more councilors than UKIP in the 2008 local elections ? Of course it did, it surprised me.
With the media news blackout of the Green Party I wouldn't be surprised if some people were surprised to discover that the Greens have an MP and control a large local council, unlike UKIP.
I don't dispute that - my point has always been the Greens have never had a nationwide break through, whereas UKIP certainly have in the Euro elections (and for clarity, only those elections). The break through is what causes the coverage.
Obviously not - but you made me smile - Caroline Lucas is on Question Time pretty often, though significantly less than Farage, so it is hardly a blackout.
So Labour has increased its percentage of the vote in the Heywood and Middleton by election, with the Tory and Lib Dem vote collapsing.
This is a dreadful argument, what is the point of a political party if you don't seek power - there isn't one.
the point of a political party is to accomplish things. being in government is a tool for that, it's not the end in itself - Lib Dems forgot this simple point.
Caroline Lucas is on Question Time pretty often, though significantly less than Farage, so it is hardly a blackout.
BBC Question Time is hardly typical of the wider media**. If you are going to argue that the Green Party gets significant coverage in the media then I think I'll leave it there.
You have already admitted that you were surprised to discover that until recently the Green Party had considerably more councilors than UKIP. The media clearly ignores Green Party related news and focuses heavily on all UKIP related news. If you want to pretend otherwise then I'm not going waste my time arguing as it seems a bit pointless.
**BBC Question Time has a deliberate policy of giving representation to smaller parties, Nigel Farage regularly appears on QT more than any other politician, including those from the 3 main parties.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/why-nigel-farage-question-time-so-often
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11153129/Heywood-and-Middleton-by-election-Labour-holds-off-Ukip-surge-by-just-617-votes.html ]Anyone still think labour doesn't need to worry about UKIP? [/url]
Heywood and Middleton is hardly a good example of why Labour should be worried about UKIP Binners, other than that former Tory and LibDem voters might unite against them.
In Heywood and Middleton Labour very slightly increased their share of the vote compared to 4 years ago.
In contrast the Tory vote collapsed to less than half of what it was 4 years ago.
And the LibDems, well the LibDems got less than a quarter of the votes they got 4 years ago.
The Tories and the LibDems should be very worried about the rise of UKIP.
Labour did less well in Clacton last night but that isn't their territory and the Tories and LibDems did considerably worse. The LibDems got 1.3% ffs.
Going by last night's results UKIP damages the Tories and LibDems far more than it damages Labour.
Tiny turnout but a surprise for Labour, Liz McInnes who won sounds like an angry fish wife 😕
I would vote Green as well but a few of their policies just dont work for me.
JY I started this thread as thought a piece of research from the Fabian Society (a left wing thinnk tank ) was interesting, as yes because it's been saying what I've been saying for 18 months. All the political parties need to take UKIP seriously. I see repeated above that "more of the same" will be good enough to defeat UKIP. I do not agree. UKIP ahev tapped into a major issue which the other parties are trying to sweep under the carpet or at a minimum defer.
The result last night in Heywood should prove the shock and awe that Labour need to get it's act together. They came within 617 votes of a stunning loss.
Still ignoring that in both results the Cons and Lib Dems got hammered
the Fabian Society (a left wing thinnk tank )
Really are they - Thanks for that 😉
The result last night in Heywood should prove the shock and awe that Labour need to get it's act together. They came within 617 votes of a stunning loss.
Unlike the tories who did lose - I assue,m that was not stunning
FWIW Labour increased their vote in the election - what happend to the Tory vote?
Your right here lets discuss labour and UKIP
But in the end, with a 36% turnout, Labour's Liz McInnes got 11,633 votes - 41% - with UKIP's John Bickley gaining 11,016 - 39%.
Conservative Iain Gartside came third with 3,496 votes - 12% - and Liberal Democrat Anthony Smith fourth with 1,457 - 5%. Abi Jackson of the Green Party got 870 votes - 3% of the total.
last election
Lab -40.1
Cons-27.2
lib dem -22.7
BNP -7
UKIP -2.6
I am not sure how you can look at all the other parties votes capitulating and labour remaining firm as a poor result for labour. I am not sure how you can ignore the tory loss to an ex tory led by an ext tory for a party funded by an ex tory - oh yes I can it is an entirely polemical point not reflected in reality
As per the facts and you analysis are not even within touching distance.
Not often me and thee agree on stuff Jambalaya, but you're absolutely bang on. I've also been saying it all along, that if labour think that UKIP are just a problem for the Tories (and back in Westminster thats clearly exactly what they're thinking) then they're in for a major wake up call! And last night should have provided it.
Middleton is the epitome of a 'labour stronghold'. You could stick a gerbil up for election, and if it was wearing labour colours, they'd get in. Its majority at the last election was 6,000. Last night it was 600. UKIP got 11,000 votes. They got 39% of the vote, to Labours 41%.
If the labour party don't view that as a course for concern then they're about to lose a lot of northern seats, because UKIP will chuck everything at the ones they deem winnable. And there are plenty of those with a lot slimmer labour majorities than Middleton.
And its not about left or right so much. Of all people Duncan Carswell just summed it up. He pointed out the bleeding obvious. People are sick to death of the cozy corporate governance we've now got, where the concerns of voters are never even considered, while corporate lobbyists get everything they ask for. That disillusionment isn't just a problem for the Tories.
Its going to be really interesting to see what happens in Rochester next month. UKIP will throw the kitchen sink at that one. So it could be another win. Or maybe if it splits the Tory vote to the extent that Daves nightmare of letting labour into previously safe Tory seats comes to pass
Labour are suffering a double whammy of the tabloid obsession with Europe immigration etc and Ed millibands charisma deficit.
The torries must be crapping it, will be chaos within the party right now I'd have thought, Carswell will have the Torry elite bricking it over who they'll lose next and how bonkers rightwing they'll have to get, meanwhile the backbenchers will be weighing up what a ukip jump would mean in their own constituencies.
Its a real worry for labour but a crisis for the Tories,
However the possibility of a ukip/ con coalition and a disastrous exit from the EU looms large, for us and the EU and that would spell a m CH worse recession than the 2008 crash caused.
The Tories and the LibDems should be very worried about the rise of UKIP.
@ernie (and JY) The Tories (and Lib Dem probably) are worried about UKIP, my point is that Labour should be too.
JY I think the Tories expected to lose Clacton, the vote stayed with the sitting MP and he had a 10,000 seat majority retaining his vote from the general election. Personally I was expecting to see Labour hold Heyward with a comfortable majority (5,000 or 10%), they nearly lost it. I appreciate your analysis but its my view the Labour party will be taking UKIP a lot more seriously, that's a good thing.
Middleton is the epitome of a 'labour stronghold'.
Whihc will be why they got the same % of the vote as last time.
Its a by election where folk typically do a protest vote [ the other parties all shifted to UKIP] and they still held it
There is really no need for this hysteria - though complacency is unwise.
Kimbers... that truly is the ultimate nightmare scenario. It just doesn't bear thinking about.
*shudders*
@kimbers it's pretty clear UKIP would enter a coalition with the Tories on the basis there would be an in-out referendum on the EU. So I don't see such a big parliamentary impact unless as Labour are desperately wishing for UKIP votes elect Labour MPs. It's going to be a very interesting few months before the general election.
Binners is right about the protest vote against th e Westminster posh boys and their corporate puppet masters
The crazy thing is that son of a millionaire,ex hedge fund trader, public school educated, expenses fraudster Farige has been able to pass himself off as a working mans alternative coz he's never photo opped without a pint and a fag
@ jam so UKIP take an MP and a seat /votes from the Tories and none of these from labour in Middleton and labour need to take them seriously. the vote changed because of what UKIP did to other parties not labour -that is what the stats say.
What do the Tories need to do then in your analysis if the events?
More of the same but with greater intensity. The Tories have promised a referendum on the EU if they win a majority (key part that last bit). They will persist with message/scare tactic that a vote for UKIP will let Labour in.
My point remains that the Clacton result was inevitable (that's why he resigned the seat, he had no need to do that), the new information here was how much of a dent UKIP could make in the Labour vote.
the vote changed because of what UKIP did to other parties not labour -that is what the stats say.
Hmm, hardly that simple, a lump of the Labour vote this time is returned limp dems, matched by core labour flight to ukip. What we have undoubtedly also seen, and are likely to see in the next election is tactical voting. A Tory voter in a safe labour seat would be mad to vote conservative rather than ukip this time round. Equally a Tory voter in a swing seat would be crazy to vote ukip.
PS. I reiterate my belief that carswell will take the ukip lead into the election. Last nights speech said a lot about the future direction of ukip, I think there will be a night of the long knives very soon, and a behind the scenes deal with the tories
Here's an interesting angle on it: [url= http://www.cityam.com/1412904231/ukip-must-show-it-can-scale-uber-editor-s-letter ]CityAM[/url]
the new information here was how much of a dent UKIP could make in the Labour vote.
THE LABOUR PARTY VOTE INCREASED
There is no dent. Your view, the facts and reality are at odds with each other once more.
Its pointless discussing with you when you say stuff that is factually incorrect and then just repeat it.
Certainly interesting times on the political scene. I reckon the poor old Lib Dems are finished and UKIP will become the third party after the next election. The two Eds have no chance, so the big question now, is whether the next Government will be Tory or a Tory/UKIP coalition?
I hope Junky is finishing off his humble pie after his post yesterday! 😳
Thinking back to when UKIP were headed up by that perma-tanned chat show bloke (can't remember the idiot's name now), have they changed under Farridge or do we think it's just surface embellishments?
I still don't think you can extrapolate from a Byelection - nothing is at stake, so people feel they can make protest votes without the consequences.
A Tory ukip coalition seems likely but poison chalice for ukip?
It certainly was for the lib dems,
I can also see a lot of any labour swing to ukip dissapearing if it means voting in another Tory government !
Rockape the problem there is that if a ukip/ concoaltion couldn't be made to work (the pro business Tory's know EU exit is madness) then that hands labour the win, especially if a lot of con voters go ukip
What do the Tories need to do then in your analysis if the events?
the Tories are perfectly aware of the risk that UKIP poses to them. that's why they're splitting: half are running to the right to reclaim the nasty party crown and half are running to the left to capture the LabLibDem vote. it won't work.
JY read what I posted and the sentence you actually quoted, the keyword is could. You can talk all you like about percentages but Labour where 617 votes from losing the seat. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Wopster - that'll be Robert Kilroy Silk
[img] 
[/img]
I know people who live in Middleton, and say that the UKIP operation was pretty slick. They had loads of people out canvassing. Knocking on doors, leafleting. In force. Were the other political parties doing this? No. Because they don't have any members. UKIP do. loads of them. And they're enthusiastic and committed. And as for organisation..... apparently its all being looked after by a lot of the campaign managers who used to work for the Tories. So they're seasoned, and they know what they're doing.
And look what it got them? 39% of the vote* in a 'Labour Stronghold'. I'm sure that Nige will be very happy for people to keep dismissing them as amateurs. They aren't. They're quietly becoming a serious political force
* Remember that both Labour and the Tories electoral strategy for May is to limp over the line with 35% of the vote. Hows that plan looking this morning?
he big question now, is whether the next Government will be Tory or a Tory/UKIP coalition?
Not even the tory head office expect to win it. They have been behing in the polls since 2011. Is this a fact free thread for Tory dreams?
I hope Junky is finishing off his humble pie after his post yesterday!
Not sure I get your point tbh.
I am not indulging it I am criticising the point and rejecting it - it is not a valid point he has made. the stats are there their vote increased. If a party threatened me i would expect to lose votes and especially in a by election where a protest vote is the norm
the entire thread premise is a joke not worth of being taken seriously or discussed. Its the tory who are getting murdered and mullered by the UKIP as shown by the fact labour vote share increased and the Tories lost an MP, a seat and a majority with another to follow in 2 weeks times
yes labour need to be very afraid of UKIP - that is what all this clearly shows...FACEPALM
THE LABOUR PARTY VOTE INCREASEDThere is no dent. Your view, the facts and reality are at odds with each other once more.
Its pointless discussing with you when you say stuff that is factually incorrect and then just repeat it.
2014: 40.9%
2010: 40.1%
2005: 49.8%
2001: 57.7%
1997: 57.7%
1992: 52.3%
1987: 49.9%
1983: 43.3%
1979: 45.8% (Middleton and Prestwich seat)
1974Oct: 45.8%
1974Feb: 39.8%
So, go on Junky, you can carry on presenting this as something less than a nightmare, but in a pre election year, with a reigning Tory government meaning that Labour should be running at an all time high in a core Labour seat like this, this is a massacre!
the keyword is could
Anything could happen - one of your posts could be supported by facts for example.
The coffee says the labour vote held up [ everyone else collapsed]and tories are loosing seats and MP's to UKIP
That leads me to think they are more of a problem for the Tories than Labour
I know its a crazy fact based conclusion i have reached there and I hope you can forgive me.
Tory fanboys clutching at straws to try and deflect from the hell of beating you took last night with another one to come.
Would make more sense to discuss if any more Tories will defect between now and the election than say labour need to be worried. Its the tories who are in trouble due to UKIP - that is what the facts say.
this is a massacre!
Aye holding on to seats is a massacre 😆
What colourful hyperbolic language would you use for the UKIP win/Tory defeat then ?
Genocide ?
Armageddon?
Not one of your best scribbles but I did genuinely laugh
I have to agree with ninfan: labour got barely more of the vote than when their discredited government was kicked out at the last general election. There is no way they're getting back into office next May with this sort of performance.
Like binners, I'm a lefty disillusioned with labour, which is why I vote Green. Whilst I don't agree with all of their policies, overall they're closer to my aspirations than any of the other political parties.