Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » By-election second places are no longer good enough for UKI
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » By-election second places are no longer good enough for UKIP. A win in 2014 would be a great launchpad for the general election
politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress
with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I suspect they'd rather win the European elections than a single Westminster by-election. If they wouldn't, then they should. Concentrating on a few constituencies here and there is a blind alley leading to a mirage.
UKIP also need the right by-election to come up. A traditionally safe Labour seat with a Con-LD government doesn't give them much hope.
It's possible, but probable? Not so much. Time is running out. An MP isn't everything of course but Galloway and the Greens got one so if a by-election doesn't come along you can be 100% certain Crosby and the tories will use that to hammer home the message the kippers are a fringe protest party after the EU elections are fading into memory. Will it work? By itself it's simply not enough ammunition for Cammie to get them under 5% and back to 2010 levels. That would need a Farage and kipper implosion and/or outbreak of deadly serious kipper infighting.
I'm not sure what impact Scottish independence will have on UKIP's chances of winning a seat - having failed to save the Union or win the GE, I figure the conservative vote may or may not really take a battering, which could open up opportunities for UKIP.
A win for UKIP would be highly significant. Not sure I see it happening.
UKIP can have far more impact on the political narrative by threatening the position of 200 existing MPs - not necessarily to their own candidate but by taking enough votes to affect the result - than by fighting a dozen really hard and maybe winning three or four.
*NB: I don't know if Nigel Evans is guilty, I'm not saying he's guilty. I'm just saying if he triggers a by-election because of it that will be politically bad for the Tories in holding the seat.
UKIP are regularly outpolling the Lib Dems. They're likely to win the next European elections. And whilst they are a bit one man show others, such as Nutall, are being given more prominence. They could fade away again, or become the fourth party of UK politics.
While there could be a by-election in Ribble Valley it's not quite ideal territory for UKIP. They must have done better in dozens of other seats in last year's locals. Mind you there is a tradition of large by-election swings in the constituency...
It's tough to think of a Kent seat where you wouldnt give them a fighting chance of a win but all those Kent MPs seem healthy and squeaky clean
The Lib Dems' success was based on:
- Very hard working activists
- Focussing relentlessly on local issues
- Being seen as nice and untainted, particularly in comparison against the parties of government.
- Winning tactical votes against Con or Lab by building on a local base and then being the least worst option.
Which was all very well when small and in opposition but was always unsustainable as soon as they had to adopt and stick to policies in government, which would inevitably include all sorts of unpopular ones into the bargain. Simply going into government would undermine part of that tactical coalition, while the policies would hit the bucket protest vote. Yet there came a point where growing to 50, 60, 70 MPs meant it was highly likely that they would end up in government as a junior partner.
It is true that they might have had the chance to reform the voting system but even if they did, would it have helped. The Scottish elections were held under PR and the Lib Dems can still arrive in a taxi. The European elections will be held under PR and the Lib Dems might be able to go in a motorcycle and sidecar. The German Liberals lost their representation in parliament altogether under PR at the last elections, in part because they lost a sense of identity.
The cost of concentrating on a smallish number of seats (10-15% in the Lib Dems' case) is that you inevitably write off 85-90%. As a result, if you ever are in a position to really break through, there are a huge number where you're starting on a very small share. The Lib Dems' vote is well concentrated now to return a mid-double-digit number of MPs. That's no doubt a legacy of their disappointments in the 1980s but as well as a more solid floor, it's also a glass ceiling.
Where does that leave UKIP? They can follow the Lib Dem path and hope one day to have enough MPs to force a referendum - but it might take decades. Or they can use their VI presence now to affect how existing MPs of other parties think and act. Their call.
The kippers have got to the point where if they keep ridding themselves of the extremists and BNP parasites who try to jump on their bandwagon, while trying to fight an election seriously with the intent of winning MPs, then that should be more than enough to cause a huge impact
Farage loves being a pressure group that makes tories jump. Make no mistake about that. But he would be even more effective at that with MPs and would use any MPs to try to become far bigger fourth westminster party that could never be ignored again. That he would love more than anything.
Will the kippers win seats? Maybe, maybe not. Will fighting an election like they want to win seats be invaluable practice if they hope to have a future after 2015? Absolutely.
1) is the BBC version of reality true or not,
2) did the credit bubble 1998-2008 disguise massive underlying problems or not.
One set of answers to those questions says Ukip are better off gradually trying to build the groundswell to good 2nd places everywhere and then over the top in one go.
*chortle*
The Lib Dems had two very strong parties to try and oust, UKIP have three weaker (relative to the middle of the century blues and reds) parties. Esteem of politicians has never been lower, but UKIP are effectively free of the taint, to the extent that even gaffes appear to be refreshing honest or harmless freedom of thought.
That's not to say I think UKIP will storm to power at once. They could yet fade away to nothingness, but if they do rise and rise it'll probably be faster, I think, than the Lib Dems.
Per link, Evans trial date is set for 10 March. Don't know whether there is a chance of a delay and how long case will last - is there a chance they could just hold out and avoid a by-election even if he is forced to resign?
If he were to resign mid summer I wonder if they might hold by-election on same date as Scottish Independence referendum so it gets overshadowed if UKIP win.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-24397834
Hmmmmm? According to who? This sounds like a set up line for sage Libdem bloggers to metaphorically shake their heads sombrely, tug their chins and declare the 'UKIP rising' dead the next time UKIP don't win a by-election (even one where Lord Ashcroft's polling indicates in the run-up they are 47 points behind the certain winner).
Sure it would be great if in one of UKIPs target seats (where they have previously done well) there was suddenly a by-election but outside those 10 or maybe 20 seats its totally unrealistic to believe that UKIP could achieve more than second place in the current climate.
Mid-summer I don't think so, not for a referendum that isn't taking place in the area.
"Don't vote for the Labour Party. They can't get in so a vote for them is a wasted vote and will just let the Tories back in. You must vote Liberal, at least the are not as bad"
A bit over a century ago an awful lot of people came to the conclusion that the political classes didn't speak for them or represent their views.
Yes, a Westminster by-election win would certainly shake things up and if they get the chance, they have to take it. However, winning the European elections would, in my opinion, be a bigger win both in its own right and in terms of the knock-on effect on the other parties.
The Lib Dems (and Greens, in Lucas), built their bases locally and strongly first. It's a route but it's not the only one, and it's questionable whether UKIP have the activists to make it work even if they wanted to. Fighting a top-down air war is equally legitimate if the opportunity is there.
UKIP's top priority should be ensuring that Farage appears in four-way PM election-time debates. If they can achieve that, it'll be worth tens of millions of leaflets by itself.
They concentrate their limited resources on their best prospects, highlighted by the 2014 local election results.
But UKIP think that if they do well in May in the EU and local elections Labour will match the Conservatives EU referendum offer. Perhaps they'll even vote a 2017 referendum bill thru before the 2015 election.
It's why Farage isn't interviewed by Marr the same as the other party leaders, UKIP only on Question Time occasionally, no regular appearance on This Week etc etc etc etc - it's all very well established and there is zero chance of any change.
I fear if any politician can deliver Scottish independence, it is him.
Cerainly a big mistake not to deliver that speech from Scotland.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DTHmPtOTBo
EDIT: That's losing with 30% of the vote to Labour's 50%, just to clarify.
Exactly. Possibly the most transparent setting up some one for a fall ever seen!
Quite embarrassing. I think OGHs misreading of the DNV/others share of the UKIP vote has revved up the hatred to 11 on the spinal tapometer.
Oh look, there's a four runner race tomorrow with a 1/12 fav... If the lightly raced maiden that is second in the betting doesn't turn it over its an absolute disaster for connections
If UKIP has just won the last major national election, has outpolled the Lib Dems in the last two sets of local elections, the PCC elections in November 2012 and the great majority of Westminster by-elections all parliament, they might reasonably argue that the rules are not compliant, failing to take into account the significant structural change since 2010 and preventing fair coverage and - consequently - Farage should be entitled to a debate spot.
I'm not saying they'd win but it is at least arguable.
Elections are dealt with separately under Ofcom (i.e. UKIP are a major party for Euros but not GEs) so that wouldn't be especially relevant.
Don't think they've have a hope tbh. Might be worth is as a publicity shot, but not with much hope beyond that.
Given they are intending to stand in all or close to all seats, have a good chance of doubling their vote on last time as a conservative estimate, even without an MP it would be hard to argue against them getting included post 2015, but an MP would really seal the deal - otherwise, there's no incentive to alter things, as you say, and for all UKIP's bluster, there is a limit on how many people are going to vote for them out of frustration at the other three; after all, there's a reason they are all very blandly similar in style and substance, despite making efforts to appear distinct policy wise in highly minute areas. Because that is what has worked up to now.
UKIP is the nation's favourite political party. :-)
http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/1076/sunday-mirror-independent-on-sunday-political-poll.htm
Re: everyone-loves-the-LDs
The LDs are the third choice for Labour supporters, UKIP are the 2nd choice for Labour supporters.
The LDs are the third choice for Conservative supporters, UKIP are the 2nd choice for Conservative supporters.
http://comresupdates.eu.com/DCJ-24O6F-F21LMD8E11/cr.aspx
Mr. Pork, you keep using that term so presumably you know who you are talking about. I wonder if you would oblige and tell the rest of us. Who are these "PB tories"?
"You loved me as a loser, but now you're afraid that I just might win."
And it is law for certain that he can't be empty chaired during the campaign.
The laws around coverage specify that the parties must be offered the opportunity. If they are given the opportunity and don't turn up it's perfectly legal to empty chair them.
Yes, elections are dealt with separately and UKIP is rightly regarded as a major party for European elections. However, when they've outpolled the Lib Dems in pretty much every set of election, and most Westminster opinion polls, for half a parliament, could it really be considered fair to include the Lib Dems and not UKIP?
That said, as others have mentioned, gaining a parliamentary by-election really would help that case.
The most likely in Wythenshawe seems to be that they'll do better than the poll rating but not come close to winning, which should have a broadly neutral effect. The trouble with winning the Euros, if they do, is that people will say it's because it was the Euros. Like Mike I think they probably do need to win a by-election, or at least come very close.
Could Cameron afford to be the absent punch-bag of the other three if he didn't turn up (and there's nothing more certain than that he would be in those circumstances). It would be dreadful PR and dreadful politics.
As for the law, IIRC, it's fine to empty chair (or lectern!) someone, providing that they've had reasonable chance to take part and have declined.
Con/Lab/LD activists may be an exception.
To be fair to the Libs with Labour, had WWI not led to the splitting of the Liberals into Asquithite and Lloyd Georgers, with one lot discredited and the other in coalition with (most of) the Tories, Labour might not have emerged as an independent party, though it was heading in that direction even before WWI.
So arguably had a higher disparity between their seat numbers and these other measures. (I am fortunately too young to remember that election, or the level of coverage the Alliance received compared to the other parties).
Under your system surely they'd be entitled to the most coverage of all the parties, or equal at the very least.
The SDP were treated as part of the SDP-Liberal Alliance, but a strict reading of (current) rules could have meant they didn't have to be, ludicrous though such an interpretation would be.
Yes, elections are dealt with separately and UKIP is rightly regarded as a major party for European elections. However, when they've outpolled the Lib Dems in pretty much every set of election, and most Westminster opinion polls, for half a parliament, could it really be considered fair to include the Lib Dems and not UKIP?
That said, as others have mentioned, gaining a parliamentary by-election really would help that case.
Quite so. That is the sticker, in that while I wouldn't mind if UKIP were included in the debates, until their high support consistent in this parliament is actually reflected in a GE (impressive though they are, by-election second places are not the same thing, and a reversion to 5% after 25% in a by-election would make including them seem retroactively inappropriate), it can still be argued with reasonable strength that they are not deserving of such equal representation.
Get enough votes at the GE, 2-3 million, and even if they win no seats and it would be such a massive showing of support that those arguments against non-inclusion would be far harder to sustain.
I know it has its issues, and I've been criticised for it before, but I think the trifecta of MPs, significant levels of support nationally and how many seats they are standing in (to demonstrate they are fighting a truly national campaign) is a fair basis. Include parties if they have MPs and you have to include Greens and Respect, who have no intention of challenging nationally. Make it on seats standing in alone and you might end up giving a party which might have almost no support a platform if they have the dosh to put up enough candidates even with no proven levels of support at previous GEs. If you insist they need MPs and significant support then a party which has millions of votes might be excluded because they have broken through despite such huge support.
Bottom line, if UKIP are patient and don't implode they will get that breakthrough eventually, and the conservatives and the EU itself seem to be all they can to encourage them, unintentionally.
But there is a middle way, not to underestimate and write off or wildly raise expectations, and just be realistic
It's possible LD+UKIP could get >30% next time, but come away with what? 5% of the seats combined...
But it is also the case that no one really knows how much of teh UKIP support will remain come the GE even if they have been very successful at the Euros. As such Mike is simply speculating as is everyone else on here, some more realistically than others.
I try to keep it real by offering bets... if I'm being too bullish I pay through the pocket... But no one takes me up on them!
http://www.southernwater.co.uk/at-home/your-water/water-resources/reservoir-levels/
Often ploughs its own furrow when it comes to the news agenda; a delightful little phrase I shall have to steal.
11 Liberals elected in 1979
2 Liberal by-election victors
27 defectors (26 Lab, 1 Con)
2 SDP by-election victors
(not including a guy called O'Halloran who defected, then re-defected to sit as Ind. Lab)
People won't be solely talking about the Euro results.
All the ducks were in a row... but a miss is as good as a mile.
As for this by-election, ~ 25% of the vote is broadly neutral for the narrative, anything over 30% will be a stonking achievement.
Sale and Wythenshawe East is far away from the UKIP heartlands of the East of England. Anyone who thought UKIP was going to win was being very unrealistic.
If you want a barometer of how UKIP will do in a sensible but realistic optimistc fashion read Richard Tyndall and iSam's posts. If you want to read fantasy-land fairy tale stuff and 100% do your cash if you're betting on UKIP then MikeK is your man.
History shows that the electoral system is invariable only changed when one of the big two parties fears being locked out, or supplanted by another.
That's why most European countries changed to PR in the early 1900s. Fear of mass enfranchisement and eternal socialism as a result.
We nearly changed also, but the Liberals fumbled the ball... and lost.
Electoral systems can be cruel and paradoxical. That's why they interest me so much...
The closest was the AV-STV combo passed five times by the Commons in 1917, but blocked by the Lords. It fell by one vote (IIRC) in the end...
More like HAVE to be.
Night all.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRuGWMk1sZ4
http://www.heart.co.uk/southcoast/news/local/portsmouth-mp-mike-hancock-admitted-to-hospital/
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1931/jul/09/first-schedule-1
Not many logicians or mathematicians around on the red benches in 1931 either...
4 months ago (edited)
Did you know the original version of A-Ha's "Take on Me" included the lyrics "Hip Hip Hooray," "Anchors Aweigh," And some kind of mutant rooster crowing noise? NOW YA DO! #80s #norway #popmusic "
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc6MumuychA
I think it's "anchors away" actually.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ8Nx7u-zso
Alison Wolf nails that one imo...