It looks like all the main parties now have something to think about, now that a bunch of fruitcakes, loons and closet racists are gaining popularity ( how's that comment working now, Dave?) It's clear that Farage now has some serious thinking to do as well, if he wants to make UKIP a real contender, with costed policies and a bigger media presence. You only ever see him or Nuttall in the limelight, so UKIP should get together a sort of "shadow" front bench, rather than the one or two man show it is now.
The biggest risk for the Kippers is they start to believe their own bullshit. The same happened the Nats in the 2011 hubris and they then fell flat on their face as it quickly became apparent they didn't have their policies ready. Partly they suffered from being too successful and not expecting it.
Patrick - Well Boris is clearly still the only hope on that view, but clearly the election is not lost for Cameron, Labour has not made huge gains based on these results, but UKIP has, the next election rests on whether Cameron can win back the UKIP vote
Miss Plato, as well as other differences a very important one between the rise of UKIP and when the BNP were doing better politically is that all three major parties have the same issue. Labour are, rightly, blamed for our financial plight, and letting immigration rip.
The Coalition is seen as too soft by the right, and the left are disappointed in the Lib Dems.
All three parties are led by millionaires with semi-identical backgrounds, which include a near (or actual) total career in politics. There's also a cosy consensus (which people bang on about as if a consensus is a good thing, whereas in reality consensus in a democracy means the electorate lose the ability to make an alternative choice) regarding climate change and policies which will hike the costs in a very difficult fashion for ordinary folk (but which party leaders will barely notice) and the EU, which a very large proportion of people wish to leave.
The only stand-out part of the three parties on those issues are the Conservative backbenchers, most prominently on the EU.
Marquee Mark - Rubbish. Research has shown of post-war elections only 1992 would have been a hung parliament outside of 2010, with the Tories largest party, and of course on present trends AV would give UKIP significantly more seats than the Liberals!
Good morning. All I can say on the UKIP results so far, are those fine words from the ancient boss in that old sitcom "Are You Being Served". AREN'T WE DOING WELL!
Didn't young Mr Grace used to say "You've all done very well"?
So very true Hertsmere. I forgot the old b*ggers name. LOL
If a former Tory Council becomes NOC due to loss of seats to UKIP, will UKIP link with the Cons to form a majority on that council and keep any left-wing alliance at bay.
" The biggest risk for the Kippers is they start to believe their own bullshit. The same happened the Nats in the 2011. "
The difference is that Salmond (Arc of Prosperity / Euro/RBS/BoE/Nato/Monarchy etc ) was always serving up bullshit , as events have shown , whereas events have vindicated Farage.
Some hilarious and startling results local to me (Herts).
In my ward UKIP got 35% from nowhere, tory vote down 15% but LD down to 8% from 30% In Braughing ward the LDs went from 26% to less than 4%, which is astonishingly dire. Labour dribbling up a few % but given they were within 3-5000 of winning the parliamentary seats here in 2001 they are still way off where they were.
UKIP getting well over 20% everywhere they are standing, but looks like no seat in Hertfordshire (randomly 7 wards counting today)
Mr. G, indeed not, alas. However, Journey to Altmortis will hopefully be out later this month and I'll try and get ye olde comedy done by Christmas.
[New books have a double bonus for new authors. They show you're not a one-hit wonder, and they also have the advantage that if someone buys book 2 they can then buy book 1, and if they liked book 1 and see book 2's arrived they can buy that as well].
I've just listened to Farage on R4. There's something quite Hitlerian about him. Easy answers. Grab a country when it's its down. Blame it all on immigrants and a political class who aren't listening. Start with the old and the uneducated because don't ask questions. Give people the idea that you're an amiable joke who'll disappear after giving the political class a shake-up.....
Peter, Hertfordshire's more affluent, though, which is why UKIP appear not to have won any seats, despite several results in the 30-35% range. They won 9 non-affluent divisions in Essex, and were a handful of Votes away from taking Pitsea off Labour, which is perhaps the most deprived division in the South.
Do you expect Ukip to do any better in the remaining SW Herts seats to declare ?
The biggest risk for the Kippers is they start to believe their own bullshit. The same happened the Nats in the 2011 hubris and they then fell flat on their face as it quickly became apparent they didn't have their policies ready.
By that you mean going from a minority administration to a majority one under PR and then winning the scottish local elections in 2012 in popular vote, seats and biggest gains?
Incisive PBtory analysis as always.
LOL
Perhaps the tea party tories should bang on about Europe, immigration and welfare yet again because it certainly looks like another triumph for the fops this morning after they did so.
LOL. Did the Lib-Dems REALLY lose their deposit and come in behind the BNP at South Shields? :^O
Don't mock - they got 1.4% of the votes... the poor chappy didn't stand a chance, but according to Mr Crick not a single LD MP bothered to help him campaign.
Shadsy still offering 8/1 on UKIP for the next GE constituency betting in Eastleigh.When u look at the figures that Mike has posted above then the residual Tories may just vote UKIP to get rid of the Lib Dems..Tactical voting coming home to roost you may say. Dont think that price will be there for long..
I've just listened to Farage on R4. There's something quite Hitlerian about him. Easy answers. Grab a country when it's its down. Blame it all on immigrants and a political class who aren't listening. Start with the old and the uneducated because don't ask questions. Give people the idea that you're an amiable joke who'll disappear after giving the political class a shake-up.....
Yes, but he's not an evil and twisted little racist, Roger.
The biggest risk for the Kippers is they start to believe their own bullshit. The same happened the Nats in the 2011 hubris and they then fell flat on their face as it quickly became apparent they didn't have their policies ready.
By that you mean going from a minority administration to a majority one under PR and then winning the scottish local elections in 2012 in popular vote, seats and biggest gains?
Incisive PBtory analysis as always.
LOL
Perhaps the tea party tories should bang on about Europe, immigration and welfare yet again because it certainly looks like another triumph for the fops this morning after they did so.
What could possibly go wrong? Again.
Well Mick if you're telling me the SNP is now a regionalist party happy within the Union that's fine, it's the way your policies have been heading for the last 2 years. And you've still got loads of time to keep changing them.
Miss Plato, as well as other differences a very important one between the rise of UKIP and when the BNP were doing better politically is that all three major parties have the same issue. Labour are, rightly, blamed for our financial plight, and letting immigration rip.
The Coalition is seen as too soft by the right, and the left are disappointed in the Lib Dems.
All three parties are led by millionaires with semi-identical backgrounds, which include a near (or actual) total career in politics. There's also a cosy consensus (which people bang on about as if a consensus is a good thing, whereas in reality consensus in a democracy means the electorate lose the ability to make an alternative choice) regarding climate change and policies which will hike the costs in a very difficult fashion for ordinary folk (but which party leaders will barely notice) and the EU, which a very large proportion of people wish to leave.
The only stand-out part of the three parties on those issues are the Conservative backbenchers, most prominently on the EU.
Today reminds me of GK Chesterton's poem, The Secret People - who now have spoken.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget; For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet. There is many a fat farmer that drinks less cheerfully, There is many a free French peasant who is richer and sadder than we. There are no folk in the whole world so helpless or so wise. There is hunger in our bellies, there is laughter in our eyes; You laugh at us and love us, both mugs and eyes are wet: Only you do not know us. For we have not spoken yet.
We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet, Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street. It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first, Our wrath come after Russia’s wrath and our wrath be the worst. It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best. But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet. Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.
@Plato I have the suspicion in all of this that the established parties, the Tories in particular, are going to make the mistake that the governing class of France did in the late 18th Century, and the governing class of Russia did in the early 20th. They know that's something's up, but their mindset is too embedded in the old ways of doing things, where only minor adjustments are needed. Hence David Cameron's idiocy in believing that thinking about looking at bringing forward legislation for an EU referendum would make a damn bit of difference. There is potentially a radical overhaul of British politics happening here, and they need to make radical changes to adjust to this threat, or else they'll be washed away. The whole policy platform needs to get looked at again, and there needs to be a willingness to sacrifice sacred cows if needed.
I see that the effort to name UKIP as Poujadists or Tea Partiers and make it stick has already started. Well it won't work tim and EdmundinTokyo. UKIP is here to stay, under it's own name, philosophy and policies. ----------------------- BBC seem in complete shock: inane talk about them needing more colours for election charts. Quite weird!
Labour fuddy duddies , tim and Roger , sound badly shaken by the democratic rise of UKIP. They've been reduced to the idiotic level of Cameron's " fruitcakes" outburst.
Good morning folks! I'm digging into the results and the UKIP pattern appears to be very interesting - where they haven't previously done well they've piled on votes - where they got some votes last time they aren't get quite as dramatic swings. This is why they aren't picking up some of the seats you would expect on a national swing of this size.
I just can't see why people have it in for immigrants. If they're polite and nice where's the problem? It's the rude and ignorant and Mothers with giant prams I'd like to see on a slow boat to China and in my experience these are least likely to be immigrants (certainly those from Eastern Europe)
Well well. I think we can safely say that Ed Miliband has just moved a big step closer to Downing Street.
How the Tories have managed to split their vote like this, it's a wonder to behold. God only knows what their strategy is going to be now.
And as others have said, it's easy to see an irresistable case for electoral reform developing now. With three of the four (!) main parties now in favour, it's difficult to see the Tories on their own holding back the tide, clinging on to their FPTP (dis) comfort blanket.
I just can't see why people have it in for immigrants. If they're polite and nice where's the problem? It's the rude and ignorant and Mothers with giant prams I'd like to see on a slow boat to China and in my experience these are least likely to be immigrants (certainly those from Eastern Europe)
"I'd like to see on a slow boat to China..."
You really are a member of the real nasty party, Roger.
Why don;t you tell us again about your views on women in the workplace?
We need a huge sacred cow barbecue - washed down with real ale and common sense. And starting with the wealth destroying, democracy destroying monster that is Brussels.
I see that the effort to name UKIP as Poujadists or Tea Partiers and make it stick has already started. Well it won't work tim and EdmundinTokyo. UKIP is here to stay, under it's own name, philosophy and policies.
The USA Tea Party are fiscal conservatives. No shame to be compared to them.
I wonder how UKIP will fare when they are held to the same scrutiny as other parties. For instance on Radio 4 Nigel Farage used the example of the Canadian Reform party stating that they won one by-election and at the next election became the biggest party in the Canadian Parliament. This is of course wholly untrue. It's pretty easy when you can just trot out answers irrespective of reality.
It looks like all the main parties now have something to think about, now that a bunch of fruitcakes, loons and closet racists are gaining popularity ( how's that comment working now, Dave?) It's clear that Farage now has some serious thinking to do as well, if he wants to make UKIP a real contender, with costed policies and a bigger media presence. You only ever see him or Nuttall in the limelight, so UKIP should get together a sort of "shadow" front bench, rather than the one or two man show it is now.
The biggest risk for the Kippers is they start to believe their own bullshit. The same happened the Nats.
Um. The SNP are one of the most successful electoral phenomena of recent times.
I'm telling you the electoral facts as opposed to your 'bullshit' as you would put it.
We all know who's going to be running about like headless chickens after this result. I'm just enjoying the hysteria.
Yes the electoral facts are the SNP is a regionalist party within the Union.
As for the headless chicken hysteria, we had that in 2011 when swarms of young Nats came on PB and claimed everything from Eck can walk on water to we'll invade England. The overriding claim was of SNP competence, and then reality slowly reimposed itself as the SNP made as many cockups as everyone else and the bold policy claims couldn't stand scrutiny.
Which is the blanker piece of paper Eck's EU legal advice or EdM's electoral policies ? Tough call.
How the Tories have managed to split their vote like this, it's a wonder to behold.
It is as nothing compared to the split inside the tory party when the gloves finally come off between the OUTs and INs. As it most assuredly will, sooner or later. Something Farage knows perfectly well and is banking on.
LABOUR has taken three seats from the Conservatives in Hastings in the East Sussex County Council elections and secured over 42 per cent of the vote.
Of the eight wards seven are now held by Labour and one by the Conservatives.
UKIP did well though did not take any seats, with candidates coming second in five wards.
The results are as follows.
Peter Pragnell (Conservative) held on to Ashdown and Conquest with 1061 votes, a majority of 215, with UKIP candidate Doug Thorogood in second place with 846 votes.
Labour made a gain in Baird and Ore with Michael Wincott taking the seat with 872 votes. Conservative Liam Atkins was second with 670 votes.
Godfrey Daniel was re-elected in Castle and Braybrooke with 1,396 votes, a huge majority of 997, another Labour hold, with UKIP’s Jay Lavender in second place.
Trevor Webb held onto his seat in Central St Leonards with 1,020 votes, with UKIP candidate Michael McIver in second place.
In Hollington and Wishing Tree Phil Scott held onto his seat with 1,152 votes, 556 more than UKIP candidate Ken Pankhurst.
In Maze Hill and West St Leonards, Labour made another gain from the Conservatives as Kim Forward won with 861 votes to Rob Lee’s 796.
Jeremy Birch held onto his seat in Old Hastings and Tressell with 1,076 votes. UKIP’s Peter Wallace was in second place with 492 votes.
Finally, in St Helens and Silverhill Labour mad another gain with John Hodges taking the seat from Conservative Matthew Lock, with 1,206 votes, a majority of 216.
Overall the voter turnout in Hastings was 30 per cent.
Well maybe, but what's Pierre Poujade got to do with it ? I'd simply say if a chunk of society is losing out in the push for internationalism belittling their concerns isn't going to make them go away.
Where I came in was that I wanted to establish that there's a typical level of support for movements like UKIP's across different countries. To have that conversation, you need to group together the different political movements in different countries according to shared characteristics. Socialism is one, Social Democracy is another.
If UKIP supporters are offended by Poujadism because the man the movement was named after was anti-semitic I don't mind using another term; I don't mean to imply that UKIP are anti-semitic. But what's the term? There's a kind of politics in most countries that is: - Socially conservative - Nationalistic - Anti-establishment - Anti-intellectual - Anti-cosmopolitan - Anti-immigration - Anti-taxation - Anti-internationalist
If the electoral system allows it, there's nearly always a substantial political party or faction in that space. People sometimes say "extreme right", but that doesn't fit because it really _does_ imply racist / anti-semitic, and often violent. What do you guys want to call it?
Yes the electoral facts are the SNP is a regionalist party
With MPs at westminster. Farage still doesn't have any of those and even Galloway managed to turn a protest vote into that.
Which is the blanker piece of paper EdM's electoral policies or Cammie's answer to the somewhat crucial question "do you support staying IN or OUT of Europe for your own Cast Iron referendum?" Tough call.
1) It's not about policies. That's just as well, because UKIP's policies are incoherent to the point of non-existent - on its supposed main plank, it doesn't seem to know whether it wants Britain to be in the EEA (and thus under the same immigration obligations as at present) or completely outside.
2) It's about a state of mind. That state of mind being rage against the present day and alienation from the existing parties. It's about demanding mutually contradictory things simultaneously and not really caring if they can be delivered.
3) With that in mind, the main parties cannot hope to win their votes back by competing on detailed policy (or indeed attacking UKIP for its policies or lack of them). There is no specific policy that UKIP voters actually care about in any detail.
4) Instead, the main parties need to show that they are less remote from these voters. It's hard to know how a north London intellectual and two public schoolboys are going to do this, but perhaps we should be seeing more of the likes of Eric Pickles and Alan Johnson on our screens?
5) If UKIP are to progress further, they need either to get more of the public angrier or to get more detailed policies that stack up. If I were them, I would be trying to get more of the public angrier.
Yes the electoral facts are the SNP is a regionalist party
With MPs at westminster. Farage still doesn't have any of those and even Galloway managed to turn a protest vote into that.
Which is the blanker piece of paper EdM's electoral policies or Cammie's answer to the somewhat crucial question "do you support staying IN or OUT of Europe for your own Cast Iron referendum?" Tough call.
As I said Mick, you're a regionalist party, and you have to persuade the rest of your countrymen to change that status. Most of them vote Labour so quite how debating with blues living in England changes minds in Scotland I can't see. But feel free to debate with me instead, I always like to hear views from across the UK.
Still no referendum hint from either of the Battenburg parties.
They might as well copy Cammie since his Cast Iron IN/OUT pledge is harmless enough and as conditional as his Lisbon Pledge was. There's a reason so many gullible tory MPs belatedly realised it's just not very believeable.
David Cameron must make EU referendum promise more 'believable', Tory MPs urge
David Cameron must speed up his plans for a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, more than 100 Tory MPs have said.
I just can't see why people have it in for immigrants. If they're polite and nice where's the problem? It's the rude and ignorant and Mothers with giant prams I'd like to see on a slow boat to China and in my experience these are least likely to be immigrants (certainly those from Eastern Europe)
@Roger. You need to get out more and speak to real people - those of the advertising milieu live in an enclosed world (physically and socially) that is often very remote from the people who are the focus of their adverts.
Firstly GB is a very small island that is rapidly getting overcrowded. Secondly, our economy cannot afford to support unrestricted immigration - only immigrants who bring in skills and are able to support themselves. Thirdly GB is suffering in many places from an overdose of culture shock and change - and where immigrants are "seen" to be prioritized, then resentment builds. Fourthly "laws" like the ECHR are seen as preventing us from removing immigrant criminals from our country. Fifthly a sector of immigrants have brought terrorism and death to GB and that leaves scars. Sixthly, all three parties have ignored the fears and concerns of the electorate - at least one of those parties for political purposes.
Well maybe, but what's Pierre Poujade got to do with it ? I'd simply say if a chunk of society is losing out in the push for internationalism belittling their concerns isn't going to make them go away.
Where I came in was that I wanted to establish that there's a typical level of support for movements like UKIP's across different countries. To have that conversation, you need to group together the different political movements in different countries according to shared characteristics. Socialism is one, Social Democracy is another.
If UKIP supporters are offended by Poujadism because the man the movement was named after was anti-semitic I don't mind using another term; I don't mean to imply that UKIP are anti-semitic. But what's the term? There's a kind of politics in most countries that is: - Socially conservative - Nationalistic - Anti-establishment - Anti-intellectual - Anti-cosmopolitan - Anti-immigration - Anti-taxation - Anti-internationalist
If the electoral system allows it, there's nearly always a substantial political party or faction in that space. People sometimes say "extreme right", but that doesn't fit because it really _does_ imply racist / anti-semitic, and often violent. What do you guys want to call it?
Not sure what you'd call it but basically it losing patience with the bunch of lying, thieving, mendacious, self serving, sexually deviant, blinkered elite that inhabit the palace of Westminster.
Michael Fabricant @Mike_Fabricant One thing will be clear by the end of the day: Life cannot go on as normal for all 3 main parties unless they have no ambition for 2015.
Plato, if that pattern holds for the remaining councils, the Con and Lab will tie on 29%, and the Lib Dems will be on 17%, in terms of projected national equivalent vote share.
Well maybe, but what's Pierre Poujade got to do with it ? I'd simply say if a chunk of society is losing out in the push for internationalism belittling their concerns isn't going to make them go away.
Where I came in was that I wanted to establish that there's a typical level of support for movements like UKIP's across different countries. To have that conversation, you need to group together the different political movements in different countries according to shared characteristics. Socialism is one, Social Democracy is another.
If UKIP supporters are offended by Poujadism because the man the movement was named after was anti-semitic I don't mind using another term; I don't mean to imply that UKIP are anti-semitic. But what's the term? There's a kind of politics in most countries that is: - Socially conservative - Nationalistic - Anti-establishment - Anti-intellectual - Anti-cosmopolitan - Anti-immigration - Anti-taxation - Anti-internationalist
If the electoral system allows it, there's nearly always a substantial political party or faction in that space. People sometimes say "extreme right", but that doesn't fit because it really _does_ imply racist / anti-semitic, and often violent. What do you guys want to call it?
Not sure what you'd call it but basically it losing patience with the bunch of lying, thieving, mendacious, self serving, sexually deviant, blinkered elite that inhabit the palace of Westminster.
Well maybe, but what's Pierre Poujade got to do with it ? I'd simply say if a chunk of society is losing out in the push for internationalism belittling their concerns isn't going to make them go away.
Where I came in was that I wanted to establish that there's a typical level of support for movements like UKIP's across different countries. To have that conversation, you need to group together the different political movements in different countries according to shared characteristics. Socialism is one, Social Democracy is another.
If UKIP supporters are offended by Poujadism because the man the movement was named after was anti-semitic I don't mind using another term; I don't mean to imply that UKIP are anti-semitic. But what's the term? There's a kind of politics in most countries that is: - Socially conservative - Nationalistic - Anti-establishment - Anti-intellectual - Anti-cosmopolitan - Anti-immigration - Anti-taxation - Anti-internationalist
If the electoral system allows it, there's nearly always a substantial political party or faction in that space. People sometimes say "extreme right", but that doesn't fit because it really _does_ imply racist / anti-semitic, and often violent. What do you guys want to call it?
Not sure what you'd call it but basically it losing patience with the bunch of lying, thieving, mendacious, self serving, sexually deviant, blinkered elite that inhabit the palace of Westminster.
@tim - re EU free movement of labour. I don't think Maggie would have ignored this bit of the legislation. Any idea why we ignore it now?
"Right of residence for more than three months
The right of residence for more than three months remains subject to certain conditions. Applicants must:
- either be engaged in economic activity (on an employed or self-employed basis); - or have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. The Member States may not specify a minimum amount which they deem sufficient, but they must take account of personal circumstances; - or be following vocational training as a student and have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay; - or be a family member of a Union citizen who falls into one of the above categories."
A few observations on UKIP: 4) Instead, the main parties need to show that they are less remote from these voters. It's hard to know how a north London intellectual and two public schoolboys are going to do this, but perhaps we should be seeing more of the likes of Eric Pickles and Alan Johnson on our screens?
Very true. Many Conservatives recognise the problem but not its current Leadership. Labour do not recognise it nor do the Lib Dems. The awakening maybe very painful, but the first to do so will be the winner in the longer term.
Not sure what you'd call it but basically it losing patience with the bunch of lying, thieving, mendacious, self serving, sexually deviant, blinkered elite that inhabit the palace of Westminster.
That might work if we translate it into Latin and put "-ism" on the end.
Do I detect a whiff of panic amongst the urban elite?
I think I do...
Of course, worth remembering that us urban elite can always upsticks and move. Us urban elite only stay because we like the country, its traditions, and its history of democracy and the rule of law. In the late 1970s, people rightly worried about 'brain drain'. Let's not forget, those urban elite are the guys who pay the taxes.
The funny bit, of course, is that UKIP (in its 2010 incarnation) used to be loved by large chunks of te urban elite. The libertarian anti-EUers (and I choose this phrase over anti-Europeans), who are the traditional UKIP supporters liked Farage because he was the Rothman smoking City-boy who wanted to reduce regulation.
But UKIP seems to be swinging away from that: it is in danger of becoming a protectionist, high regulation entity. (Which is, of course, where the votes are.) But it is also a profoundly negative message. It's the message of managed decline, that people can be protected from competition from abroad. And it's a chimera.
And, of course, it won't be us urban elite with our ability to move to the US or Singapore or Hong Kong or Australia that suffer - it will be the people who voted for cutting us off from the rest of the world.
2) It's about a state of mind. That state of mind being rage against the present day and alienation from the existing parties. It's about demanding mutually contradictory things simultaneously and not really caring if they can be delivered.
I think this is a misunderstanding. People who are alienated from the main parties may personally want things which are internally consistent and could be implemented. The challenge is that not all of them want the same thing. This mean that UKIP is a coalition of different views much like any large party.
E I T I would have said radical right, but increasingly that's used to include parties like Jobbik, rather than just being confined to parties like the DUP or True Finns.
@tim - re EU free movement of labour. I don't think Maggie would have ignored this bit of the legislation. Any idea why we ignore it now?
"Right of residence for more than three months
The right of residence for more than three months remains subject to certain conditions. Applicants must:
- either be engaged in economic activity (on an employed or self-employed basis); - or have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. The Member States may not specify a minimum amount which they deem sufficient, but they must take account of personal circumstances; - or be following vocational training as a student and have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay; - or be a family member of a Union citizen who falls into one of the above categories."
Really amusing listening to Hughes on the beeb extolling the virtues of FPTP as it keeps the LD's in councillors!
And in 2015, it will be FPTP that allows the LibDemers to hang on to 40-odd seats, thanks to splitting the right wing vote between UKIP and the Conservatives.
Really amusing listening to Hughes on the beeb extolling the virtues of FPTP as it keeps the LD's in councillors!
And in 2015, it will be FPTP that allows the LibDemers to hang on to 40-odd seats, thanks to splitting the right wing vote between UKIP and the Conservatives.
It is amusingly ironic.
Remember, only the Liberal Democrats can come THIRD under first past the post.
When you add the UKIP + Tory numbers, what we are seeing is a rejection of Ed Miliband and a mid-term lurch to the right.
There are none so blind today as those on the Left...
Tough economic times make people focus on their own pockets, and favour right wing govts. While times of prosperity people feel more generous..
So the conservatives win in 2010, 1992, 1979, 1950, 1930's; Labour wins in2001, 2005, 1997, 1964 etc
UKIP are re setting the political centre, and all three parties need to worry, perhaps SNP too as a right wing govt in Westminster would hinder their regionalism plans, perhaps pushing them to true seperatism.
Miss Plato, as well as other differences a very important one between the rise of UKIP and when the BNP were doing better politically is that all three major parties have the same issue. Labour are, rightly, blamed for our financial plight, and letting immigration rip.
The Coalition is seen as too soft by the right, and the left are disappointed in the Lib Dems.
All three parties are led by millionaires with semi-identical backgrounds, which include a near (or actual) total career in politics. There's also a cosy consensus (which people bang on about as if a consensus is a good thing, whereas in reality consensus in a democracy means the electorate lose the ability to make an alternative choice) regarding climate change and policies which will hike the costs in a very difficult fashion for ordinary folk (but which party leaders will barely notice) and the EU, which a very large proportion of people wish to leave.
The only stand-out part of the three parties on those issues are the Conservative backbenchers, most prominently on the EU.
Today reminds me of GK Chesterton's poem, The Secret People - who now have spoken.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget; For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet. There is many a fat farmer that drinks less cheerfully, There is many a free French peasant who is richer and sadder than we. There are no folk in the whole world so helpless or so wise. There is hunger in our bellies, there is laughter in our eyes; You laugh at us and love us, both mugs and eyes are wet: Only you do not know us. For we have not spoken yet.
We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet, Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street. It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first, Our wrath come after Russia’s wrath and our wrath be the worst. It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best. But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet. Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.
Brilliant. Absolutely perfect for this morning. Well done.
E I T I would have said radical right, but increasingly that's used to include parties like Jobbik, rather than just being confined to parties like the DUP or True Finns.
I suppose we could do "populist right" or "right-wing populist", but that feels a bit ambiguous.
When you add the UKIP + Tory numbers, what we are seeing is a rejection of Ed Miliband and a mid-term lurch to the right.
There are none so blind today as those on the Left...
Tough economic times make people focus on their own pockets, and favour right wing govts. While times of prosperity people feel more generous..
So the conservatives win in 2010, 1992, 1979, 1950, 1930's; Labour wins in2001, 2005, 1997, 1964 etc
UKIP are re setting the political centre, and all three parties need to worry, perhaps SNP too as a right wing govt in Westminster would hinder their regionalism plans, perhaps pushing them to true seperatism.
Not entirely true, if a CON majority looks likely that is good news for the SNP 'Oot' campaign.
Do I detect a whiff of panic amongst the urban elite?
I think I do...
Of course, worth remembering that us urban elite can always upsticks and move. Us urban elite only stay because we like the country, its traditions, and its history of democracy and the rule of law. In the late 1970s, people rightly worried about 'brain drain'. Let's not forget, those urban elite are the guys who pay the taxes.
The funny bit, of course, is that UKIP (in its 2010 incarnation) used to be loved by large chunks of te urban elite. The libertarian anti-EUers (and I choose this phrase over anti-Europeans), who are the traditional UKIP supporters liked Farage because he was the Rothman smoking City-boy who wanted to reduce regulation.
But UKIP seems to be swinging away from that: it is in danger of becoming a protectionist, high regulation entity. (Which is, of course, where the votes are.) But it is also a profoundly negative message. It's the message of managed decline, that people can be protected from competition from abroad. And it's a chimera.
And, of course, it won't be us urban elite with our ability to move to the US or Singapore or Hong Kong or Australia that suffer - it will be the people who voted for cutting us off from the rest of the world.
yeah, I'm just not getting lots of stories of Switzerland or Australia being overtaken by UK bankers.
1. for all your internationalism, a lot of you only speak english so you're stuck in anglo land and the other countries don't want you that much 2. if you had all left in 2000 would we be any worse off ? ( no banking crisis ) 3. the tax argument is only becuause of salaries which many would argue are artifically inflated or transfer payments from the regions
I've no wish to see loads of people leave but maybe you need to assess what the true risk is. The thing about London is it's a lot of bravado and swagger but people will call your bluff out here in the sticks.
Really amusing listening to Hughes on the beeb extolling the virtues of FPTP as it keeps the LD's in councillors!
And in 2015, it will be FPTP that allows the LibDemers to hang on to 40-odd seats, thanks to splitting the right wing vote between UKIP and the Conservatives.
It is amusingly ironic.
Remember, only the Liberal Democrats can come THIRD under first past the post.
:-)
I can easily foresee a situation in 2015 where the LDs get 12-14% (as in 1997), and get 40 seats. It would be a classic case of FPTP working in their favour.
It took the left 15 years to work out how to tactically vote; I wonder how long in will take the right.
Really amusing listening to Hughes on the beeb extolling the virtues of FPTP as it keeps the LD's in councillors!
And in 2015, it will be FPTP that allows the LibDemers to hang on to 40-odd seats, thanks to splitting the right wing vote between UKIP and the Conservatives.
It is amusingly ironic.
Remember, only the Liberal Democrats can come THIRD under first past the post.
:-)
I can easily foresee a situation in 2015 where the LDs get 12-14% (as in 1997), and get 40 seats. It would be a classic case of FPTP working in their favour.
It took the left 15 years to work out how to tactically vote; I wonder how long in will take the right.
Comments
The Coalition is seen as too soft by the right, and the left are disappointed in the Lib Dems.
All three parties are led by millionaires with semi-identical backgrounds, which include a near (or actual) total career in politics. There's also a cosy consensus (which people bang on about as if a consensus is a good thing, whereas in reality consensus in a democracy means the electorate lose the ability to make an alternative choice) regarding climate change and policies which will hike the costs in a very difficult fashion for ordinary folk (but which party leaders will barely notice) and the EU, which a very large proportion of people wish to leave.
The only stand-out part of the three parties on those issues are the Conservative backbenchers, most prominently on the EU.
I'm just wondering if the mismatch in gains and losses is due to boundaries being redrawn.
Where are the Yellow Peril? Ah...now I understand.....
There are none so blind today as those on the Left...
The difference is that Salmond (Arc of Prosperity / Euro/RBS/BoE/Nato/Monarchy etc ) was always serving up bullshit , as events have shown , whereas events have vindicated Farage.
In my ward UKIP got 35% from nowhere, tory vote down 15% but LD down to 8% from 30%
In Braughing ward the LDs went from 26% to less than 4%, which is astonishingly dire.
Labour dribbling up a few % but given they were within 3-5000 of winning the parliamentary seats here in 2001 they are still way off where they were.
UKIP getting well over 20% everywhere they are standing, but looks like no seat in Hertfordshire (randomly 7 wards counting today)
[New books have a double bonus for new authors. They show you're not a one-hit wonder, and they also have the advantage that if someone buys book 2 they can then buy book 1, and if they liked book 1 and see book 2's arrived they can buy that as well].
Incisive PBtory analysis as always.
LOL
Perhaps the tea party tories should bang on about Europe, immigration and welfare yet again because it certainly looks like another triumph for the fops this morning after they did so.
What could possibly go wrong? Again.
"Aren't half the Whigs in the Conservative Party?"
One very prominent one and I'm advised a noted political betting blogger of LibDem heritage !!
Dont think that price will be there for long..
Leaving the EU Hitlerian? FFS! Hitlerian is a word much better used to decribe Brussels than Nige.
@Plato and @Morris_Dancer
Today reminds me of GK Chesterton's poem, The Secret People - who now have spoken.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget;
For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet.
There is many a fat farmer that drinks less cheerfully,
There is many a free French peasant who is richer and sadder than we.
There are no folk in the whole world so helpless or so wise.
There is hunger in our bellies, there is laughter in our eyes;
You laugh at us and love us, both mugs and eyes are wet:
Only you do not know us. For we have not spoken yet.
We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,
Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.
It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,
Our wrath come after Russia’s wrath and our wrath be the worst.
It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.
latest Councillor +/- Con 201 -66 LD 73 -15 Lab 42 +30 UKIP 42 +42 Green 3 +2
Politico Daily @Politico_Daily
Percentage of the vote so far: Con 36% -9 UKIP 24% +20 Lab 16% +6 LD 15% -11 Green 3% -1 Other 6% -5
Well it won't work tim and EdmundinTokyo. UKIP is here to stay, under it's own name, philosophy and policies.
-----------------------
BBC seem in complete shock: inane talk about them needing more colours for election charts. Quite weird!
Perfect.
We all know who's going to be running about like headless chickens after this result. I'm just enjoying the hysteria.
How the Tories have managed to split their vote like this, it's a wonder to behold. God only knows what their strategy is going to be now.
And as others have said, it's easy to see an irresistable case for electoral reform developing now. With three of the four (!) main parties now in favour, it's difficult to see the Tories on their own holding back the tide, clinging on to their FPTP (dis) comfort blanket.
You really are a member of the real nasty party, Roger.
Why don;t you tell us again about your views on women in the workplace?
We need a huge sacred cow barbecue - washed down with real ale and common sense. And starting with the wealth destroying, democracy destroying monster that is Brussels.
Like Like Like
Not quite so assured on the thorny subject of Clegg. Seems to be a bit quiet on that for some reason.
As for the headless chicken hysteria, we had that in 2011 when swarms of young Nats came on PB and claimed everything from Eck can walk on water to we'll invade England. The overriding claim was of SNP competence, and then reality slowly reimposed itself as the SNP made as many cockups as everyone else and the bold policy claims couldn't stand scrutiny.
Which is the blanker piece of paper Eck's EU legal advice or EdM's electoral policies ? Tough call.
It was safe Labour for years, went BNP in 2009, and Labour were expected to regain it. It's mostly a London overspill estate.
LABOUR has taken three seats from the Conservatives in Hastings in the East Sussex County Council elections and secured over 42 per cent of the vote.
Of the eight wards seven are now held by Labour and one by the Conservatives.
UKIP did well though did not take any seats, with candidates coming second in five wards.
The results are as follows.
Peter Pragnell (Conservative) held on to Ashdown and Conquest with 1061 votes, a majority of 215, with UKIP candidate Doug Thorogood in second place with 846 votes.
Labour made a gain in Baird and Ore with Michael Wincott taking the seat with 872 votes. Conservative Liam Atkins was second with 670 votes.
Godfrey Daniel was re-elected in Castle and Braybrooke with 1,396 votes, a huge majority of 997, another Labour hold, with UKIP’s Jay Lavender in second place.
Trevor Webb held onto his seat in Central St Leonards with 1,020 votes, with UKIP candidate Michael McIver in second place.
In Hollington and Wishing Tree Phil Scott held onto his seat with 1,152 votes, 556 more than UKIP candidate Ken Pankhurst.
In Maze Hill and West St Leonards, Labour made another gain from the Conservatives as Kim Forward won with 861 votes to Rob Lee’s 796.
Jeremy Birch held onto his seat in Old Hastings and Tressell with 1,076 votes. UKIP’s Peter Wallace was in second place with 492 votes.
Finally, in St Helens and Silverhill Labour mad another gain with John Hodges taking the seat from Conservative Matthew Lock, with 1,206 votes, a majority of 216.
Overall the voter turnout in Hastings was 30 per cent.
If UKIP supporters are offended by Poujadism because the man the movement was named after was anti-semitic I don't mind using another term; I don't mean to imply that UKIP are anti-semitic. But what's the term? There's a kind of politics in most countries that is:
- Socially conservative
- Nationalistic
- Anti-establishment
- Anti-intellectual
- Anti-cosmopolitan
- Anti-immigration
- Anti-taxation
- Anti-internationalist
If the electoral system allows it, there's nearly always a substantial political party or faction in that space. People sometimes say "extreme right", but that doesn't fit because it really _does_ imply racist / anti-semitic, and often violent. What do you guys want to call it?
Which is the blanker piece of paper EdM's electoral policies or Cammie's answer to the somewhat crucial question "do you support staying IN or OUT of Europe for your own Cast Iron referendum?" Tough call.
Still no referendum hint from either of the Battenburg parties.
I think I do...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf3NxCCSz3Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRcMrd5wEhk
1) It's not about policies. That's just as well, because UKIP's policies are incoherent to the point of non-existent - on its supposed main plank, it doesn't seem to know whether it wants Britain to be in the EEA (and thus under the same immigration obligations as at present) or completely outside.
2) It's about a state of mind. That state of mind being rage against the present day and alienation from the existing parties. It's about demanding mutually contradictory things simultaneously and not really caring if they can be delivered.
3) With that in mind, the main parties cannot hope to win their votes back by competing on detailed policy (or indeed attacking UKIP for its policies or lack of them). There is no specific policy that UKIP voters actually care about in any detail.
4) Instead, the main parties need to show that they are less remote from these voters. It's hard to know how a north London intellectual and two public schoolboys are going to do this, but perhaps we should be seeing more of the likes of Eric Pickles and Alan Johnson on our screens?
5) If UKIP are to progress further, they need either to get more of the public angrier or to get more detailed policies that stack up. If I were them, I would be trying to get more of the public angrier.
Lol! That's majestic.
FPTP is the established choice of the electorate (overwhelmingly so), and cannot be changed for a generations.
Expect earthquakes - maybe.
David Cameron must make EU referendum promise more 'believable', Tory MPs urge
David Cameron must speed up his plans for a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, more than 100 Tory MPs have said.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9967069/David-Cameron-must-make-EU-referendum-promise-more-believable-Tory-MPs-urge.html
Firstly GB is a very small island that is rapidly getting overcrowded. Secondly, our economy cannot afford to support unrestricted immigration - only immigrants who bring in skills and are able to support themselves. Thirdly GB is suffering in many places from an overdose of culture shock and change - and where immigrants are "seen" to be prioritized, then resentment builds. Fourthly "laws" like the ECHR are seen as preventing us from removing immigrant criminals from our country. Fifthly a sector of immigrants have brought terrorism and death to GB and that leaves scars. Sixthly, all three parties have ignored the fears and concerns of the electorate - at least one of those parties for political purposes.
How about calling it 'sensible'.
We need more sensible parties and sensible policies. There - wasn't too hard.
One thing will be clear by the end of the day: Life cannot go on as normal for all 3 main parties unless they have no ambition for 2015.
"Right of residence for more than three months
The right of residence for more than three months remains subject to certain conditions. Applicants must:
- either be engaged in economic activity (on an employed or self-employed basis);
- or have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. The Member States may not specify a minimum amount which they deem sufficient, but they must take account of personal circumstances;
- or be following vocational training as a student and have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay;
- or be a family member of a Union citizen who falls into one of the above categories."
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/free_movement_of_persons_asylum_immigration/l33152_en.htm
Labour do not recognise it nor do the Lib Dems.
The awakening maybe very painful, but the first to do so will be the winner in the longer term.
The funny bit, of course, is that UKIP (in its 2010 incarnation) used to be loved by large chunks of te urban elite. The libertarian anti-EUers (and I choose this phrase over anti-Europeans), who are the traditional UKIP supporters liked Farage because he was the Rothman smoking City-boy who wanted to reduce regulation.
But UKIP seems to be swinging away from that: it is in danger of becoming a protectionist, high regulation entity. (Which is, of course, where the votes are.) But it is also a profoundly negative message. It's the message of managed decline, that people can be protected from competition from abroad. And it's a chimera.
And, of course, it won't be us urban elite with our ability to move to the US or Singapore or Hong Kong or Australia that suffer - it will be the people who voted for cutting us off from the rest of the world.
It is amusingly ironic.
So the conservatives win in 2010, 1992, 1979, 1950, 1930's; Labour wins in2001, 2005, 1997, 1964 etc
UKIP are re setting the political centre, and all three parties need to worry, perhaps SNP too as a right wing govt in Westminster would hinder their regionalism plans, perhaps pushing them to true seperatism.
1. for all your internationalism, a lot of you only speak english so you're stuck in anglo land and the other countries don't want you that much
2. if you had all left in 2000 would we be any worse off ? ( no banking crisis )
3. the tax argument is only becuause of salaries which many would argue are artifically inflated or transfer payments from the regions
I've no wish to see loads of people leave but maybe you need to assess what the true risk is. The thing about London is it's a lot of bravado and swagger but people will call your bluff out here in the sticks.
I can easily foresee a situation in 2015 where the LDs get 12-14% (as in 1997), and get 40 seats. It would be a classic case of FPTP working in their favour.
It took the left 15 years to work out how to tactically vote; I wonder how long in will take the right.
UKIP are one by-election away from their first MP. It will happen before 2015, in my estimation.