I'd be amazed if there was anyone so stupid as to still believe in a tory/UKIP pact given how obvious it is that Farage thinks Cammie is contemptible and indeed vice versa, but for those who still don't get it.
" “A lot of unemployed families were moved to Hastings and places were built for them. They’re communities of unemployed people. It’s been difficult dealing with that,” says Rudd, tucking her honey-blonde hair behind her ears as the train trundles through the stockbroker belt. "
I really have to laugh out loud at some of the comments trying to talk down and dismiss UKIPs election achievements.
After the shock; the dismissive talkdown.
The fact is that a small party, UKIP managed to elect 147 candidates where there were only 8 originally. Their vote share is on a par with the two main political parties.
Only two days ago the establishment was spitting in the face of UKIP voters. All those trying to belittle UKIP should wake up and smell the coffee. Times are a changing, live with it.
I'll keep smelling my Latte but Just don't believe for a second that the times are changing though. Protest votes are par for the course in mid-term council elections, doesn't mean anything much though.
Whereas previous protest votes have gone Labour, Conservative, Lib-Dem, Green and many other parties this week they went UKIP. I'll eat my hat if they win anything approaching 100 Westminster seats set alone 326 to form a majority government.
So UKIP managed to gain 139 Councillors. Wow, the Tories in 2000 gained 594 - did they win a landslide election in 2001?
The expectations were set so low for UKIP. Just because they cleared a low bar once doesn't mean they're out of the junior leagues.
Like - can we have the buttons back please - because a couple of posters were silly about it doesn't outweigh how helpful they were.
If I read a thread after its done and can't register my views [I think I pressed Dislike once ever] - its a bit pointless reading it as I can't even see what was popular or well regarded.
'OGH now being re-tweeted by CCHQ Press Office: "Agreed. Lab should have more gains. In fact Ukip, CON and LDs all did better than expectations - LAB did worse"
Strange,Tim's been commenting about everything except Labour's poor performance.
Israel has refused to wait.. Late on several nights back I reported that Israeli piloted aircraft and not just drones were being seen over Damsacus. I described this as a clear statement to anyone who cared to watch that they were not going to sit and watch as things that may affect its security.
And so it is that they struck last night with activity on a number of targets in Syria not just the one reported.
The signals could not have been more clear and yet the Israeli airforce came and went almost as they pleased. Though the report is that the actual strikes were launched from Lebanese airspace Israeli aircraft were also over Syrian territory. A large (between 15-20k) mobilisation of Israeli forces for an exercise has occurred this week on the Northern Israeli borders. The commencement date of the exercises? Tomorrow. The media has focussed on the strike in Damascus (reportedly an SSM transport site) but there has been more Israeli activity that that single action would justify and that the media has reported.
Add on the mobilisation and unless they like wasting money the Israelis are clearly getting their ducks in a row.
The situation for the Israeli's is acute. There is undoubtedly plans to ship weapons from Syrian stores to Hizbollah, the chemical weapons issue (whoever has them) continue to worry. There have been numerous incidents on the Golan border and to top it all Iran has started shipping a number regimental sized fighting to help Assad, and located some of those way too close to Israel's borders for comfort.
On the balance of probability you can only assume that more actions will occur.
I really have to laugh out loud at some of the comments trying to talk down and dismiss UKIPs election achievements.
After the shock; the dismissive talkdown.
The fact is that a small party, UKIP managed to elect 147 candidates where there were only 8 originally. Their vote share is on a par with the two main political parties.
Only two days ago the establishment was spitting in the face of UKIP voters. All those trying to belittle UKIP should wake up and smell the coffee. Times are a changing, live with it.
I'll keep smelling my Latte but Just don't believe for a second that the times are changing though. Protest votes are par for the course in mid-term council elections, doesn't mean anything much though.
Whereas previous protest votes have gone Labour, Conservative, Lib-Dem, Green and many other parties this week they went UKIP. I'll eat my hat if they win anything approaching 100 Westminster seats set alone 326 to form a majority government.
So UKIP managed to gain 139 Councillors. Wow, the Tories in 2000 gained 594 - did they win a landslide election in 2001?
The expectations were set so low for UKIP. Just because they cleared a low bar once doesn't mean they're out of the junior leagues.
the significance of yesterday wasn't the number of seats but the vote share which frankly is impressive. It's about 30 years since we last had that type of change. The key issue is can UKIP keep their support better than the SDP ?
The second point is success build success, UKIP will now get more members, more money and at some point more defectors. So when you face them next time there's more of them and they're more experienced. That's no guarantee they will win but it does mean the other parties now have to try harder.
Like - can we have the buttons back please - because a couple of posters were silly about it doesn't outweigh how helpful they were.
Unspoofable.
You whined for weeks about the like/dislike system and now you are whining that it's gone?
Almost as hilarious as a "serial labour voting" "floating voter" congratulating the kippers after making an amusingly ostentatious show of proclaiming to all on PB that they were now going to vote for Cammie in the locals after his EU speech of a lifetime.
Someone was ahead of the 2013 LE results by a year... Mr Skelton from Policy Exchange...
"A new poll for Policy Exchange shows that a gulf has opened up between politicians and the people. More than 80% of voters think that politicians don’t understand the real world at all. At a time of the biggest squeeze in living standards for decades, ordinary voters don’t believe that politicians understand their concerns. What is clear is that both parties are affected by the strong anti politics mood.
Like - can we have the buttons back please - because a couple of posters were silly about it doesn't outweigh how helpful they were.
If I read a thread after its done and can't register my views [I think I pressed Dislike once ever] - its a bit pointless reading it as I can't even see what was popular or well regarded.
@MorrisDancer There is a very famous scene when Mr Douglas snaps - he wants to buy breakfast but its 11:31 and the server won't allow it. It sums up petty-minded rule making.
You saw the story about Michael Bloomberg (he of the no giant size Cokes) being denied a second slice of pizza? Of course, then reality intrudes... it was a mash-up:
The Shires will be even more unhappy if the coalitions relaxed planning rules mean more housing developments in their towns/villages.
I'm not really sure that's true. I live in a village and most people round here would accept more housing if was sensitively done. Instead of the usual execcy house sprawl which often gets attached to villages, if we get additions which blend in with the rest of the place no-one's that concerned. For villagers more people is often a benefit since it means the shop or school or church or pub or bus route all stay viable.
Osbrowne and Pickles seem very keen on pushing a housing agenda here in Shropshire. But yes, the tragedy is that it all has to be driven through big corporate housebuilders in blocks of 100 homes that pay little reference to what is already there. Meanwhile trying to get planning permission for small sustainable developments of one or two houses is virtually impossible. Of course its all a numbers game and payback for the big boys isnt it?
In Doncaster UKIP decided not to run to give Davies a clear run. They endorsed him
Do you think he would have done better with UKIP logo next to his name?
Yes. I don't have any local knowledge to back that up but I doubt, given his background, that having UKIP rather than Independent as his flag would have cost him much support at all. By contrast, it would have pulled in a number of votes from the politically disengaged who wanted to make the same protest as across the rest of the country. We might not have been talking all that many votes but given how the result panned out, it may well have made the difference.
the significance of yesterday wasn't the number of seats
Actually it pretty much was. Voteshare and polling can go up or down in the meantime but those councillors are now in and UKIP have a toehold in far more places now with the resulting membership and activist boost being harnessed into campaigning on the ground for such things as the EU elections, the next locals and indeed the GE.
Those who think those councillors are an accident waiting to happen don't seem to realise that the tory papers who led the attack on them before the locals had the opposite effect as some on here warned. UKIP also don't actually control any councils so can enjoy the luxury of opposition. Which isn't to say there might not be one or two big problems from those elected yesterday but that holds true for all the parties who have an even bigger intake and are no strangers to problem councillors either.
Thats why I'd like to see the UKIP percentages by county. Is this predominantly a South East/Swouth West/East Anglia phenomenon, results in Lancashire, Durham,Derby,Notts etc appear to be very different.
There's one thing I do like about Farage though. His resolute determination not to use his wife and kids.
Can you imagine him doing a Dave and having his Date Nights televised?
Labour took one of the Bristol seats from The Tory, but 500+ voted for the UKIP guy.
Anecdote klaxon - I also can't imagine Dave going along with a phone prank the way Ed M did after his rotten WATO interview with Martha K; am told he was relaxed, pleasant about it - I'm not making it up either - I could have easily been on the receiving end of his call.
'OGH now being re-tweeted by CCHQ Press Office: "Agreed. Lab should have more gains. In fact Ukip, CON and LDs all did better than expectations - LAB did worse"
Strange,Tim's been commenting about everything except Labour's poor performance.
It's a bit like the Scottish Separatists commenting on anything - the EU referendum, Camosbrowne, fops, etc other than their own referendum or their currency or anything to do with Scottish separation.....
the significance of yesterday wasn't the number of seats
Actually it pretty much was. Voteshare and polling can go up or down in the meantime but those councillors are now in and UKIP have a toehold in far more places now with the resulting membership and activist boost being harnessed into campaigning on the ground for such things as the EU elections, the next locals and indeed the GE.
Those who think those councillors are an accident waiting to happen don't seem to realise that the tory papers who led the attack on them before the locals had the opposite effect as some on here warned. UKIP also don't actually control any councils so can enjoy the luxury of opposition. Which isn't to say there might not be one or two big problems from those elected yesterday but that holds true for all the parties who have an even bigger intake and are no strangers to problem councillors either.
yes, you can look at it that way, but that's similar to the approach some of the Blues want to use to talk down the size of the UKIP surge - nothing to see move on. I'd say however if Farage can maintain support he's in real danger of winning seats in Parlt; for the first time some of my local councillors who have been in very safe wards are now having to look over their shoulders and worry about support levels in coming elections. And there is a major event a year to keep UKIP going right up to the GE. If it's just Cleggasm 2 then you're right the seats matter but they can't do much with them and may struggle to survive.
In Doncaster UKIP decided not to run to give Davies a clear run. They endorsed him
Do you think he would have done better with UKIP logo next to his name?
Yes. I don't have any local knowledge to back that up but I doubt, given his background, that having UKIP rather than Independent as his flag would have cost him much support at all. By contrast, it would have pulled in a number of votes from the politically disengaged who wanted to make the same protest as across the rest of the country. We might not have been talking all that many votes but given how the result panned out, it may well have made the difference.
Considering the 'unfortunate' record of Labour councillors and mayors in Doncaster it might not be long before EdM is asked to comment about 'unfortunate' political developments in his constituency.
"What the Conservatives can seek to do is reduce anti-government voting, they’ll hope by being able to point to some economic progress at some point, by presenting an image of competence and ability, by reducing noises-off and disunity and maintaining a clear message and purpose. Of course, this is probably also the best way for the Conservatives to win support from non-voters, from Labour and Lib Dem voters, or from anyone else (it is also rather dull and obvious advice – govern well – so don’t expect many columnists to waste their time with it)."
"Nobody believes UKIP is a party of government. In elections like these, that matters not at all. Indeed for those wishing to show their discontent with politics, and with the general state of things, it is a positive advantage (and one that used to work for the Liberal Democrats). By the same token, in a general election the same factor ought to work against them.
Whether it will or not is up to us. In 2015 we will not be competing with UKIP for votes among those who are trying to choose the best government for Britain. Among those attracted to UKIP, a Conservative government is a more popular outcome than any of the alternatives. Our task is to convince them – as well as the former Labour and Lib Dem voters we also need for a majority – that whether or not they get one actually matters."
Have you collected your wagered kiss from MikeL ??
If not have you decided on "French" or Glasgow" ??
Happily, Jack, the kiss was on offer as a bonus only if the Kippers got to 150. As you know, they only scored a 'Ronnie'(147), so I am spared the embarrassment.
Have you ever seen MikeK? I mean, I don't wish to be rude, but an oil painting he ain't.
Now if it had been you, Young Jack....
Are you saying that I'm 'ugly"? The girls don't think so. I looked for your address yesterday, but couldn't find it. So please send it to me, either direct or through Mike . A crisp £5 note is yours and I'll add on that kiss anyway: after all a 'Ronnie" is not to be sneezed at.
Well, I wouldn't say ugly, Mike, and I am sure you are in strong demand, but, well....you're just not quite my type. Sorry Honey.
I like them dark and dirty, like thrusting young Jack.
Just collected my winnings from Shadsy after getting over £200 on at an average of 9/4 on UKIP gaining over 100 seats... Wonder how they will get on in London..I reckon that a lot of Tory cllrs will be talking to UKIP about them standing in their wards or at least only putting 1 up against them..could be carnage otherwise..
Well done Timmo.
London would be very good territory for UKIP, especially at Locals and Euros.
yes, you can look at it that way, but that's similar to the approach some of the Blues want to use to talk down the size of the UKIP surge - nothing to see move on.
Hardly a surprise. After any party gets a beating the rote response is platitudes about listening to the voter with some piecemeal posturing in the aftermath while the spinners get to work saying it is of no consequence anyway.
for the first time some of my local councillors who have been in very safe wards are now having to look over their shoulders and worry about support levels in coming elections.
Of course. It's always easy for a party leadership to forget about things like locals after a few days but the base knows perfectly well that it matters. So will some of those MPs in marginals who will be told in the coming days in quite explicit terms from their activists just how much they should be worrying.
And there is a major event a year to keep UKIP going right up to the GE. If it's just Cleggasm 2 then you're right the seats matter but they can't do much with them and may struggle to survive.
Think of it more as a backstop and hedge against the sometimes fickle winds of polling. It's going to keep Farage focused on growing his party in the gaps between campaigning which is exactly what he should be doing. The point about the Clegg surge is that the lib dems weren't wiped out after it had vanished. Nor are they dead yet even though Clegg is still toxic. Because they have that local base, even though it is still eroding year on year.
London would be very good territory for UKIP, especially at Locals and Euros.
London has always been weak for UKIP, PtP. They've only broken the 5% threshold for Assembly members once in four attempts (in 2004 when the election fell at the same time as the Euros). Obviously the parts of London that border Essex and Kent should be reasonably fertile but vast swathes of London will be a desert for UKIP.
the significance of yesterday wasn't the number of seats
Actually it pretty much was. Voteshare and polling can go up or down in the meantime but those councillors are now in and UKIP have a toehold in far more places now with the resulting membership and activist boost being harnessed into campaigning on the ground for such things as the EU elections, the next locals and indeed the GE.
Those who think those councillors are an accident waiting to happen don't seem to realise that the tory papers who led the attack on them before the locals had the opposite effect as some on here warned. UKIP also don't actually control any councils so can enjoy the luxury of opposition. Which isn't to say there might not be one or two big problems from those elected yesterday but that holds true for all the parties who have an even bigger intake and are no strangers to problem councillors either.
I'd say however if Farage can maintain support he's in real danger of winning seats in Parlt.
It's encouraging that the locals have already enabled UKIP to identify 2+ westminster targets for 2015. Lots of time to work on those.
William Hill @sharpeangle 8m UKIP to win by-election before next General Election? - 5/1. #UKIP
Where?
Can't see UKIP getting anywhere in Sutton Coldfield, but isn't Mike Hancock still in trouble in Portsmouth? A by-election there would be a gift to UKIP.
'OGH now being re-tweeted by CCHQ Press Office: "Agreed. Lab should have more gains. In fact Ukip, CON and LDs all did better than expectations - LAB did worse"
Strange,Tim's been commenting about everything except Labour's poor performance.
It's a bit like the Scottish Separatists commenting on anything - the EU referendum, Camosbrowne, fops, etc other than their own referendum or their currency or anything to do with Scottish separation.....
It's a bit like the nasty party's inept spinners whining when there is talk of independence on PB and whining when there isn't.
South Tyneside council reports that the votes in South Shields have been
14,431 postal votes 10,349 in person votes
The postal total is almost the same as 2012 locals (14,570). The Voting on the Day turnout increased from 6,751 last may.
Why would so many people need postal votes? They can't all have been on holiday!
BTW in South Shields, UKIP came from nowhere to get 24%. LDs went down by 13% compared with 2010, Tories down by 10%. Most Kipper votes came from 2010 LDs?
Not sure about that, their London assembly performance was pitiful, thecity is also a lot younger and less bothered by the immigration issue than he shires
I would bet there are a lot of people living in the East End and in SE london who dont usually vote but will now vote UKIP. Although there are a lot of your transient 'non Londoners;' living in London who love the diversity (because they werent brought up in London and dont think of it as home) Guardian Reading types who have come to London to work after Uni.
I have been working in London recently and I like its multicultural diversity. But it could never be home and I dont even think of it as English its just like any other capital
I am going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on 11th June and will report back
There's a model farm in St James' park that attracts lots of arable farmers to London for day trips. The commercial possibilities of ice cream cone vines are the talk of young farmer associations up and down the country.
North East was among the all postal ballot experiment in the Euros (was it 2004?). They still keep all the postal votes since then! The NE constituencies are always the ones with the highest share of postal votes.
Which isn't to say there might not be one or two big problems from those elected yesterday but that holds true for all the parties who have an even bigger intake and are no strangers to problem councillors either.
This was a point which became startlingly obvious when the Tories launched this strategy in the week leading up to the locals.
For every UKIP candidate with a dodgy comment they had managed to uncover through trawling the social media it was possible with just 30 seconds googling to find one or two elected Tory councillors who had been hauled up in front of either the standards committee or the police for something just as bad if not worse. All the Tory attack did highlight the deficiencies with their own councillors.
All the Tory attack did highlight the deficiencies with their own councillors.
They were banking on the attacks being highlighted in the papers giving them more prominence and salience but all it proved is that such co-ordinated press attacks, scare stories and monsterings have less and less currency these days and that diminution of power is simply going to continue.
The worst is still to come for the LD's.Next years European elections are likely to be won by UKIP and the Lib dems will be consigned to 4th or 5th place.The elections in London will see further hollowing out of their local election base.Other district elections are genearlly 1/3 up so that should redice the scale of futher local council losses.After what are likely to be disatrous results overall in 2014 this would be the last chance for any leadership challenge before the GE.
Looking ahead to the GE in 2015 if the economy improves it is the Tories who will get most credit and that could give a swing away from Lib dems to the Tories.The LD's will be fighting to retain there seats against multiple challenges-The SNP and Labour in Scotland,a strong Labour challenge in English LD/Lab marginals,a smaller swing to the Tories in the numerous COn/LD marginal and if thta wasn't enough a threat from UKIP.
Still at leat the strategy is clear-concentrtae all resources from now until 2015 on the current seats.The hope is for a another hung parlaiment although there could be three parties SNP ,LD and UKIP in the equation!
Not sure about that, their London assembly performance was pitiful, thecity is also a lot younger and less bothered by the immigration issue than he shires
I would bet there are a lot of people living in the East End and in SE london who dont usually vote but will now vote UKIP. Although there are a lot of your transient 'non Londoners;' living in London who love the diversity (because they werent brought up in London and dont think of it as home) Guardian Reading types who have come to London to work after Uni.
I have been working in London recently and I like its multicultural diversity. But it could never be home and I dont even think of it as English its just like any other capital
I am going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on 11th June and will report back
Yes, I'm with you on this one, Sam.
The type of Londoner Tim has in mind is the least likely to vote, if indeed he/she has a vote.
BTW in South Shields, UKIP came from nowhere to get 24%. LDs went down by 13% compared with 2010, Tories down by 10%. Most Kipper votes came from 2010 LDs?
I doubt it. More likely LD went to Labour. UKIP came from Labour and Tory.
BTW in South Shields, UKIP came from nowhere to get 24%. LDs went down by 13% compared with 2010, Tories down by 10%. Most Kipper votes came from 2010 LDs?
I doubt it. More likely LD went to Labour. UKIP came from Labour and Tory.
Lab also went down by about 2%. BNP also down by about 4%.
London would be very good territory for UKIP, especially at Locals and Euros.
London has always been weak for UKIP, PtP. They've only broken the 5% threshold for Assembly members once in four attempts (in 2004 when the election fell at the same time as the Euros). Obviously the parts of London that border Essex and Kent should be reasonably fertile but vast swathes of London will be a desert for UKIP.
Perhaps it depends on what you call London, Neil.
I was thinking particularly of the Inner Suburbs, like my patch here in Wanstead, the Estuary and inner Home Counties generally.
I'd have thought these were potentially good hunting grounds for UKIP.
London would be very good territory for UKIP, especially at Locals and Euros.
London has always been weak for UKIP, PtP. They've only broken the 5% threshold for Assembly members once in four attempts (in 2004 when the election fell at the same time as the Euros). Obviously the parts of London that border Essex and Kent should be reasonably fertile but vast swathes of London will be a desert for UKIP.
Perhaps it depends on what you call London, Neil.
I was thinking particularly of the Inner Suburbs, like my patch here in Wanstead, the Estuary and inner Home Counties generally.
I'd have thought these were potentially good hunting grounds for UKIP.
I think people living in London whose Parents lived in the same borough would be possible UKIP voters. Those whose Grandparents lived in the same borough even more so. This is true for all ethnicities but white more than any other. People that have moved into London BECAUSE they like multiculturalism etc would obviously not be. But I think the former would be previously uninterested non voters.
Not sure about that, their London assembly performance was pitiful, thecity is also a lot younger and less bothered by the immigration issue than he shires
Not many people live in the city though, people commute there to work
yes, you can look at it that way, but that's similar to the approach some of the Blues want to use to talk down the size of the UKIP surge - nothing to see move on.
Hardly a surprise. After any party gets a beating the rote response is platitudes about listening to the voter with some piecemeal posturing in the aftermath while the spinners get to work saying it is of no consequence anyway.
for the first time some of my local councillors who have been in very safe wards are now having to look over their shoulders and worry about support levels in coming elections.
Of course. It's always easy for a party leadership to forget about things like locals after a few days but the base knows perfectly well that it matters. So will some of those MPs in marginals who will be told in the coming days in quite explicit terms from their activists just how much they should be worrying.
And there is a major event a year to keep UKIP going right up to the GE. If it's just Cleggasm 2 then you're right the seats matter but they can't do much with them and may struggle to survive.
Think of it more as a backstop and hedge against the sometimes fickle winds of polling. It's going to keep Farage focused on growing his party in the gaps between campaigning which is exactly what he should be doing. The point about the Clegg surge is that the lib dems weren't wiped out after it had vanished. Nor are they dead yet even though Clegg is still toxic. Because they have that local base, even though it is still eroding year on year.
Yup Mick, all valid points. For the next year or so we're headingb in to uncharted territory.
Fancy a bet that UKIP do worse in the London locals next year than they did yesterday. Average over the shires vs average over the city.
That's setting the bar a bit high, Tim.
Yesterday's performance was exceptional. They'd be very happy with 20% in London, I should think, especially as their results are bound to be patchy - good in places like Ilford, for example, bad in Shoreditch.
Not sure about that, their London assembly performance was pitiful, thecity is also a lot younger and less bothered by the immigration issue than he shires
I would bet there are a lot of people living in the East End and in SE london who dont usually vote but will now vote UKIP. Although there are a lot of your transient 'non Londoners;' living in London who love the diversity (because they werent brought up in London and dont think of it as home) Guardian Reading types who have come to London to work after Uni.
I have been working in London recently and I like its multicultural diversity. But it could never be home and I dont even think of it as English its just like any other capital
I am going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on 11th June and will report back
Anecdote vs Polling
Immigration top 3 issue.
Greater London 18% South East outside Greater London 41%
April MORI
Same bet offer to you.
(this could be like preying on the local knowledge of the Scottish Tories and monetising fitalass,Easterross and ScottP)
Haha what a tempting offer!
White British people are, disgracefully, the minority in London thanks to people like you, so Ill pass. I would bet that UKIP do better than any other party in the white British part of the vote if you like?
Can I have Evens that Arsenal will beat QPR this evening and then call you a bottler when you say no?
Fancy a bet that UKIP do worse in the London locals next year than they did yesterday. Average over the shires vs average over the city.
That's setting the bar a bit high, Tim.
Yesterday's performance was exceptional. They'd be very happy with 20% in London, I should think, especially as their results are bound to be patchy - good in places like Ilford, for example, bad in Shoreditch.
I'll pass.
Depends which part of Ilford! Ilford North perhaps, while Ilford South is more like Shoreditch electorally.
Fancy a bet that UKIP do worse in the London locals next year than they did yesterday. Average over the shires vs average over the city.
That's setting the bar a bit high, Tim.
Yesterday's performance was exceptional. They'd be very happy with 20% in London, I should think, especially as their results are bound to be patchy - good in places like Ilford, for example, bad in Shoreditch.
I'll pass.
Depends which part of Ilford! Ilford North perhaps, while Ilford South is more like Shoreditch electorally.
I offered Easterross a bet upthread, have a look at his assertion.
Hardly a surprise he didn't take that up. A somewhat bold assertion akin to "killing them stone dead". Not to mention an amusing lack of knowledge about the process of independence.
Not sure about that, their London assembly performance was pitiful, thecity is also a lot younger and less bothered by the immigration issue than he shires
I would bet there are a lot of people living in the East End and in SE london who dont usually vote but will now vote UKIP. Although there are a lot of your transient 'non Londoners;' living in London who love the diversity (because they werent brought up in London and dont think of it as home) Guardian Reading types who have come to London to work after Uni.
I have been working in London recently and I like its multicultural diversity. But it could never be home and I dont even think of it as English its just like any other capital
I am going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on 11th June and will report back
Anecdote vs Polling
Immigration top 3 issue.
Greater London 18% South East outside Greater London 41%
April MORI
Same bet offer to you.
(this could be like preying on the local knowledge of the Scottish Tories and monetising fitalass,Easterross and ScottP)
Haha what a tempting offer!
White British people are, disgracefully, the minority in London thanks to people like you, so Ill pass. I would bet that UKIP do better than any other party in the white British part of the vote if you like?
Can I have Evens that Arsenal will beat QPR this evening and then call you a bottler when you say no?
Fancy a bet that UKIP do worse in the London locals next year than they did yesterday. Average over the shires vs average over the city.
That's setting the bar a bit high, Tim.
Yesterday's performance was exceptional. They'd be very happy with 20% in London, I should think, especially as their results are bound to be patchy - good in places like Ilford, for example, bad in Shoreditch.
I'll pass.
Depends which part of Ilford! Ilford North perhaps, while Ilford South is more like Shoreditch electorally.
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
5 £50 bets for the first people to put together the half of London they think will match the UKIP Shire vote.
16 Boroughs, roll up roll up. Or as the Mockney Fop Osborne would say "'Would you Adam and Eve it, feast your minces on that, ave a butchers at tim's bet"
No I will bet you that UKIP are the leading party in the share of white British people in Greater London.
I never said they would do better in London than the shires, just that there are plenty of people who will vote for them who didnt previously vote at all
So how much at EVS UKIP win the London British white vote share?
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
Er, what ever gave you the idea that I'm a "newly converted kipper"?
Still, your fixation with Cammo must give you amusement while you're awaiting the decisive "No" vote next year!
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
Er, what ever gave you the idea that I'm a "newly converted kipper"?
You did.
"Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 552 1:43PM
Peter_the_Punter said:
» show previous quotes Well I'm sure UKIP can count on your vote, Sunil!
Still, your fixation with Cammo must give you amusement while you're awaiting the decisive "No" vote next year!
All that trainspotting must be taking it's toll Sunny. It is not Cammie who is most to blame for helping the kipper surge, it is Osbrowne. He is the master strategist. Cammie is merely the fop at the top having a jolly time letting his close chums do all the 'work'.
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
Er, what ever gave you the idea that I'm a "newly converted kipper"?
You did.
Nonsense, Mick! Your eyes are playing tricks on you. I have not changed my avatar at all!
UKIP will have limited impact in London in terms of seats or shares. I expect hardly any defection from Tory voters in Inner London. They are emphatically not of the UKIP variety but are Liberal Cameron metropolitan type Tories. UKIP could have some success in places like Havering, Bexley on the Esssex and Kent fringes but not in outer West and South West London where it is a Tory/Labour/Lib Dem battle. More interestingly will be the UKIP performance in Metropolitan and Unitary authorities in 2014 again I think their success will be patchy and limited as it was this week UKIP scored remarkable shares in places like Lincolnshire, Kent & Norfolk but were weak in places like Durham, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Lancashire, Cumbria and Northumberland.
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
Er, what ever gave you the idea that I'm a "newly converted kipper"?
Still, your fixation with Cammo must give you amusement while you're awaiting the decisive "No" vote next year!
UKIP are the anti HS2party, so are you coming out against it?
Too fast to get the numbers? or just not enough stations and shunting yards?
If you seriously think that UKIP will get biggest share of white British in most of those boroughs you clearly don't know a thing about the demographic/economic make up of London. UKIP will come behind both behind the Tories and Lib Dems in Richmond upon Thames which is made up of affluent small L liberal constituencies. Sutton is conventional surburbia which the Liberals have sewn up since 1980s. The white vote in Ealing Central & Acton is a middle class BBC/media/academic public sector and intellectual vote. Tons of BBC workers live there & in wards like Walpole the battle is between Labour & Tories. The Tory vote in Hammersmith and Fulham & Wandsworth is not the same as the Tory vote in Havering, Bexley or Bromley UKIP has limited appeal to these on the whole Metropolitan Wet Tories. The Tory MP for Battersea Jane Ellison is firmly on the left of the Tory Party and is in tune with the local party.
UKIP success will come in the Essex & Kent parts of London and even then they won't overcome the Tories in probably all the wards but pick up ex WWC non voters.
If you seriously think that UKIP will get biggest share of white British in most of those boroughs you clearly don't know a thing about the demographic/economic make up of London. UKIP will come behind both behind the Tories and Lib Dems in Richmond upon Thames which is made up of affluent small L liberal constituencies. Sutton is conventional surburbia which the Liberals have sewn up since 1980s. The white vote in Ealing Central & Acton is a middle class BBC/media/academic public sector and intellectual vote. Tons of BBC workers live there & in wards like Walpole the battle is between Labour & Tories. The Tory vote in Hammersmith and Fulham & Wandsworth is not the same as the Tory vote in Havering, Bexley or Bromley UKIP has limited appeal to these on the whole Metropolitan Wet Tories. The Tory MP for Battersea Jane Ellison is firmly on the left of the Tory Party and is in tune with the local party.
UKIP success will come in the Essex & Kent parts of London and even then they won't overcome the Tories in probably all the wards but pick up ex WWC non voters.
I dont think they will but Im prepared to back it at 7/4 for a throwaway £50
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
Er, what ever gave you the idea that I'm a "newly converted kipper"?
Still, your fixation with Cammo must give you amusement while you're awaiting the decisive "No" vote next year!
UKIP are the anti HS2party, so are you coming out against it?
Too fast to get the numbers? or just not enough stations and shunting yards?
I have mentioned previously I am against it for cost reasons, not only to the taxpayer during construction, but also cost of tickets, potentially. The already extant HS1, which opened in 2007 from St Pancras to Kent, has fares that are around 20% more than the normal routes to Victoria, London Bridge et al. And a single from St Pancras to Stratford off-peak costs nearly 6 pounds whereas the equivalent Tube fare is under 3 pounds.
Wee-Timmy, who ran-away from a post this 'morn, yet again shows that he knows 'nuffinck' about London. PtP knows; so does sam.
Ah, but Wee-Timmy has the support od the former London "genious" Tumbleweed, and his fellow-travellors and friends Jobbik-boy and Fee-Neil! Why should he listen to the 'Stender...?
Here is why: Be aware the Kentish-Folk! Bromley and Orpington may hold to the Tories. Yet UKIP have other chances; would the same be said to areas around Bexley and Croydon...?
"How about the legendary Scottish "Yes" vote surge?"
I don't think anyone's described it as a "surge", but even you would have to concede that there's been a clear swing to Yes since the end of last year.
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
Er, what ever gave you the idea that I'm a "newly converted kipper"?
Still, your fixation with Cammo must give you amusement while you're awaiting the decisive "No" vote next year!
UKIP are the anti HS2party, so are you coming out against it?
Too fast to get the numbers? or just not enough stations and shunting yards?
I have mentioned previously I am against it for cost reasons, not only to the taxpayer during construction, but also cost of tickets, potentially. The already extant HS1, which opened in 2007 from St Pancras to Kent, has fares that are around 20% more than the normal routes to Victoria, London Bridge et al. And a single from St Pancras to Stratford off-peak costs nearly 6 pounds whereas the equivalent Tube fare is under 3 pounds.
Over a year away, yes. But it's still actually real and not some amusing figment of Cammie's imagination like his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum. Something I'm sure you appreciate as a newly converted kipper.
Er, what ever gave you the idea that I'm a "newly converted kipper"?
Still, your fixation with Cammo must give you amusement while you're awaiting the decisive "No" vote next year!
UKIP are the anti HS2party, so are you coming out against it?
Too fast to get the numbers? or just not enough stations and shunting yards?
I have mentioned previously I am against it for cost reasons, not only to the taxpayer during construction, but also cost of tickets, potentially. The already extant HS1, which opened in 2007 from St Pancras to Kent, has fares that are around 20% more than the normal routes to Victoria, London Bridge et al. And a single from St Pancras to Stratford off-peak costs nearly 6 pounds whereas the equivalent Tube fare is under 3 pounds.
I agree Sunil, just teasing!
Leicester 3:2 at Forest into the playoffs on Goal Difference
"What the Conservatives can seek to do is reduce anti-government voting, they’ll hope by being able to point to some economic progress at some point, by presenting an image of competence and ability, by reducing noises-off and disunity and maintaining a clear message and purpose. Of course, this is probably also the best way for the Conservatives to win support from non-voters, from Labour and Lib Dem voters, or from anyone else (it is also rather dull and obvious advice – govern well – so don’t expect many columnists to waste their time with it)."
I'm reminded of a recent Andrew Lansley interview: good governance can be bad politics whereas good politics can mean poor governance - ref Blair for the latter.
Someone was ahead of the 2013 LE results by a year... Mr Skelton from Policy Exchange...
"A new poll for Policy Exchange shows that a gulf has opened up between politicians and the people. More than 80% of voters think that politicians don’t understand the real world at all. At a time of the biggest squeeze in living standards for decades, ordinary voters don’t believe that politicians understand their concerns. What is clear is that both parties are affected by the strong anti politics mood.
I think this is UKIP's opening. There's no significant policy difference between Con, Lab, LD on cost of living issues.
I agree that there is an opportunity on cost of living and also on the cost of 'luxuries'. I always thought the Tories could have won the election if they had had a more working class candidate and promised to:
Cut fuel duty by 10% and then freeze it Cut alcohol duty by 10% and then freeze it Cut cigarette duty by 10% and then freeze it Abolish the TV licence fee (get the BBC to show adverts instead)
Might be the sort of thing that UKIP could pick up. I would promise these things and then try to put posters up in every pub in the country.
Of course, this would all be strongly opposed by the Guardian tendency but would be very popular in working class areas.
CAFC end up ninth in the Championship! Away-form works....
Shows Master FiSUK sad summary about 'The Championship': Poor teams matched by the fact that they are poor. Hopefully Chrissie Powell will teach the 'home-boyz' that The Valley is wide!
Next year may all depend upon our Arab-owners: Could we raid lower-league teams - Celtic, Rangers, QPR - and emulate the days-of-fore? Who knows, but teams such as Leeds, Millwall and - yes - Leicester must be quaking....
Someone was ahead of the 2013 LE results by a year... Mr Skelton from Policy Exchange...
"A new poll for Policy Exchange shows that a gulf has opened up between politicians and the people. More than 80% of voters think that politicians don’t understand the real world at all. At a time of the biggest squeeze in living standards for decades, ordinary voters don’t believe that politicians understand their concerns. What is clear is that both parties are affected by the strong anti politics mood.
I think this is UKIP's opening. There's no significant policy difference between Con, Lab, LD on cost of living issues.
I agree that there is an opportunity on cost of living and also on the cost of 'luxuries'. I always thought the Tories could have won the election if they had had a more working class candidate and promised to:
Cut fuel duty by 10% and then freeze it Cut alcohol duty by 10% and then freeze it Cut cigarette duty by 10% and then freeze it Abolish the TV licence fee (get the BBC to show adverts instead)
Might be the sort of thing that UKIP could pick up. I would promise these things and then try to put posters up in every pub in the country.
Of course, this would all be strongly opposed by the Guardian tendency but would be very popular in working class areas.
Just to add that whenever there is a budget, people always talk about how progressive the changes to taxation are. No-one ever mentions how regressive the 4 taxes above are.
"Miliband should be making hay at this point yet Labour only did as well as in 2005 which was, admittedly, a general election Labour won "
Doing as well as on the day when Labour actually won a GE is not good enough. Remember, Labour voters do not turn out in the same numbers in LA elections as they do in GE's even taking into account differential turnout.
After all, Labour only managed to double their number of councillors.
Someone was ahead of the 2013 LE results by a year... Mr Skelton from Policy Exchange...
"A new poll for Policy Exchange shows that a gulf has opened up between politicians and the people. More than 80% of voters think that politicians don’t understand the real world at all. At a time of the biggest squeeze in living standards for decades, ordinary voters don’t believe that politicians understand their concerns. What is clear is that both parties are affected by the strong anti politics mood.
I think this is UKIP's opening. There's no significant policy difference between Con, Lab, LD on cost of living issues.
I agree that there is an opportunity on cost of living and also on the cost of 'luxuries'. I always thought the Tories could have won the election if they had had a more working class candidate and promised to:
Cut fuel duty by 10% and then freeze it Cut alcohol duty by 10% and then freeze it Cut cigarette duty by 10% and then freeze it Abolish the TV licence fee (get the BBC to show adverts instead)
Might be the sort of thing that UKIP could pick up. I would promise these things and then try to put posters up in every pub in the country.
Of course, this would all be strongly opposed by the Guardian tendency but would be very popular in working class areas.
Just to add that whenever there is a budget, people always talk about how progressive the changes to taxation are. No-one ever mentions how regressive the 4 taxes above are.
couldn't we just cut the TV licence to zero ? The BBC can just borrow money to keep going and then take on more staff.
"As it keeps being mentioned - I've just listened to EdM on WATO - hell's teeth, what a shocker."
Thanks for that Plato. I wasn't shocked , it confirmed me in my opinion the EdM isn't up to snuff. In fact I wouldn't trust him with a pair of scissors.
UKIP could do well in South East fringe London near Essex and Kent. Many of the WWC voters there vote Tory.
Dagenham could also be a good Labour / UKIP contest. Other than that, I can't see too many UKIP big votes in London unless the Tory vote actually collapses. If they do a little, it will hurt the Tories disproportionately.
The difference between this UKIP surge and other surges [ past UKIP and Green surges ] is that they have not got a small nucleus of elected councillors.
Note even the much lower Lib Dem votes brought in twice as many Councillors. It is called Organisation.
Comments
Does the FT share writers with Mills & Boon ?
Whereas previous protest votes have gone Labour, Conservative, Lib-Dem, Green and many other parties this week they went UKIP. I'll eat my hat if they win anything approaching 100 Westminster seats set alone 326 to form a majority government.
So UKIP managed to gain 139 Councillors. Wow, the Tories in 2000 gained 594 - did they win a landslide election in 2001?
The expectations were set so low for UKIP. Just because they cleared a low bar once doesn't mean they're out of the junior leagues.
Percentage of seats held
North (Ukip plus 2 from zero before):
Lab 48%
Con 30%
LD 12%
Midlands:
Con 49%
Lab 31%
LD 10%
Other 6%
Ukip 5%
South:
Con 51%
LD 19%
Lab 12%
Other 10%
Ukip 8%
Like - can we have the buttons back please - because a couple of posters were silly about it doesn't outweigh how helpful they were.
If I read a thread after its done and can't register my views [I think I pressed Dislike once ever] - its a bit pointless reading it as I can't even see what was popular or well regarded.
In York the Labour council has just passed a large housing building programe through against Conservative opposition. It is so need in the York area.
It was a major mistake by the last Labour government not to build enough houses.
Maybe they now realise this from the example of York
0: Staffs;
1-5: Bucks; Derbys; IOW; Lincs; Worcs;
6-10: Devon; Durham; E Sussex; Essex; Kent; Lancs; Notts; Norfolk; Northants; N Yorks; Suffolk; Surrey; Warwicks; W Sussex;
11-15: Cambs; Dorset; Glos; Leics; Oxon; Northumberland; Shrops;
16-20: Cumbria; Hants; Herts; Somerset;
21-30: Bristol; Wilts;
>30: Cornwall;
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2013/05/what-should-conservatives-offer-ukip-to-be-council-coalition-partners.html
'OGH now being re-tweeted by CCHQ Press Office: "Agreed. Lab should have more gains. In fact Ukip, CON and LDs all did better than expectations - LAB did worse"
Strange,Tim's been commenting about everything except Labour's poor performance.
Israel has refused to wait.. Late on several nights back I reported that Israeli piloted aircraft and not just drones were being seen over Damsacus. I described this as a clear statement to anyone who cared to watch that they were not going to sit and watch as things that may affect its security.
And so it is that they struck last night with activity on a number of targets in Syria not just the one reported.
The signals could not have been more clear and yet the Israeli airforce came and went almost as they pleased. Though the report is that the actual strikes were launched from Lebanese airspace Israeli aircraft were also over Syrian territory. A large (between 15-20k) mobilisation of Israeli forces for an exercise has occurred this week on the Northern Israeli borders. The commencement date of the exercises? Tomorrow.
The media has focussed on the strike in Damascus (reportedly an SSM transport site) but there has been more Israeli activity that that single action would justify and that the media has reported.
Add on the mobilisation and unless they like wasting money the Israelis are clearly getting their ducks in a row.
The situation for the Israeli's is acute. There is undoubtedly plans to ship weapons from Syrian stores to Hizbollah, the chemical weapons issue (whoever has them) continue to worry. There have been numerous incidents on the Golan border and to top it all Iran has started shipping a number regimental sized fighting to help Assad, and located some of those way too close to Israel's borders for comfort.
On the balance of probability you can only assume that more actions will occur.
The second point is success build success, UKIP will now get more members, more money and at some point more defectors. So when you face them next time there's more of them and they're more experienced. That's no guarantee they will win but it does mean the other parties now have to try harder.
You whined for weeks about the like/dislike system and now you are whining that it's gone?
Almost as hilarious as a "serial labour voting" "floating voter" congratulating the kippers after making an amusingly ostentatious show of proclaiming to all on PB that they were now going to vote for Cammie in the locals after his EU speech of a lifetime.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2013/05/03/fake-bloomberg-pizza-story-fools-drudge-report/
Those who think those councillors are an accident waiting to happen don't seem to realise that the tory papers who led the attack on them before the locals had the opposite effect as some on here warned. UKIP also don't actually control any councils so can enjoy the luxury of opposition. Which isn't to say there might not be one or two big problems from those elected yesterday but that holds true for all the parties who have an even bigger intake and are no strangers to problem councillors either.
Anecdote klaxon - I also can't imagine Dave going along with a phone prank the way Ed M did after his rotten WATO interview with Martha K; am told he was relaxed, pleasant about it - I'm not making it up either - I could have easily been on the receiving end of his call.
"What the Conservatives can seek to do is reduce anti-government voting, they’ll hope by being able to point to some economic progress at some point, by presenting an image of competence and ability, by reducing noises-off and disunity and maintaining a clear message and purpose. Of course, this is probably also the best way for the Conservatives to win support from non-voters, from Labour and Lib Dem voters, or from anyone else (it is also rather dull and obvious advice – govern well – so don’t expect many columnists to waste their time with it)."
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/7386
"Nobody believes UKIP is a party of government. In elections like these, that matters not at all. Indeed for those wishing to show their discontent with politics, and with the general state of things, it is a positive advantage (and one that used to work for the Liberal Democrats). By the same token, in a general election the same factor ought to work against them.
Whether it will or not is up to us. In 2015 we will not be competing with UKIP for votes among those who are trying to choose the best government for Britain. Among those attracted to UKIP, a Conservative government is a more popular outcome than any of the alternatives. Our task is to convince them – as well as the former Labour and Lib Dem voters we also need for a majority – that whether or not they get one actually matters."
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/05/two-years-to-show-it-matters-whether-we-get-a-conservative-government/?utm_source=LAPolls&utm_medium=Twitter&utm_campaign=Local+elections
Thank goodness the Tory party only ever panics in a crisis.....
I like them dark and dirty, like thrusting young Jack.
Have emailed you.
Atb.
London would be very good territory for UKIP, especially at Locals and Euros.
Of course. It's always easy for a party leadership to forget about things like locals after a few days but the base knows perfectly well that it matters. So will some of those MPs in marginals who will be told in the coming days in quite explicit terms from their activists just how much they should be worrying. Think of it more as a backstop and hedge against the sometimes fickle winds of polling. It's going to keep Farage focused on growing his party in the gaps between campaigning which is exactly what he should be doing. The point about the Clegg surge is that the lib dems weren't wiped out after it had vanished. Nor are they dead yet even though Clegg is still toxic. Because they have that local base, even though it is still eroding year on year.
When were you last in London, tim?
Can't see UKIP getting anywhere in Sutton Coldfield, but isn't Mike Hancock still in trouble in Portsmouth? A by-election there would be a gift to UKIP.
14,431 postal votes
10,349 in person votes
The postal total is almost the same as 2012 locals (14,570). The Voting on the Day turnout increased from 6,751 last may.
LOL
BTW in South Shields, UKIP came from nowhere to get 24%. LDs went down by 13% compared with 2010, Tories down by 10%. Most Kipper votes came from 2010 LDs?
I have been working in London recently and I like its multicultural diversity. But it could never be home and I dont even think of it as English its just like any other capital
I am going to a UKIP meeting in Hornchurch on 11th June and will report back
North East was among the all postal ballot experiment in the Euros (was it 2004?). They still keep all the postal votes since then! The NE constituencies are always the ones with the highest share of postal votes.
For every UKIP candidate with a dodgy comment they had managed to uncover through trawling the social media it was possible with just 30 seconds googling to find one or two elected Tory councillors who had been hauled up in front of either the standards committee or the police for something just as bad if not worse. All the Tory attack did highlight the deficiencies with their own councillors.
100 LOLs = 1 Chortle
100 Chortles = 1 Snort
100 Snorts = 1 Unspoofable.
Mystery solved!
Looking ahead to the GE in 2015 if the economy improves it is the Tories who will get most credit and that could give a swing away from Lib dems to the Tories.The LD's will be fighting to retain there seats against multiple challenges-The SNP and Labour in Scotland,a strong Labour challenge in English LD/Lab marginals,a smaller swing to the Tories in the numerous COn/LD marginal and if thta wasn't enough a threat from UKIP.
Still at leat the strategy is clear-concentrtae all resources from now until 2015 on the current seats.The hope is for a another hung parlaiment although there could be three parties SNP ,LD and UKIP in the equation!
The type of Londoner Tim has in mind is the least likely to vote, if indeed he/she has a vote.
I was thinking particularly of the Inner Suburbs, like my patch here in Wanstead, the Estuary and inner Home Counties generally.
I'd have thought these were potentially good hunting grounds for UKIP.
That's setting the bar a bit high, Tim.
Yesterday's performance was exceptional. They'd be very happy with 20% in London, I should think, especially as their results are bound to be patchy - good in places like Ilford, for example, bad in Shoreditch.
I'll pass.
I think this might be a problem for a party called UKIP.
White British people are, disgracefully, the minority in London thanks to people like you, so Ill pass. I would bet that UKIP do better than any other party in the white British part of the vote if you like?
Can I have Evens that Arsenal will beat QPR this evening and then call you a bottler when you say no?
I think a Green V UKIP total Cllrs in London bet might be a good one to try to price up.
Four graphs that might interest you:
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/329674724491816960/photo/1
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/329675229020422144/photo/1
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/326660744479391744/photo/1
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/326658870867013633/photo/1
I never said they would do better in London than the shires, just that there are plenty of people who will vote for them who didnt previously vote at all
So how much at EVS UKIP win the London British white vote share?
Still, your fixation with Cammo must give you amusement while you're awaiting the decisive "No" vote next year!
"Sunil_Prasannan Posts: 552
1:43PM
Peter_the_Punter said:
» show previous quotes
Well I'm sure UKIP can count on your vote, Sunil!
Er, um, I take it you noted my avatar change?
On the other bet, if you want to lay 7/4 I will go with these 16
B&D
Barnet
Bexley
Bromley
Croydon
Ealing
Enfield
Hammersmith and Fulham
Havering
Hillingdon
Hounslow
Merton
Richmond Upon Thames
Sutton
Waltham Forest
Wandsworth
@sam
Four graphs that might interest you:
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/329674724491816960/photo/1
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/329675229020422144/photo/1
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/326660744479391744/photo/1
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/326658870867013633/photo/1
Thank you
Too fast to get the numbers? or just not enough stations and shunting yards?
Ah, but Wee-Timmy has the support od the former London "genious" Tumbleweed, and his fellow-travellors and friends Jobbik-boy and Fee-Neil! Why should he listen to the 'Stender...?
Here is why: Be aware the Kentish-Folk! Bromley and Orpington may hold to the Tories. Yet UKIP have other chances; would the same be said to areas around Bexley and Croydon...?
"How about the legendary Scottish "Yes" vote surge?"
I don't think anyone's described it as a "surge", but even you would have to concede that there's been a clear swing to Yes since the end of last year.
Leicester 3:2 at Forest into the playoffs on Goal Difference
Foxes never quit!
He's terribly shouty, defensive and angry - cripes. Starts about 9mins in.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01s46vj/World_at_One_29_04_2013/
Cut fuel duty by 10% and then freeze it
Cut alcohol duty by 10% and then freeze it
Cut cigarette duty by 10% and then freeze it
Abolish the TV licence fee (get the BBC to show adverts instead)
Might be the sort of thing that UKIP could pick up. I would promise these things and then try to put posters up in every pub in the country.
Of course, this would all be strongly opposed by the Guardian tendency but would be very popular in working class areas.
Shows Master FiSUK sad summary about 'The Championship': Poor teams matched by the fact that they are poor. Hopefully Chrissie Powell will teach the 'home-boyz' that The Valley is wide!
Next year may all depend upon our Arab-owners: Could we raid lower-league teams - Celtic, Rangers, QPR - and emulate the days-of-fore? Who knows, but teams such as Leeds, Millwall and - yes - Leicester must be quaking....
Doing as well as on the day when Labour actually won a GE is not good enough. Remember, Labour voters do not turn out in the same numbers in LA elections as they do in GE's even taking into account differential turnout.
After all, Labour only managed to double their number of councillors.
Thanks for that Plato. I wasn't shocked , it confirmed me in my opinion the EdM isn't up to snuff. In fact I wouldn't trust him with a pair of scissors.
Dagenham could also be a good Labour / UKIP contest. Other than that, I can't see too many UKIP big votes in London unless the Tory vote actually collapses. If they do a little, it will hurt the Tories disproportionately.
The difference between this UKIP surge and other surges [ past UKIP and Green surges ] is that they have not got a small nucleus of elected councillors.
Note even the much lower Lib Dem votes brought in twice as many Councillors. It is called Organisation.