Easy hold for the tories there, it will be a battle for second place though. If the LD fall by less than 15% that the average nationwide polls suggest, then their narrative of losing all their votes in seats they don't hold so that they can hold most of their vote in their seats, is going to suffer. That's the irony of it, the LD need to lose more votes than usual to spin it as positive for them.
Kids clothing and shoe banks, might be more popular. But don't let anything get in the way of your callous disregard, We would hate you to develop a conscience, and lose your invaluable contributions.
"How long do you think a white teacher would last in a British primary school if he were to tell his class of seven-year olds that all non-Christians were "filthy heathens"? Or if he referred to black people using the "n-word"? Or he accused all Muslims of being frustrated terrorists?"
Or accused all Romanian men of belonging to ATM theft gangs...
Nobody has done this.
Sorry, your right, it was just the Romanian men who happen to live next door.
If you're referring to Farage, he didn't say that all Romanian men who move in next door belong to ATM theft gangs either.
Here's a question: if you have to knowingly lie about what someone said to justify your belief system, your belief system is a crock of shit, isn't it?
I'll drop the poor attempt at sarcasm then and stick to the Farage quote instead:
"Any normal and fair-minded person would have a perfect right to be concerned if a group of Romanian people suddenly moved in next door."
This was quickly followed in the Telegraph racism denial ad by reference to the Met finding on ATM crime and Romanian crimes.
So, fair cop that I linked the two above into a single sentence that was never said by Farage, not that I ever suggested he had.
I'm sure you have a perfectly benign explanation why Farage would draw a distinction between normal and fair minded people and Romanian people; and why the former should be concerned about the latter. And I'm sure that benign explanation would go to the heart of your own belief system.
Did he say "Romanian people" ?
Why do people of all political persuasions prefer to live next door to Germans than Romanians?
Yes he did... Quote taken from UKIP website.
Regarding your second question... Because some people drawn upon stereotypes to reach an opinion. Others chose instead to put national stereotypes to one side and to deal with people as individuals. I'd consider the latter to be more civilised than the former. Do you?
lf UKIP or Labour can take second place in this very very rural and very very wealthy seat it will be a good result for them, as for the Conservatives whatever the result is it will be positive for them (ranging from winning another by election, to increasing their vote share from LD collapse).
I'll drop the poor attempt at sarcasm then and stick to the Farage quote instead:
"Any normal and fair-minded person would have a perfect right to be concerned if a group of Romanian people suddenly moved in next door."
This was quickly followed in the Telegraph racism denial ad by reference to the Met finding on ATM crime and Romanian crimes.
So, fair cop that I linked the two above into a single sentence that was never said by Farage, not that I ever suggested he had.
I'm sure you have a perfectly benign explanation why Farage would draw a distinction between normal and fair minded people and Romanian people; and why the former should be concerned about the latter. And I'm sure that benign explanation would go to the heart of your own belief system.
He didn't make a distinction between the two groups. At no point did he say that "normal and fair minded people" excluded Romanians.
As for why normal and fair-minded people would have the right to be concerned about a group of Romanian men (rather than Romanian people), it's because there's quite a few criminal gangs in London that are composed of Romanian men. And they would have the right to have concerns about that. It doesn't mean they should judge them as being criminals. Just that they have the right to be wary about the possibility.
There's a game on Radio 5 on Saturday mornings during the football season that ends with a round called "defend the indefensible". You'd be very good at it.
Another very interesting article from Dan Hodges. As so often, he over-simplifies to make his point, but as is often the case, he has an interesting point.
It won't go down well with the usual suspects, I think I can safely predict!
I dont get why Cameroons & Blairite cuckoos think they can tell UKIP what they think and why they think it
What I do know is it is that kind of attitude that has seen UKIP membership hit record levels
You don't seem to understand the concept of comment and analysis. Nobody is dictating anything, in the way that cartographers map rather than shape the geography.
I do understand it. Try not to use that condescending attitude
"How long do you think a white teacher would last in a British primary school if he were to tell his class of seven-year olds that all non-Christians were "filthy heathens"? Or if he referred to black people using the "n-word"? Or he accused all Muslims of being frustrated terrorists?"
Or accused all Romanian men of belonging to ATM theft gangs...
Nobody has done this.
Sorry, your right, it was just the Romanian men who happen to live next door.
If you're referring to Farage, he didn't say that all Romanian men who move in next door belong to ATM theft gangs either.
Here's a question: if you have to knowingly lie about what someone said to justify your belief system, your belief system is a crock of shit, isn't it?
I'll drop the poor attempt at sarcasm then and stick to the Farage quote instead:
"Any normal and fair-minded person would have a perfect right to be concerned if a group of Romanian people suddenly moved in next door."
This was quickly followed in the Telegraph racism denial ad by reference to the Met finding on ATM crime and Romanian crimes.
So, fair cop that I linked the two above into a single sentence that was never said by Farage, not that I ever suggested he had.
I'm sure you have a perfectly benign explanation why Farage would draw a distinction between normal and fair minded people and Romanian people; and why the former should be concerned about the latter. And I'm sure that benign explanation would go to the heart of your own belief system.
Why do people of all political persuasions prefer to live next door to Germans than Romanians?
Everybody knows Germans have cake mid-afternoon and probably have some left over, who knows what Romanians have got?
So do the Portuguese. Indeed tea drinking (with, I am sure, the accompanying cake) was introduced into this country by Catherine of Braganza, the Portuguese wife of Charles II. Yet I hear that the Portuguese are no longer welcome immigrants in areas of East Anglia. Cake, and tea, may not be the driving issue.
"How long do you think a white teacher would last in a British primary school if he were to tell his class of seven-year olds that all non-Christians were "filthy heathens"? Or if he referred to black people using the "n-word"? Or he accused all Muslims of being frustrated terrorists?"
I'll drop the poor attempt at sarcasm then and stick to the Farage quote instead:
"Any normal and fair-minded person would have a perfect right to be concerned if a group of Romanian people suddenly moved in next door."
This was quickly followed in the Telegraph racism denial ad by reference to the Met finding on ATM crime and Romanian crimes.
So, fair cop that I linked the two above into a single sentence that was never said by Farage, not that I ever suggested he had.
I'm sure you have a perfectly benign explanation why Farage would draw a distinction between normal and fair minded people and Romanian people; and why the former should be concerned about the latter. And I'm sure that benign explanation would go to the heart of your own belief system.
Did he say "Romanian people" ?
Why do people of all political persuasions prefer to live next door to Germans than Romanians?
Yes he did... Quote taken from UKIP website.
Regarding your second question... Because some people drawn upon stereotypes to reach an opinion. Others chose instead to put national stereotypes to one side and to deal with people as individuals. I'd consider the latter to be more civilised than the former. Do you?
If you are asked a question with a yes or no answer you have to take the average and make a decision based on that.. I would say I would have to make the judgement based on meeting the individual, but if someone put a gun to my head and said I had to choose one or the other,I would think about who was more likely to be prosperous, and who was more likely to be a criminal and go from there
The point is that even Lib Dems said theyd prefer Germans over Romanians, so to pretend that Farage was extreme in saying there was a difference flies in the face of public opinion
Actually, Mr Tokyo, they do. At any rate they did in the cafes I used to use in Lisbon. The rituals of English afternoon tea are, in fact, mainly imported. Granted the Portuguese don't go in for silly sandwiches or scones.
Mr. Charles, such linguistic treachery is most unworthy of you.
My mother's family comes from Nashville...
As my (Californian) wife delights in reminding me, that means our daughter has a majority of American blood...
Given the wide variety of sources from which the American gene pool is derived, Mr Charles, what is “American blood”?
Always a debate: but I do know they were in Vermont and the Carolinas before the Rebellion. So I'm guessing they were pretty WASPy. There again, my wife's family is from Donetsk - her grandfather immigrated to Cali as a baby - I like to point out that I'm more American that she is
"How long do you think a white teacher would last in a British primary school if he were to tell his class of seven-year olds that all non-Christians were "filthy heathens"? Or if he referred to black people using the "n-word"? Or he accused all Muslims of being frustrated terrorists?"
Why do people of all political persuasions prefer to live next door to Germans than Romanians?
Yes he did... Quote taken from UKIP website.
Regarding your second question... Because some people drawn upon stereotypes to reach an opinion. Others chose instead to put national stereotypes to one side and to deal with people as individuals. I'd consider the latter to be more civilised than the former. Do you?
If you are asked a question with a yes or no answer you have to take the average and make a decision based on that.. I would say I would have to make the judgement based on meeting the individual, but if someone put a gun to my head and said I had to choose one or the other,I would think about who was more likely to be prosperous, and who was more likely to be a criminal and go from there
The point is that even Lib Dems said theyd prefer Germans over Romanians, so to pretend that Farage was extreme in saying there was a difference flies in the face of public opinion
There is some logic there and honesty but Farage has a responsibility as a well quoted politician to not stoke up fears which can result ultimately in personal attacks on individuals. He was clumsy and he realised this . Thsi sort of thing makes me think he is not up to high office not for any extreme views (he clearly does not hold extreme views or indeed any coherent ones imo) but because he is too accident prone and not professional enough for the position he hopes to achieve
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
Yeah I was wrong!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Did the BNP ever get >20% at by-elections?
Sunil are you still ok to meet up thursday evening with SO and myself ?
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
I would think plenty of ex BNP supporters do vote UKIP. I would also say that plenty of those people were not racist, just desperate for someone to listen to them instead of deride their concerns as racist.
UKIP are not the BNP, and they have done society a favour by giving people with immigration concerns a non extremist place to go.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
Yeah I was wrong!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
1) You could be wrong now.
2) UKIP used to be the eccentric Uncle at the family gathering, now they've morphed into something unpleasant, with posters, like this
Given how popular these food banks are - can we expect to see beer banks and fag banks opening soon ? I suspect they will be popular too.
I used to wonder about whether it would be possible to set up a sort of a fag bank. It would be, conceptually, a website where people who don't smoke could sell the 200 duty-free B&H they had bought for £10 in Singapore airport to the highest bid.
Given that they'd normally cost at least £80 retail, this would be splendid for everyone, and would leave room for a nice little tickle for the website.
It would work for fags because they weigh nothing and the postage would be minimal. The shipping cost of duty free spirits would probably kill it.
I have a feeling, though, that duty free goods are sold on the condition that they are only for personal consumption and therefore that doing this would violate the T & C.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
Yeah I was wrong!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
UKIP used to have a position where they were anti-EU. They moaned ,sometimes quite correctly, about how interfering it was and how expensive it was and the inate corruptness at the centre of it. (i did vote for UKIP once a few years ago)
This euro election though they did not go on about this at all and concentrated on EU immigration and this made them seem nasty and more narrow minded than before
Easy hold for the tories there, it will be a battle for second place though. If the LD fall by less than 15% that the average nationwide polls suggest, then their narrative of losing all their votes in seats they don't hold so that they can hold most of their vote in their seats, is going to suffer. That's the irony of it, the LD need to lose more votes than usual to spin it as positive for them.
Well: Cambs South is one of the few areas of the UK where there is still local councillor strength for the Libs, and they also have a large base of activists and councillors in Cambridge to draw upon, so I think it's a bit more complex than that.
The LibDem "it's all OK" / "head in the sand" (delete as approriate) story is that they have a number - perhaps 60 or 70, certainly less than 100 - places in the country where they still have substantial councillor and activist bases, and in these places, the LibDem vote is holding up OK. South Cambs would be one of those places (they were a strong second in the locals there last month). So, in the event of a by-election, a disastrous result (i.e. sub 20%, pushed into third) would genuinely be a disastrous result for them.
I think the time has really come to insist that religious schools take 20% of their intake from outside the associated faith. I don't think this would be a problem for good Anglican, Catholic or liberal Muslim schools, but it would mean we could stop sending money to those spreading conservative Islam, which is just an intolerant, ugly and undemocratic ideology.
Why not just phase out religious schools?
When I was an MP the Hindu Council (forget the exact name) proposed that all faith schools should be required in return for public funding to invite a representative of each other recognised faith in turn to put their views, once a week for one hour (so in a few months you'd have heard them all and could start again) - they argued that although lots of parents wanted their kids brought up in a particular faith, it was reasonable to ensure that the kids were exposed to other ways of thinking, at least in order to see that they seemed to be rational and civilised.
I thought that was quite an attractive idea which could blunt unease about faith schools, even if it has a few practical problems about what is recognised, and I'd want to add Dawkinsian atheism as one of the rota.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Did the BNP ever get >20% at by-elections?
Sunil are you still ok to meet up thursday evening with SO and myself ?
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
I would think plenty of ex BNP supporters do vote UKIP. I would also say that plenty of those people were not racist, just desperate for someone to listen to them instead of deride their concerns as racist.
UKIP are not the BNP, and they have done society a favour by giving people with immigration concerns a non extremist place to go.
I was happy to vote UKIP in the Euros, but I could never vote BNP.
I think the time has really come to insist that religious schools take 20% of their intake from outside the associated faith. I don't think this would be a problem for good Anglican, Catholic or liberal Muslim schools, but it would mean we could stop sending money to those spreading conservative Islam, which is just an intolerant, ugly and undemocratic ideology.
Why not just phase out religious schools?
When I was an MP the Hindu Council (forget the exact name) proposed that all faith schools should be required in return for public funding to invite a representative of each other recognised faith in turn to put their views, once a week for one hour (so in a few months you'd have heard them all and could start again) - they argued that although lots of parents wanted their kids brought up in a particular faith, it was reasonable to ensure that the kids were exposed to other ways of thinking, at least in order to see that they seemed to be rational and civilised.
I thought that was quite an attractive idea which could blunt unease about faith schools, even if it has a few practical problems about what is recognised, and I'd want to add Dawkinsian atheism as one of the rota.
Nice idea on paper but who do you class as representaive of islam say , an orthodox Wahabi (probably spelt that wrong) or a whirliing dervish (and that as well?). Your insistence on having an athiest might well reinforce the view that not believing in God is an eccentric view given how outnumered he would be by representatives of slightly different strands of 'men in the sky' talkers
Just don't have state funded religious schools imo .It would be embarrassing to any future contact with another intelligent world to say we separate children for education based on parent's superstition
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
Yeah I was wrong!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
1) You could be wrong now.
2) UKIP used to be the eccentric Uncle at the family gathering, now they've morphed into something unpleasant, with posters, like this
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn · 3 mins Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Interesting attempt to peer through the morass in Europe by Hannan. I think his Juncker solution is more likely than Andrew Mitchell as EU Commissioner
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
Yeah I was wrong!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
UKIP used to have a position where they were anti-EU. They moaned ,sometimes quite correctly, about how interfering it was and how expensive it was and the inate corruptness at the centre of it. (i did vote for UKIP once a few years ago)
This euro election though they did not go on about this at all and concentrated on EU immigration and this made them seem nasty and more narrow minded than before
Well look, I am not trying to convert you or anyone else, but to me it isnt nasty or racist to want to curb immigration. It is nasty to pretend that it doesnt affect those at the lowest end of the pay scale though, and thats what the other parties do by refusing to acknowledge it or do anything about it
Given how popular these food banks are - can we expect to see beer banks and fag banks opening soon ? I suspect they will be popular too.
I used to wonder about whether it would be possible to set up a sort of a fag bank. It would be, conceptually, a website where people who don't smoke could sell the 200 duty-free B&H they had bought for £10 in Singapore airport to the highest bid.
Given that they'd normally cost at least £80 retail, this would be splendid for everyone, and would leave room for a nice little tickle for the website.
It would work for fags because they weigh nothing and the postage would be minimal. The shipping cost of duty free spirits would probably kill it.
I have a feeling, though, that duty free goods are sold on the condition that they are only for personal consumption and therefore that doing this would violate the T & C.
So I just sell mine at cost to a mate.
Lorry drivers used to be a very reliable source of cheap cigarettes.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn · 3 mins Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Good news for Cameron.
Interesting, as one would have thought the politics would be in the other direction.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
I would think plenty of ex BNP supporters do vote UKIP. I would also say that plenty of those people were not racist, just desperate for someone to listen to them instead of deride their concerns as racist.
UKIP are not the BNP, and they have done society a favour by giving people with immigration concerns a non extremist place to go.
Trouble is, the language they use ain't a whole lot different from the language of racist parties.
Witness their euro leaflets immigration, foreigners, etc etc front and centre. Not a mention of the CAP or working time directive.
We get that someone needed to be able to represent a voice on immigration that the major parties (shame on them) recoiled from. But that moment has passed. UKIP needs, and promptly, to broaden its policy appeal.
Otherwise a natural conclusion to draw is that the party is comfortable with the "undesirables" it has picked up, and continues to pick up, by means of the ugly tone and content of its ongoing campaigns.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
Yeah I was wrong!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
1) You could be wrong now.
2) UKIP used to be the eccentric Uncle at the family gathering, now they've morphed into something unpleasant, with posters, like this
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2020 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
People and parties change.
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
Yeah I was wrong!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
1) You could be wrong now.
2) UKIP used to be the eccentric Uncle at the family gathering, now they've morphed into something unpleasant, with posters, like this
Interesting attempt to peer through the morass in Europe by Hannan. I think his Juncker solution is more likely than Andrew Mitchell as EU Commissioner
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Trouble is, the language they use ain't a whole lot different from the language of racist parties.
Witness their euro leaflets immigration, foreigners, etc etc front and centre. Not a mention of the CAP or working time directive.
We get that someone needed to be able to represent a voice on immigration that the major parties (shame on them) recoiled from. But that moment has passed. UKIP needs, and promptly, to broaden its policy appeal.
Otherwise a natural conclusion to draw is that the party is comfortable with the "undesirables" it has picked up, and continues to pick up, by means of the ugly tone and content of its ongoing campaigns.
For people whose pay packet, social cohesion and self esteem has suffered bercause of the effects of mass immigration, pussy footing around is not enough.
Doing nothing and letting the consequences take place is far nastier, just easier to distance yourself from, and thats what all parties, Labour in particular, have done
"The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.
Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after." "
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn · 3 mins Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Good news for Cameron.
Interesting, as one would have thought the politics would be in the other direction.
It presumably means they believe Juncker won't get the job and want to blunt the 'Cameron sees off Juncker' headlines.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Former BNP members are barred from joining UKIP.
In at least one case, they have become Labour Party candidates.
Interesting attempt to peer through the morass in Europe by Hannan. I think his Juncker solution is more likely than Andrew Mitchell as EU Commissioner
Isn't Mrs Kinnock a bit busy running Denmark and taking selfies, though?
(Actually a serious question: I don't have a good feel for whether someone in her position would be interested in the EU position).
I suspect Mrs Kinnock might prefer to be in an EU position if her hubby gets to Parliament rather than running another country. I suspect even in Denmark it would be commented on. Although you never know.
Interesting attempt to peer through the morass in Europe by Hannan. I think his Juncker solution is more likely than Andrew Mitchell as EU Commissioner
Isn't Mrs Kinnock a bit busy running Denmark and taking selfies, though?
(Actually a serious question: I don't have a good feel for whether someone in her position would be interested in the EU position).
It's been suggested before. The Danish government has been struggling and it was suggested that she might find it a welcome option. Recently, though, the Danish opposition has been struggling too, so we may have been encouraged to stay on. Her official comments on the issue have been studiously neutral - "hope we can reach a good decision by July".
The Labour group previously declined to support Schulz as they thought him too federalist, so not totally surprised they're not up for Juncker.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Former BNP members are barred from joining UKIP.
In at least one case, they have become Labour Party candidates.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
I would think plenty of ex BNP supporters do vote UKIP. I would also say that plenty of those people were not racist, just desperate for someone to listen to them instead of deride their concerns as racist.
UKIP are not the BNP, and they have done society a favour by giving people with immigration concerns a non extremist place to go.
Trouble is, the language they use ain't a whole lot different from the language of racist parties.
Witness their euro leaflets immigration, foreigners, etc etc front and centre. Not a mention of the CAP or working time directive.
We get that someone needed to be able to represent a voice on immigration that the major parties (shame on them) recoiled from. But that moment has passed. UKIP needs, and promptly, to broaden its policy appeal.
Otherwise a natural conclusion to draw is that the party is comfortable with the "undesirables" it has picked up, and continues to pick up, by means of the ugly tone and content of its ongoing campaigns.
The CAP, and EU Energy policy were issues raised by UKIP in the EU Pariliament campaign.
The Tories are the greater threat to a social democratic revival in the UK.
The "social democratic revival" should never happen - socialism was the greatest evil of the 20th century and should be stamped out at every opportunity including its wolf in sheeps clothing of "social democracy" for the greater good of all mankind.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn · 3 mins Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Good news for Cameron.
Interesting, as one would have thought the politics would be in the other direction.
It presumably means they believe Juncker won't get the job and want to blunt the 'Cameron sees off Juncker' headlines.
Well that would betray a limited grasp of how politics works.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn · 3 mins Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Good news for Cameron.
Until Ed changes his mind tomorrow, or 5 minutes before the vote...
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Former BNP members are barred from joining UKIP.
In at least one case, they have become Labour Party candidates.
Do you have to be a member of UKIP to vote for them?
No.
Are you suggesting that parties should not attempt to win votes from supporters of other parties? Should not stand candidates in wards/constituencies/EU regions that have previously returned BNP/Respect/Sinn Fein representatives?
It's been suggested before. The Danish government has been struggling and it was suggested that she might find it a welcome option. Recently, though, the Danish opposition has been struggling too, so we may have been encouraged to stay on. Her official comments on the issue have been studiously neutral - "hope we can reach a good decision by July".
Maybe I'm looking at it too much from a British perspective, but I find it hard to imagine a British PM, even one in big trouble and heading for certain defeat, such as Major in 1996 or Brown in 2009, swanning off to a cushy EU or international role whilst still in office.
@megalomaniacs4u "Socialism" is about people working together for the common good, you seem to be advocating selfishness and conflict as a better option. Interesting concept you have there.
Jane Merrick @janemerrick23 6 mins Gordon Brown says "it would be good" if David Cameron did head to head debate with Alex Salmond #indyref #pressgallery
Andrew Neil @afneil 8 mins Gordon Brown says you can't allow referendum to be Britain v Scotland. Must be about two visions of Scotland.
So at least one person doesn't think an Eck v Dave debate would be an Scotland v England thing.
It's been suggested before. The Danish government has been struggling and it was suggested that she might find it a welcome option. Recently, though, the Danish opposition has been struggling too, so we may have been encouraged to stay on. Her official comments on the issue have been studiously neutral - "hope we can reach a good decision by July".
Maybe I'm looking at it too much from a British perspective, but I find it hard to imagine a British PM, even one in big trouble and heading for certain defeat, such as Major in 1996 or Brown in 2009, swanning off to a cushy EU or international role whilst still in office.
Barosso was PM of Portugal when nominated to be EU Commission President, Santer was PM of Lux up to being appointed to the EU Commission etc
@megalomaniacs4u "Socialism" is about people working together for the common good, you seem to be advocating selfishness and conflict as a better option. Interesting concept you have there.
Thats an interesting definition of 'socialism' . People work together for the common good in many areas of life but I would not call most examples 'socialism' To me socialism always involves the state controlling things which then may lead to a common good. You sould as if a dislike of socialism is a dislike of your fellow people -absolutely wrong
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn · 3 mins Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Good news for Cameron.
Interesting, as one would have thought the politics would be in the other direction.
It presumably means they believe Juncker won't get the job and want to blunt the 'Cameron sees off Juncker' headlines.
Or they've done the Maths, seen that Juncker has a huge majority in the Euro parliament, and have been given permission to vote against so they can avoid the charge that they voted for Juncker - thus preventing Cameron from making it a domestic political issue.
The Tories are the greater threat to a social democratic revival in the UK.
The "social democratic revival" should never happen - socialism was the greatest evil of the 20th century and should be stamped out at every opportunity including its wolf in sheeps clothing of "social democracy" for the greater good of all mankind.
Thats not right imo as well.Social Democracy is not Socialism in my eyes.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn · 3 mins Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Good news for Cameron.
Interesting, as one would have thought the politics would be in the other direction.
Why would Labour hand Cameron the "I'm sticking up for Britain / they are bending the knee before the Eurocrats" stick with which to beat them?
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Former BNP members are barred from joining UKIP.
In at least one case, they have become Labour Party candidates.
Do you have to be a member of UKIP to vote for them?
No.
Are you suggesting that parties should not attempt to win votes from supporters of other parties? Should not stand candidates in wards/constituencies/EU regions that have previously returned BNP/Respect/Sinn Fein representatives?
Nope.
I was asking whether former BNP supporters were voting for what they thought was Original UKIP or New UKIP.
If the former, where will they go when they discover it's turned/turning into the latter?
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Trouble is, the language they use ain't a whole lot different from the language of racist parties.
Otherwise a natural conclusion to draw is that the party is comfortable with the "undesirables" it has picked up, and continues to pick up, by means of the ugly tone and content of its ongoing campaigns.
For people whose pay packet, social cohesion and self esteem has suffered bercause of the effects of mass immigration, pussy footing around is not enough.
Doing nothing and letting the consequences take place is far nastier, just easier to distance yourself from, and thats what all parties, Labour in particular, have done
"The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.
Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after." "
Yeah, I get that.
But what about the deficit?
We get that immigration affects lower-skilled indigenous workers (yet according to some studies brings net benefit to the host nation). It is a sensible message. But not one which UKIP seem to be making.
Instead of championing a new, anti-elite, man-on-the-street politics, which would include a thought-out and costed immigration policy, they are instead in danger of settling into a comfort zone of borderline racist anti-immigration rhetoric.
Interesting attempt to peer through the morass in Europe by Hannan. I think his Juncker solution is more likely than Andrew Mitchell as EU Commissioner
Isn't Mrs Kinnock a bit busy running Denmark and taking selfies, though?
(Actually a serious question: I don't have a good feel for whether someone in her position would be interested in the EU role).
Wasn't Barosso (?sp) running Portugal before his current role?
I'd suggest it makes a lot of sense for her as a way to step up the food chain. And don't forget that she is Cameron's first choice - cements the Hanseatic/Scandi alliance he has going on
"Socialism" would be a very good system, unfortunately greed and power get in the way. It has been a problem since it was espoused millenia ago, We are all semi evolved apes, and acting like animals comes more naturally than thinking as humans.
I am slightly surprised by Labour's position as I understand that the grouping they are members of in the EU Parliament had already given their backing to Juncker. I suppose that will be another group who will have learned the lesson of relying on Miliband.
It is difficult to sort out the real and the illusion here. I would be more than slightly surprised that Cameron would be quite so vocal in coming out against someone who will be in a position to be at least administratively difficult if he was not very confident that he could stop him. Boris is probably right about the long term effect though.
If there is to be a serious rethink about the relationship between the non EZ members (specifically us) and the EZ bloc having the person in charge of the paperwork being resentful and hostile would hardly seem to be a help.
Denmark is the other country with a permanent opt out on the Euro is it not? I think that makes Mrs Kinnock's appointment potentially problematic.
"Socialism" would be a very good system, unfortunately greed and power get in the way. It has been a problem since it was espoused millenia ago, We are all semi evolved apes, and acting like animals comes more naturally than thinking as humans.
Yeah, we just need to change mankind to fit the political theory.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Whats great about the Hodges article is that he is trying to paint the UKIP that got 3% in 2010 and was called "closet racists" by Cameron as cuddly and earnest, while saying that the newer version that politicians are tripping over themselves to say arent racist, and is getting 20% plus in by elections, is nasty and extreme
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Former BNP members are barred from joining UKIP.
In at least one case, they have become Labour Party candidates.
Do you have to be a member of UKIP to vote for them?
No.
Are you suggesting that parties should not attempt to win votes from supporters of other parties? Should not stand candidates in wards/constituencies/EU regions that have previously returned BNP/Respect/Sinn Fein representatives?
Nope.
I was asking whether former BNP supporters were voting for what they thought was Original UKIP or New UKIP.
If the former, where will they go when they discover it's turned/turning into the latter?
Are you suggesting peole who voted BNP should be written off? People have real fears which no one was listening to so voted for the BNP out of anger. Now there is amoderate party that listens to them they go there, you should be happy
I dont think you should try and take the moral high ground over people that once voted BNP and have changed their mind
Mr, Charles, can't remember where I read this, but I'm reasonably sure a Portuguese told me that the country was rather pissed off at Barrosso[sp]'s duplicity, abandoning the presidency of that country to plunge his prominent proboscis into the Brussels trough after he specifically said he would not.
'I was struck by how he talked approvingly of ‘New Ukip’'
Priceless.
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
So, which party are the former BNP supporters voting for then?
Trouble is, the language they use ain't a whole lot different from the language of racist parties.
Otherwise a natural conclusion to draw is that the party is comfortable with the "undesirables" it has picked up, and continues to pick up, by means of the ugly tone and content of its ongoing campaigns.
"
Yeah, I get that.
But what about the deficit?
We get that immigration affects lower-skilled indigenous workers (yet according to some studies brings net benefit to the host nation). It is a sensible message. But not one which UKIP seem to be making.
Instead of championing a new, anti-elite, man-on-the-street politics, which would include a thought-out and costed immigration policy, they are instead in danger of settling into a comfort zone of borderline racist anti-immigration rhetoric.
Sometimes you need to bludgeon the establishment into taking notice, and shout it out loud.
The Euros were fought on EU policies, the most immediate of which is immigration. I would have thought you will get your wish and it will have much less prominence in the General Election manifesto and campaign
@Richard_Nabavi Yes, several people have tried, but it is a slow process, and quite often those putting the idea forward get nailed to bits of wood, or something similar.
It's not often that I think that shadsy is wide of the mark with his market-setting, but that's one example.
..... and it's not like you antifrank to miss the best value available in the market - Betfair currently have £40+ available at 2.2, thats 1.14/1 net in old money on the Scots' Indy turnout being >75.0%. That's 1% lower than Ladbrokes' fulcrum point and at 36.8% better odds.
****** HURRY! ******
Snaffled!
Lots of other movement in the IndyRef Turnout market today. Eg. Shadsy has just raised his under/over bar from 76% to 78%.
That BWIN.com price of 6/5 for 75% or over is still available btw.
It is difficult to sort out the real and the illusion here. I would be more than slightly surprised that Cameron would be quite so vocal in coming out against someone who will be in a position to be at least administratively difficult if he was not very confident that he could stop him.
My reading of it is that it was a Thick-Of-It-style cock-up.
Merkel had been intending to switch out Juncker for some other candidate and avoid setting the precedent that the winning group's candidate got the job. Cameron must have known this and thought he could safely make a big deal of it, get him switched out for some other conservative (best guess is that the plot probably called for Katainen, whose announced resignation was a bit mysterious) and come home declaring victory, like John Major did when he had that one federalist changed to that other federalist. So Cameron went ahead and made his Big Stand, and started getting the press roiled up so he can show everyone how terrible this particular federalist is and how great the next federalist will be in comparison.
But then Merkel got far more push-back than she expected and had to hurriedly back-pedal. That leaves the opponents without enough votes to make a blocking minority. In theory they can get one with Renzi, but his big beef is austerity, and if they pick an anti-austerity socialist then they've got a whole new problem straightening out other conservative heads of government, in addition to which Cameron's victory starts to look really, really weird... Not to mention that the parliament will probably just send the whole thing back to them, and come September Sweden gets a new government and then the blocking minority is short of votes again...
Comments
If the LD fall by less than 15% that the average nationwide polls suggest, then their narrative of losing all their votes in seats they don't hold so that they can hold most of their vote in their seats, is going to suffer.
That's the irony of it, the LD need to lose more votes than usual to spin it as positive for them.
Kids clothing and shoe banks, might be more popular. But don't let anything get in the way of your callous disregard,
We would hate you to develop a conscience, and lose your invaluable contributions.
Regarding your second question... Because some people drawn upon stereotypes to reach an opinion. Others chose instead to put national stereotypes to one side and to deal with people as individuals. I'd consider the latter to be more civilised than the former. Do you?
http://order-order.com/2014/06/09/pledge-breaking-libdem-tweet-of-the-day/
Harry Cole @MrHarryCole
This is going really well. RT @GuidoFawkes: LIB DEM CORRECTION: http://bit.ly/1ifTa09 http://bit.ly/1ifT8FI
UKIP challenge to win GE2015 seat.
Happens to the best of us.
The point is that even Lib Dems said theyd prefer Germans over Romanians, so to pretend that Farage was extreme in saying there was a difference flies in the face of public opinion
David Cameron looks like a visionary when he talked about twitter (and Kippers)
http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/politics/9225851/nigel-farage-is-becoming-a-moderniser/
@LibDems U ok hun?
Priceless.
Oh for the old UKIP that everyone thought was wonderfully pleasant!
You admitted last night you voted for labour in 2010, just after he had called a woman raising immigration a bigot.
Now look at you!
But is it credible to say UKIP have turned into some kind of nasty party as if that wasnt what everyone has said all along?!
UKIP are not the BNP, and they have done society a favour by giving people with immigration concerns a non extremist place to go.
2) UKIP used to be the eccentric Uncle at the family gathering, now they've morphed into something unpleasant, with posters, like this
http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/04/ukip-immigration-native-americans/
Given that they'd normally cost at least £80 retail, this would be splendid for everyone, and would leave room for a nice little tickle for the website.
It would work for fags because they weigh nothing and the postage would be minimal. The shipping cost of duty free spirits would probably kill it.
I have a feeling, though, that duty free goods are sold on the condition that they are only for personal consumption and therefore that doing this would violate the T & C.
So I just sell mine at cost to a mate.
This euro election though they did not go on about this at all and concentrated on EU immigration and this made them seem nasty and more narrow minded than before
The LibDem "it's all OK" / "head in the sand" (delete as approriate) story is that they have a number - perhaps 60 or 70, certainly less than 100 - places in the country where they still have substantial councillor and activist bases, and in these places, the LibDem vote is holding up OK. South Cambs would be one of those places (they were a strong second in the locals there last month). So, in the event of a by-election, a disastrous result (i.e. sub 20%, pushed into third) would genuinely be a disastrous result for them.
I thought that was quite an attractive idea which could blunt unease about faith schools, even if it has a few practical problems about what is recognised, and I'd want to add Dawkinsian atheism as one of the rota.
Sent you a PM.
Just don't have state funded religious schools imo .It would be embarrassing to any future contact with another intelligent world to say we separate children for education based on parent's superstition
Breaking: Labour reveal they won't support Jean-Claude Juncker for EU commission president and their MEPs will vote against. Gives PM unity.
Good news for Cameron.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100275511/heres-my-prediction-helle-thorning-schmidt-as-commission-president-jean-claude-juncker-as-council-president-andrew-mitchell-as-uk-commissioner/
Witness their euro leaflets immigration, foreigners, etc etc front and centre. Not a mention of the CAP or working time directive.
We get that someone needed to be able to represent a voice on immigration that the major parties (shame on them) recoiled from. But that moment has passed. UKIP needs, and promptly, to broaden its policy appeal.
Otherwise a natural conclusion to draw is that the party is comfortable with the "undesirables" it has picked up, and continues to pick up, by means of the ugly tone and content of its ongoing campaigns.
(Actually a serious question: I don't have a good feel for whether someone in her position would be interested in the EU role).
Doing nothing and letting the consequences take place is far nastier, just easier to distance yourself from, and thats what all parties, Labour in particular, have done
"The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.
Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after." "
In at least one case, they have become Labour Party candidates.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10260130/Son-of-Jack-Straw-gets-support-from-ex-BNP-member-for-his-bid-to-be-an-MP.html
The Labour group previously declined to support Schulz as they thought him too federalist, so not totally surprised they're not up for Juncker.
http://www.ukip.org/new_ukip_posters_reveal_added_eu_cost_of_living
As was the loss of sovereignty to the EU.
http://www.ukip.org/ukip_releases_the_final_billboard_poster_of_its_european_election_campaign
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ukipdev/pages/151/attachments/original/1398093353/Burning_flag_48sheet.jpeg?1398093353
Are you suggesting that parties should not attempt to win votes from supporters of other parties? Should not stand candidates in wards/constituencies/EU regions that have previously returned BNP/Respect/Sinn Fein representatives?
"Socialism" is about people working together for the common good, you seem to be advocating selfishness and conflict as a better option.
Interesting concept you have there.
Gordon Brown says "it would be good" if David Cameron did head to head debate with Alex Salmond #indyref #pressgallery
Andrew Neil @afneil 8 mins
Gordon Brown says you can't allow referendum to be Britain v Scotland. Must be about two visions of Scotland.
So at least one person doesn't think an Eck v Dave debate would be an Scotland v England thing.
You sould as if a dislike of socialism is a dislike of your fellow people -absolutely wrong
Mr. Divvie, Gordon is a moron.
Parties blaming each other and playing politics whilst refusing to admit the reason for the whole mess
I was asking whether former BNP supporters were voting for what they thought was Original UKIP or New UKIP.
If the former, where will they go when they discover it's turned/turning into the latter?
But what about the deficit?
We get that immigration affects lower-skilled indigenous workers (yet according to some studies brings net benefit to the host nation). It is a sensible message. But not one which UKIP seem to be making.
Instead of championing a new, anti-elite, man-on-the-street politics, which would include a thought-out and costed immigration policy, they are instead in danger of settling into a comfort zone of borderline racist anti-immigration rhetoric.
I'd suggest it makes a lot of sense for her as a way to step up the food chain. And don't forget that she is Cameron's first choice - cements the Hanseatic/Scandi alliance he has going on
"Socialism" would be a very good system, unfortunately greed and power get in the way.
It has been a problem since it was espoused millenia ago,
We are all semi evolved apes, and acting like animals comes more naturally than thinking as humans.
It is difficult to sort out the real and the illusion here. I would be more than slightly surprised that Cameron would be quite so vocal in coming out against someone who will be in a position to be at least administratively difficult if he was not very confident that he could stop him. Boris is probably right about the long term effect though.
If there is to be a serious rethink about the relationship between the non EZ members (specifically us) and the EZ bloc having the person in charge of the paperwork being resentful and hostile would hardly seem to be a help.
Denmark is the other country with a permanent opt out on the Euro is it not? I think that makes Mrs Kinnock's appointment potentially problematic.
I dont think you should try and take the moral high ground over people that once voted BNP and have changed their mind
The Euros were fought on EU policies, the most immediate of which is immigration.
I would have thought you will get your wish and it will have much less prominence in the General Election manifesto and campaign
As the Sunil Said
"Stick it up your Juncker !"
Yes, several people have tried, but it is a slow process, and quite often those putting the idea forward get nailed to bits of wood, or something similar.
Patronising tone, tripping up over her words, and playing party politics instead of addressing the root of the problem
.. and it shouldnt matter, but she looks awful
That BWIN.com price of 6/5 for 75% or over is still available btw.
Mind you, she'd be better than Gove.
Jim Pickard @PickardJE - Gordon Brown: "Britain wouldn't be Britain without Farage with a pint in one hand and a mystery lady in the other"
Merkel had been intending to switch out Juncker for some other candidate and avoid setting the precedent that the winning group's candidate got the job. Cameron must have known this and thought he could safely make a big deal of it, get him switched out for some other conservative (best guess is that the plot probably called for Katainen, whose announced resignation was a bit mysterious) and come home declaring victory, like John Major did when he had that one federalist changed to that other federalist. So Cameron went ahead and made his Big Stand, and started getting the press roiled up so he can show everyone how terrible this particular federalist is and how great the next federalist will be in comparison.
But then Merkel got far more push-back than she expected and had to hurriedly back-pedal. That leaves the opponents without enough votes to make a blocking minority. In theory they can get one with Renzi, but his big beef is austerity, and if they pick an anti-austerity socialist then they've got a whole new problem straightening out other conservative heads of government, in addition to which Cameron's victory starts to look really, really weird... Not to mention that the parliament will probably just send the whole thing back to them, and come September Sweden gets a new government and then the blocking minority is short of votes again...
"Do you think he was impartial in this"
Do you think that those who rewrote the bible for Constantine were impartial?
If there is then it makes sense to take that into account when deciding immigration policy.
All debate on immigration surrounds the character of people proposing to limit it and not whether what they are saying is true or not.
Patricia Hewitt levels ?
"GOTCHA!
"Argentina invades the Vatican!
"Their lads sink European and African Papal chances!"