Arguing that a party that has massively improved its vote share in every recent by election, has just won a national election for the first time, and has never had more members, is somehow "toxic" for voters has to be the biggest "lalalala I don't want to hear, I'm not listening" in the history of political debate
I put a question mark at the end of my - well ummm... question. The fact of Newark was that people from other parties voted against UKIP and chose the Tories. We will gloss over the motives behind voting UKIP, there are many from the banal through the bogus and on to the beastly - what is important is that the extreme right wing views (or if you cannot face that then the extreme right wing reputation) of UKIP prompted many from the mainstream to chose the Tories as the best alternative to prevent 'an Orpington'.
Quite a a statement - wrong in every salient point.
ATTN Morris_Dancer (?): I'm reading with pleasure Charlotte Higgins's book "Under Another Sky". It's about seeking Roman traces in the palimpsest that is English countryside & town. It's not a heavy work, but it is giving me insights, and her fluency in Latin permeates her interesting and idiosyncratic writing, which some might construe as flowery, but which I like.
Now, I've had my arm twisted and so must decamp to another house, one with a tele, to watch some football match or other.
Mr. W, I thought Thorpe had been out of the closet for years?
Apparently not. In his recent autobiography he specifically denied any breast stroking !!
He's also suffered considerably from depression, that I would have thought is probably repression related. Hopefully he find some peace once the fuss has died down, although that will probably be some time with Thorpe's huge reputation in Oz.
As a former Liberal activist, who hadn't been following this thread, having had a few days away from my computer, this brought be up very sharply as I scold down.
Arguing that a party that has massively improved its vote share in every recent by election, has just won a national election for the first time, and has never had more members, is somehow "toxic" for voters has to be the biggest "lalalala I don't want to hear, I'm not listening" in the history of political debate
I put a question mark at the end of my - well ummm... question. The fact of Newark was that people from other parties voted against UKIP and chose the Tories. We will gloss over the motives behind voting UKIP, there are many from the banal through the bogus and on to the beastly - what is important is that the extreme right wing views (or if you cannot face that then the extreme right wing reputation) of UKIP prompted many from the mainstream to chose the Tories as the best alternative to prevent 'an Orpington'.
Some did. But, UKIP's vote share rose by 22%, and the Conservatives' fell by 7%. So, clearly, more people from other parties switched to UKIP than switched to the Tories.
Mr. Freggles, that's a bit unexpected. Is he particularly pro-EU?
I think he is pro for the usual economic reasons. I think he views their immigration stance as racist. I'll have to ask him why exactly, given that in the past he has argued that 'affirmative action'- what we call positive discrimination - is just discrimination. I would think of myself as more liberal than him but I am more sympathetic to UKIP. Perhaps the party messaging is poor, but I get the benefit of speaking to actual Kippers online?
Mr. W, I thought Thorpe had been out of the closet for years?
Apparently not. In his recent autobiography he specifically denied any breast stroking !!
He's also suffered considerably from depression, that I would have thought is probably repression related. Hopefully he find some peace once the fuss has died down, although that will probably be some time with Thorpe's huge reputation in Oz.
As a former Liberal activist, who hadn't been following this thread, having had a few days away from my computer, this brought be up very sharply as I scold down.
Isam, yes the votes had to come from somewhere and UKIP were able to energise a vote where there are no consequences. But it still was not big enough. And they did get a vote and some of it was from former conservatives. There is a little discussion below about 'quantum politics' - and clearly here the 'obsevation' (ie understanding the consequenses) of the experiment affected the result. The fact is people from other parties voted for the tories to keep UKIP out (Labour's agent admitted it) and that hardly qualifies the tories as 'toxic' which was the point of this thread. As you are all betting men I would have thought you had to consider that.
Farage by the way swanned in from Malta and promptly massively overstated his projected vote share. Not sure where he went after that.
Isam, yes the votes had to come from somewhere and UKIP were able to energise a vote where there are no consequences. But it still was not big enough. And they did get a vote and some of it was from former conservatives. There is a little discussion below about 'quantum politics' - and clearly here the 'obsevation' (ie understanding the consequenses) of the experiment affected the result. The fact is people from other parties voted for the tories to keep UKIP out (Labour's agent admitted it) and that hardly qualifies the tories as 'toxic' which was the point of this thread. As you are all betting men I would have thought you had to consider that.
Farage by the way swanned in from Malta and promptly massively overstated his projected vote share. Not sure where he went after that.
Why do you keep saying "The fact is.. " when it isn't a proven fact, and looks extraordinarily unlikely to be one?
Who voted for UKIP in Newark? It cant have been the Conservatives, because we hear they had 600 activists, all the MPs and 4 visits form Dave, Boris et al.. a fantastic ground campaign that neutralised Con-UKIP switchers.....
We also hear that lots of Lib Dems and Labour voters hate UKIP so much that they voted Conservative as well...
Cons down 9% Lab down 4% LD down 18%
UKIP up 22%
Those are the arguments presented on PB... problem being they cant possibly be right
'Some did. But, UKIP's vote share rose by 22%, and the Conservatives' fell by 7%. So, clearly, more people from other parties switched to UKIP than switched to the Tories.'
This is possible but you will have to explain how pro EU libdems voted for UKIP. Even allowing for the reduced turnout its quite possible that UKIP attracted a whole new group of people I would rather not think about to vote for them.
'Some did. But, UKIP's vote share rose by 22%, and the Conservatives' fell by 7%. So, clearly, more people from other parties switched to UKIP than switched to the Tories.'
This is possible but you will have to explain how pro EU libdems voted for UKIP. Even allowing for the reduced turnout its quite possible that UKIP attracted a whole new group of people I would rather not think about to vote for them.
Nice try, but then you have to show why these nasty brutes didn't vote UKIP in 2010
Laughing at the assertions below about who voted for whom and for what reason. The psephologists make an educated guess on the basis of what people tell pollsters but sadly lots of voters tell porkie pies. Some people take great delight in giving incorrect answers to smart arse pushy questioners. I have even been known to give answers which could be described as terminological inexactitudes from time to time if pissed off by something.
Apart from an increasingly small number of diehards, most people now seem to share their support among a number of parties at different elections for a wide variety of reasons and often nothing to do with political philosophy or ideology.
Labour are trying ton win support off the Lib Dems but what about the Greens. They are polling around 6% at the moment. Where has this support come from? Labour should be targeting them relentlessly. In some cases it may be people who are not really on the left right spectrum but given the Greens general political positioning there should be votes for Labour if they inspire them.
I have a friend who has never been that interested in politics - enough to be informed and know the big policies, but not enough to, say, post on a political betting blog. He has some fairly socially conservative views and is very anti-PC. Yet to my surprise he hates UKIP and the fact that they won the EU elections has spurred him on to actually want to be an activist, he's currently debating which party to align himself to.
Anecdote over.
The same is true of so many people with little interest in politics. Their thoughts are aligned to the only party whose policies make any sort of sense (it used to be the Conservatives), but the 'toxicity' leads them astray. Years of unhappiness in a party that despises his views await your friend, before the penny finally drops.
In a way it's good for UKIP because it speaks of a massive and growing pool of potential voters and supporters if they can 'break through', but the general dislike and distrust of them and their agenda that is the result of the MSM carpet bombing they received in the euros is very real and badly needs diffusing.
'Some did. But, UKIP's vote share rose by 22%, and the Conservatives' fell by 7%. So, clearly, more people from other parties switched to UKIP than switched to the Tories.'
This is possible but you will have to explain how pro EU libdems voted for UKIP. Even allowing for the reduced turnout its quite possible that UKIP attracted a whole new group of people I would rather not think about to vote for them.
Many Lib Dem voters from 2010 weren't pro-EU.
Probably UKIP did attract some people who didn't vote in 2010. But, given that overall turnout fell, most of their support will have come from other parties. UKIP's vote was up 8,000 on 2010. The Conservative and Lib Dems fell by 9,000 each, and Labour were down 4,000.
Labour are trying ton win support off the Lib Dems but what about the Greens. They are polling around 6% at the moment. Where has this support come from? Labour should be targeting them relentlessly. In some cases it may be people who are not really on the left right spectrum but given the Greens general political positioning there should be votes for Labour if they inspire them.
I think the Green vote will head back tactically to the left where it needs to at the GE.
'Some did. But, UKIP's vote share rose by 22%, and the Conservatives' fell by 7%. So, clearly, more people from other parties switched to UKIP than switched to the Tories.'
This is possible but you will have to explain how pro EU libdems voted for UKIP. Even allowing for the reduced turnout its quite possible that UKIP attracted a whole new group of people I would rather not think about to vote for them.
Many Lib Dem voters from 2010 weren't pro-EU.
Probably UKIP did attract some people who didn't vote in 2010. But, given that overall turnout fell, most of their support will have come from other parties. UKIP's vote was up 8,000 on 2010. The Conservative and Lib Dems fell by 9,000 each, and Labour were down 4,000.
It really is remarkable that 22,000 fewer people voting for the main three 2010 parties, and 8,000 more voting UKIP is being spun as proof of UKIP toxicity
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
I wouldn't worry. UKIPs vote share is going up and up, and Farage is not seen as less popular than the party. It is only scared loyalists from other parties that are convinced UKIP have a problem.. and all they do is talk to each other on here while UKIP take their voters in the real world
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
I wouldn't worry. UKIPs vote share is going up and up, and Farage is not seen as less popular than the party. It is only scared loyalists from other parties that are convinced UKIP have a problem.. and all they do is talk to each other on here while UKIP take their voters in the real world
I remember Farage doing an interview in which he said if there was an in/out referendum he shouldn't and wouldn't be the lead guy on it because of his public image etc.
Which (given that that's UKIP's central aim) would count as a Farage problem I think.
EDIT:
I've only found a summary of the interview where Farage says it shouldn't be him because he's a warrior not a figurehead.
I can't find the full text so I may be misremembering if he explicitly talked about public perception.
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
Most of the people who consider UKIP racist are the ones that would consider any right wing party that campaigns on immigration racist. A new leader wouldn't change that. UKIP should just carry on doing what they're doing: kicking out members that turn out to be racist while maintaining their highly popular policies on immigration and the EU.
What was particularly short-sighted by the Tories was smearing UKIP so much. It's highly likely that UKIP are here to stay, and they make better natural bedfellows with the Tories than the other two parties do. Thus when the inevitable coalition government or merger happens, the Tories will be tarred with association with the toxic image they helped create. The fact they were working with the Guardian to fight against people pushing conservative arguments shows how the Tories don't have any principles any more.
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
I wouldn't worry. UKIPs vote share is going up and up, and Farage is not seen as less popular than the party. It is only scared loyalists from other parties that are convinced UKIP have a problem.. and all they do is talk to each other on here while UKIP take their voters in the real world
I remember Farage doing an interview in which he said if there was an in/out referendum he shouldn't and wouldn't be the lead guy on it because of his public image etc.
Which (given that that's UKIP's central aim) would count as a Farage problem I think.
Try and imagine a world where Nigel Farage was good for getting votes for UKIP but less good at leading a campaign that requires over 50% of the country on side
Officials in Brussels and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office have advised Cameron that the appointment of a woman as the UK’s commissioner in Brussels will give Britain a better chance of landing the plum portfolio.
Jean-Claude Juncker, who was appointed president of the European Commission despite Cameron’s objections, has indicated that he will look favourably on a female candidate. Sources say Cameron’s closest aides and advisers have considered Baroness Hogg, the former head of John Major’s policy unit, Andrea Leadsom, the Treasury minister, and Theresa Villiers, the Northern Ireland secretary, for the post.
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
I wouldn't worry. UKIPs vote share is going up and up, and Farage is not seen as less popular than the party. It is only scared loyalists from other parties that are convinced UKIP have a problem.. and all they do is talk to each other on here while UKIP take their voters in the real world
I remember Farage doing an interview in which he said if there was an in/out referendum he shouldn't and wouldn't be the lead guy on it because of his public image etc.
Which (given that that's UKIP's central aim) would count as a Farage problem I think.
Try and imagine a world where Nigel Farage was good for getting votes for UKIP but less good at leading a campaign that requires over 50% of the country on side
That's the one we live in
Out of curiosity, how much of UKIP's rise do you think is down to Farage vs all the other factors?
Iv'e always wondered, is this site like the ex bankruptee drug sellers site. There are only actually a small number of posters but they all have loads of different ID's.
Iv'e always wondered, is this site like the ex bankruptee drug sellers site. There are only actually a small number of posters but they all have loads of different ID's.
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
I wouldn't worry. UKIPs vote share is going up and up, and Farage is not seen as less popular than the party. It is only scared loyalists from other parties that are convinced UKIP have a problem.. and all they do is talk to each other on here while UKIP take their voters in the real world
I remember Farage doing an interview in which he said if there was an in/out referendum he shouldn't and wouldn't be the lead guy on it because of his public image etc.
Which (given that that's UKIP's central aim) would count as a Farage problem I think.
Try and imagine a world where Nigel Farage was good for getting votes for UKIP but less good at leading a campaign that requires over 50% of the country on side
That's the one we live in
Out of curiosity, how much of UKIP's rise do you think is down to Farage vs all the other factors?
I would find that hard to quantify to be honest. I'd say he is a net positive for the party. People in Thurrock were weeping when he visited, calling him a God, and worth his weight in gold. I don't hear that kind of nonsense/praise of other party leaders.
I guess you might say no other leader is hated like Farage but look at the shit Cameron and Ed get from their rivals, and I don't think it would stand up.
His detractors say UKIP is a one man band that would fall apart without him, so I guess that is kind of an answer to your question
Iv'e always wondered, is this site like the ex bankruptee drug sellers site. There are only actually a small number of posters but they all have loads of different ID's.
Iv'e always wondered, is this site like the ex bankruptee drug sellers site. There are only actually a small number of posters but they all have loads of different ID's.
Iv'e always wondered, is this site like the ex bankruptee drug sellers site. There are only actually a small number of posters but they all have loads of different ID's.
Iv'e always wondered, is this site like the ex bankruptee drug sellers site. There are only actually a small number of posters but they all have loads of different ID's.
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Wow, now my post asking if other posts have been removed has been removed. It can only be a matter of minutes before this post is removed. If I post another one asking about the removal of posts asking about the removal of posts asking about the removal of posts will that also be removed? I expect so, and its not as if I have actually said anything to offend or criticise, I only asked a genuine question.
Wow, now my post asking if other posts have been removed has been removed. It can only be a matter of minutes before this post is removed. If I post another one asking about the removal of posts asking about the removal of posts asking about the removal of posts will that also be removed? I expect so, and its not as if I have actually said anything to offend or criticise, I only asked a genuine question.
Corporeal said -- 'I've only found a summary of the interview where Farage says it shouldn't be him because he's a warrior not a figurehead.'
And you believe that? Where was this 'warrior' on the day of the Newark by-election? In Malta on a little pointless freebie. It strikes me that Farage has one or two flaws and as a party leader who alleges he does not want to be a figurehead - then just who would be UKIP's prime minister?
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
As a marketer, I'm thinking how I would tackle this for UKIP. The most useless thing a marketer can do is try to change a perception -the mind is like cement; once a perception is formed, it's nigh on impossible to change it. So if people think UKIP is racist, you don't (sadly) try and convince them that they aren't. You go with the grain. So off the top of my head, I think the best strategy is to get a new leader. Someone like Suzanne Evans. Nigel obviously would still be hugely important. You need to feed people a story that agrees with their perception 'they were racist old tory boys -now they're not'. You then work to establish Suzanne's public image whilst you are still dealing with wet cement in people's minds. And you're going for something much softer, much more inclusive. I think this would actually free Nigel up much more to engage in campaigns much more, without worrying if they make him seem racist.
Most of the people who consider UKIP racist are the ones that would consider any right wing party that campaigns on immigration racist. A new leader wouldn't change that. UKIP should just carry on doing what they're doing: kicking out members that turn out to be racist while maintaining their highly popular policies on immigration and the EU.
What was particularly short-sighted by the Tories was smearing UKIP so much. It's highly likely that UKIP are here to stay, and they make better natural bedfellows with the Tories than the other two parties do. Thus when the inevitable coalition government or merger happens, the Tories will be tarred with association with the toxic image they helped create. The fact they were working with the Guardian to fight against people pushing conservative arguments shows how the Tories don't have any principles any more.
Your second point may well be true, and I've stated before my firm belief that the genesis of UKIP represents the death of The Conservative Party -how many years this will take I don't know.
However, your strategy is based on truth and logic. Mine is based on perception. In politics, as in marketing, perception trumps truth. I personally know people who agree we must exit the EU, but shy away from UKIP because of the constant stream of unpleasant stories.
There is no doubt that UKIP face a very determined and very effective campaign, no longer to dissuade their supporters away from them, but to smear the whole bunch so much that they become a 'tea party' style vocal but despised minority who no 'right thinking' person would vote for. It doesn't matter to the main parties how incensed Ukippers get by the smears, as long as they work on everyone else. Nigel can get somewhere playing along with this angry minority thing -it may even get UKIP into parliament, but I don't think it will form a nationwide consensus on the need for our exit from the EU.
Officials in Brussels and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office have advised Cameron that the appointment of a woman as the UK’s commissioner in Brussels will give Britain a better chance of landing the plum portfolio.
Jean-Claude Juncker, who was appointed president of the European Commission despite Cameron’s objections, has indicated that he will look favourably on a female candidate. Sources say Cameron’s closest aides and advisers have considered Baroness Hogg, the former head of John Major’s policy unit, Andrea Leadsom, the Treasury minister, and Theresa Villiers, the Northern Ireland secretary, for the post.
What are their views on the EU? Do they have any, or do they follow the "Whatever Dave tells me to believe" approach?
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
Parents, always telling their kids porkies to boost their ego and make them feel good.
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
Parents, always telling their kids porkies to boost their ego and make them feel good.
Most parents yes, but luckily for him a reputable polling organisations went forth and asked the electorate.
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
Parents, always telling their kids porkies to boost their ego and make them feel good.
Most parents yes, but luckily for him a reputable polling organisations went forth and asked the electorate.
Who did they ask, bankers? Generally he is about as popular as a fart in a lift.
There's a great chart on page 222 here showing immigration back to the 1960s. All that us "extremists" on the issue want to do is to return to the stable level that existed from the mid-60s to the mid-90s.
I think this is going to be the story of the weekend
Margaret Thatcher personally covered up child abuse allegations made against one of her senior ministers, according to explosive new claims.
The Sunday People reports Tory Prime Minister is said to have held a high-powered meeting with the rising star, who was being tipped for promotion, and told him: “You have to clean up your sexual act.”
It followed an allegation that the minister had sexually abused young boys at the home of one of his political allies in 1982.
I take it Basil is still on goalpost duty seeing Murdochs underlings haven't tweeted about a poll of seismic proportions.
I thought this had been pooh-poohed a while ago. There were examples of the Sun not tweeting a really good poll for the Blues, and conversely announcing a good poll for the Reds early.
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
Parents, always telling their kids porkies to boost their ego and make them feel good.
Most parents yes, but luckily for him a reputable polling organisations went forth and asked the electorate.
Who did they ask, bankers? Generally he is about as popular as a fart in a lift.
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
Parents, always telling their kids porkies to boost their ego and make them feel good.
Most parents yes, but luckily for him a reputable polling organisations went forth and asked the electorate.
Who did they ask, bankers? Generally he is about as popular as a fart in a lift.
'It really is remarkable that 22,000 fewer people voting for the main three 2010 parties, and 8,000 more voting UKIP is being spun as proof of UKIP toxicity ' ...
I'm not sure its wise of you to keep believing that. For one - the libdems are in government and not a repository for the uncle Tom Cobly and all protest faction. For another - take a look at a real earthquake, Orpington where the liberal vote share showed a +31% swing. The Tories -22%. That was 26% swing toxic.
Where is the evidence of the Tories being 'toxic'? It is not to be found in them comfortably holding a seat a year out from an election.
Well Sunday People is making a huge claim. I presume they have evidence to back it up.
PEOPLE: Thatcher 'child abuse cover-up'
"She let Minister off hook over sex attacks on boys"
Yes, the rumours about this guy have been there since the early 80's !
I have always considered Thatcher to be a complete innocent in these matters, but it was recently put to me that she may have had those cosy Christmases at Chequers with Jimmy Savile so he could fill her in on what all of her Ministers and backbenchers were up to in his sordid world, and she could more effectively control would-be troublemakers. It's an interesting theory (not easy for someone who thinks as much of Mrs T as I do), though on the whole I still err on the side of her just being very naive about these things.
By the way, typing former Prime Minister's names into google and seeing the suggestions is always an interesting exercise isn't it?
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
Parents, always telling their kids porkies to boost their ego and make them feel good.
Most parents yes, but luckily for him a reputable polling organisations went forth and asked the electorate.
Who did they ask, bankers? Generally he is about as popular as a fart in a lift.
"Brazilian fans looked miffed".....a bit more than miffed. They look like Gideons dad must have looked when young Gideon told him he had just got a job folding returned towels at Selfridges.
Probably a lot different from his look when he was told Gideon was the most popular politician in the country! ;-)
Parents, always telling their kids porkies to boost their ego and make them feel good.
Most parents yes, but luckily for him a reputable polling organisations went forth and asked the electorate.
Who did they ask, bankers? Generally he is about as popular as a fart in a lift.
People must really like farts in lifts then. ;-)
PB Hodges?
"George Osborne, the chancellor, continues to outperform everyone..."
'It really is remarkable that 22,000 fewer people voting for the main three 2010 parties, and 8,000 more voting UKIP is being spun as proof of UKIP toxicity ' ...
I'm not sure its wise of you to keep believing that. For one - the libdems are in government and not a repository for the uncle Tom Cobly and all protest faction. For another - take a look at a real earthquake, Orpington where the liberal vote share showed a +31% swing. The Tories -22%. That was 26% swing toxic.
Where is the evidence of the Tories being 'toxic'? It is not to be found in them comfortably holding a seat a year out from an election.
I can't quite justify it, but I have this sneaking position that the polling and election results from the entire UK might be a better guide to what's going on politically than the results in Orpington. Call me crazy.
Evening Mr Eagles, carrying the PB Hodge banner as usual I see. How did the crossover party go, before you could say Tally Ho!, it was over.
No, I'm just pointing out you're talking rubbish, and the polling contradicts you.
I'd like to remind you, you're the poster earlier on this year that said there wouldn't be crossover before the general election.
Are you sure you're not Sion Simon with that kind of predictive powers?
Actually Mr Eagles I first said that late 2012, and considering how many polls we have had since then I don't think it's too bad of a prediction. Three out of hundreds. Could have been worse I could have made about six predictions and kept moving the goalposts along every time the most recent one failed....now who was that?
Comments
Interesting - last night a lot of PBers thought EBS would have to go. No sign of any budging yet.
I'm reading with pleasure Charlotte Higgins's book "Under Another Sky". It's about seeking Roman traces in the palimpsest that is English countryside & town. It's not a heavy work, but it is giving me insights, and her fluency in Latin permeates her interesting and idiosyncratic writing, which some might construe as flowery, but which I like.
Now, I've had my arm twisted and so must decamp to another house, one with a tele, to watch some football match or other.
Until I realised it wasn't THAT Thorpe!
I would think of myself as more liberal than him but I am more sympathetic to UKIP. Perhaps the party messaging is poor, but I get the benefit of speaking to actual Kippers online?
You have mail.
Thank you.
yes the votes had to come from somewhere and UKIP were able to energise a vote where there are no consequences. But it still was not big enough. And they did get a vote and some of it was from former conservatives.
There is a little discussion below about 'quantum politics' - and clearly here the 'obsevation' (ie understanding the consequenses) of the experiment affected the result.
The fact is people from other parties voted for the tories to keep UKIP out (Labour's agent admitted it) and that hardly qualifies the tories as 'toxic' which was the point of this thread. As you are all betting men I would have thought you had to consider that.
Farage by the way swanned in from Malta and promptly massively overstated his projected vote share. Not sure where he went after that.
Who voted for UKIP in Newark? It cant have been the Conservatives, because we hear they had 600 activists, all the MPs and 4 visits form Dave, Boris et al.. a fantastic ground campaign that neutralised Con-UKIP switchers.....
We also hear that lots of Lib Dems and Labour voters hate UKIP so much that they voted Conservative as well...
Cons down 9%
Lab down 4%
LD down 18%
UKIP up 22%
Those are the arguments presented on PB... problem being they cant possibly be right
'Some did. But, UKIP's vote share rose by 22%, and the Conservatives' fell by 7%. So, clearly, more people from other parties switched to UKIP than switched to the Tories.'
This is possible but you will have to explain how pro EU libdems voted for UKIP. Even allowing for the reduced turnout its quite possible that UKIP attracted a whole new group of people I would rather not think about to vote for them.
Apart from an increasingly small number of diehards, most people now seem to share their support among a number of parties at different elections for a wide variety of reasons and often nothing to do with political philosophy or ideology.
He sold a clown for £50m.
I put some on Netherlands +1 Handicap at 11/2 pre match.
In a way it's good for UKIP because it speaks of a massive and growing pool of potential voters and supporters if they can 'break through', but the general dislike and distrust of them and their agenda that is the result of the MSM carpet bombing they received in the euros is very real and badly needs diffusing.
Probably UKIP did attract some people who didn't vote in 2010. But, given that overall turnout fell, most of their support will have come from other parties. UKIP's vote was up 8,000 on 2010. The Conservative and Lib Dems fell by 9,000 each, and Labour were down 4,000.
Anyway Mike's rules, Mike's site !
I think that sentence is rather more revealing about Liberal Democrats attitudes to everyone else than you intended!
Is that the first time a player has been booked for diving, and the guy who tackled him was injured by the contact???!!!
Which (given that that's UKIP's central aim) would count as a Farage problem I think.
EDIT:
I've only found a summary of the interview where Farage says it shouldn't be him because he's a warrior not a figurehead.
I can't find the full text so I may be misremembering if he explicitly talked about public perception.
Summary here.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/05/exclusive-nigel-farage-doesnt-want-to-lead-the-out-campaign/
What was particularly short-sighted by the Tories was smearing UKIP so much. It's highly likely that UKIP are here to stay, and they make better natural bedfellows with the Tories than the other two parties do. Thus when the inevitable coalition government or merger happens, the Tories will be tarred with association with the toxic image they helped create. The fact they were working with the Guardian to fight against people pushing conservative arguments shows how the Tories don't have any principles any more.
That's the one we live in
Officials in Brussels and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office have advised Cameron that the appointment of a woman as the UK’s commissioner in Brussels will give Britain a better chance of landing the plum portfolio.
Jean-Claude Juncker, who was appointed president of the European Commission despite Cameron’s objections, has indicated that he will look favourably on a female candidate. Sources say Cameron’s closest aides and advisers have considered Baroness Hogg, the former head of John Major’s policy unit, Andrea Leadsom, the Treasury minister, and Theresa Villiers, the Northern Ireland secretary, for the post.
No, George, just no!
Whilst Anna Soubry and Penny Mordurant will be given more media responsibilities.
Hi Tim!
I guess you might say no other leader is hated like Farage but look at the shit Cameron and Ed get from their rivals, and I don't think it would stand up.
His detractors say UKIP is a one man band that would fall apart without him, so I guess that is kind of an answer to your question
That's the kind of speech I'd give.
This BBC radio programme contains the comparison to God!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b048nqkm
A bit OTT ! But maybe if the mass immigration lovers lived in places like Grays, they would feel the same
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BsYA0UPCQAEYXsR.jpg
But it reminds me of Cool Hand Luke a bit
And you believe that?
Where was this 'warrior' on the day of the Newark by-election? In Malta on a little pointless freebie.
It strikes me that Farage has one or two flaws and as a party leader who alleges he does not want to be a figurehead - then just who would be UKIP's prime minister?
PEOPLE: Thatcher 'child abuse cover-up'
"She let Minister off hook over sex attacks on boys"
However, your strategy is based on truth and logic. Mine is based on perception. In politics, as in marketing, perception trumps truth. I personally know people who agree we must exit the EU, but shy away from UKIP because of the constant stream of unpleasant stories.
There is no doubt that UKIP face a very determined and very effective campaign, no longer to dissuade their supporters away from them, but to smear the whole bunch so much that they become a 'tea party' style vocal but despised minority who no 'right thinking' person would vote for. It doesn't matter to the main parties how incensed Ukippers get by the smears, as long as they work on everyone else. Nigel can get somewhere playing along with this angry minority thing -it may even get UKIP into parliament, but I don't think it will form a nationwide consensus on the need for our exit from the EU.
http://www.eufreshstart.org/downloads/immigration-chapter.pdf
Margaret Thatcher personally covered up child abuse allegations made against one of her senior ministers, according to explosive new claims.
The Sunday People reports Tory Prime Minister is said to have held a high-powered meeting with the rising star, who was being tipped for promotion, and told him: “You have to clean up your sexual act.”
It followed an allegation that the minister had sexually abused young boys at the home of one of his political allies in 1982.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-personally-covered-up-3848836?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed
Is he the worst football predictor ever ?
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/17/ed-miliband-nick-clegg-fall-lowest-popularity-guardian-icm
I'm not sure its wise of you to keep believing that.
For one - the libdems are in government and not a repository for the uncle Tom Cobly and all protest faction.
For another - take a look at a real earthquake, Orpington where the liberal vote share showed a +31% swing. The Tories -22%. That was 26% swing toxic.
Where is the evidence of the Tories being 'toxic'? It is not to be found in them comfortably holding a seat a year out from an election.
By the way, typing former Prime Minister's names into google and seeing the suggestions is always an interesting exercise isn't it?
I'd like to remind you, you're the poster earlier on this year that said there wouldn't be crossover before the general election.
Are you sure you're not Sion Simon with that kind of predictive powers?
*titter*