Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The polling says UKIP are the most extreme and the least fi
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The polling says UKIP are the most extreme and the least fit to govern party
“I am going to read out some things both favourable and unfavourable that have been said about various political parties. Which of these, if any, do you think apply to…”
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It also has the benefit of being so simple to understand that 99% of non-blinkered people won't be taken in by the self-serving, dissembling bullshit trying to persuade them otherwise.
That's why to them the fact that the Tory party might benefit is the one and only thing that matters on the issue.
This was obviously stupid of the Tories, as UKIP are undoubtedly here to stay, which means future Tory success depends on an alliance/merger under FPTP or a coalition under PR. Regrettably for conservatives, the Tory leadership is too thick to think more than about three months ahead, as has been shown on a number of occasions.
Ha! Govt statement from Nov warns against rushed answer to English question, says it shld be "thorough & rigorous": https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/264086/8749.pdf
UKIP are more right-wing than the Tories so are incredibly evil indeed. And racist.
Completely bonkers, but there we go.
Which is rubbish of course.
But Beverly's concise statement resonates very strongly with the notion of fairness and parity. What what irksome but tolerable before devomax becomes untenable thereafter.
https://audioboo.fm/boos/2500068-jeremy-speaks-to-gambler-who-placed-900-000-bet-on-no-vote
Tory thinking is mad.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eb1d4b70-41b9-11e4-b98f-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3E1hTsapW
I suppose giving Scotland devomax doesn't come under the same category for some spurious reason.
1440 Kempton Pact 50-1 ew (B365, Sp Bet, SJ)
Are you Ed Milliband by any chance?
I may think that prolonging austerity just guarantees discontent and will do nothing to solve Britain's deep economic issues being made worse by Osborne, but all round Labour are a million times better than the current shower of a government.
OK, enough playing, back to work.
"People of England. Nigel Farage is the only party leader offering to spend hundreds of millions of pounds a year, perhaps more, in setting up another layer of government and bureaucracy, and this one's a biggie - not just an assembly for 5m Scots, but another layer of government for the whole of England. Imagine having the luxury of an MP to send to the UK Parliament in London and another to the English Parliament in London. Think about all those leaflets through the door! You're crying out for more politicians - well, Nigel's the man to give them to you. Do you look longingly at those sexy new assemblies in Cardiff Bay and Edinburgh, and think "why can't England spend £400m on its own brand new massively over-budget parliament building"? - well now's your chance of having one of your own!"
Is that what UKIP are going to be treating us to in the campaign?
Hope so!
- 16% support Barnett formula, compared to 71% against
- 65% support for EVfEL, compared to 19% against
- Should EVfEL make it impossible for a Scot to be PM: 46% yes, 34% no
- 59% support for English parliament, compared to 11% against
- Top priority for government: 31% immigration, 20% economy, 9% jobs, 9% health
It's that middle one that shows how EVfEL could break up the union far more easily than an English parliament would.
UKIP would more than pay for that £400m by scrapping the Barnett formula.
And, the constituencies where UKIP are strong (eg Thurrock, Boston, Clacton, Grimsby, Rotherham, Thanet South etc.) are ones in which UKIP's message is not seen as extreme.
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2014/09/21/the-nasty-coalition-move-to-make-english-human-rights-subservient-to-business-profits-david-hencke/
I assume all the juicy policy announcements and detailled plans are being kept back for other Ed's speech ?
1) Con Maj - No anomaly, the same party has a majority in both the UK and England.
2) Reasonable size Lab Maj - Ditto
3) Small Lab Maj - Anomaly might apply, although if Labour have any sized majority, then they've probably at least got most seats in England as well.
4) Hung parliament - this is the interesting one. I think the real significance of EV4EL would apply here, in that it would make a coalition involving the largest English party more attractive than a coalition involving the largest UK party.
Please do keep it up. These attitudes are worth their weight in gold to UKIP.
Lets take a seat where UKIP are threatening the Tories. Are Labour and Libdems going to vote for the Tory candidate to stop UKIP and in doing so improve the chances of the Tories staying in power. The idea is absurd. Labour and Libdem have traditionally joined in voting against the Tories. They are not going (well other than complete fools) to vote Tory and lessen the chance of a Labour Government.
Similarly, are Tory voter in a seat where UKIP are challenging Labour going to vote Labour to stop UKIP and in doing so help Labour to throw the Tories out?
Yes you may get Libdem voters voting for Labour as they have done for decades but that is nothing new and next year there are likely far fewer of them to do so.
As for the Libdems they cannot afford to lend their votes to anyone this time.
Why would Tories and Labour voters vote to stop UKIP and in doing so potentially vote their main opponents into Downing Street. Its a nonsense. I doubt there is a more ridiculous and frankly delusional idea doing the rounds at the moment than the idea that there will be any serious tactical voting against UKIP.
"Mainstream" means turning a blind eye to child rape.
The other way of looking at it is that it is possible in the future that Labour and the LDs -representing over 50% of the votes in England and the UK generally - might agree a coalition, but that for England this might not work because with 35% of the vote the Tories have obtained a majority of English seats. Thus, policies agreed by parties that have received the majority support of English voters would be unable to pursue a legislative agenda for England.
It's all very interesting - and important - stuff.
Don't put the cart before the horse, I think UKIP have a disproportionate amount of closet racists due to banging on about immigration etc.
"Extreme" = rubbing your hands with glee at the thought of 5 years of Ed Miliband PM on the off chance it increases the chance of winning a referendum.
Just as the Nats had no answer to the currency question, Ukip have no answer to the "why should I vote Kipper to get Ed ? " question.
Am here waiting - convince me.
UKIP is gaining members and support largely, I think, from those that Labour and the Conservatives have thought "locked-in" and so ignored. UKIP is changing as a result and for the same reason it is not going to go away.
My thread headers (like Mike's) we don't repeat all the polling, conducted, as we're not into churnalism, we pick, what we think is most relevant, it is a subjective thing. What I find interesting and relevant, may not cater all to tastes.
Plus, I've managed to get two threads out of this Ipsos-Mori polling, As this polling is quite substanstial and informative, I'm hoping to get another 3 threads out of it, Two of which I anticipate will be favourable to UKIP
No thanks.
"People of England. Nigel Farage is the only party leader offering to spend hundreds of millions of pounds a year, perhaps more, in setting up another layer of government and bureaucracy, and this one's a biggie - not just an assembly for 5m Scots, but another layer of government for the whole of England. Imagine having the luxury of an MP to send to the UK Parliament in London and another to the English Parliament in London. Think about all those leaflets through the door! You're crying out for more politicians - well, Nigel's the man to give them to you. Do you look longingly at those sexy new assemblies in Cardiff Bay and Edinburgh, and think "why can't England spend £400m on its own brand new massively over-budget parliament building"? - well now's your chance of having one of your own!"
Is that what UKIP are going to be treating us to in the campaign?
Hope so!
Oh dear not this load of mindless drivel again. Why do they bother with such arguments when they are predicated on a false concept that somehow devolution involves creating new powers. It doesn't it redistributes power and that means reducing one groups powers and moving it elsewhere. Basically large parts of the Westminster machine would be replaced and upgraded with something better! Something that is long overdue!
UKIP want to abolish the House Of Lords and replace it with an English Parliament as part of a federalisation of the UK. The English Parliament will no doubt have no more than 531 representatives (the number of English Constituencies) and possibly less than that. There are currently 828 peers who have the right to sit in the House Of Lords so worst case scenario is that by introducing an English Parliament you reduce the number of politicians in the Westminster Freakshow by almost three hundred.
Further by devolving all that legislation to an English Parliament there would be no need for anywhere near as many MP's in the now Federal House of Commons and so further cuts in personnel could be made there. So it would always be the case of less overall running costs less politicians and more democracy. And of course there is no need to send them to London. The site of a new English Parliament could be anywhere in the country but on the other hand as the HoL chamber would be redundant they could sit there.
Such attacks as above are risible.
Admittedly with a small sample size, of three polls, the polling did show a swing to the Tories from non UKIP parties during the campaign.
Plus Mike did say, he was told by an impeccable source on the ground that it did happen.
Fruticake: Opposing gay marriage is fruitcake. Wanting the law to forbid legal relationships being treated the same is fruitcake. Anyone who so disregards civil liberties they care more about their own homophobia than they do the rights of my gay and lesbian friends is a fruitcake.
Loons: Come on, banging on about Europe but opposing actually having a referendum. Talk about loony. Then again maybe they're too frit and its easier to bang on about something than have a vote you may lose.
Closet racists: Immigration, immigration, immigration. Giving the word closet is too polite for many LOL.
What's wrong here?
If you take extreme away from fitness to govern the blues are on 28, the reds 27.
And if a lot of people think politicans are thieving corrupt useless scum...
You're on a losing wicket and I suspect deep down you know it.
Opposing mass immigration is "racist"?
Being in favour of a referendum on EU membership means being opposed to one?
I see.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzPPOHfIp34
A lot of racists in the country, apparently.
Furthermore, EV4EL under our present electoral system would often make it impossible for parties that received 50% or more of the vote in England to even discuss a coalition.
Did you not read Phillip Thompson? We're all swivel-eyed nutters. You don't want us back (Cameron has made that perfectly clear in his way) even if we wanted to and speaking for myself I'd rather the oceans freeze over than rejoin the Tories.
Will UKIP win the GE? - of course not. Most of us have never claimed they would.
Will they win some seats? -Yes almost certainly. Not many but enough to show they mean business and are not just going to fade away as you might hope.
Will Cameron win if he and his party continue to alienate UKIP supporters - No not a chance.
Get used to it.
""Apparently, the First Minister of Scotland said today while he'd lost the referendum, never mind, he might be able to seize power some other way. I just say to Mr Alex Salmond: you lost the argument, you lost the referendum, you've lost office, and now you've lost the plot. The people of Scotland are sovereign and the people of Scotland have said 'no thanks' to separation and you must accept that result.""
Mass immigration being opposed due to racism is racist.
Opposing the only main party pledged to an EU referendum due to wanting an EU referendum is loony.
'Listened to Rachel Reeves being interviewed by Brillo. Either hilarious of terrifying, depending on if you expect Labour to form the next government or not.'
Really muted applause for her speech just now,followed by SKY on the streets of Manchester trying to find anyone that thought Ed Balls was credible,after the fourth person they gave up.
Disagree on priorities.
The gay marriage stuff, I will if you will excuse me just side-step. It is not an area I will enter into.
On Europe, "Banging on" is often a big clue to a persons attitude to the EU. A Better Off Out position is perfectly respectable and can be cogently argued. Where the idea comes from the UKIP doesn't want a referendum on the issue comes from I don't know.
On immigration you seem to be arguing the same way as many others have in the past. That is to say to talk about mass immigration and its effects is equivalent to racism. That is I think no longer held to be the case even amongst the chattering classes. It never was amongst the people most affected.
Extra powers for Scotland: Easy and deliverable.
Corresponding extra powers for England: Fiendishly complex and not deliverable.
'SO's comment below illustrates beautifully why a more considerred approach than "stop the non-English MPs from voting" is required. Careful consideration is needed to avoid legislative gridlock.'
Just more excuses to try and kick the issue into the long grass and keep Labour's unfair advantage
If, on the other hand, the prospectus is solely one of regaining sovereignty without any prejudicial undertone then who knows....