The debate regarding Lord Freud's (related?) comments is over. As ever Briskin and co need some time, in this case 3 days, to analyse.
What many people may or may not understand - and who may or be not be reading this, is that there are many disabled people who work for less than 2 GBP per hour. This is because they "work" (unpaid) in the voluntary sector (related to the third sector, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_sector , see also NGO's such as Greenpeace, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace )
Hague (MP, Con) has stated that since the beginning of the coalition (Con/LD) parliament there are now more than 70,000 (figure from memory )disabled people in work.
I kept out of this debate because it reminds me of the Israel/Palestine debate where its very hard to solve satisfactorily and too much emotion gets in the way so whatever you say or propose will be exaggerated to the point where you look like a demon to one side
Women over 30 (ys/o) are beating their younger counterparts - when it comes to having more babies that is.
Biriskin and co would say for reference to all that the younger mothers will have healthier (physically) babbas - however the yuppies that have made it to thirty will presumably be cheered by the news.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
I think the relevance of this poll is perhaps not in the effect on UKIP's chances of winning seats (which i think should fall apart under scrutiny in the course of a GE campaign as long as the Conservatives keep their heads). The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal. For the sake of avoiding a few Conservative MPs in safe seats actually having to do some proper election campaigning, a deal/pact would throw away huge number of moderate Conservative or potential Conservative voters in more marginal seats.
The LibDems must be praying for such an eventuality, as they will become the natural home for those voters, considering their participation in the coalition government.
I've been saying this for some time: too many people assume that, by shifting towards UKIP's position to capture UKIP voters, the Conservatives will end up with more voters in total.
Whereas they would probably lose more voters from the centre, who are actively repelled by UKIP. And who can blame them?
If we assume that there is a Labour government after GE 2015, led by Ed Miliband, then it is probable that Labour will move slightly further to the left. It's also very possible that the Lib Dems, once Clegg resigns or is defenestrated, will also move to the left to differentiate themselves from the coalition.
If this transpires, the centre ground will be more open. That is where parties need to be, and not at the ground that UKIP currently holds.
Having said all that, UKIP shows the need for all parties to understand and cater for all segments of society. That has to be the lesson for, and of, GE2015.
The "centre ground" is a bit like the Somme battlefield. A small slice of territory that the established parties spend enormous resources trying to capture.
UKIP are rewriting the rules.
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
For the two main parties to vote for their counterpart at the GE to keep UKIP out would be suicidal.
The balancing act that the two main parties will be trying to make is, say for the Tories, to encourage tactical voting from Labour voters against UKIP in Tory/UKIP contests while appealing to potential UKIP voters to vote tactically in Tory/Labour contests.
It's all bollocks, really, and the contortions that the campaigns will have to go through at the net election indicate why it is so vital to change the voting system to one that does not so heavily reward tactical/dishonest/negative voting. With a system like STV you simply vote for what you want.
It pays not to be too clever with the electorate, unless you're filling the ballots yourself.
In recent council elections in my borough, UKIP put only one candidate up in each ward. Huge numbers of ballots had one vote for UKIP and two for the Tories. The voters were scared of spoiling their ballot. Obvious to PBers, perhaps, but not to the electorate.
Perhaps the importance of politics to the general population is exaggerated on this site.
Not sure I understand that ? I would have thought in a ward with 3 councillors that ,if there was only one UKIP candidate there would be many who put Tories as their preferred choice for the other two
It was a FPTP election.
I presume you live in Scotland, where they have PR for local elections.
For the two main parties to vote for their counterpart at the GE to keep UKIP out would be suicidal.
The balancing act that the two main parties will be trying to make is, say for the Tories, to encourage tactical voting from Labour voters against UKIP in Tory/UKIP contests while appealing to potential UKIP voters to vote tactically in Tory/Labour contests.
It's all bollocks, really, and the contortions that the campaigns will have to go through at the net election indicate why it is so vital to change the voting system to one that does not so heavily reward tactical/dishonest/negative voting. With a system like STV you simply vote for what you want.
It pays not to be too clever with the electorate, unless you're filling the ballots yourself.
In recent council elections in my borough, UKIP put only one candidate up in each ward. Huge numbers of ballots had one vote for UKIP and two for the Tories. The voters were scared of spoiling their ballot. Obvious to PBers, perhaps, but not to the electorate.
Perhaps the importance of politics to the general population is exaggerated on this site.
Perhaps The importance of politics to the general population is exaggerated on this site.
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
What threat will there be "to you and your family" from UKIP being in government?
All those polls were done before the game changers of Clacton and Heywood & Middleton
You think both will rank highly in the ITN news index poll at the end of the month?
Your posts are of such bad quality I actually feel sorry for you that Ukip are doing so well
So that's a "no" then.
So much for "game changer"
And like the NATS your modus operandi is to play the player, not the ball......
I haven't given one thought to the itn news index poll !!!
Evidently not.
Otherwise you wouldn't be making ludicrous claims about "game changers"!
So let me get this straight... You are saying that Ukip winning a seat and pushing labour a close 2nd in their heartlands, is not a game changer.
This is despite every respected political journalist saying it is, Ukip hitting record highs in almost every poll
And your justification is that you don't reckon it will be in the itn news index poll at the end of the month?
Can you confirm that is what you really think
As we are interested in politics we tend to grossly over estimate the general public's interest.
The ITN news index poll is a useful antidote to that.
Britain being forced out of the ERM was a "game changer".
I doubt Carsell holding his seat is remotely in the same league.
Do I have to preface everything with 'political' then? I thought it was obvious we were taking about politics because we are on a politics site
So if we were on a site discussing football, and someone described Liverpool selling Suarez as a game changer in terms of their league title hopes, you would argue that it wasn't as it wouldn't be in the itn end of month index poll?
This conversation is borderline madnes.
Do you still think that 35 % of labour and Tories thinking Ukip aren't a wasted vote is bad for Ukip? Or us this nonsense a deflection from that ricket?
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
Indeed. The view is "the right must be united to stop left-wing government, but only by you lot getting behind us and our centre-left program".
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
I love the tolerance of other views displayed by UKIP supporters - it kind of proves my point about the UKIP 'message'.
For the two main parties to vote for their counterpart at the GE to keep UKIP out would be suicidal.
The balancing act that the two main parties will be trying to make is, say for the Tories, to encourage tactical voting from Labour voters against UKIP in Tory/UKIP contests while appealing to potential UKIP voters to vote tactically in Tory/Labour contests.
It's all bollocks, really, and the contortions that the campaigns will have to go through at the net election indicate why it is so vital to change the voting system to one that does not so heavily reward tactical/dishonest/negative voting. With a system like STV you simply vote for what you want.
It pays not to be too clever with the electorate, unless you're filling the ballots yourself.
In recent council elections in my borough, UKIP put only one candidate up in each ward. Huge numbers of ballots had one vote for UKIP and two for the Tories. The voters were scared of spoiling their ballot. Obvious to PBers, perhaps, but not to the electorate.
Perhaps the importance of politics to the general population is exaggerated on this site.
Not sure I understand that ? I would have thought in a ward with 3 councillors that ,if there was only one UKIP candidate there would be many who put Tories as their preferred choice for the other two
It was a FPTP election.
I presume you live in Scotland, where they have PR for local elections.
Over the last few years, I've gradually cooled on Europe. I honestly thought that it was meant to be a mutually beneficial trading relationship with a few rules to make it operate fairly. The idea that it was always meant to be a political union was news to me but then I'm probably naive.
Although I was always against the Iraq invasion on the basis that it made no sense - there are many dictators around the world and Saddam was never a fan of Jihandist - I sort of hoped that Tony had some secret and damning information that he couldn't share with the public because of security reasons. Perhaps I was always an idealist (I did vote Labour when Michael Foot was in charge),
But now, I'm better. Not only am I now a "NOTA" but I'm actively insulted by the lying and posturing of politicians. No more benefit of the doubt.
Does Cameron really mean to re-negotiate? No, he's a lying snake like all the rest.
It's quite cathartic; Let the children play their playground games but include me out.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
I love the tolerance of other views displayed by UKIP supporters - it kind of proves my point about the UKIP 'message'.
Again, how is pointing out that UKIP didn't say the thing you claimed they are saying "intolerance"? I'm asking questions and trying to have a dialogue. You're just insulting me.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
The candidate, Jamie Huntman is very well thought of by Ukip. I met him last week, proper Essex boy!
He is in charge of Ukip Essex I think.. You never know he might help me pick a winnable seat!
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
What threat will there be "to you and your family" from UKIP being in government?
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Women over 30 (ys/o) are beating their younger counterparts - when it comes to having more babies that is.
Biriskin and co would say for reference to all that the younger mothers will have healthier (physically) babbas - however the yuppies that have made it to thirty will presumably be cheered by the news.
Source - The London Times
and I am definitely keeping out of a debate about what age women should have kids!!
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
Others - eg isam - would know better than me. Personally, I generally read little into council by-elections (only the civically obsessed vote in them), but I know others pore over them.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
I love the tolerance of other views displayed by UKIP supporters - it kind of proves my point about the UKIP 'message'.
Again, how is pointing out that UKIP didn't say the thing you claimed they are saying "intolerance"? I'm asking questions and trying to have a dialogue. You're just insulting me.
I prefer to call it a measured response to your reference to "stupid". Perhaps we both need to be less sensitive. You are unwilling to see that the UKIP message to people like me comes across as simplistic pandering to people's genuine fears and concerns - this is something I find seriously worrying. If you don't like that tough.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
iSam said that was Labour's strongest ward in the seat. So they were expected to hold.
TBH, I don't read the comments in the DT anymore because they're filled with anti-Muslim comments irrespective of the topic under discussion. And when they run out of those, it reverts to the EU. It's hobby-horse stuff writ large, and reminds me of the ugly online Yestapo.
I'm sure all these posters are quite delightful in person, but they give UKIP a very unattractive face to a soft-right Tory like me. It's the volume and the tone that's so off-putting.
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
I see that on Question Time, Ed - via his proxy Angela Eagles - got a good kicking over the faux outrage about Freud's comments.
Labour don't seem to have woken up to the fact that voters have woken up. They see political stunts and think political c****.
I wonder if Labour is now reconsidering an election campaign based entirely around trotting out people Ed has met in a park who are victims of the "bedroom tax"?
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
Others - eg isam - would know better than me. Personally, I generally read little into council by-elections (only the civically obsessed vote in them), but I know others pore over them.
I have same approach as you but Labour going up in Thurrock seems interesting.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
I honestly don't understand it either, but it is view held by huge number of people.
The fact that UKIP are evil Nazis is axiomatic to them, it is the starting point of their thinking.
I'd say that branding people as bigots without sufficient evidence is itself bigoted, but I fear I'm in the minority on that one.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
Do you believe, as one prominent UKIPper put it on here, that one of UKIP's aims is "to put the rights of the indigenous peoples of these islands first?"
Do you agree with the Islamaphobia that infects many UKIPpers on here?
Do you agree that child sex abuse is only noteworthy when it is performed mostly by Muslims?
Do you agree with the religious bigotry so often shown?
That is why UKIP and many of its supporters are a direct threat to me, my wife, and any children we may have.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
Others - eg isam - would know better than me. Personally, I generally read little into council by-elections (only the civically obsessed vote in them), but I know others pore over them.
The best ones are outside the cities, where they sometimes hold county by-elections on the day or a district election (or the other way on). This once enabled me to vote Labour and Tory (a personal vote) in different elections on the same day...
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
It will be interesting to read Harry's analysis of last nite's results.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
I think in Japan clients 'give presents' to prostitutes, who then return them to the shops for cash.
Isn't an ugly ,fat middle aged or even elderly multi millionaire effectively paying for sex when he beds or weds!! a fit twentysomething lady? Don't we all ultimately pay for sex in reality and in some form!!
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
It is not bizarre - I'm gay and very disturbed at some of the comments of UKIP candidates let alone their supporters about homosexuality. I'm by no means strident or remotely left-wing in my views but it's the tone of the UKIP message which disturbs me.
The Tories are evil scum who must be stopped at all costs.
UKIP are even worse scum who also must be stopped at all costs.
The Lib Dems are treacherous Tory turncoats who must be stopped at all costs.
etc.
The SNP are evil scum who steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
The Greens are evil scum who are about to steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
Plaid Cymru - aw, bless...
Actually I was thinking about the Greens the other day. I think the protest lefty vote is going to go to them until the point where they actually get some power and don't do exactly what Labour want.
When that happens they'll be as hated by Labour supporters as the Lib Dems are these days.
To be honest I think there's a certain amount of people who lean leftwards that enjoy, no in fact need someone to hate. No one quite does demonisation and hatred like the left.
The Ipsos MORI date may give us a clue as to the maximum potential of the UKIP vote ie the likely ceiling for vote share.The detailed figures behind the Net Like/ Dislike question for UKIP are Like UKIP 29%,Dislike UKIP 63% DK 10%. If we exclude don't knows we get Like 30% Dislike 70%.Accepting that by elections have General elections it seems that the people who dislike UKIP 70% are at a,GE unlikely to support UKIP.Thus the maximum national voting share at the GE is effectively capped at 30%.
Wearing my PR hat - I remain totally perplexed why Angela Eagle is ever the right answer to a TV/radio question. Her voice makes me want to stuff cotton wool in her mouth, and she always looks so down in the mouth - like a walking talking rain cloud. She'd be great on EastEnders playing the part of downtrodden complaining wifey.
I see that on Question Time, Ed - via his proxy Angela Eagles - got a good kicking over the faux outrage about Freud's comments.
Labour don't seem to have woken up to the fact that voters have woken up. They see political stunts and think political c****.
I wonder if Labour is now reconsidering an election campaign based entirely around trotting out people Ed has met in a park who are victims of the "bedroom tax"?
TBH, I don't read the comments in the DT anymore because they're filled with anti-Muslim comments irrespective of the topic under discussion. And when they run out of those, it reverts to the EU. It's hobby-horse stuff writ large, and reminds me of the ugly online Yestapo.
I'm sure all these posters are quite delightful in person, but they give UKIP a very unattractive face to a soft-right Tory like me. It's the volume and the tone that's so off-putting.
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
I find those comments off-putting, but I simply don't find them representative of UKIP supporters at all.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
Do you agree with the Islamaphobia that infects many UKIPpers on here?
I don't think talking about some of the more worrying aspects of Islam should be banned even if they have thought up a trendy word for it.
I don't think that UKIP are Nazis. I do think that they are vile reactionary bandwagon-jumpers who if they ever got close to the levers of power would turn Britain into a diminished, sour backwater, and who thrive on fostering hatred of others rather than co-operation with and tolerance of others.
I would tactically vote against them if necessary for any of the main parties and would tactically vote against any of the main parties that entered into any kind of alliance with them as well.
Lord Ashcroft has often noted that his polls give a consistently lower two-party share of the vote for Labour and Conservatives. If this difference is maintained, then the recent decline in the two-party share of the vote in the YouGov polls suggests that the next Ashcroft poll could have all parties with <30% support, and possibly all three of Conservative, Labour and UKIP in the 20s.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
It will be interesting to read Harry's analysis of last nite's results.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
Cheers, I missed that.
Regarding Rochester, you haven't taken into account one crucial thing.
I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015.
The debate regarding Lord Freud's (related?) comments is over. As ever Briskin and co need some time, in this case 3 days, to analyse.
What many people may or may not understand - and who may or be not be reading this, is that there are many disabled people who work for less than 2 GBP per hour. This is because they "work" (unpaid) in the voluntary sector (related to the third sector, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_sector , see also NGO's such as Greenpeace, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace )
Hague (MP, Con) has stated that since the beginning of the coalition (Con/LD) parliament there are now more than 70,000 (figure from memory )disabled people in work.
I kept out of this debate because it reminds me of the Israel/Palestine debate where its very hard to solve satisfactorily and too much emotion gets in the way so whatever you say or propose will be exaggerated to the point where you look like a demon to one side
The phrase "the Israel/Palestine debate where its very hard to solve satisfactorily” must be the understatement of the year! If not the decade!
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
Do you believe, as one prominent UKIPper put it on here, that one of UKIP's aims is "to put the rights of the indigenous peoples of these islands first?"
Do you agree with the Islamaphobia that infects many UKIPpers on here?
Do you agree that child sex abuse is only noteworthy when it is performed mostly by Muslims?
Do you agree with the religious bigotry so often shown?
That is why UKIP and many of its supporters are a direct threat to me, my wife, and any children we may have.
I haven't read the first comment. However, I see no evidence that any figure of significance in UKIP wants to introduce discriminatory legislation against British citizens who aren't White.
As to the rest, Islam gets criticised here. So does Christianity and belief in God generally. I've read just as much criticism of the Catholic Church over child sex as I have over Muslim paedophiles.
Muslims have had a poor press recently and I can understand your sensitivity. So have Catholic priests, and they now put up with being looked on with suspicion when the real culprits represent only a tiny minority as always. Life isn't fair sometimes.
But we should always treat people as individuals, even if we don't.
Being white and male, it's easy for me to say that.
Yet positive discrimination is regarded by many as a good thing - usually from the theory of it's rectifying a wrong previously committed. From the Rooney ruling to AWS, it means treating an individual as a group member - surely the definition of an "ism"?
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
Do you agree with the Islamaphobia that infects many UKIPpers on here?
I don't think talking about some of the more worrying aspects of Islam should be banned even if they have thought up a trendy word for it.
Do you believe, as one prominent UKIPper put it on here, that one of UKIP's aims is "to put the rights of the indigenous peoples of these islands first?"
Depends what he meant by "indigenous". If he means people born and brought up here, then yes. If he means people of white British ethnicity, then no.
Do you agree with the Islamaphobia that infects many UKIPpers on here?
I do not agree with Islamophobia. Individuals should never be judged prejudicially on their race or religion. However, what I suspect you mean by "Islamophobia" is pointing out the widespread existence of intolerant views and behaviour within the UK and global Muslim communities.
Do you agree that child sex abuse is only noteworthy when it is performed mostly by Muslims?
No, and I've never met anyone in UKIP that believes that it is. What is believed is that the most widespread existence of uninvestigated child abuse in this country is that performed by grooming gangs of Islamic backgrounds.
The Ipsos MORI date may give us a clue as to the maximum potential of the UKIP vote ie the likely ceiling for vote share.The detailed figures behind the Net Like/ Dislike question for UKIP are Like UKIP 29%,Dislike UKIP 63% DK 10%. If we exclude don't knows we get Like 30% Dislike 70%.Accepting that by elections have General elections it seems that the people who dislike UKIP 70% are at a,GE unlikely to support UKIP.Thus the maximum national voting share at the GE is effectively capped at 30%.
I'm sometimes baffled by the LDs adopting unpopular positions, but then posters remind us that they're only talking to those who would consider voting LD.
The Tories are evil scum who must be stopped at all costs.
UKIP are even worse scum who also must be stopped at all costs.
The Lib Dems are treacherous Tory turncoats who must be stopped at all costs.
etc.
The SNP are evil scum who steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
The Greens are evil scum who are about to steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
Plaid Cymru - aw, bless...
Actually I was thinking about the Greens the other day. I think the protest lefty vote is going to go to them until the point where they actually get some power and don't do exactly what Labour want.
When that happens they'll be as hated by Labour supporters as the Lib Dems are these days.
To be honest I think there's a certain amount of people who lean leftwards that enjoy, no in fact need someone to hate. No one quite does demonisation and hatred like the left.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
It will be interesting to read Harry's analysis of last nite's results.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
Cheers, I missed that.
Regarding Rochester, you haven't taken into account one crucial thing.
I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015.
That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent.
"That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent. "
The Tories are evil scum who must be stopped at all costs.
UKIP are even worse scum who also must be stopped at all costs.
The Lib Dems are treacherous Tory turncoats who must be stopped at all costs.
etc.
The SNP are evil scum who steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
The Greens are evil scum who are about to steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
Plaid Cymru - aw, bless...
Actually I was thinking about the Greens the other day. I think the protest lefty vote is going to go to them until the point where they actually get some power and don't do exactly what Labour want.
When that happens they'll be as hated by Labour supporters as the Lib Dems are these days.
To be honest I think there's a certain amount of people who lean leftwards that enjoy, no in fact need someone to hate. No one quite does demonisation and hatred like the left.
The Left is the last place where you can still hate in Britain without being brought up before the justice system....
The Ipsos MORI date may give us a clue as to the maximum potential of the UKIP vote ie the likely ceiling for vote share.The detailed figures behind the Net Like/ Dislike question for UKIP are Like UKIP 29%,Dislike UKIP 63% DK 10%. If we exclude don't knows we get Like 30% Dislike 70%.Accepting that by elections have General elections it seems that the people who dislike UKIP 70% are at a,GE unlikely to support UKIP.Thus the maximum national voting share at the GE is effectively capped at 30%.
I'm sometimes baffled by the LDs adopting unpopular positions, but then posters remind us that they're only talking to those who would consider voting LD.
I have a soft spot for the lib dems . I even think they have some good economic and tax input but I lose all urge to support them when they seemingly come out with loads of policies that contain the words 'ban' 'make compulsory' or 'regulate more' which I would have thought is the opposite of what a good liberal should be
"I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015....."
Doomed! Doomed I tell 'ee....
Seriously, good luck. I always admire those who go round working the constituencies door to door. It's tough work but it's the very heart of democracy.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
You can project anything onto UKIP. And that applies in a negative as well as a positive sense.
UKIP wins over Labour and Tory voters because outside of immigration and the EU the message is often very mixed - deliberately so probably. But in the same way, people hear things that UKIP supporters say about Ting Tongs, about judgements against gays, about immigrants, about Muslims and so on, and they extrapolate. Of course, these individuals are probably not representative of anything, but because UKIP has not been around for that long there is no context against which to judge such statements.
What UKIP lacks is a history. If by some extraordinary set of circumstances the party ended up with 100+ MPs after the next GE we have absolutely no idea how they would behave or vote in the Commons. That's not the same with any of the other parties.
Running a loose ship in which anyone feels free to say exactly what they like is great, but for those on the outside looking in it creates a level of uncertainty that may not be to UKIP's long term benefit.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
As a cyclist, UKIPs manifesto in 2010 contained many threatening policies directed at me. I've started assuming that the drivers who overtake me most dangerously are more likely to be UKIP supporters, especially the ones who like to shout abuse at me for daring to be on the road at all.
Perhaps UKIPs next manifesto will move away from some of these stereotypical angry middle-aged white man sort of policies. You'd expect that a party that moves from 3% national support to around five times that level would change in some ways.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
It will be interesting to read Harry's analysis of last nite's results.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
Cheers, I missed that.
Regarding Rochester, you haven't taken into account one crucial thing.
I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015.
That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent.
"That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent. "
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
It will be interesting to read Harry's analysis of last nite's results.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
Cheers, I missed that.
Regarding Rochester, you haven't taken into account one crucial thing.
I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015.
That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent.
"That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent. "
"I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015....."
Doomed! Doomed I tell 'ee....
Seriously, good luck. I always admire those who go round working the constituencies door to door. It's tough work but it's the very heart of democracy.
I don't know why, but Mark Reckless really has pissed me off.
I don't think that UKIP are Nazis. I do think that they are vile reactionary bandwagon-jumpers who if they ever got close to the levers of power would turn Britain into a diminished, sour backwater, and who thrive on fostering hatred of others rather than co-operation with and tolerance of others.
I would tactically vote against them if necessary for any of the main parties and would tactically vote against any of the main parties that entered into any kind of alliance with them as well.
I personally find your views on immigration and deconstructing the welfare net vile and reactionary, but I don't think you are personally those things. I just think you are badly mistaken.
Do you think myself, Sean Fear, isam and Luckyguy1983 are vile and reactionary?
Do you believe, as one prominent UKIPper put it on here, that one of UKIP's aims is "to put the rights of the indigenous peoples of these islands first?"
Depends what he meant by "indigenous". If he means people born and brought up here, then yes. If he means people of white British ethnicity, then no.
I can't see a definition of 'indigenous' that includes people of foreign stock born in a place.
"originating in and characteristic of a particular region or country; native (often followed by to)"
I do not agree with Islamophobia. Individuals should never be judged prejudicially on their race or religion. However, what I suspect you mean by "Islamophobia" is pointing out the widespread existence of intolerant views and behaviour within the UK and global Muslim communities.
I'd say failure to point out such intolerances in other cultures as well, or not pointing out that there are many good people within that religion as well, would make it Islamaphobia. Or at the very least Islama-fear-and-loathing. Witness your first post this morning.
No, and I've never met anyone in UKIP that believes that it is. What is believed is that the most widespread existence of uninvestigated child abuse in this country is that performed by grooming gangs of Islamic backgrounds.
Good article by Liam Halligan. Europe has paid a heavy price for supporting neo con and NATO adventurism. Ending the sanctions war and reconciliation with Russia should be a top priority but the damage is done.
The entire conflict between Russia and Europe was completely unnecessary, counterproductive and shows how easy it is for Europe to be led around by the nose against its own interests by an expansionist NATO and the imaginary threat of an aggressive expansionist Russia. Europe needs to stop being such a poodle to the likes of Victoria Nudelman Kagan, whether in Syria or the Ukraine.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
It will be interesting to read Harry's analysis of last nite's results.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
Cheers, I missed that.
Regarding Rochester, you haven't taken into account one crucial thing.
I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015.
That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent.
"That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent. "
To which side?
I think that's a red card offence, no, TSE?
No, it's a fair comment.
I'm not sure how a Yorkshiremanc who quotes latin, pop music references, wears red footwear and will extol the virtues of immigration will go down on the mean streets of Rochester & Strood.
You know I love you, but that's hand-waving. The DT is a huge newspaper and the behaviour of the Kippers commenting there is doing your Party no favours.
I assume they simply either don't see how it looks from the outside, or don't care. Either way - as a window into the thinking of the more vocal Kipper, it's very off-putting. Hence my reference to the Yestapo who are equally likely to be unrepresentative of the average Yes voter - but that's what we experience.
I'd be equally concerned if the SWPers who hang out at the Guardian got anywhere near power in a by-election or six. It's about tone/demonisation not whether they're nice chaps when you get to know them.
As @felix noted, many of us on the softer-right wonder what Kipper World would look like, and given what we see/hear - it doesn't look like one we'd want to be part of.
TBH, I don't read the comments in the DT anymore because they're filled with anti-Muslim comments irrespective of the topic under discussion. And when they run out of those, it reverts to the EU. It's hobby-horse stuff writ large, and reminds me of the ugly online Yestapo.
I'm sure all these posters are quite delightful in person, but they give UKIP a very unattractive face to a soft-right Tory like me. It's the volume and the tone that's so off-putting.
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
I find those comments off-putting, but I simply don't find them representative of UKIP supporters at all.
Labour Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough shortlist
Harry Harpham (Sheffield council deputy leader, usual agent for Blunkett)) www.harryharpham.com/ Mike Buckley (community organzier for Movement for Change) www.mikebuckley.org.uk/ Leigh Bramall (Sheffield Cllr) Jackie Drayton (Sheffield Cllr)
Chris Brannigan (former Lieutenant Colonel in the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards. He lost the PCC selection in Hampshire against Michael Mates) Robert Light (Kirklees Cllr) Wendy Morton (chair of Richmond Conservative Association. Fought Tynemouth in 2010 GE) Rishi Sunak (businessman, already been in Hertsmere shortlist)
Havanet longlist. Selection on October 26th
Antonia Cox Suella Fernandez Sian Flynn Mark Fox Chris Hayward Sarah Heald Sarah Macken Alan Mak Michael McManus Luke Parker Laura Trott Charlotte Vere
I don't think that UKIP are Nazis. I do think that they are vile reactionary bandwagon-jumpers who if they ever got close to the levers of power would turn Britain into a diminished, sour backwater, and who thrive on fostering hatred of others rather than co-operation with and tolerance of others.
I would tactically vote against them if necessary for any of the main parties and would tactically vote against any of the main parties that entered into any kind of alliance with them as well.
I personally find your views on immigration and deconstructing the welfare net vile and reactionary, but I don't think you are personally those things. I just think you are badly mistaken.
Do you think myself, Sean Fear, isam and Luckyguy1983 are vile and reactionary?
I try not to make value judgements about individual posters, either positive or negative.
I'm well aware that my political views are those of a tiny minority (comprised of roughly one). That won't stop me holding them and I expect that most other posters on here feel the same way - even those whose expressed positions seem batshit mental to me.
The Swale result looks very good to my mind for UKIP, also adding in the outperformance of UKIP at the H&M by election I think perhaps the 6-1 on 45-50% is perhaps the best value right now. Have also taken a smidgen of 50-55% as cover.
As such I've altered my position to be more pro-UKIP
UKIP + £5.85 Tory + £28.50
UKIP 30-35% +£7.50 UKIP 40-45% +£5 UKIP 45-50% +£42.50 <-- £10 @ 6-1 today's recommended bet ! UKIP 50-55% +£5 Any other (35-40% in practice) -£27.50
I think the Conservatives have a slim chance but not worth laying at 4.8 without more polling data. It also covers the 35-40% band to a degree, though UKIP could still win with 39% or so. Anyway this IS betting so there must be some risk.
You know I love you, but that's hand-waving. The DT is a huge newspaper and the behaviour of the Kippers commenting there is doing your Party no favours.
TBH, I don't read the comments in the DT anymore because they're filled with anti-Muslim comments irrespective of the topic under discussion. And when they run out of those, it reverts to the EU. It's hobby-horse stuff writ large, and reminds me of the ugly online Yestapo.
I'm sure all these posters are quite delightful in person, but they give UKIP a very unattractive face to a soft-right Tory like me. It's the volume and the tone that's so off-putting.
You may be right but for many moderate right-wingers like myself UKIP do precious little to re-assure us that they are something more than an organised version of the 'grumpy old men'. Much fun yes and we all like to indulge from time to time but in the real world we need real practical policies that go beyond the sloganizing which conflates the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat. I doubt if I'd vote Labour to keep UKIP out but I'd certainly consider most of the others.
When have UKIP ever "conflated the evil immigrant with the evil EU bureaucrat"?
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
I find those comments off-putting, but I simply don't find them representative of UKIP supporters at all.
The problem there is the culture the Telegraph have allowed to grow around their website comments, not UKIP.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
It will be interesting to read Harry's analysis of last nite's results.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
Cheers, I missed that.
Regarding Rochester, you haven't taken into account one crucial thing.
I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015.
That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent.
"That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent. "
To which side?
I think that's a red card offence, no, TSE?
No, it's a fair comment.
I'm not sure how a Yorkshiremanc who quotes latin, pop music references, wears red footwear and will extol the virtues of immigration will go down on the mean streets of Rochester & Strood.
As @felix noted, many of us on the softer-right wonder what Kipper World would look like, and given what we see/hear - it doesn't look like one we'd want to be part of.
Jeremey Clarkson stamping on a human face forever...
The Tories are evil scum who must be stopped at all costs.
UKIP are even worse scum who also must be stopped at all costs.
The Lib Dems are treacherous Tory turncoats who must be stopped at all costs.
etc.
The SNP are evil scum who steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
The Greens are evil scum who are about to steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
Plaid Cymru - aw, bless...
Actually I was thinking about the Greens the other day. I think the protest lefty vote is going to go to them until the point where they actually get some power and don't do exactly what Labour want.
When that happens they'll be as hated by Labour supporters as the Lib Dems are these days.
To be honest I think there's a certain amount of people who lean leftwards that enjoy, no in fact need someone to hate. No one quite does demonisation and hatred like the left.
The Left is the last place where you can still hate in Britain without being brought up before the justice system....
1. I agree that "indigenous" does mean the second meaning, but sometimes people want a quick word for the "born and brought up here Britons" that doesn't exist, so they use terms like "indigenous" or "native" incorrectly.
2. So if someone points out abuses by Israeli extremist settlers, without then mentioning that other non-Jewish militarties cause abuses, or that there are a lot of decent and kind-hearted Jews, then they're being anti-Semitic? This is an absurd position. Nobody should have to state their entire nuanced and moderated views on an ethnic group every time they criticise poor behaviour by members of that ethnic group.
Oh, and for the record, I have regularly criticised intolerance from other groups. I post a fair amount about Russian extremism and authoritarianism from our own government, in case you haven't noticed. And I also point out that there are many decent and integrated Muslims ALL THE DAMN TIME. It's just people like you refuse to hear those bits. You've got your existing mindset that UKIP supporters are bigots, and you pick and choose evidence to back up your belief. That's far more prejudice than I display.
3. How the hell is it Islamophobic to believe that the most widespread cases of uninvestigated child abuse in this country is carried out by Muslim-background gangs? We have a case of 1400 kids being raped in one northern town, "hundreds" of child rapists walking free in one of our northern cities, about 20 cases of this model of abuse happening in other towns, and a chief investigator saying what has happened in Rotherham is likely to have happened elsewhere. What evidence is there of anything similar happening by perpetrators of other groups? To avoid the "Islamophobic" slur from politically correct muppets you have to not mention crimes by Muslims. It's ridiculous.
Oh, and I note you just toss out the Islamophobe charge without justifying it. People like you aren't actually interested in the facts. You're just interested in delegitimising uncomfortable facts.
4. Once again, a joke without any argument or evidence to back it up. Your case is weak so you don't even try to make it.
UKIP are presently 5/2 to take Castle Point with Ladbrokes. BBC London on Breakfast News led with the story that the Canvey Island Independent Party are going to back UKIP at the general election. UKIP should now be closer to evens in this seat, given its strong history in the seat, its continuing strength in the national polls and the backing of this grouping (who hold 16 out of 17 councillors on the island). I'm on!
Cheers.
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
Others - eg isam - would know better than me. Personally, I generally read little into council by-elections (only the civically obsessed vote in them), but I know others pore over them.
I have same approach as you but Labour going up in Thurrock seems interesting.
I will probably be accused of making excuses, but please remember that I said this before the result last night in Thurrock
I spoke to the Thurrock candidate last week and said "it's almost a certainty isn't it?" Regarding next years GE result
He said it was going well but a lot if hard work to go etc
Then he said "if we win the by election in west Thurrock next week then it would be a certainty because it's the strongest labour ward and we never do well there"
So my rational analysis would be its nothing to worry about. The labour councillor who died was popular etc
But if you think it is bad for ukip, labour are now odds against I think in a place, they're definitely evens., so if you have backed ukip at fancy prices and have concerns on the back of last nights result, you can get out for a nice green
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
As a cyclist, UKIPs manifesto in 2010 contained many threatening policies directed at me. I've started assuming that the drivers who overtake me most dangerously are more likely to be UKIP supporters, especially the ones who like to shout abuse at me for daring to be on the road at all.
Perhaps UKIPs next manifesto will move away from some of these stereotypical angry middle-aged white man sort of policies. You'd expect that a party that moves from 3% national support to around five times that level would change in some ways.
Matthew Parris once proposed stringing piano wire across country lanes to strangle cyclists.
Hey, Antifrank, we've got the Castlepoint price down to 7/4.
Shall we keep backing it, just to frighten Shadsy? ;-)
7/4 remains a good price in my view, given today's news. UKIP have just acquired a first class ground game in a substantial part of a constituency where they already were doing well. These were the local election results this year:
The most notable bit about it is that everyone in Labour seems to agree that Ed M is completely useless, but they each seem to have very different ideas about the alternative direction they'd prefer. I suppose that is what lack of leadership means.
The relevance is what it says about the crazy suggestions of any sort of Con-UKIP pact/deal.
If there is a Con/UKIP pact there'll be one fewer Con vote here.....
Make that 2. I am already concerned about the tendency of the Tories to bend in the wind to accommodate potential UKIP voters.
Enjoy your time in opposition, then.
And I'm sure you'll enjoy a Miliband government and further integration into the EU.....
You do rather prove his point. UKIP get accused here of splitting the right-wing vote, and letting in Labour. But then you, and others here, say you'd refuse to vote Conservative if they made a pact with UKIP. Which does rather suggest that for all the talk of the horrors of a Milliband government, it's not in reality a prospect that bothers you much.
The threat to me and my family from a UKIP majority or minority government, especially given the views of many UKIP supporters on here, is far greater than it would be from a Labour government.
And that's saying something. Therefore, if it comes to play in my constituency, my vote will be an anti-UKIP vote. This was not the case a year (or possibly even six months) ago.
How on earth would UKIP threaten you?
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
As a cyclist, UKIPs manifesto in 2010 contained many threatening policies directed at me. I've started assuming that the drivers who overtake me most dangerously are more likely to be UKIP supporters, especially the ones who like to shout abuse at me for daring to be on the road at all.
Perhaps UKIPs next manifesto will move away from some of these stereotypical angry middle-aged white man sort of policies. You'd expect that a party that moves from 3% national support to around five times that level would change in some ways.
Matthew Parris once proposed stringing piano wire across country lanes to strangle cyclists.
would have to pay Steve McQueen copyright fees for doing that!
A link to a news story with an entirely neutral description of the story. JosiasJessop is as nutty on this issue as the NUS refusing to condemn ISIS because it would be Islamophobic.
How is your fear of the ideology of UKIP any different to other people having fear of the ideology of Islam?
Saying one is absolutely disgusting whilst the other cannot be criticised seems a little inconsistent.
It's very different. Firstly, most adherents do not choose to become Muslim, or Christian, or Hindu, or Jewish: they just are. People choose to be UKIPpers (as opposed to UKIP voters, which are a separate matter).
Secondly, your comment 'fear of the ideology of Islam' shows your problem all too well.
Good article by Liam Halligan. Europe has paid a heavy price for supporting neo con and NATO adventurism. Ending the sanctions war and reconciliation with Russia should be a top priority but the damage is done.
The entire conflict between Russia and Europe was completely unnecessary, counterproductive and shows how easy it is for Europe to be led around by the nose against its own interests by an expansionist NATO and the imaginary threat of an aggressive expansionist Russia. Europe needs to stop being such a poodle to the likes of Victoria Nudelman Kagan, whether in Syria or the Ukraine.
"...Mobilising in their usual manner, French farmers have been setting fire to regional tax offices."
Hey, Antifrank, we've got the Castlepoint price down to 7/4.
Shall we keep backing it, just to frighten Shadsy? ;-)
7/4 remains a good price in my view, given today's news. UKIP have just acquired a first class ground game in a substantial part of a constituency where they already were doing well. These were the local election results this year:
UKIP did not compete against the Canvey Island Independents, so they picked up 5 out of 8 of the seats that they contested.
Went back to Canvey a few months ago. No longer looks like the place where I grew up. And no, not full of BME people. Just people didn’t seem cheerful. Even in the pubs!
Hey, Antifrank, we've got the Castlepoint price down to 7/4.
Shall we keep backing it, just to frighten Shadsy? ;-)
This is precisely why we should use the "back door" for this sort of thing, I'm fairly convinced there are a fair few lurkers here sniping our tips.
Yes, I agree, Pulpstar, although this time I suspect it was just the sheer weight of our money.
I got fifty on, which is quite big for a constituency market. Antifrank, as we all know, is loaded and probably had ten times that amount. ;-)
shadsy apparently limits me to c£100 of winnings on any constituency, so I was allowed £40.40 on this constituency. I suppose it's a compliment of sorts.
Comments
Women over 30 (ys/o) are beating their younger counterparts - when it comes to having more babies that is.
Biriskin and co would say for reference to all that the younger mothers will have healthier (physically) babbas - however the yuppies that have made it to thirty will presumably be cheered by the news.
Source - The London Times
In fact, they don't even say immigrants are evil. They say the main problem is with the overall scale of immigration. Of course opposing parties' views seem simplistic and stupid when you simplify them into stupid statements.
So if we were on a site discussing football, and someone described Liverpool selling Suarez as a game changer in terms of their league title hopes, you would argue that it wasn't as it wouldn't be in the itn end of month index poll?
This conversation is borderline madnes.
Do you still think that 35 % of labour and Tories thinking Ukip aren't a wasted vote is bad for Ukip? Or us this nonsense a deflection from that ricket?
I'm voting against Cameron because of his complete reluctance to defend religious minorities in this country (or outside it).
The European Arrest Warrant was used against Jehovah's Witnesses, completely unjustifiably.
UKIP stood up for them, the Tories didn't.
Over the last few years, I've gradually cooled on Europe. I honestly thought that it was meant to be a mutually beneficial trading relationship with a few rules to make it operate fairly. The idea that it was always meant to be a political union was news to me but then I'm probably naive.
Although I was always against the Iraq invasion on the basis that it made no sense - there are many dictators around the world and Saddam was never a fan of Jihandist - I sort of hoped that Tony had some secret and damning information that he couldn't share with the public because of security reasons. Perhaps I was always an idealist (I did vote Labour when Michael Foot was in charge),
But now, I'm better. Not only am I now a "NOTA" but I'm actively insulted by the lying and posturing of politicians. No more benefit of the doubt.
Does Cameron really mean to re-negotiate? No, he's a lying snake like all the rest.
It's quite cathartic; Let the children play their playground games but include me out.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ulster-unionist-bob-stoker-defects-to-ukip-30666977.html
Also, northern Ireland is set to be the unlikely trailblazer in Britain for a controversial Swedish law:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-ford-in-bid-to-scupper-bill-making-it-illegal-to-pay-for-sex-30670787.html
Should I read too much into last night's result in Thurrock though ?
He is in charge of Ukip Essex I think.. You never know he might help me pick a winnable seat!
I'm on too, although I had to take 2/1.
The most bizarre accusations get hurled at UKIP on this forum.
I'm sure all these posters are quite delightful in person, but they give UKIP a very unattractive face to a soft-right Tory like me. It's the volume and the tone that's so off-putting.
The Tories are evil scum who must be stopped at all costs.
UKIP are even worse scum who also must be stopped at all costs.
The Lib Dems are treacherous Tory turncoats who must be stopped at all costs.
etc.
Labour don't seem to have woken up to the fact that voters have woken up. They see political stunts and think political c****.
I wonder if Labour is now reconsidering an election campaign based entirely around trotting out people Ed has met in a park who are victims of the "bedroom tax"?
The fact that UKIP are evil Nazis is axiomatic to them, it is the starting point of their thinking.
I'd say that branding people as bigots without sufficient evidence is itself bigoted, but I fear I'm in the minority on that one.
The Greens are evil scum who are about to steal their voters and must be stopped at all costs.
Plaid Cymru - aw, bless...
Do you agree with the Islamaphobia that infects many UKIPpers on here?
Do you agree that child sex abuse is only noteworthy when it is performed mostly by Muslims?
Do you agree with the religious bigotry so often shown?
That is why UKIP and many of its supporters are a direct threat to me, my wife, and any children we may have.
The two big by-elections produced strangely differing results. In West Thurrock, Labour held strong, and didn't lose ground to either the Blues or the Purples. In the Medway constituency of Swale however, UKIP stormed home.
Weejohnny (of this Parish) suggested the Thurrock result might have reflected the absence of a LD candidate. There's another by locally next month which should help to indicate what is going in Thurrock.
There doesn't seem to be much doubt of what is going on in Rochester if the Swale result is indicative.
When that happens they'll be as hated by Labour supporters as the Lib Dems are these days.
To be honest I think there's a certain amount of people who lean leftwards that enjoy, no in fact need someone to hate. No one quite does demonisation and hatred like the left.
If we exclude don't knows we get Like 30% Dislike 70%.Accepting that by elections have General elections it seems that the people who dislike UKIP 70% are at a,GE unlikely to support UKIP.Thus the maximum national voting share at the GE is effectively capped at 30%.
Wearing my PR hat - I remain totally perplexed why Angela Eagle is ever the right answer to a TV/radio question. Her voice makes me want to stuff cotton wool in her mouth, and she always looks so down in the mouth - like a walking talking rain cloud. She'd be great on EastEnders playing the part of downtrodden complaining wifey.
I would tactically vote against them if necessary for any of the main parties and would tactically vote against any of the main parties that entered into any kind of alliance with them as well.
How would that affect the political narrative?
Regarding Rochester, you haven't taken into account one crucial thing.
I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015.
That had to be worth at least 5 to 10 per cent.
If not the decade!
As to the rest, Islam gets criticised here. So does Christianity and belief in God generally. I've read just as much criticism of the Catholic Church over child sex as I have over Muslim paedophiles.
Muslims have had a poor press recently and I can understand your sensitivity. So have Catholic priests, and they now put up with being looked on with suspicion when the real culprits represent only a tiny minority as always. Life isn't fair sometimes.
But we should always treat people as individuals, even if we don't.
Being white and male, it's easy for me to say that.
Yet positive discrimination is regarded by many as a good thing - usually from the theory of it's rectifying a wrong previously committed. From the Rooney ruling to AWS, it means treating an individual as a group member - surely the definition of an "ism"?
I'm not Sean_F but let me answer some of those questions. Depends what he meant by "indigenous". If he means people born and brought up here, then yes. If he means people of white British ethnicity, then no. I do not agree with Islamophobia. Individuals should never be judged prejudicially on their race or religion. However, what I suspect you mean by "Islamophobia" is pointing out the widespread existence of intolerant views and behaviour within the UK and global Muslim communities. No, and I've never met anyone in UKIP that believes that it is. What is believed is that the most widespread existence of uninvestigated child abuse in this country is that performed by grooming gangs of Islamic backgrounds. I don't know what religious bigotry you are talking about.
To which side?
"I'm planning to campaign in Rochester with Grant Shapps' team 2015....."
Doomed! Doomed I tell 'ee....
Seriously, good luck. I always admire those who go round working the constituencies door to door. It's tough work but it's the very heart of democracy.
UKIP wins over Labour and Tory voters because outside of immigration and the EU the message is often very mixed - deliberately so probably. But in the same way, people hear things that UKIP supporters say about Ting Tongs, about judgements against gays, about immigrants, about Muslims and so on, and they extrapolate. Of course, these individuals are probably not representative of anything, but because UKIP has not been around for that long there is no context against which to judge such statements.
What UKIP lacks is a history. If by some extraordinary set of circumstances the party ended up with 100+ MPs after the next GE we have absolutely no idea how they would behave or vote in the Commons. That's not the same with any of the other parties.
Running a loose ship in which anyone feels free to say exactly what they like is great, but for those on the outside looking in it creates a level of uncertainty that may not be to UKIP's long term benefit.
Perhaps UKIPs next manifesto will move away from some of these stereotypical angry middle-aged white man sort of policies. You'd expect that a party that moves from 3% national support to around five times that level would change in some ways.
Reckless delenda est is my new motto
Do you think myself, Sean Fear, isam and Luckyguy1983 are vile and reactionary?
"originating in and characteristic of a particular region or country; native (often followed by to)" I'd say failure to point out such intolerances in other cultures as well, or not pointing out that there are many good people within that religion as well, would make it Islamaphobia. Or at the very least Islama-fear-and-loathing. Witness your first post this morning.
I'm amazed how often people assume that public opinion is irrevocably fixed. Certainly it can be very stubborn, but change is not impossible.
Good article by Liam Halligan. Europe has paid a heavy price for supporting neo con and NATO adventurism. Ending the sanctions war and reconciliation with Russia should be a top priority but the damage is done.
The entire conflict between Russia and Europe was completely unnecessary, counterproductive and shows how easy it is for Europe to be led around by the nose against its own interests by an expansionist NATO and the imaginary threat of an aggressive expansionist Russia. Europe needs to stop being such a poodle to the likes of Victoria Nudelman Kagan, whether in Syria or the Ukraine.
No surge for UKIP from Populus. Today's poll LAB 35 (-1), Con 33 (-2), LD 10 (+1), UKIP 14 (+1), GRN 4
I'm not sure how a Yorkshiremanc who quotes latin, pop music references, wears red footwear and will extol the virtues of immigration will go down on the mean streets of Rochester & Strood.
I love it.
The Left does not hate Britain. Some on the left do, just as some on the right do - see English nationalism and Tartan Tories.
What both the left and the right hate is each other's versions of what they think Britain should be. But that's very different.
Shall we keep backing it, just to frighten Shadsy? ;-)
Labour Press Team ✔ @labourpress
watch @angelaeagle on @bbcquestiontime tonight at 10.45 #bbcqt
I assume they simply either don't see how it looks from the outside, or don't care. Either way - as a window into the thinking of the more vocal Kipper, it's very off-putting. Hence my reference to the Yestapo who are equally likely to be unrepresentative of the average Yes voter - but that's what we experience.
I'd be equally concerned if the SWPers who hang out at the Guardian got anywhere near power in a by-election or six. It's about tone/demonisation not whether they're nice chaps when you get to know them.
As @felix noted, many of us on the softer-right wonder what Kipper World would look like, and given what we see/hear - it doesn't look like one we'd want to be part of.
Mr. Anorak, are you now copyrighted?
Labour Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough shortlist
Harry Harpham (Sheffield council deputy leader, usual agent for Blunkett)) www.harryharpham.com/
Mike Buckley (community organzier for Movement for Change) www.mikebuckley.org.uk/
Leigh Bramall (Sheffield Cllr)
Jackie Drayton (Sheffield Cllr)
Selection on October 26th
Conservative Richmond (Yorks). Selection tomorrow...shortlist:
Chris Brannigan (former Lieutenant Colonel in the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards. He lost the PCC selection in Hampshire against Michael Mates)
Robert Light (Kirklees Cllr)
Wendy Morton (chair of Richmond Conservative Association. Fought Tynemouth in 2010 GE)
Rishi Sunak (businessman, already been in Hertsmere shortlist)
Havanet longlist. Selection on October 26th
Antonia Cox
Suella Fernandez
Sian Flynn
Mark Fox
Chris Hayward
Sarah Heald
Sarah Macken
Alan Mak
Michael McManus
Luke Parker
Laura Trott
Charlotte Vere
I'm well aware that my political views are those of a tiny minority (comprised of roughly one). That won't stop me holding them and I expect that most other posters on here feel the same way - even those whose expressed positions seem batshit mental to me.
The Swale result looks very good to my mind for UKIP, also adding in the outperformance of UKIP at the H&M by election I think perhaps the 6-1 on 45-50% is perhaps the best value right now. Have also taken a smidgen of 50-55% as cover.
As such I've altered my position to be more pro-UKIP
UKIP + £5.85
Tory + £28.50
UKIP 30-35% +£7.50
UKIP 40-45% +£5
UKIP 45-50% +£42.50 <-- £10 @ 6-1 today's recommended bet !
UKIP 50-55% +£5
Any other (35-40% in practice) -£27.50
I think the Conservatives have a slim chance but not worth laying at 4.8 without more polling data. It also covers the 35-40% band to a degree, though UKIP could still win with 39% or so. Anyway this IS betting so there must be some risk.
Go to it, TSE.
Saying one is absolutely disgusting whilst the other cannot be criticised seems a little inconsistent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLvoz52AW7c
http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/11541335.Former_politician_charged_with_fraud_offences/
What is it about Farage's personal choices?
1. I agree that "indigenous" does mean the second meaning, but sometimes people want a quick word for the "born and brought up here Britons" that doesn't exist, so they use terms like "indigenous" or "native" incorrectly.
2. So if someone points out abuses by Israeli extremist settlers, without then mentioning that other non-Jewish militarties cause abuses, or that there are a lot of decent and kind-hearted Jews, then they're being anti-Semitic? This is an absurd position. Nobody should have to state their entire nuanced and moderated views on an ethnic group every time they criticise poor behaviour by members of that ethnic group.
Oh, and for the record, I have regularly criticised intolerance from other groups. I post a fair amount about Russian extremism and authoritarianism from our own government, in case you haven't noticed. And I also point out that there are many decent and integrated Muslims ALL THE DAMN TIME. It's just people like you refuse to hear those bits. You've got your existing mindset that UKIP supporters are bigots, and you pick and choose evidence to back up your belief. That's far more prejudice than I display.
3. How the hell is it Islamophobic to believe that the most widespread cases of uninvestigated child abuse in this country is carried out by Muslim-background gangs? We have a case of 1400 kids being raped in one northern town, "hundreds" of child rapists walking free in one of our northern cities, about 20 cases of this model of abuse happening in other towns, and a chief investigator saying what has happened in Rotherham is likely to have happened elsewhere. What evidence is there of anything similar happening by perpetrators of other groups? To avoid the "Islamophobic" slur from politically correct muppets you have to not mention crimes by Muslims. It's ridiculous.
Oh, and I note you just toss out the Islamophobe charge without justifying it. People like you aren't actually interested in the facts. You're just interested in delegitimising uncomfortable facts.
4. Once again, a joke without any argument or evidence to back it up. Your case is weak so you don't even try to make it.
I spoke to the Thurrock candidate last week and said "it's almost a certainty isn't it?" Regarding next years GE result
He said it was going well but a lot if hard work to go etc
Then he said "if we win the by election in west Thurrock next week then it would be a certainty because it's the strongest labour ward and we never do well there"
So my rational analysis would be its nothing to worry about. The labour councillor who died was popular etc
But if you think it is bad for ukip, labour are now odds against I think in a place, they're definitely evens., so if you have backed ukip at fancy prices and have concerns on the back of last nights result, you can get out for a nice green
I got fifty on, which is quite big for a constituency market. Antifrank, as we all know, is loaded and probably had ten times that amount. ;-)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/councils/E07000069
UKIP did not compete against the Canvey Island Independents, so they picked up 5 out of 8 of the seats that they contested.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/df271bcc-5512-11e4-b616-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3GJtDz3vV
The most notable bit about it is that everyone in Labour seems to agree that Ed M is completely useless, but they each seem to have very different ideas about the alternative direction they'd prefer. I suppose that is what lack of leadership means.
would have to pay Steve McQueen copyright fees for doing that!
Secondly, your comment 'fear of the ideology of Islam' shows your problem all too well.
!!
Charlotte Vere"
Isn't Laura Trott a delightful cyclist? And Charlotte de Vere's one of the main characters in my WIP...
Mr. Anorak, hmm. Is that the villainous organisation in RoboCop? Could be wrong, never seen the film.