Here's a little tester for PBers to cogitate upon within the febrile mix of the weekend political wash-up and their own prejudices :
Which of the Conservatives, Labour and LibDems will lose most seats at the general election ?
Is that net loss? I can see Labour losing quite a few, particularly in Scotland, but gaining quite a few elsewhere to make up for it. Tough though. I don't see the Tories losing more than 20 or so, maybe 30, and I'd say the same for the LDs, currently more likely to be 30 or a few higher than toward the 20s.
Gross loss.
Presently the LibDems appear favourites - upward of 30 losses but a campaign swingback might limit the losses to twenty.
Labour are at risk in Scotland and in a handful of English seats, perhaps also totalling 20 and the Conservatives also may lose around that number.
Its largely better opportunities elsewhere. I have said a couple of times here, my brother-in-law is a partner in a rural GP practise, they are currently running with half the doctors they need, despite having the budget because they are not getting the applicants, and the few they do get, dont take the job. When he asked a couple of applications who were decent enough to phone to say "no thanks" if they had any reasons, they both told him because they had been offered jobs in Australia for twice the money, and doing half the hours. The only way to get more doctors is sadly to pay them a lot more money, and the newspapers scream about GPs on over 100K right now (which my BiL certainly isn't).
Are Australian GPs really earning £200,000 a year? I know there's the need to buy silence, but that's a lot to pay for it.
I have no idea, maybe not quite that much as most GPs in the UK aren't on 100K despite what the Daily Mail tells you. The fact remains that even on the same pay the package is massively more attractive, and since its a lot more money as well, we have next to no chance of keeping new GPs, despite having paid to train them - maybe the answer is a training bond, like Airline Pilots (you take out a bank loan over say five years for the cost of the training, the employer undertakes to make the payments for the loan, if you leave the job you have to take over the payments from the employer)
Final Paragraph - On the Loonies. Their performance at by-elections in this Parliament, tabulated. Note that since the Loonies did not stand in any by-elections outside of England I have only listed the English by-elections, though I've left in the English by-elections which the Loonies did not contest.
Oldham East and Saddleworth 145 Barnsley Central 198 Leicester South 553 Feltham and Heston --- Bradford West 111 Corby --- Croydon North 110 Manchester Central 78 Middlesbrough --- Rotherham --- Eastleigh 136 South Shields 197 Wythenshawe and Sale East 288 Newark 168 Clacton 127 Heywood and Middleton --- Rochester and Strood 151
What do we make of this? The result for the Loonies in Rochester and Strood was pretty much par for the course for this Parliament. Although their best result came near the beginning of the Parliament, their second-best result was relatively recent, so there's no sign of a declining trend in the Loony vote as UKIP rise. Evidently there are some parts of the electorate that Farage simply can't reach...
Thanks to all who came to Dirty Dicks last night - great fun, as ever, and lots of new faces. Nice to see Peter the Punter in a rather "daring" yet tasteful outfit, and he has very good legs a for a man of his age.
We need photographic proof ... or might that crash the site ?
That Charles Moore piece MikeK linked was excellent:
Those who berate the Ukip nostalgists the most are those who most uncritically believe that the European Union is the future. .
There's a non sequitur there. Berating UKIP nostalgia does not mean one necessarily thinks the EU is the future. It is actually possible, you know, to conceive of a future with a Britain that is either loosely linked to the EU, or not at all, without having to subscribe to UKIP in general or UKIP nostalgia in particular. This will be an important point during the General Election and it will be remembered that it is Cameron who will be campaigning on a straight In-Out referendum.
Having said all this, the EU really isn't particularly important as a topic.
... it'll be hard for UKIP to keep up the momentum, and secondly that the natural drift from protest voting to government-deciding will take effect as the election draws nearer.
Just by holding onto their current support UKIP can create an illusion of momentum.
As the election approaches the pollsters will have to accept that UKIP is not fading as expected, and start including them in their initial prompt question. This should create an illusion of increased UKIP support.
I feel it's an existential, visceral gap now - not one of being simply a bit pissed off.
The Tories had it for a long time - Hell, I didn't touch them with a bargepole for 20yrs. I know I'm not very representative of anything bar a fickle voter - but I really do get the Kipper appeal. I understand White Van Man without patronising him or his other half. I come from the same stock, I just disguise it well as I was lucky enough to be exposed to a bit more of life by my very Boho mother.
I want a bit of Hang'em and Flog'em, think we've too many unproductive/culturally alien immigrants - I don't mind if you don't like multi-culti or gay marriage or a load of other things like smoking in saloon bars. Or being very unPC. Or being big on Defence. And Iike sovereignty - a lot, and a huge English patriot.
But I'm a liberally-minded Wet Tory/Blairite too when it comes social issues. So a complete split personality. If I was 18yrs old again - I'd be a Kipper at heart - but a Tory Head at the ballot box. I think I've come full circle over 30yrs.
Its largely better opportunities elsewhere. I have said a couple of times here, my brother-in-law is a partner in a rural GP practise, they are currently running with half the doctors they need, despite having the budget because they are not getting the applicants, and the few they do get, dont take the job. When he asked a couple of applications who were decent enough to phone to say "no thanks" if they had any reasons, they both told him because they had been offered jobs in Australia for twice the money, and doing half the hours. The only way to get more doctors is sadly to pay them a lot more money, and the newspapers scream about GPs on over 100K right now (which my BiL certainly isn't).
Are Australian GPs really earning £200,000 a year? I know there's the need to buy silence, but that's a lot to pay for it.
I have no idea, maybe not quite that much as most GPs in the UK aren't on 100K despite what the Daily Mail tells you. The fact remains that even on the same pay the package is massively more attractive, and since its a lot more money as well, we have next to no chance of keeping new GPs, despite having paid to train them - maybe the answer is a training bond, like Airline Pilots (you take out a bank loan over say five years for the cost of the training, the employer undertakes to make the payments for the loan, if you leave the job you have to take over the payments from the employer)
We are also seeing the consequences of the disastrous MMC reforms brought in by Patricia Hewitt.
The thrust of MMC (and the new Shape of Training Review) was to force Doctors into jobs that they did not want to do. As a result approx 30% of British Medical graduates are not practising in the UK 2 years post qualification. Many have left the country, others have left the profession.
Working in the NHS can be pretty unpleasant, and private hospitals do not train postgraduates.
I think I'm rather alike to you Plato and, dare I say, quite a lot of people in this country. I went through Thatcherism, took the good points on board but disliked some of her harshness especially the poll tax so when Blair offered the same thing with a social conscience it seemed like a win-win. I'm painting in broad brush strokes, but that's where the majority of this country sit and it's where power is won or lost.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
That Charles Moore piece MikeK linked was excellent:
Those who berate the Ukip nostalgists the most are those who most uncritically believe that the European Union is the future. .
There's a non sequitur there. Berating UKIP nostalgia does not mean one necessarily thinks the EU is the future. It is actually possible, you know, to conceive of a future with a Britain that is either loosely linked to the EU, or not at all, without having to subscribe to UKIP in general or UKIP nostalgia in particular. This will be an important point during the General Election and it will be remembered that it is Cameron who will be campaigning on a straight In-Out referendum.
Having said all this, the EU really isn't particularly important as a topic.
UK aren't the party of nostalgia. They want us to be a globalised country with FTAs with Brazil and India. They want the unprecedented step of a federal UK. They want the radical step of recall elections. It's because Tories don't understand (and don't bother to understand) UKIP's true position that they can't deal with them. You are the one being so nostalgic in assuming the UK will return to a two-party system. It won't. Pluralism is the new normal.
To be honest, I cannot say I've ever seen a house with three flags on it before either (2, yes, I have had 2 out myself), so merely saying that would probably have passed muster, but referring to as remarkable seemed to make it more of a total surprise rather than just an unusual number, and of course the white van set off people's snobbery alarms.
Typical metropolitan elite snobbery expressing surprise that you might want to display the flag of your country.
Does London really need a Mayor who will be about 70 at the time of starting their term of office?
Surely Jowell has had long enough being a paid politician - she can live quite happily on her massive MP pension and just keep her grubby hands away from trying to mess up London.
The absolute crap I have read on here over the last few days about the "white working class" really is extraordinary. To start with, the idea that the group as a whole is synonymous with people who drive white vans, are covered in tattoos and have England flags hanging out their windows is utterly ridiculous. There are far more working class people employed by the state - but for some reason they seem not to count. Neither, presumably, do the ones who are vilified on here regularly for going on strike to protect their jobs, wages and conditions - they are a vested interest. And what about the 50% of WWC people who are female?
Then let's think about all the times people on here who sneeringly refer to 'elf n' safety, or put an "innit" at the end of some mocking sentence about thick lefties (my, don't common folk talk funny?), or the opprobrium so often heaped on working class footballers because of the money they earn, or constant references to "Chavs" and the support that was shown to dyed in the wool Tory Katie Hopkins when she said that she would not let her kids play with other kids who have certain names. And so on.
Politicians of all kinds - including those from UKIP - are primarily middle class and have absolutely no clue. Emily Thornberry demonstrated that, as did Ed Miliband in his absurd over-reaction to what she did, as did David Cameron and as have so many others. The working class is as multi-faceted as any other class in this country. It has been left behind and it has been taken for granted and it has been ignored - depending on who has been in power.
Some working class people are intensely patriotic, some are not; most are like everyone else - they wave the flag at certain times of the year or on certain occasion, and put it away for the rest of the time. They are not defined by liking the scouts, or supporting their local football team, or any other activity that we may or may not approve of. Mostly, and just like everyone else, they work their arses off, look forward to their holidays, aspire for better things for themselves and their kids, and just want to get on with life. And just like everyone else, they don't think much of politicians who pretend to do their weekly shop at Morrison's or who ostentatiously fly on budget airlines or who claim to go weak-kneed at the sight of an England flag flying from a window. They know when they are being sold a pup, which is why so many of them are disengaged from politics.
UKIP undeniably has a chance to ta into a deep well of disenchantment, but the people who lead the party are almost entirely right wing Thatcherites who at some stage are going to have to start looking beyond immigration and the EU if they wish to make a lasting mark. Whether they are capable of doing that and turning UKIP into something that goes beyond a party of protest remains to be seen.
I think it will be difficult for UKIP to handle the contradiction of appealing to Labour and Tory voters, but far from impossible.
I notice that Owen Jones in the Guardian likes to point out that UKIP voters are often in favour of re-nationalizing utilities.
I'm a former Tory voter, and like many other UKIP voters, I feel let down by the Tories on the EU and the lack of an in-out referendum. But what really did it for me with the Tories was help to buy. I think that policy is as disgraceful as anything Blair and Brown did.
I consider myself to be on the right of politics and I believe in a smaller state. But if UKIP put in their manifesto a policy of re-nationalizing the utilities, it wouldn't stop me voting for them. I don't know if it would be a good thing, but I don't think it would be a lot worse than what we have now.
I enjoy the hate UKIP receive from Tories on here. But I take a little bit more pride to see a party offering an alternative to Labour in areas of the country where for too long they haven't had an alternative.
That Charles Moore piece MikeK linked was excellent:
Those who berate the Ukip nostalgists the most are those who most uncritically believe that the European Union is the future. .
There's a non sequitur there. Berating UKIP nostalgia does not mean one necessarily thinks the EU is the future. It is actually possible, you know, to conceive of a future with a Britain that is either loosely linked to the EU, or not at all, without having to subscribe to UKIP in general or UKIP nostalgia in particular. This will be an important point during the General Election and it will be remembered that it is Cameron who will be campaigning on a straight In-Out referendum.
Having said all this, the EU really isn't particularly important as a topic.
UK aren't the party of nostalgia.
If UKIP (UK?) aren't in your view the party of nostalgia then you're distancing yourself from Charles Moore. That in itself is no bad thing: he's a reactionary old school Catholic, the sort of voice from the past one listens to with polite attention before getting on with real life. Perhaps that's a tad harsh, but reading him is like stepping back into the 1950's.
Other final paragraph - On the defection of a Labour MP.
This would be about the one thing that would make this Parliament a better one for UKIP in terms of progress, leading up to the general election next May. Herdson thinks that this is unlikely, but we know that there is an anti-EU rump in the Labour party, not happy with the pro-EU direction taken by the leadership.
We also know that there are MPs who will be somewhat despairing that the alternative for the party leadership, to the current metropolitan liberal set is the Blairities, essentially just another group of metropolitan liberals. It would be like replacing Cameron with Boris because you were worried there were too many Old Etonians at the top of the Conservative party.
The defections from MPs take all the headlines, naturally, but I've also heard on here of a steady procession of defections to UKIP from the Conservatives at the local councillor level. Does anyone know whether there have been similar defections of Labour councillors to UKIP? Leaving aside the potential for a one-off maverick to do something unexpected, the existence or otherwise of defections at this level would give us an objective indicator of how likely a defection at MP level would be.
I think it will be difficult for UKIP to handle the contradiction of appealing to Labour and Tory voters, but far from impossible.
I'm going to be accused of being hoisted on my own petard here, but there is of course precedence for right-wing nationalist parties appealing to the working person's vote …
I think I'm rather alike to you Plato and, dare I say, quite a lot of people in this country. I went through Thatcherism, took the good points on board but disliked some of her harshness especially the poll tax so when Blair offered the same thing with a social conscience it seemed like a win-win. I'm painting in broad brush strokes, but that's where the majority of this country sit and it's where power is won or lost.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
"The rudeness of some people, and I'm sorry but it's often you-kippers, is the thing which drags the site down. Having a go at a party is one thing, getting personally insulting is another. There's really no need for it.
"I've honestly never encountered such a group of miserable whiners as the you-kippers on here."
Given how close you posted these two comments together it appears you've forgotten 'what you had for breakfast', I'm sure the good Dr Fox can help with an opinion.
Swiss 'Bob' you seem hell-bent on being rude to me and others. I'm not entirely sure what I've done to so upset you, but you could have bided your time and found a better example of me being contradictory. All you have done is to show your hand out of turn there.
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
I think I'm rather alike to you Plato and, dare I say, quite a lot of people in this country. I went through Thatcherism, took the good points on board but disliked some of her harshness especially the poll tax so when Blair offered the same thing with a social conscience it seemed like a win-win. I'm painting in broad brush strokes, but that's where the majority of this country sit and it's where power is won or lost.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
"The rudeness of some people, and I'm sorry but it's often you-kippers, is the thing which drags the site down. Having a go at a party is one thing, getting personally insulting is another. There's really no need for it.
"I've honestly never encountered such a group of miserable whiners as the you-kippers on here."
Given how close you posted these two comments together it appears you've forgotten 'what you had for breakfast', I'm sure the good Dr Fox can help with an opinion.
Swiss 'Bob' you seem hell-bent on being rude to me and others. I'm not entirely sure what I've done to so upset you, apart from disliking your party, but you could have bided your time and found a better example of me being contradictory. All you have done is to show your hand out of turn there.
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Its quite harsh to expect people to get up in the morning and go to work, and then hand over a chunk of money to pay someone else to sit on the sofa and play xbox as well. How is it savage to expect people to contribute to society in return for the largess its grants them ?
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
UKIP is led by right wing politician who have a couple of policies that are very popular at a time when the established parties are immensely unpopular and (rightly) perceived to be totally out of touch. Right now UKIP is riding the crest of a wave. That will not last forever.
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
I think I'm rather alike to you Plato and, dare I say, quite a lot of people in this country. I went through Thatcherism, took the good points on board but disliked some of her harshness especially the poll tax so when Blair offered the same thing with a social conscience it seemed like a win-win. I'm painting in broad brush strokes, but that's where the majority of this country sit and it's where power is won or lost.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
"The rudeness of some people, and I'm sorry but it's often you-kippers, is the thing which drags the site down. Having a go at a party is one thing, getting personally insulting is another. There's really no need for it.
"I've honestly never encountered such a group of miserable whiners as the you-kippers on here."
Given how close you posted these two comments together it appears you've forgotten 'what you had for breakfast', I'm sure the good Dr Fox can help with an opinion.
Swiss 'Bob' you seem hell-bent on being rude to me and others. I'm not entirely sure what I've done to so upset you, apart from disliking your party, but you could have bided your time and found a better example of me being contradictory. All you have done is to show your hand out of turn there.
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
audrey, on your very first day posting on here you insulted me personally several times because I disagreed with you, including saying that I shouldn't be allowed to have my profile name. You regularly insult UKIP people and engage in ad hominem attacks. You really are one of the last people that has a right to complain about this. I admit that I'm not perfect, but I only insult other posters after they already have form.
That Charles Moore piece MikeK linked was excellent:
Those who berate the Ukip nostalgists the most are those who most uncritically believe that the European Union is the future. .
There's a non sequitur there. Berating UKIP nostalgia does not mean one necessarily thinks the EU is the future. It is actually possible, you know, to conceive of a future with a Britain that is either loosely linked to the EU, or not at all, without having to subscribe to UKIP in general or UKIP nostalgia in particular. This will be an important point during the General Election and it will be remembered that it is Cameron who will be campaigning on a straight In-Out referendum.
Having said all this, the EU really isn't particularly important as a topic.
UK aren't the party of nostalgia. They want us to be a globalised country with FTAs with Brazil and India. They want the unprecedented step of a federal UK. They want the radical step of recall elections. It's because Tories don't understand (and don't bother to understand) UKIP's true position that they can't deal with them. You are the one being so nostalgic in assuming the UK will return to a two-party system. It won't. Pluralism is the new normal.
Is that UKIP's true position last week, this week or next week?
You're right that the UK won't return to a two-party system - there's too much 'anti-' voting to permit that - but UKIP is also limited by its pick-and-mix policies, which Farage is far too keen to change on a whim. The party has a strong core message and can make (and has made) a lot of progress based on that alone. But it can only get further by becoming more professional, and becoming more professional undermines one of its key selling points, namely being 'not the same as the rest'.
But pluralism is indeed the new normal. No party has a divine right to exist and there are plenty to mop up the votes of those doing poorly.
To be honest, I cannot say I've ever seen a house with three flags on it before either (2, yes, I have had 2 out myself), so merely saying that would probably have passed muster, but referring to as remarkable seemed to make it more of a total surprise rather than just an unusual number, and of course the white van set off people's snobbery alarms.
Typical metropolitan elite snobbery expressing surprise that you might want to display the flag of your country.
Her or me? The surprise I was referring to of hers which might have passed muster would be the number - when I put out 2 flags it was because one was the Union Flag and the other the English flag I should say - but referring that number being remarkable was what pushed it into snobbery territory, in conjunction with the white van.
I think I'm rather alike to you Plato and, dare I say, quite a lot of people in this country. I went through Thatcherism, took the good points on board but disliked some of her harshness especially the poll tax so when Blair offered the same thing with a social conscience it seemed like a win-win. I'm painting in broad brush strokes, but that's where the majority of this country sit and it's where power is won or lost.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
"The rudeness of some people, and I'm sorry but it's often you-kippers, is the thing which drags the site down. Having a go at a party is one thing, getting personally insulting is another. There's really no need for it.
"I've honestly never encountered such a group of miserable whiners as the you-kippers on here."
Given how close you posted these two comments together it appears you've forgotten 'what you had for breakfast', I'm sure the good Dr Fox can help with an opinion.
Swiss 'Bob' you seem hell-bent on being rude to me and others. I'm not entirely sure what I've done to so upset you, apart from disliking your party, but you could have bided your time and found a better example of me being contradictory. All you have done is to show your hand out of turn there.
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
I was responding to you, not to Plato.
You're moaning at me for being rude to you. Simple answer, stop insulting other people, especially with crass generalisation like the one just a few comments below ie UKIP=Nazis and then pretending you're holier than thou.
I think I'm rather alike to you Plato and, dare I say, quite a lot of people in this country. I went through Thatcherism, took the good points on board but disliked some of her harshness especially the poll tax so when Blair offered the same thing with a social conscience it seemed like a win-win. I'm painting in broad brush strokes, but that's where the majority of this country sit and it's where power is won or lost.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
"The rudeness of some people, and I'm sorry but it's often you-kippers, is the thing which drags the site down. Having a go at a party is one thing, getting personally insulting is another. There's really no need for it.
"I've honestly never encountered such a group of miserable whiners as the you-kippers on here."
Given how close you posted these two comments together it appears you've forgotten 'what you had for breakfast', I'm sure the good Dr Fox can help with an opinion.
Swiss 'Bob' you seem hell-bent on being rude to me and others. I'm not entirely sure what I've done to so upset you, apart from disliking your party, but you could have bided your time and found a better example of me being contradictory. All you have done is to show your hand out of turn there.
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
audrey, on your very first day posting on here you insulted me personally several times because I disagreed with you, including saying that I shouldn't be allowed to have my profile name. You regularly insult UKIP people and engage in ad hominem attacks. You really are one of the last people that has a right to complain about this. I admit that I'm not perfect, but I only insult other posters after they already have form.
The difference is that I don't insult individuals. I admit I take a pop at UKIP as a party and collectively, which seems fair game to me. Tories are subject to the same, and I take no offence if someone says 'you Tories are …'
Did I insult you? I'm sorry if so. Was that suggesting that you were rather less wise than your pseudonym?
Final Paragraph - On the Loonies. Their performance at by-elections in this Parliament, tabulated. Note that since the Loonies did not stand in any by-elections outside of England I have only listed the English by-elections, though I've left in the English by-elections which the Loonies did not contest.
Oldham East and Saddleworth 145 Barnsley Central 198 Leicester South 553 Feltham and Heston --- Bradford West 111 Corby --- Croydon North 110 Manchester Central 78 Middlesbrough --- Rotherham --- Eastleigh 136 South Shields 197 Wythenshawe and Sale East 288 Newark 168 Clacton 127 Heywood and Middleton --- Rochester and Strood 151
What do we make of this? The result for the Loonies in Rochester and Strood was pretty much par for the course for this Parliament. Although their best result came near the beginning of the Parliament, their second-best result was relatively recent, so there's no sign of a declining trend in the Loony vote as UKIP rise. Evidently there are some parts of the electorate that Farage simply can't reach...
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
That Charles Moore piece MikeK linked was excellent:
Those who berate the Ukip nostalgists the most are those who most uncritically believe that the European Union is the future. .
There's a non sequitur there. Berating UKIP nostalgia does not mean one necessarily thinks the EU is the future. It is actually possible, you know, to conceive of a future with a Britain that is either loosely linked to the EU, or not at all, without having to subscribe to UKIP in general or UKIP nostalgia in particular. This will be an important point during the General Election and it will be remembered that it is Cameron who will be campaigning on a straight In-Out referendum.
Having said all this, the EU really isn't particularly important as a topic.
UK aren't the party of nostalgia. They want us to be a globalised country with FTAs with Brazil and India. They want the unprecedented step of a federal UK. They want the radical step of recall elections. It's because Tories don't understand (and don't bother to understand) UKIP's true position that they can't deal with them. You are the one being so nostalgic in assuming the UK will return to a two-party system. It won't. Pluralism is the new normal.
Is that UKIP's true position last week, this week or next week?
You're right that the UK won't return to a two-party system - there's too much 'anti-' voting to permit that - but UKIP is also limited by its pick-and-mix policies, which Farage is far too keen to change on a whim. The party has a strong core message and can make (and has made) a lot of progress based on that alone. But it can only get further by becoming more professional, and becoming more professional undermines one of its key selling points, namely being 'not the same as the rest'.
But pluralism is indeed the new normal. No party has a divine right to exist and there are plenty to mop up the votes of those doing poorly.
Farage has already said he doesn't want to run the country, but he does want to get the country out of the EU, the catch is that without votes you have no credibility, and you cant get enough votes as a single issue party, so you are forced to develop a platform about all sorts of things that you dont really care about, so you can get some votes, win some seats and try and effect what you actually want to do.
It looks like exactly the same thing is happening in Germany, AfD was originally another single issued anti-Euro (rather than anti-EU) party, but they hit a road block in terms of winning votes, and hence seats, and hence influence, so now they have also broadened their program to be anti-immigrant, law and order, education based.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
How do such harsh policies of benefit withdrawal fit with Repealing the bedroom tax? Would unemployed in the Welsh valleys be moved to the fields of East Anglia if they cannot find work locally?
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
I think I'm rather alike to you Plato and, dare I say, quite a lot of people in this country. I went through Thatcherism, took the good points on board but disliked some of her harshness especially the poll tax so when Blair offered the same thing with a social conscience it seemed like a win-win. I'm painting in broad brush strokes, but that's where the majority of this country sit and it's where power is won or lost.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
"The rudeness of some people, and I'm sorry but it's often you-kippers, is the thing which drags the site down. Having a go at a party is one thing, getting personally insulting is another. There's really no need for it.
"I've honestly never encountered such a group of miserable whiners as the you-kippers on here."
Given how close you posted these two comments together it appears you've forgotten 'what you had for breakfast', I'm sure the good Dr Fox can help with an opinion.
Swiss 'Bob' you seem hell-bent on being rude to me and others. I'm not entirely sure what I've done to so upset you, apart from disliking your party, but you could have bided your time and found a better example of me being contradictory. All you have done is to show your hand out of turn there.
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
audrey, on your very first day posting on here you insulted me personally several times because I disagreed with you, including saying that I shouldn't be allowed to have my profile name. You regularly insult UKIP people and engage in ad hominem attacks. You really are one of the last people that has a right to complain about this. I admit that I'm not perfect, but I only insult other posters after they already have form.
The difference is that I don't insult individuals. I admit I take a pop at UKIP as a party and collectively, which seems fair game to me. Tories are subject to the same, and I take no offence if someone says 'you Tories are …'
Did I insult you? I'm sorry if so. Was that suggesting that you were rather less wise than your pseudonym?
No you didn't insult me. You regularly insult UKIP supports here, one example of which I quoted.
It's your hypocrisy, as I stated down thread when you made the original comment but you disappeared without reply, only to reappear sometime later. . .
To be honest, I cannot say I've ever seen a house with three flags on it before either (2, yes, I have had 2 out myself), so merely saying that would probably have passed muster, but referring to as remarkable seemed to make it more of a total surprise rather than just an unusual number, and of course the white van set off people's snobbery alarms.
Typical metropolitan elite snobbery expressing surprise that you might want to display the flag of your country.
Her or me? The surprise I was referring to of hers which might have passed muster would be the number - when I put out 2 flags it was because one was the Union Flag and the other the English flag I should say - but referring that number being remarkable was what pushed it into snobbery territory, in conjunction with the white van.
If all those who do not regularly see three England flags hanging from windows are part of the metropolitan elite then we live in a strange country: one in which 95% of the population is part of the elite.
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
Love it! I use 'gosh' a lot, for similar reasons.
Oops is effective for those occasions such as dropping things when in relaxed circumstances one would use an expletive, I can attest to that. Oopsie Daisy seems to take it too far though.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
UKIP is led by right wing politician who have a couple of policies that are very popular at a time when the established parties are immensely unpopular and (rightly) perceived to be totally out of touch. Right now UKIP is riding the crest of a wave. That will not last forever.
I agree with a lot of your post about the Working Class, and the stereotypes falsely placed on it, but don't you think your point about Farage/UKIP being right wing, which you seem to consider a bit of an ace up your sleeve, is implicitly stereotyping the working class as left wing?
I feel it's an existential, visceral gap now - not one of being simply a bit pissed off.
The Tories had it for a long time - Hell, I didn't touch them with a bargepole for 20yrs. I know I'm not very representative of anything bar a fickle voter - but I really do get the Kipper appeal. I understand White Van Man without patronising him or his other half. I come from the same stock, I just disguise it well as I was lucky enough to be exposed to a bit more of life by my very Boho mother.
I want a bit of Hang'em and Flog'em, think we've too many unproductive/culturally alien immigrants - I don't mind if you don't like multi-culti or gay marriage or a load of other things like smoking in saloon bars. Or being very unPC. Or being big on Defence. And Iike sovereignty - a lot, and a huge English patriot.
But I'm a liberally-minded Wet Tory/Blairite too when it comes social issues. So a complete split personality. If I was 18yrs old again - I'd be a Kipper at heart - but a Tory Head at the ballot box. I think I've come full circle over 30yrs.
To be honest, I cannot say I've ever seen a house with three flags on it before either (2, yes, I have had 2 out myself), so merely saying that would probably have passed muster, but referring to as remarkable seemed to make it more of a total surprise rather than just an unusual number, and of course the white van set off people's snobbery alarms.
Typical metropolitan elite snobbery expressing surprise that you might want to display the flag of your country.
Her or me? The surprise I was referring to of hers which might have passed muster would be the number - when I put out 2 flags it was because one was the Union Flag and the other the English flag I should say - but referring that number being remarkable was what pushed it into snobbery territory, in conjunction with the white van.
Hers.
I hope when you put out the Union Flag and the Crusader flag together you ensured the Union Flag had the correct, superior position (I think it should be flown above or to the left of another flag).
Yes, UKIP's by-election victory is a clear indication that they are on their last legs. I don't know why they even bother really. In the face of the Tory's magnificent second place, compared with UKIP's pathetic 1st place, it really is brandy and revolver time for Farage.
The absolute crap I have read on here over the last few days about the "white working class" really is extraordinary. To start with, the idea that the group as a whole is synonymous with people who drive white vans, are covered in tattoos and have England flags hanging out their windows is utterly ridiculous. There are far more working class people employed by the state - but for some reason they seem not to count. Neither, presumably, do the ones who are vilified on here regularly for going on strike to protect their jobs, wages and conditions - they are a vested interest. And what about the 50% of WWC people who are female?
Politicians of all kinds - including those from UKIP - are primarily middle class and have absolutely no clue. Emily Thornberry demonstrated that, as did Ed Miliband in his absurd over-reaction to what she did, as did David Cameron and as have so many others. The working class is as multi-faceted as any other class in this country. It has been left behind and it has been taken for granted and it has been ignored - depending on who has been in power.
Some working class people are intensely patriotic, some are not; most are like everyone else - they wave the flag at certain times of the year or on certain occasion, and put it away for the rest of the time. They are not defined by liking the scouts, or supporting their local football team, or any other activity that we may or may not approve of. Mostly, and just like everyone else, they work their arses off, look forward to their holidays, aspire for better things for themselves and their kids, and just want to get on with life. And just like everyone else, they don't think much of politicians who pretend to do their weekly shop at Morrison's or who ostentatiously fly on budget airlines or who claim to go weak-kneed at the sight of an England flag flying from a window. They know when they are being sold a pup, which is why so many of them are disengaged from politics.
UKIP undeniably has a chance to ta into a deep well of disenchantment, but the people who lead the party are almost entirely right wing Thatcherites who at some stage are going to have to start looking beyond immigration and the EU if they wish to make a lasting mark. Whether they are capable of doing that and turning UKIP into something that goes beyond a party of protest remains to be seen.
UKIP will collapse in a heap. I am only hoping it will be after May 2015 !
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
Love it! I use 'gosh' a lot, for similar reasons.
Oops is effective for those occasions such as dropping things when in relaxed circumstances one would use an expletive, I can attest to that. Oopsie Daisy seems to take it too far though.
Haha!!! Indeed. Also I can't now hear 'Oopsie Daisy' (or ? Whoopsie Daisy) without seeing and hearing Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New York: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IXwmlkriqc
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Once again I have to point out I am not a UKIP supporter,
My suggestion had both carrot and stick in it. We will retrain you properly for a job in your capabilities. If you are still sitting on your sofa however after three years then your welfare goes down to a subsistence level. You have a roof over your head, you have food on the table but if you want life's luxuries such as 99 channels of sky then get off your arse and work for them like the people you are leeching off.
Many unemployed people enjoy a standard of living equal to or exceeding those who work for a living currently. A friend of mine is a case in point. He is single has worked all his life but is on minimum wage. He recently had to make a choice between downsizing his accomodation from a pokey little one bedroom flat to a bedsit or get rid of his car as he couldn't afford both. So at age 50 he is now the proud inhabitant of a bedsit as he needs his car to get to work. If he had gone on the dole however his flat would have been paid for, his council tax would have been paltry and he wouldn't need the car. By his calculations he would be about 10£ a week better off. Can you honestly sit there and tell him that is right? The welfare state is meant to be a safety net. Those who are on it year after year have made a lifestyle choice because they can have a reasonable standard of living.
If you are able to work there is no reason on earth that you should be on the welfare for years and my proposal offered training for real jobs which is the barrier to many
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
UKIP is led by right wing politician who have a couple of policies that are very popular at a time when the established parties are immensely unpopular and (rightly) perceived to be totally out of touch. Right now UKIP is riding the crest of a wave. That will not last forever.
I agree with a lot of your post about the Working Class, and the stereotypes falsely placed on it, but don't you think your point about Farage/UKIP being right wing, which you seem to consider a bit of an ace up your sleeve, is implicitly stereotyping the working class as left wing?
Nope - my point was more about UKIP being able to tap into dissatisfied working class Labour support. Traditionally, there has always been a working class right wing vote. The Tories lost it some time in the 90s. It is this that UKIP is most likely to tap into long-term in my view.
Thanks to all who came to Dirty Dicks last night - great fun, as ever, and lots of new faces. Nice to see Peter the Punter in a rather "daring" yet tasteful outfit, and he has very good legs a for a man of his age.
We need photographic proof ... or might that crash the site ?
I couldn't agree more JackW; we all need to see that stately and leggy form for the joy of all PBers. Come on PtP, drop 'em!
Final Paragraph - On the Loonies. Their performance at by-elections in this Parliament, tabulated. Note that since the Loonies did not stand in any by-elections outside of England I have only listed the English by-elections, though I've left in the English by-elections which the Loonies did not contest.
Oldham East and Saddleworth 145 Barnsley Central 198 Leicester South 553 Feltham and Heston --- Bradford West 111 Corby --- Croydon North 110 Manchester Central 78 Middlesbrough --- Rotherham --- Eastleigh 136 South Shields 197 Wythenshawe and Sale East 288 Newark 168 Clacton 127 Heywood and Middleton --- Rochester and Strood 151
What do we make of this? The result for the Loonies in Rochester and Strood was pretty much par for the course for this Parliament. Although their best result came near the beginning of the Parliament, their second-best result was relatively recent, so there's no sign of a declining trend in the Loony vote as UKIP rise. Evidently there are some parts of the electorate that Farage simply can't reach...
Leics South is quite a student/junior faculty area! I used to vote their myself.
The difference is that I don't insult individuals. I admit I take a pop at UKIP as a party and collectively, which seems fair game to me. Tories are subject to the same, and I take no offence if someone says 'you Tories are …'
Did I insult you? I'm sorry if so. Was that suggesting that you were rather less wise than your pseudonym?
Often you accuse UKIP posters on here, as a group, of being things like "vile". Even if you're not referencing specific individuals, you often do it on a thread when one or two have been posting, which makes it quite clear who you're aiming the personal insult at.
You said several things about me lacking intelligence and "not being fit" to have my pseudonym. Anyway, your graceful apology is accepted. Let's move on.
Final Paragraph - On the Loonies. Their performance at by-elections in this Parliament, tabulated. Note that since the Loonies did not stand in any by-elections outside of England I have only listed the English by-elections, though I've left in the English by-elections which the Loonies did not contest.
Oldham East and Saddleworth 145 Barnsley Central 198 Leicester South 553 Feltham and Heston --- Bradford West 111 Corby --- Croydon North 110 Manchester Central 78 Middlesbrough --- Rotherham --- Eastleigh 136 South Shields 197 Wythenshawe and Sale East 288 Newark 168 Clacton 127 Heywood and Middleton --- Rochester and Strood 151
What do we make of this? The result for the Loonies in Rochester and Strood was pretty much par for the course for this Parliament. Although their best result came near the beginning of the Parliament, their second-best result was relatively recent, so there's no sign of a declining trend in the Loony vote as UKIP rise. Evidently there are some parts of the electorate that Farage simply can't reach...
To be honest, I cannot say I've ever seen a house with three flags on it before either (2, yes, I have had 2 out myself), so merely saying that would probably have passed muster, but referring to as remarkable seemed to make it more of a total surprise rather than just an unusual number, and of course the white van set off people's snobbery alarms.
Typical metropolitan elite snobbery expressing surprise that you might want to display the flag of your country.
Her or me? The surprise I was referring to of hers which might have passed muster would be the number - when I put out 2 flags it was because one was the Union Flag and the other the English flag I should say - but referring that number being remarkable was what pushed it into snobbery territory, in conjunction with the white van.
If all those who do not regularly see three England flags hanging from windows are part of the metropolitan elite then we live in a strange country: one in which 95% of the population is part of the elite.
Well quite. As someone who has hanged more than one flag outside my house and yet never seen three outside a single house before, the line of acceptable snobbery would to me seem pretty thin. A reaction of 'huh, never seen three outside a house before *shrug*' and 'My gods, three outside one house, that's remarkable, I feel like a zoologist exploring a strange new world!' seems to be it, or which extreme one is seen to sound like. Being a rich lefty who described it as in essence astonishing put Thornberry toward the latter.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
How do such harsh policies of benefit withdrawal fit with Repealing the bedroom tax? Would unemployed in the Welsh valleys be moved to the fields of East Anglia if they cannot find work locally?
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
I said right at the start that I wasn't speaking for UKIP
And you expressly said "locally" so obviously the Wales/East Anglia thing is absolute nonsense
And I never said axe the welfare state, I just think people qualified to do jobs that are available should do them part time until they find a job they want full time, while still getting benefits.
I feel it's an existential, visceral gap now - not one of being simply a bit pissed off.
The Tories had it for a long time - Hell, I didn't touch them with a bargepole for 20yrs. I know I'm not very representative of anything bar a fickle voter - but I really do get the Kipper appeal. I understand White Van Man without patronising him or his other half. I come from the same stock, I just disguise it well as I was lucky enough to be exposed to a bit more of life by my very Boho mother.
I want a bit of Hang'em and Flog'em, think we've too many unproductive/culturally alien immigrants - I don't mind if you don't like multi-culti or gay marriage or a load of other things like smoking in saloon bars. Or being very unPC. Or being big on Defence. And Iike sovereignty - a lot, and a huge English patriot.
But I'm a liberally-minded Wet Tory/Blairite too when it comes social issues. So a complete split personality. If I was 18yrs old again - I'd be a Kipper at heart - but a Tory Head at the ballot box. I think I've come full circle over 30yrs.
If Miliband wants to win back white man van he could start by:
- Supporting an English parliament - Limiting mass immigration - Winning back powers from Brussels - Abolishing anti-white job quotas as a policy
Will he do any of those things? Will he hell.
Finally you [Plato] have allowed yourself to be exposed for what you truly are. The rest of us , unsurprisingly, knew that already.
There is a simple word to describe you. The law of the land [ and in consideration of Mike ] prevents me from writing it.
You see, it's comments like that which just cross a boundary. I'm sorry folks, but there's no need for it. It seems to happen all the time on Guido but that's just being horrid. Plato's comment was a heartfelt resume of where she is at, and I suggest it's actually where a lot of people are at given that Blair so successfully tapped it.
Right, time to listen to some Will Todd whilst I attend to the lighting issues on my spiral staircase.
I suppose you think you are funny Swiss Bob. But you just reveal yourself as crass. Your hatred of women shines through. Like the good kipper you are. And of course if you can portray fat women as hateful so much the better. if you want to vent your spleen in this way then you just have to put up with being called an oaf. A nasty thick oaf who hardly enhances the intellect of the site. Someone left it yesterday and I don't blame him. Congratulations for reinforcing the stereotype of the typical kipper, how fortunate for you that your party does not care tuppence.
Final Paragraph - On the Loonies. Their performance at by-elections in this Parliament, tabulated. Note that since the Loonies did not stand in any by-elections outside of England I have only listed the English by-elections, though I've left in the English by-elections which the Loonies did not contest.
Oldham East and Saddleworth 145 Barnsley Central 198 Leicester South 553 Feltham and Heston --- Bradford West 111 Corby --- Croydon North 110 Manchester Central 78 Middlesbrough --- Rotherham --- Eastleigh 136 South Shields 197 Wythenshawe and Sale East 288 Newark 168 Clacton 127 Heywood and Middleton --- Rochester and Strood 151
What do we make of this? The result for the Loonies in Rochester and Strood was pretty much par for the course for this Parliament. Although their best result came near the beginning of the Parliament, their second-best result was relatively recent, so there's no sign of a declining trend in the Loony vote as UKIP rise. Evidently there are some parts of the electorate that Farage simply can't reach...
Leics South is quite a student/junior faculty area! I used to vote their myself.
Me too, though it was as a student and I fell between GEs, so it was for the Euros.
To be honest, I cannot say I've ever seen a house with three flags on it before either (2, yes, I have had 2 out myself), so merely saying that would probably have passed muster, but referring to as remarkable seemed to make it more of a total surprise rather than just an unusual number, and of course the white van set off people's snobbery alarms.
Typical metropolitan elite snobbery expressing surprise that you might want to display the flag of your country.
Her or me? The surprise I was referring to of hers which might have passed muster would be the number - when I put out 2 flags it was because one was the Union Flag and the other the English flag I should say - but referring that number being remarkable was what pushed it into snobbery territory, in conjunction with the white van.
If all those who do not regularly see three England flags hanging from windows are part of the metropolitan elite then we live in a strange country: one in which 95% of the population is part of the elite.
Well quite. As someone who has hanged more than one flag outside my house and yet never seen three outside a single house before, the line of acceptable snobbery would to me seem pretty thin. A reaction of 'huh, never seen three outside a house before *shrug*' and 'My gods, three outside one house, that's remarkable, I feel like a zoologist exploring a strange new world!' seems to be it, or which extreme one is seen to sound like. Being a rich lefty who described it as in essence astonishing put Thornberry toward the latter.
There is so much dishonesty around this whole issue. Those condemning Thornberry are recognising that they also saw something a little peculiar in that photo. Otherwise, how would they have been able to make a judgement about her motives?
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
How do such harsh policies of benefit withdrawal fit with Repealing the bedroom tax? Would unemployed in the Welsh valleys be moved to the fields of East Anglia if they cannot find work locally?
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
I said right at the start that I wasn't speaking for UKIP
And you expressly said "locally" so obviously the Wales/East Anglia thing is absolute nonsense
And I never said axe the welfare state, I just think people qualified to do jobs that are available should do them part time until they find a job they want full time, while still getting benefits.
If you think that is harsh then fair enough.
All I want is for it to be honestly expounded as a policy so that people can see what they vote for.
Reckless now opposes the Bedroom tax and opposes NHS privatisation. Is this a heartfelt conversion or voter deception? His position on deporting migrants does seem to differ from his party too, or so his comments post election imply.
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
Love it! I use 'gosh' a lot, for similar reasons.
Oops is effective for those occasions such as dropping things when in relaxed circumstances one would use an expletive, I can attest to that. Oopsie Daisy seems to take it too far though.
We had a swear jar at work for a long time, 20p for standard stuff, £1 for real anglo saxon language. It developed its own lingo so we would describe people and situations as 20 pences. I still say it sometimes.
Does David's excellent piece not come down to this: that politics is going to start getting serious again as we enter the new year and that people are likely, reluctantly, to start getting serious about it?
We have had our fun with those pointless Euros, with irrelevant local government and with the odd by election but soon we have to choose a PM to lead this country for another 5 years. The choice may be exasperating and limited, it may be frustrating and, on some issues seem like no choice at all because it is not easy to get fag paper (if they are still allowed in this puritanical age) between the main parties' positions but the choice essentially comes down to Cameron or Miliband.
And for anyone who is serious about the future of this country that is no choice at all.
I suppose you think you are funny Swiss Bob. But you just reveal yourself as crass. Your hatred of women shines through. Like the good kipper you are. And of course if you can portray fat women as hateful so much the better. if you want to vent your spleen in this way then you just have to put up with being called an oaf. A nasty thick oaf who hardly enhances the intellect of the site. Someone left it yesterday and I don't blame him. Congratulations for reinforcing the stereotype of the typical kipper, how fortunate for you that your party does not care tuppence.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
UKIP is led by right wing politician who have a couple of policies that are very popular at a time when the established parties are immensely unpopular and (rightly) perceived to be totally out of touch. Right now UKIP is riding the crest of a wave. That will not last forever.
I agree with a lot of your post about the Working Class, and the stereotypes falsely placed on it, but don't you think your point about Farage/UKIP being right wing, which you seem to consider a bit of an ace up your sleeve, is implicitly stereotyping the working class as left wing?
Nope - my point was more about UKIP being able to tap into dissatisfied working class Labour support. Traditionally, there has always been a working class right wing vote. The Tories lost it some time in the 90s. It is this that UKIP is most likely to tap into long-term in my view.
If the WC right wing vote moves more or less permanently to UKIP, there are not going to be enough liberals for Labour and the Tories to fight over, and have any chance of a majority. To some extent the Tories are able to move right and reattach the shire/golfclub vote, which will become less enamoured with UKIP as it becomes more WC orientated, they may even make a directly eurosceptic offering. Not sure what Labour does, if the WC mostly decamps to UKIP, it can try and move right and pick them up and lose all the metropolitans to the Green Party (which is an oddly authoritarian place for a liberal to go to), or they can try and fight it out with the greens.
Incidentally if the Tories lose next May, what's the odds of them dumping Dave and going for a full on Eurosceptic platform, pick a BOO leader, and try and grab the WC right wing vote from UKIP and reattach the Shire Tories.
I feel it's an existential, visceral gap now - not one of being simply a bit pissed off.
The Tories had it for a long time - Hell, I didn't touch them with a bargepole for 20yrs. I know I'm not very representative of anything bar a fickle voter - but I really do get the Kipper appeal. I understand White Van Man without patronising him or his other half. I come from the same stock, I just disguise it well as I was lucky enough to be exposed to a bit more of life by my very Boho mother.
I want a bit of Hang'em and Flog'em, think we've too many unproductive/culturally alien immigrants - I don't mind if you don't like multi-culti or gay marriage or a load of other things like smoking in saloon bars. Or being very unPC. Or being big on Defence. And Iike sovereignty - a lot, and a huge English patriot.
But I'm a liberally-minded Wet Tory/Blairite too when it comes social issues. So a complete split personality. If I was 18yrs old again - I'd be a Kipper at heart - but a Tory Head at the ballot box. I think I've come full circle over 30yrs.
Studying the 1920s/30s in Europe. Neo Nasty parties on the right appealled prodominantly to working class electorate due to propogating a mix of fear of the outsiders and popularlist simple policies. That is not to say there were a sprinkling of middle and aristrocratic supporters. For example some of the followers of Mosley. I predict that come the GE the UKIP vote will hold better in areas where there is a larger white working class electorate than for instance the shire counties. This will probably be more at the expense of Lab than Con
I feel it's an existential, visceral gap now - not one of being simply a bit pissed off.
The Tories had it for a long time - Hell, I didn't touch them with a bargepole for 20yrs. I know I'm not very representative of anything bar a fickle voter - but I really do get the Kipper appeal. I understand White Van Man without patronising him or his other half. I come from the same stock, I just disguise it well as I was lucky enough to be exposed to a bit more of life by my very Boho mother.
I want a bit of Hang'em and Flog'em, think we've too many unproductive/culturally alien immigrants - I don't mind if you don't like multi-culti or gay marriage or a load of other things like smoking in saloon bars. Or being very unPC. Or being big on Defence. And Iike sovereignty - a lot, and a huge English patriot.
But I'm a liberally-minded Wet Tory/Blairite too when it comes social issues. So a complete split personality. If I was 18yrs old again - I'd be a Kipper at heart - but a Tory Head at the ballot box. I think I've come full circle over 30yrs.
Well quite. As someone who has hanged more than one flag outside my house and yet never seen three outside a single house before, the line of acceptable snobbery would to me seem pretty thin.
I think flags (unlike people) are hung rather than hanged. Hope you appreciate the pedantry.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
How do such harsh policies of benefit withdrawal fit with Repealing the bedroom tax? Would unemployed in the Welsh valleys be moved to the fields of East Anglia if they cannot find work locally?
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
I said right at the start that I wasn't speaking for UKIP
And you expressly said "locally" so obviously the Wales/East Anglia thing is absolute nonsense
And I never said axe the welfare state, I just think people qualified to do jobs that are available should do them part time until they find a job they want full time, while still getting benefits.
If you think that is harsh then fair enough.
People seem resistant to taking a part time job as part of a jobsearch strategy (a) you may be better off than on benefits even if the income isn't sustainable long term (b) you still have time to look for other jobs (c) it is easier to get offered jobs when you are currently employed (d) if you are lucky the part-time job may become full-time.
The oddest experience I ever had at my all girls public school was a supply RE teacher called Mrs Mukaghee. An English lady who'd gone the whole hog when it came to adopting her husband's culture.
She wore a sari, and then attempted to explain why she put dirt from the floor on her hair as a sign of respect/deference to her husband.
We were about 13yrs old and looked at each other with WTF on our faces. All our other teachers were Old Girls, Jolly Hockey Knee-Cappers who told us we should wear the trousers all the time/never underestimate ourselves. They were formidable.
Seeing up close a woman who'd gone back several centuries was bizarre. I can only assume this is quite common in some faith schools nowadays.
Needless to say, Mrs M never taught us another lesson.
Yes, UKIP's by-election victory is a clear indication that they are on their last legs. I don't know why they even bother really. In the face of the Tory's magnificent second place, compared with UKIP's pathetic 1st place, it really is brandy and revolver time for Farage.
'Doing well' and 'getting better' are two different, if often related, things - as are 'doing badly' and 'getting worse'.
For example, the Conservatives hit their nadir in terms of share of the vote in 1995. Both opinion polling and local election results support that time. However, due to the long cycles over which politics operates, despite doing better in 1996 than 1995, the Tories still lost a huge number of councillors (coming off 1992 - a very good year - didn't help); 1997 was obviously a disaster for the party at the GE but it would have been even worse two years earlier; the next six to eight years can all be categorised as recovery / improvement but it wasn't until at least 2006 that the Conservatives could be said to be doing well.
UKIP is doing well. It will continue to make council gains next year and probably in 2016 too. It will score by far its best ever GE performance and is likely to win a small number of seats. Even so, I think they hit their peak last month.
the choice essentially comes down to Cameron or Miliband.
And for anyone who is serious about the future of this country that is no choice at all.
Given the limitations that will be placed on either of them through financial realities, while I will not pretend it would make no difference, I don't think either would be capable of being significantly more a disaster than the other on the big things.
Reckless now opposes the Bedroom tax and opposes NHS privatisation. Is this a heartfelt conversion or voter deception? His position on deporting migrants does seem to differ from his party too, or so his comments post election imply.
Actually it sounded to me like he was trying to toe the line of his new party, and the line was changed on him when it didn't fly in the way it was expected. We dont know if Reckless personally supports or opposes the Bedroom Tax, he might simply be trying to represent the line-to-take of first his old, then his new party.
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
Love it! I use 'gosh' a lot, for similar reasons.
Oops is effective for those occasions such as dropping things when in relaxed circumstances one would use an expletive, I can attest to that. Oopsie Daisy seems to take it too far though.
We had a swear jar at work for a long time, 20p for standard stuff, £1 for real anglo saxon language. It developed its own lingo so we would describe people and situations as 20 pences. I still say it sometimes.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
UKIP is led by right wing politician who have a couple of policies that are very popular at a time when the established parties are immensely unpopular and (rightly) perceived to be totally out of touch. Right now UKIP is riding the crest of a wave. That will not last forever.
I agree with a lot of your post about the Working Class, and the stereotypes falsely placed on it, but don't you think your point about Farage/UKIP being right wing, which you seem to consider a bit of an ace up your sleeve, is implicitly stereotyping the working class as left wing?
Nope - my point was more about UKIP being able to tap into dissatisfied working class Labour support. Traditionally, there has always been a working class right wing vote. The Tories lost it some time in the 90s. It is this that UKIP is most likely to tap into long-term in my view.
If the WC right wing vote moves more or less permanently to UKIP, there are not going to be enough liberals for Labour and the Tories to fight over, and have any chance of a majority. To some extent the Tories are able to move right and reattach the shire/golfclub vote, which will become less enamoured with UKIP as it becomes more WC orientated, they may even make a directly eurosceptic offering. Not sure what Labour does, if the WC mostly decamps to UKIP, it can try and move right and pick them up and lose all the metropolitans to the Green Party (which is an oddly authoritarian place for a liberal to go to), or they can try and fight it out with the greens.
Incidentally if the Tories lose next May, what's the odds of them dumping Dave and going for a full on Eurosceptic platform, pick a BOO leader, and try and grab the WC right wing vote from UKIP and reattach the Shire Tories.
Labour won elections when there was a sizeable working class Tory vote. It can do so in the future. But not under Ed Miliband.
Thanks to all who came to Dirty Dicks last night - great fun, as ever, and lots of new faces. Nice to see Peter the Punter in a rather "daring" yet tasteful outfit, and he has very good legs a for a man of his age.
I didn't think the service at the bar was that great last night - Perhaps prior to the next gathering we can canvass opinions on location.
@Fat_Steve There is a good Pub on the corner of Shaftbury Ave and Charing Cross Road where I once paid back a betting debt to JohnO.
The Cambridge 93 Charing Cross Rd London WC2H 0DP United Kingdom
Not far from the Coach and Horses but that gone vegetarian.
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
Sean Thomas has written on here that being a Muslim may eventually be seen as incompatible with living in an EC country. I like living in a country with tolerance but some Muslims are stretching that tolerance. I also like having schools with a Christian ethos but we may have to have only secular schools because of the abuses by some Muslims.
The oddest experience I ever had at my all girls public school was a supply RE teacher called Mrs Mukaghee. An English lady who'd gone the whole hog when it came to adopting her husband's culture.
She wore a sari, and then attempted to explain why she put dirt from the floor on her hair as a sign of respect/deference to her husband.
We were about 13yrs old and looked at each other with WTF on our faces. All our other teachers were Old Girls, Jolly Hockey Knee-Cappers who told us we should wear the trousers all the time/never underestimate ourselves. They were formidable.
Seeing up close a woman who'd gone back several centuries was bizarre. I can only assume this is quite common in some faith schools nowadays.
Needless to say, Mrs M never taught us another lesson.
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
When UKIP supporters like me and Labour supporters like Southam can agree that these schools should be closed down, why is the government just saying "improvement is needed"?
It's stunning that combatting intolerance is considered important enough to the Tories that they should start limiting free speech, but not important enough to close down extremist schools?
The choice may be exasperating and limited, it may be frustrating and, on some issues seem like no choice at all because it is not easy to get fag paper (if they are still allowed in this puritanical age) between the main parties' positions but the choice essentially comes down to Cameron or Miliband.
And for anyone who is serious about the future of this country that is no choice at all.
Otoh (unless I read you wrong), you're considering voting SLab to preserve the Union, so the choice isn't that binary.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
How do such harsh policies of benefit withdrawal fit with Repealing the bedroom tax? Would unemployed in the Welsh valleys be moved to the fields of East Anglia if they cannot find work locally?
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
I said right at the start that I wasn't speaking for UKIP
And you expressly said "locally" so obviously the Wales/East Anglia thing is absolute nonsense
And I never said axe the welfare state, I just think people qualified to do jobs that are available should do them part time until they find a job they want full time, while still getting benefits.
If you think that is harsh then fair enough.
All I want is for it to be honestly expounded as a policy so that people can see what they vote for.
Reckless now opposes the Bedroom tax and opposes NHS privatisation. Is this a heartfelt conversion or voter deception? His position on deporting migrants does seem to differ from his party too, or so his comments post election imply.
Well if I become the UKIP spokesman for Welfare I will do it! Until then its just my view, and you shouldn't keep ignoring the fact that I keep pointing that out
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
Love it! I use 'gosh' a lot, for similar reasons.
Oops is effective for those occasions such as dropping things when in relaxed circumstances one would use an expletive, I can attest to that. Oopsie Daisy seems to take it too far though.
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
Sean Thomas has written on here that being a Muslim may eventually be seen as incompatible with living in an EC country. I like living in a country with tolerance but some Muslims are stretching that tolerance. I also like having schools with a Christian ethos but we may have to have only secular schools because of the abuses by some Muslims.
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
Sean Thomas has written on here that being a Muslim may eventually be seen as incompatible with living in an EC country. I like living in a country with tolerance but some Muslims are stretching that tolerance. I also like having schools with a Christian ethos but we may have to have only secular schools because of the abuses by some Muslims.
You don't need to close down Christian schools. Just close the ones down where extremist views have been taught. You'd get rid of almost all the Muslim ones pretty quickly, barely any Christian ones, and wouldn't be breaking any discriminatory laws. Job done.
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
Love it! I use 'gosh' a lot, for similar reasons.
Oops is effective for those occasions such as dropping things when in relaxed circumstances one would use an expletive, I can attest to that. Oopsie Daisy seems to take it too far though.
We had a swear jar at work for a long time, 20p for standard stuff, £1 for real anglo saxon language. It developed its own lingo so we would describe people and situations as 20 pences. I still say it sometimes.
You cant be taking seriously in any form . Smithson has made the point many times he has lost more money on UKIP than any other party . That was before his latest loses . But the hits on ukip speaking from the pocket are just a joke .
I feel it's an existential, visceral gap now - not one of being simply a bit pissed off.
The Tories had it for a long time - Hell, I didn't touch them with a bargepole for 20yrs. I know I'm not very representative of anything bar a fickle voter - but I really do get the Kipper appeal. I understand White Van Man without patronising him or his other half. I come from the same stock, I just disguise it well as I was lucky enough to be exposed to a bit more of life by my very Boho mother.
I want a bit of Hang'em and Flog'em, think we've too many unproductive/culturally alien immigrants - I don't mind if you don't like multi-culti or gay marriage or a load of other things like smoking in saloon bars. Or being very unPC. Or being big on Defence. And Iike sovereignty - a lot, and a huge English patriot.
But I'm a liberally-minded Wet Tory/Blairite too when it comes social issues. So a complete split personality. If I was 18yrs old again - I'd be a Kipper at heart - but a Tory Head at the ballot box. I think I've come full circle over 30yrs.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
How do such harsh policies of benefit withdrawal fit with Repealing the bedroom tax? Would unemployed in the Welsh valleys be moved to the fields of East Anglia if they cannot find work locally?
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
I said right at the start that I wasn't speaking for UKIP
And you expressly said "locally" so obviously the Wales/East Anglia thing is absolute nonsense
And I never said axe the welfare state, I just think people qualified to do jobs that are available should do them part time until they find a job they want full time, while still getting benefits.
If you think that is harsh then fair enough.
People seem resistant to taking a part time job as part of a jobsearch strategy (a) you may be better off than on benefits even if the income isn't sustainable long term (b) you still have time to look for other jobs (c) it is easier to get offered jobs when you are currently employed (d) if you are lucky the part-time job may become full-time.
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
Sean Thomas has written on here that being a Muslim may eventually be seen as incompatible with living in an EC country. I like living in a country with tolerance but some Muslims are stretching that tolerance. I also like having schools with a Christian ethos but we may have to have only secular schools because of the abuses by some Muslims.
We have to disentangle race and religion before we will be able to take that step, with current equality laws we couldn't even talk about it lawfully in all but the most circular terms. We need to return to robust free speech, where citizens can say what concerns them without worrying about being arrested, and other people can disagree just as robustly if it suits them. People need to grow a thicker skin. To paraphrase The Joker "This country needs an enema".
Yes, UKIP's by-election victory is a clear indication that they are on their last legs. I don't know why they even bother really. In the face of the Tory's magnificent second place, compared with UKIP's pathetic 1st place, it really is brandy and revolver time for Farage.
UKIP is doing well. It will continue to make council gains next year and probably in 2016 too. It will score by far its best ever GE performance and is likely to win a small number of seats. Even so, I think they hit their peak last month.
I reckon their average poll rating sneaked up to about 17% in the second half of October, it has now fallen back to about 15.5%, although even that is higher than anything else we have seen (even after the Euro election this May). Will be interesting to see if the Rochester result has an impact. However it is interesting that their "not much going on" rating is above 15%.
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
Sean Thomas has written on here that being a Muslim may eventually be seen as incompatible with living in an EC country. I like living in a country with tolerance but some Muslims are stretching that tolerance. I also like having schools with a Christian ethos but we may have to have only secular schools because of the abuses by some Muslims.
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
Sean Thomas has written on here that being a Muslim may eventually be seen as incompatible with living in an EC country. I like living in a country with tolerance but some Muslims are stretching that tolerance. I also like having schools with a Christian ethos but we may have to have only secular schools because of the abuses by some Muslims.
You don't need to close down Christian schools. Just close the ones down where extremist views have been taught. You'd get rid of almost all the Muslim ones pretty quickly, barely any Christian ones, and wouldn't be breaking any discriminatory laws. Job done.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
Asking people to take jobs they are qualified to do on a PT basis, while still getting benefits, how harsh!
How do such harsh policies of benefit withdrawal fit with Repealing the bedroom tax? Would unemployed in the Welsh valleys be moved to the fields of East Anglia if they cannot find work locally?
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
I said right at the start that I wasn't speaking for UKIP
And you expressly said "locally" so obviously the Wales/East Anglia thing is absolute nonsense
And I never said axe the welfare state, I just think people qualified to do jobs that are available should do them part time until they find a job they want full time, while still getting benefits.
If you think that is harsh then fair enough.
All I want is for it to be honestly expounded as a policy so that people can see what they vote for.
Reckless now opposes the Bedroom tax and opposes NHS privatisation. Is this a heartfelt conversion or voter deception? His position on deporting migrants does seem to differ from his party too, or so his comments post election imply.
Reckless is struggling with the transition to socialism.
The choice may be exasperating and limited, it may be frustrating and, on some issues seem like no choice at all because it is not easy to get fag paper (if they are still allowed in this puritanical age) between the main parties' positions but the choice essentially comes down to Cameron or Miliband.
And for anyone who is serious about the future of this country that is no choice at all.
Otoh (unless I read you wrong), you're considering voting SLab to preserve the Union, so the choice isn't that binary.
A fair point but from the point of view of selecting a PM I am in one of these seats that makes little difference. It is those that live in the Con/Lab marginals that will, as usual, make the choice for the rest of us. And it may be some time before Dundee West becomes one of those, no matter how well Ruth Davidson does!
Scotland is different and will have a markedly different GE campaign. Last time around all the leaflets I got from SLAB explained how I had to vote Labour to keep those nasty tories out. No doubt they will mention this again, it is the core of their GOTV effort but just maybe they will mention the SNP this time?
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
UKIP is led by right wing politician who have a couple of policies that are very popular at a time when the established parties are immensely unpopular and (rightly) perceived to be totally out of touch. Right now UKIP is riding the crest of a wave. That will not last forever.
I agree with a lot of your post about the Working Class, and the stereotypes falsely placed on it, but don't you think your point about Farage/UKIP being right wing, which you seem to consider a bit of an ace up your sleeve, is implicitly stereotyping the working class as left wing?
Nope - my point was more about UKIP being able to tap into dissatisfied working class Labour support. Traditionally, there has always been a working class right wing vote. The Tories lost it some time in the 90s. It is this that UKIP is most likely to tap into long-term in my view.
If the WC right wing vote moves more or less permanently to UKIP, there are not going to be enough liberals for Labour and the Tories to fight over, and have any chance of a majority. To some extent the Tories are able to move right and reattach the shire/golfclub vote, which will become less enamoured with UKIP as it becomes more WC orientated, they may even make a directly eurosceptic offering. Not sure what Labour does, if the WC mostly decamps to UKIP, it can try and move right and pick them up and lose all the metropolitans to the Green Party (which is an oddly authoritarian place for a liberal to go to), or they can try and fight it out with the greens.
Incidentally if the Tories lose next May, what's the odds of them dumping Dave and going for a full on Eurosceptic platform, pick a BOO leader, and try and grab the WC right wing vote from UKIP and reattach the Shire Tories.
Labour won elections when there was a sizeable working class Tory vote. It can do so in the future. But not under Ed Miliband.
Would that be in the days when there were only two major parties, and when the working class was much larger?
Yes, UKIP's by-election victory is a clear indication that they are on their last legs. I don't know why they even bother really. In the face of the Tory's magnificent second place, compared with UKIP's pathetic 1st place, it really is brandy and revolver time for Farage.
UKIP is doing well. It will continue to make council gains next year and probably in 2016 too. It will score by far its best ever GE performance and is likely to win a small number of seats. Even so, I think they hit their peak last month.
I reckon their average poll rating sneaked up to about 17% in the second half of October, it has now fallen back to about 15.5%, although even that is higher than anything else we have seen (even after the Euro election this May). Will be interesting to see if the Rochester result has an impact. However it is interesting that their "not much going on" rating is above 15%.
The choice may be exasperating and limited, it may be frustrating and, on some issues seem like no choice at all because it is not easy to get fag paper (if they are still allowed in this puritanical age) between the main parties' positions but the choice essentially comes down to Cameron or Miliband.
And for anyone who is serious about the future of this country that is no choice at all.
Otoh (unless I read you wrong), you're considering voting SLab to preserve the Union, so the choice isn't that binary.
Ha Ha Ha , they are cheeks of the same arse in any event. Easily pleased and need someone else to run their affairs.
Comments
Presently the LibDems appear favourites - upward of 30 losses but a campaign swingback might limit the losses to twenty.
Labour are at risk in Scotland and in a handful of English seats, perhaps also totalling 20 and the Conservatives also may lose around that number.
A tight race for gross losses seems probable.
Having said all this, the EU really isn't particularly important as a topic.
As the election approaches the pollsters will have to accept that UKIP is not fading as expected, and start including them in their initial prompt question. This should create an illusion of increased UKIP support.
ComRes has already done this. Others will follow.
Some slimy Tory scumbag?
(PS I do know the answer...)
The Tories had it for a long time - Hell, I didn't touch them with a bargepole for 20yrs. I know I'm not very representative of anything bar a fickle voter - but I really do get the Kipper appeal. I understand White Van Man without patronising him or his other half. I come from the same stock, I just disguise it well as I was lucky enough to be exposed to a bit more of life by my very Boho mother.
I want a bit of Hang'em and Flog'em, think we've too many unproductive/culturally alien immigrants - I don't mind if you don't like multi-culti or gay marriage or a load of other things like smoking in saloon bars. Or being very unPC. Or being big on Defence. And Iike sovereignty - a lot, and a huge English patriot.
But I'm a liberally-minded Wet Tory/Blairite too when it comes social issues. So a complete split personality. If I was 18yrs old again - I'd be a Kipper at heart - but a Tory Head at the ballot box. I think I've come full circle over 30yrs.
We are also seeing the consequences of the disastrous MMC reforms brought in by Patricia Hewitt.
The thrust of MMC (and the new Shape of Training Review) was to force Doctors into jobs that they did not want to do. As a result approx 30% of British Medical graduates are not practising in the UK 2 years post qualification. Many have left the country, others have left the profession.
Working in the NHS can be pretty unpleasant, and private hospitals do not train postgraduates.
And you use the word 'golly' which makes you even better.
Surely Jowell has had long enough being a paid politician - she can live quite happily on her massive MP pension and just keep her grubby hands away from trying to mess up London.
Then let's think about all the times people on here who sneeringly refer to 'elf n' safety, or put an "innit" at the end of some mocking sentence about thick lefties (my, don't common folk talk funny?), or the opprobrium so often heaped on working class footballers because of the money they earn, or constant references to "Chavs" and the support that was shown to dyed in the wool Tory Katie Hopkins when she said that she would not let her kids play with other kids who have certain names. And so on.
Politicians of all kinds - including those from UKIP - are primarily middle class and have absolutely no clue. Emily Thornberry demonstrated that, as did Ed Miliband in his absurd over-reaction to what she did, as did David Cameron and as have so many others. The working class is as multi-faceted as any other class in this country. It has been left behind and it has been taken for granted and it has been ignored - depending on who has been in power.
Some working class people are intensely patriotic, some are not; most are like everyone else - they wave the flag at certain times of the year or on certain occasion, and put it away for the rest of the time. They are not defined by liking the scouts, or supporting their local football team, or any other activity that we may or may not approve of. Mostly, and just like everyone else, they work their arses off, look forward to their holidays, aspire for better things for themselves and their kids, and just want to get on with life. And just like everyone else, they don't think much of politicians who pretend to do their weekly shop at Morrison's or who ostentatiously fly on budget airlines or who claim to go weak-kneed at the sight of an England flag flying from a window. They know when they are being sold a pup, which is why so many of them are disengaged from politics.
UKIP undeniably has a chance to ta into a deep well of disenchantment, but the people who lead the party are almost entirely right wing Thatcherites who at some stage are going to have to start looking beyond immigration and the EU if they wish to make a lasting mark. Whether they are capable of doing that and turning UKIP into something that goes beyond a party of protest remains to be seen.
I notice that Owen Jones in the Guardian likes to point out that UKIP voters are often in favour of re-nationalizing utilities.
I'm a former Tory voter, and like many other UKIP voters, I feel let down by the Tories on the EU and the lack of an in-out referendum. But what really did it for me with the Tories was help to buy. I think that policy is as disgraceful as anything Blair and Brown did.
I consider myself to be on the right of politics and I believe in a smaller state. But if UKIP put in their manifesto a policy of re-nationalizing the utilities, it wouldn't stop me voting for them. I don't know if it would be a good thing, but I don't think it would be a lot worse than what we have now.
I enjoy the hate UKIP receive from Tories on here. But I take a little bit more pride to see a party offering an alternative to Labour in areas of the country where for too long they haven't had an alternative.
This would be about the one thing that would make this Parliament a better one for UKIP in terms of progress, leading up to the general election next May. Herdson thinks that this is unlikely, but we know that there is an anti-EU rump in the Labour party, not happy with the pro-EU direction taken by the leadership.
We also know that there are MPs who will be somewhat despairing that the alternative for the party leadership, to the current metropolitan liberal set is the Blairities, essentially just another group of metropolitan liberals. It would be like replacing Cameron with Boris because you were worried there were too many Old Etonians at the top of the Conservative party.
The defections from MPs take all the headlines, naturally, but I've also heard on here of a steady procession of defections to UKIP from the Conservatives at the local councillor level. Does anyone know whether there have been similar defections of Labour councillors to UKIP? Leaving aside the potential for a one-off maverick to do something unexpected, the existence or otherwise of defections at this level would give us an objective indicator of how likely a defection at MP level would be.
"I've honestly never encountered such a group of miserable whiners as the you-kippers on here."
Given how close you posted these two comments together it appears you've forgotten 'what you had for breakfast', I'm sure the good Dr Fox can help with an opinion.
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
Time for me to head off to the footy soon, but I largely agree. The UKIP leadership are as out of touch a political elite as the other parties, and I do wonder if they can satisfy the often contradictory passions that they have whipped up.
Could they be honest enough to propose something as harsh and coercive as the proposals for workfare that isam and ZenPagan suggest below? I think that they are a wolf in sheeps clothing, with a savage right wing dressed in pro-NHS, anti bedroom tax policies. Which is the real UKIP?
I was praising Plato so I'm not too sure what point you're making. Plato is a very good presence on this forum, not least for being female in what sometimes feels like the Twickenham changing room.
I have a tendency to swear colourfully a great deal in relaxed company, and found it very hard to not do it. So I copied a trick from a female colleague who substituted Golly, Crumbs, Crikey for what would otherwise be even a teensy bit rude. I find Damn and Bugger on the risque margins.
It does tend to throw anyone who doesn't know me, as they then tip-toe round their own language worrying that I'll get a fit of the vapours at a four-letter word. I'm also very courteous which is another thing that's not so common nowadays/can be disconcerting!
I like manners. It shows respect. Like a dance. And excessive politeness is a marvellously restrained and precise weapon of insult. Mr Gove made it an art form.
You're right that the UK won't return to a two-party system - there's too much 'anti-' voting to permit that - but UKIP is also limited by its pick-and-mix policies, which Farage is far too keen to change on a whim. The party has a strong core message and can make (and has made) a lot of progress based on that alone. But it can only get further by becoming more professional, and becoming more professional undermines one of its key selling points, namely being 'not the same as the rest'.
But pluralism is indeed the new normal. No party has a divine right to exist and there are plenty to mop up the votes of those doing poorly.
You're moaning at me for being rude to you. Simple answer, stop insulting other people, especially with crass generalisation like the one just a few comments below ie UKIP=Nazis and then pretending you're holier than thou.
Did I insult you? I'm sorry if so. Was that suggesting that you were rather less wise than your pseudonym?
It looks like exactly the same thing is happening in Germany, AfD was originally another single issued anti-Euro (rather than anti-EU) party, but they hit a road block in terms of winning votes, and hence seats, and hence influence, so now they have also broadened their program to be anti-immigrant, law and order, education based.
http://news.sky.com/story/1377667/muslim-pupils-confused-over-sharia-and-uk-law
Pupils at a Muslim school told inspectors it was a woman's job to stay at home and many could not say which laws to follow.
These schools don't need "urgent action". They need to be closed down.
Such an axe to the welfare state may be a good policy, but Is it an open UKIP pledge in places like Strood? Or is there some deception going on?
It's your hypocrisy, as I stated down thread when you made the original comment but you disappeared without reply, only to reappear sometime later. . .
There is a simple word to describe you. The law of the land [ and in consideration of Mike ] prevents me from writing it.
I hope when you put out the Union Flag and the Crusader flag together you ensured the Union Flag had the correct, superior position (I think it should be flown above or to the left of another flag).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IXwmlkriqc
My suggestion had both carrot and stick in it. We will retrain you properly for a job in your capabilities. If you are still sitting on your sofa however after three years then your welfare goes down to a subsistence level. You have a roof over your head, you have food on the table but if you want life's luxuries such as 99 channels of sky then get off your arse and work for them like the people you are leeching off.
Many unemployed people enjoy a standard of living equal to or exceeding those who work for a living currently. A friend of mine is a case in point. He is single has worked all his life but is on minimum wage. He recently had to make a choice between downsizing his accomodation from a pokey little one bedroom flat to a bedsit or get rid of his car as he couldn't afford both. So at age 50 he is now the proud inhabitant of a bedsit as he needs his car to get to work. If he had gone on the dole however his flat would have been paid for, his council tax would have been paltry and he wouldn't need the car. By his calculations he would be about 10£ a week better off. Can you honestly sit there and tell him that is right? The welfare state is meant to be a safety net. Those who are on it year after year have made a lifestyle choice because they can have a reasonable standard of living.
If you are able to work there is no reason on earth that you should be on the welfare for years and my proposal offered training for real jobs which is the barrier to many
You said several things about me lacking intelligence and "not being fit" to have my pseudonym. Anyway, your graceful apology is accepted. Let's move on.
And you expressly said "locally" so obviously the Wales/East Anglia thing is absolute nonsense
And I never said axe the welfare state, I just think people qualified to do jobs that are available should do them part time until they find a job they want full time, while still getting benefits.
If you think that is harsh then fair enough.
Right, time to listen to some Will Todd whilst I attend to the lighting issues on my spiral staircase.
No sh i t Sherlock
Someone left it yesterday and I don't blame him. Congratulations for reinforcing the stereotype of the typical kipper, how fortunate for you that your party does not care tuppence.
Reckless now opposes the Bedroom tax and opposes NHS privatisation. Is this a heartfelt conversion or voter deception? His position on deporting migrants does seem to differ from his party too, or so his comments post election imply.
We have had our fun with those pointless Euros, with irrelevant local government and with the odd by election but soon we have to choose a PM to lead this country for another 5 years. The choice may be exasperating and limited, it may be frustrating and, on some issues seem like no choice at all because it is not easy to get fag paper (if they are still allowed in this puritanical age) between the main parties' positions but the choice essentially comes down to Cameron or Miliband.
And for anyone who is serious about the future of this country that is no choice at all.
Incidentally if the Tories lose next May, what's the odds of them dumping Dave and going for a full on Eurosceptic platform, pick a BOO leader, and try and grab the WC right wing vote from UKIP and reattach the Shire Tories.
Hope you appreciate the pedantry.
She wore a sari, and then attempted to explain why she put dirt from the floor on her hair as a sign of respect/deference to her husband.
We were about 13yrs old and looked at each other with WTF on our faces. All our other teachers were Old Girls, Jolly Hockey Knee-Cappers who told us we should wear the trousers all the time/never underestimate ourselves. They were formidable.
Seeing up close a woman who'd gone back several centuries was bizarre. I can only assume this is quite common in some faith schools nowadays.
Needless to say, Mrs M never taught us another lesson.
For example, the Conservatives hit their nadir in terms of share of the vote in 1995. Both opinion polling and local election results support that time. However, due to the long cycles over which politics operates, despite doing better in 1996 than 1995, the Tories still lost a huge number of councillors (coming off 1992 - a very good year - didn't help); 1997 was obviously a disaster for the party at the GE but it would have been even worse two years earlier; the next six to eight years can all be categorised as recovery / improvement but it wasn't until at least 2006 that the Conservatives could be said to be doing well.
UKIP is doing well. It will continue to make council gains next year and probably in 2016 too. It will score by far its best ever GE performance and is likely to win a small number of seats. Even so, I think they hit their peak last month.
Anyway, must be off. A civil farewell.
Maybe even a fiver.
There is a good Pub on the corner of Shaftbury Ave and Charing Cross Road where I once paid back a betting debt to JohnO.
The Cambridge
93 Charing Cross Rd
London WC2H 0DP
United Kingdom
Not far from the Coach and Horses but that gone vegetarian.
It's stunning that combatting intolerance is considered important enough to the Tories that they should start limiting free speech, but not important enough to close down extremist schools?
Believing in traditional gender roles.
Not being legally qualified as a child.
Is this really the best you can come up with, Socrates?
And Yikes for dropping something. Oops appears when I've really effed up.
Oopsy Daisy is for when someone falls over - especially when pie-eyed.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/top-london-cofe-school-failed-to-safeguard-pupils-from-islamic-extremism-9871462.html
Scotland is different and will have a markedly different GE campaign. Last time around all the leaflets I got from SLAB explained how I had to vote Labour to keep those nasty tories out. No doubt they will mention this again, it is the core of their GOTV effort but just maybe they will mention the SNP this time?