Will UKIP still exist in May 2020 ? Whatever the result of any EU referendum, perhaps UKIP may not be seen as a party that is relevant. The electoral system is against them, as they have 1 MP after receiving 3 million votes. This is unlikely to change before May 2020. I doubt that the Tories will go back to reducing the number of MP's but will go ahead with the standard boundary review. The new boundaries are not likely to make any difference.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. FPTP is a daft system, which we will be stuck with, until people vote for the smallers parties in larger numbers in constituencies where they can win.
What a fantastic choice for Leader Of The Opposition!!
Musing on the (hopefully temporary) absence of Jack W earlier, I was reminded that one of the PB Kinnocks asked for a list of people who had ever posted EMWNBPM
Did anyone compile such a roll of honour? Should it appear at the head of every thread?
@toadmeister: RT @TheHappySlapper: Just got to an #nhs hospital ... 6 days after election It's still open and no one has asked me for a credit card. #shocked
Farage will be gone soon, as I think he now a liability to UKIP and not an asset. If UKIP wants to survive, they need to recruit more people who are well known to the British public and to get them to take up responsibility for representing the party on different issues.
Lib Dems will be in a mess for 10+ years, as their local support bases have been demolished over the last 5 years and I think it will be difficult to get back to where they were in May 2010. Do the Lib Dems have a potential leader who is not seen as left of right politics wise ? The Libs need to appeal to as many people as possible.
Labour will I think elect Yvette Cooper, as I think it is time to see another Woman as potential PM. Also I think Cameron would struggle against her in PMQ's, as he would have to be really careful how he spoke to her.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership, offered only because I know they will be ignored.
Someone pointed out that although the US Presidential election is next year, the candidates have yet to be picked, but Labour are choosing a leader they expect to fight in 2020.
They will pick Burnham, and he will lose badly.
What they should do is learn the one lesson from Ed's 5 wasted years, which is ditch a loser.
If Burnham is selected, he should spend 2-3 years testing to destruction the notions that
- Labour were not left wing enough - The unions can pick the right leader - Anyone from Gordo's cabinet can win
Then, when his rating are at rock bottom, and it might be clear who will follow Cameron for the Tories, defenestrate him and pick someone who might have a chance
The Sun has it right. Burnham like Ed has very little politican identity of his own. He seems the Unions choice, so he'll probably get it.
Lets not forget this is the guy which came 4th in 2010 behind Ed Balls. That doesn't bode well. But then out of the top 4, there's little real talent. Liz Kendell is probably best, as she is at least most unknown, and so has the power to suprise. Andy Burnham is already known, and hardly stellar in any way shape or form.
Will UKIP still exist in May 2020 ? Whatever the result of any EU referendum, perhaps UKIP may not be seen as a party that is relevant. The electoral system is against them, as they have 1 MP after receiving 3 million votes. This is unlikely to change before May 2020. I doubt that the Tories will go back to reducing the number of MP's but will go ahead with the standard boundary review. The new boundaries are not likely to make any difference.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. FPTP is a daft system, which we will be stuck with, until people vote for the smallers parties in larger numbers in constituencies where they can win.
Controversial thought, but UKIP have not been that successful in the last five years. It is simply that other parties have been less successful. A large proportion of the public are willing to vote for protest parties and the other protest parties other than UKIP have been devastated which has allowed them to grow.
The votes for both of the two main parties (and the SNP) increased significantly between 2010 and 2015. What collapsed was the Lib Dems and the BNP.
2010: LD, UKIP and BNP: 8.32 million voters 2015: LD, UKIP and BNP: 6.30 million voters
UKIP have gained from being the sole main party for protest voters. If the Lib Dems can recover a share of protest votes then UKIP may not be as relevant.
@toadmeister: RT @TheHappySlapper: Just got to an #nhs hospital ... 6 days after election It's still open and no one has asked me for a credit card. #shocked
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
But we gave the Lib Dems an absolute pasting. 9,000 majority
Massive spending before the election period started. I have talked to someone who was involved in campaigning in Hampshire for the Tories and they put massive resources into targetting Lib Dem seats. The knew that the Lib Dems were vulnerable, as many who voted Lib Dem in May 2010, were not happy with how the Libs acted in government. Also those not bothered whether it was a Lib Dem or Tory MP may have been open to swing their votes to Tories, so there was a majority government.
Will UKIP still exist in May 2020 ? Whatever the result of any EU referendum, perhaps UKIP may not be seen as a party that is relevant. The electoral system is against them, as they have 1 MP after receiving 3 million votes. This is unlikely to change before May 2020. I doubt that the Tories will go back to reducing the number of MP's but will go ahead with the standard boundary review. The new boundaries are not likely to make any difference.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. FPTP is a daft system, which we will be stuck with, until people vote for the smallers parties in larger numbers in constituencies where they can win.
I think a reduction in the number of MPs is already set in law, with a boundary review for 600 seats happening automatically. It would take a change in law to increase the number of seats back up to 650 which would be controversial since that would be a breach in the manifesto I believe.
Secondly, O’Flynn has been licking his wounds since the ‘Wag tax’ row at their party conference last year — during which he floated the idea of a luxury goods tax, only for Nigel Farage to step in and kibosh the idea. O’Flynn was left looking foolish and after this, he was sidelined from the leadership operation. Others such as Suzanne Evans took a much bigger role for example. His comments today could be seen as revenge for this shafting.
The question now is whether O’Flynn will remain as economic spokesman or whether we are witnessing the beginning of a leadership coup. Nigel Farage is due on Question Time this evening, so we’ll find out then how he feels about the criticisms. Like the other parties, you would expect Ukip to be examining why it failed to win more seats — be it a strategy or personality problem. But instead, it has been squabbling over money and a leader who broke his promise. Ukip is beginning to fall apart and it needs to pull its act together quickly if it wishes to remain a serious political force.
But we gave the Lib Dems an absolute pasting. 9,000 majority
I am an Eastliegh resident and did back the lovely Mims at 3/1 with Ladbrokes. My whole decision was based on the total lack of Lib Dem posters in Eastleigh. During election time Eastleigh is normally orange heaven. What did astound me was the majority of 9000 especially as the lib dems still won all but two of the local council seats contested on the same day. People voted tory nationally and lib dem locally. Amazing.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
Indeed. Last time the public was asked (regarding AV not PR) we chose by two to one to keep FPTP.
I see no groundswell of support to change the voting system to cater to those who find they can't win a plurality of votes.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
They will come to regret it. Cameron is not going to get the EU reforms he wants and may then be faced with having an EU referendum, where he recommends that the UK still remains part of the EU. Could be a farce, which splits the Tory party and they may not recover. It could be difficult getting legislation passed in the HOC and they face a massive battle in winning votes in the HOL's anyway.
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
Farage is now dragging UKIP down rather than picking them up. There was no rush to do anything, he could have taken the summer off, and then come back in Sept.
This just smacks of hubris, and him thinking he 'is' the party, which is uber dangerous for small parties. At least Caroline Lucus in the Greens realised that she shouldnt and couldn't be the only face of the party.
Will UKIP still exist in May 2020 ? Whatever the result of any EU referendum, perhaps UKIP may not be seen as a party that is relevant. The electoral system is against them, as they have 1 MP after receiving 3 million votes. This is unlikely to change before May 2020. I doubt that the Tories will go back to reducing the number of MP's but will go ahead with the standard boundary review. The new boundaries are not likely to make any difference.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. FPTP is a daft system, which we will be stuck with, until people vote for the smallers parties in larger numbers in constituencies where they can win.
I think a reduction in the number of MPs is already set in law, with a boundary review for 600 seats happening automatically. It would take a change in law to increase the number of seats back up to 650 which would be controversial since that would be a breach in the manifesto I believe.
Only the boundary review is set in law, with proposals due on 2018. The reduction to 600 was subject to HOL amendment and the HOC voted for the amendment.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
They will come to regret it. Cameron is not going to get the EU reforms he wants and may then be faced with having an EU referendum, where he recommends that the UK still remains part of the EU. Could be a farce, which splits the Tory party and they may not recover. It could be difficult getting legislation passed in the HOC and they face a massive battle in winning votes in the HOL's anyway.
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
I think you're projecting wishful thinking. What evidence have you got for that?
So long as Cameron allows a free vote so that Conservatives can vote and campaign for Out - and he's said he will I think - what reason is there for the party to split?
During the AV Referendum there were Labour people campaigning for AV and Labour people campaigning for FPTP. The party didn't split on that.
Farage is now dragging UKIP down rather than picking them up. There was no rush to do anything, he could have taken the summer off, and then come back in Sept.
This just smacks of hubris, and him thinking he 'is' the party, which is uber dangerous for small parties. At least Caroline Lucus in the Greens realised that she shouldnt and couldn't be the only face of the party.
The thing that is driving it is disillusion with the established parties. It is very likely this disillusionment still has a long way to go in those parts of the North that support Labour.
The other problem Labour has is the feedback I heard a few times that, if they thought UKIP could win, they would vote for it - that is likely to be a bigger drag for Labour in 2020
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
Indeed. Last time the public was asked (regarding AV not PR) we chose by two to one to keep FPTP.
I see no groundswell of support to change the voting system to cater to those who find they can't win a plurality of votes.
Many people I have heard discuss the electoral system think that at some stage FPTP will be changed to a version of PR. But it may take a long time.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
You're turning into the Coldstone of this parliment.
Will UKIP still exist in May 2020 ? Whatever the result of any EU referendum, perhaps UKIP may not be seen as a party that is relevant. The electoral system is against them, as they have 1 MP after receiving 3 million votes. This is unlikely to change before May 2020. I doubt that the Tories will go back to reducing the number of MP's but will go ahead with the standard boundary review. The new boundaries are not likely to make any difference.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. FPTP is a daft system, which we will be stuck with, until people vote for the smallers parties in larger numbers in constituencies where they can win.
I think a reduction in the number of MPs is already set in law, with a boundary review for 600 seats happening automatically. It would take a change in law to increase the number of seats back up to 650 which would be controversial since that would be a breach in the manifesto I believe.
Only the boundary review is set in law, with proposals due on 2018. The reduction to 600 was subject to HOL amendment and the HOC voted for the amendment.
But do they have to vote again? I thought the HOC vote for 600 still stood, it was only the review that was postponed - the rules for the review are still set as they were, which is 600 roughly equal sized seats.
I saw Liz Kendell on Newsnight last night. I mean really? Ambition is a rather curious thing. I think we can all strike her off as a possibility; she'll struggle to get any MP's backing her I'm sure.
Considering Tristram Hunt lacks any credibility, the Blairite torchbearer seems to be Chuka who has these rather worrying social media skeletons.
On the traditional side, Andy Burnham's entry AD was all a bit embarrassing, so that leaves Yvette who I think stands a good chance.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
They will come to regret it. Cameron is not going to get the EU reforms he wants and may then be faced with having an EU referendum, where he recommends that the UK still remains part of the EU. Could be a farce, which splits the Tory party and they may not recover. It could be difficult getting legislation passed in the HOC and they face a massive battle in winning votes in the HOL's anyway.
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
I think you're projecting wishful thinking. What evidence have you got for that?
So long as Cameron allows a free vote so that Conservatives can vote and campaign for Out - and he's said he will I think - what reason is there for the party to split?
During the AV Referendum there were Labour people campaigning for AV and Labour people campaigning for FPTP. The party didn't split on that.
Can you point me to a conservative government that has been anti european union? They're a lot of issues about the EU that nark people, but some sensible changes will satisfy most.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
Indeed. Last time the public was asked (regarding AV not PR) we chose by two to one to keep FPTP.
I see no groundswell of support to change the voting system to cater to those who find they can't win a plurality of votes.
Many people I have heard discuss the electoral system think that at some stage FPTP will be changed to a version of PR. But it may take a long time.
Yes they've been saying that for a century now and its still not happened. Some people want the moon but there's no evidence for any change - the only party that especially cares about it has just been reduced to eight seats. What evidences is there for change being popular?
But we gave the Lib Dems an absolute pasting. 9,000 majority
I am an Eastliegh resident and did back the lovely Mims at 3/1 with Ladbrokes. My whole decision was based on the total lack of Lib Dem posters in Eastleigh. During election time Eastleigh is normally orange heaven. What did astound me was the majority of 9000 especially as the lib dems still won all but two of the local council seats contested on the same day. People voted tory nationally and lib dem locally. Amazing.
Interesting. They've held the seat for years, and even retained it in a by-election when in govt. I wonder if they thought it was in the bag and put their resources to other more marginal seats? There was a substantial UKIP vote at the by-election too, which collapsed at the GE - worried about the prospect of a Lab-SNP coalition?
Is the sneak preview all of it or is there more? I get to a final paragraph ending "This explains his preternatural calm and his astonishing self-belief — but it also explains why he drove his party over a cliff."
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
They will come to regret it. Cameron is not going to get the EU reforms he wants and may then be faced with having an EU referendum, where he recommends that the UK still remains part of the EU. Could be a farce, which splits the Tory party and they may not recover. It could be difficult getting legislation passed in the HOC and they face a massive battle in winning votes in the HOL's anyway.
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
The backbencher dynamic *after* an EU referendum, assuming Dave wins, could be really rocky. A new leader/PM who can bring them back onside probably won't be the leader who can win the subsequent election. Against the backdrop of a united and resurgent left, 2020 should be labours election to lose.
The thing that is driving it is disillusion with the established parties. It is very likely this disillusionment still has a long way to go in those parts of the North that support Labour.
The other problem Labour has is the feedback I heard a few times that, if they thought UKIP could win, they would vote for it - that is likely to be a bigger drag for Labour in 2020
Your premise is 100% categorically false. The established parties (if you mean Labour and Conservatives) vote share increased this Parliament. A significant increase. Over 1.37 million extra votes went to those parties despite Labour's loss of votes to the SNP.
The rise of UKIP has matched with a disillusionment in other protest parties. EG the Lib Dems and the BNP.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership, offered only because I know they will be ignored.
Someone pointed out that although the US Presidential election is next year, the candidates have yet to be picked, but Labour are choosing a leader they expect to fight in 2020.
They will pick Burnham, and he will lose badly.
What they should do is learn the one lesson from Ed's 5 wasted years, which is ditch a loser.
If Burnham is selected, he should spend 2-3 years testing to destruction the notions that
- Labour were not left wing enough - The unions can pick the right leader - Anyone from Gordo's cabinet can win
Then, when his rating are at rock bottom, and it might be clear who will follow Cameron for the Tories, defenestrate him and pick someone who might have a chance
The Sun has it right. Burnham like Ed has very little politican identity of his own. He seems the Unions choice, so he'll probably get it.
Lets not forget this is the guy which came 4th in 2010 behind Ed Balls. That doesn't bode well. But then out of the top 4, there's little real talent. Liz Kendell is probably best, as she is at least most unknown, and so has the power to suprise. Andy Burnham is already known, and hardly stellar in any way shape or form.
Liz Kendell maybe unknown, but she was utterly hopeless last night when questioned by the hardly threatening Evan Davies.
Yvette or Chuka will begin to create the winners narrative around them. Chaka has star quality and Yvette is very bright. Burnham lacks gravitas. And Tristram- the unmentionable.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
They will come to regret it. Cameron is not going to get the EU reforms he wants and may then be faced with having an EU referendum, where he recommends that the UK still remains part of the EU. Could be a farce, which splits the Tory party and they may not recover. It could be difficult getting legislation passed in the HOC and they face a massive battle in winning votes in the HOL's anyway.
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
I think you're projecting wishful thinking. What evidence have you got for that?
So long as Cameron allows a free vote so that Conservatives can vote and campaign for Out - and he's said he will I think - what reason is there for the party to split?
During the AV Referendum there were Labour people campaigning for AV and Labour people campaigning for FPTP. The party didn't split on that.
Can you point me to a conservative government that has been anti european union? They're a lot of issues about the EU that nark people, but some sensible changes will satisfy most.
Miss Plato, could be wrong but I think QT picks the panellists rather than saying to Party X "We'd like someone from your side on the panel."
It'll be interesting to see what approach they take. Blues and reds need a representative, of course, but what about the SNP? Will they get one as a matter of course?
Mr. 67, smaller businesses tied up by red tape and sick of the EU's bloody idiocy (I refer once again to the VAT nonsense) might disagree. That said, I concur it's very unlikely Cameron would shift from In.
Miss Plato, could be wrong but I think QT picks the panellists rather than saying to Party X "We'd like someone from your side on the panel."
It'll be interesting to see what approach they take. Blues and reds need a representative, of course, but what about the SNP? Will they get one as a matter of course?
Mr. 67, smaller businesses tied up by red tape and sick of the EU's bloody idiocy (I refer once again to the VAT nonsense) might disagree. That said, I concur it's very unlikely Cameron would shift from In.
The LDs used to get one as a matter of course didn't they?
I don't see how that can be justified anymore. Nor why the SNP should be denied one when they're now in the same position the LDs used to be.
"This is tough stuff and it is hard to see how both Farage and O’Flynn can continue in the same party. One of them surely has to go."
Correct and if it happens it will be O'Flynn.
For anybody senior in the party who willfully undermines the party by this sort of interview, they are clearly putting their own views ahead of wider party loyalty. . Why on earth did the blessed Carswell join the party if he is seemingly prepared to undermine its hard won legal entitlement to the short money, and seems to have an issue with just about everything UKIP stands for. He would do us all a favour if he just legged it to independent for the life of me I cannot see anything on him that even remotely resonates Kipper. Too many people have joined the party over the years simply to advance their own political profile and ambitions, Kilroy Silk being the case it point.
If Farage is to be criticised for anything, it is perhaps his judgement in embracing people into the party, who seem to simply want to use the 20 years of our lives we have given to build up the party as a shortcut to doing it the hard way themselves, it would seem if anything he is to trusting. If they are not committed then they and any others hiding in the shadows should just pi** off, we have survived other self important nobodies leaving, we will survive and grow whatever they do.
The fact so many of the crystal ball gazing gobsh*tes are still trying to undermine Farage, is because they see him as the real threat, which he is, we would be lunatics to get rid of him in preference to nobodies like O'Flynn and Carswell.
Bit of hubris there. UKIP wouldn't be entitled to a single penny of Short money if it wasn't for Carswell, so its funny your quick dismissal of him.
EDIT: But I hope you're right and Carswell in your words decides to "pi** off" to be an Independent. Lets see UKIP "survive" as "self import nobodies" in a protest party with no MPs. Those who are in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
I predict that Farage will go and will start a new party called "Nigel's Alliance for Zero Immigration" just as soon as he can think of a suitable acronym.
Between the Nigel news and the Butcher candidacy it's all looking pretty good.
I predict that Farage will go and will start a new party called "Nigel's Alliance for Zero Immigration" just as soon as he can think of a suitable acronym.
Yes Mr Dancer that's what I meant. The Lib Dems should be on rotation with the Greens and UKIP, I see no justification to them having a permanent seat on the QT panel.
Reading on Twitter there's a risk of Palmyra falling to ISIS.
Palmyria are the ruins of the city that was capital of the short-lived Palmyrene Empire, latterly ruled by Empress Zenobia. It was brought back to the Roman Empire proper by Aurelian in the third century.
"This is tough stuff and it is hard to see how both Farage and O’Flynn can continue in the same party. One of them surely has to go."
Correct and if it happens it will be O'Flynn.
For anybody senior in the party who willfully undermines the party by this sort of interview, they are clearly putting their own views ahead of wider party loyalty. . Why on earth did the blessed Carswell join the party if he is seemingly prepared to undermine its hard won legal entitlement to the short money, and seems to have an issue with just about everything UKIP stands for. He would do us all a favour if he just legged it to independent for the life of me I cannot see anything on him that even remotely resonates Kipper. Too many people have joined the party over the years simply to advance their own political profile and ambitions, Kilroy Silk being the case it point.
If Farage is to be criticised for anything, it is perhaps his judgement in embracing people into the party, who seem to simply want to use the 20 years of our lives we have given to build up the party as a shortcut to doing it the hard way themselves, it would seem if anything he is to trusting. If they are not committed then they and any others hiding in the shadows should just pi** off, we have survived other self important nobodies leaving, we will survive and grow whatever they do.
The fact so many of the crystal ball gazing gobsh*tes are still trying to undermine Farage, is because they see him as the real threat, which he is, we would be lunatics to get rid of him in preference to nobodies like O'Flynn and Carswell.
If O'Flynn goes, so does the Desmond money. If Carswell goes, so does the Short money.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
Except....that would give Carswell plenty of time to start moulding the party in a direction which causes apoplexy amongst UKIP's senior troughers....
Quite. Carswell is the one accountable for the Short money and wants to see it spent responsibly. Fair play to him for standing his ground and sticking up for the taxpayer.
Its not even as if this is a sudden change of heart or new idea either. He wrote about wanting Short Money - and the idea of state funding for parties in general - phased out years ago.
Carswell represents the people of Clacton, those who voted for him and those who didn't.
People who voted UKIP in other constituencies are represented by other MPs from other parties.
You are thinking about it as narrowly as Carswell. Strictly speaking you are right. But the de facto position is that as UKIP's sole paliamentary representative, he speaks for all UKIP members. Caroline Lucas represents ALL green party members in the HoC. For local matters, they only speak for Clacton/Brighton Pavilion. For party specific matters, they speak for all their members across the country.
"This is tough stuff and it is hard to see how both Farage and O’Flynn can continue in the same party. One of them surely has to go."
Correct and if it happens it will be O'Flynn.
For anybody senior in the party who willfully undermines the party by this sort of interview, they are clearly putting their own views ahead of wider party loyalty. . Why on earth did the blessed Carswell join the party if he is seemingly prepared to undermine its hard won legal entitlement to the short money, and seems to have an issue with just about everything UKIP stands for. He would do us all a favour if he just legged it to independent for the life of me I cannot see anything on him that even remotely resonates Kipper. Too many people have joined the party over the years simply to advance their own political profile and ambitions, Kilroy Silk being the case it point.
If Farage is to be criticised for anything, it is perhaps his judgement in embracing people into the party, who seem to simply want to use the 20 years of our lives we have given to build up the party as a shortcut to doing it the hard way themselves, it would seem if anything he is to trusting. If they are not committed then they and any others hiding in the shadows should just pi** off, we have survived other self important nobodies leaving, we will survive and grow whatever they do.
The fact so many of the crystal ball gazing gobsh*tes are still trying to undermine Farage, is because they see him as the real threat, which he is, we would be lunatics to get rid of him in preference to nobodies like O'Flynn and Carswell.
If O'Flynn goes, so does the Desmond money. If Carswell goes, so does the Short money.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
Is that true about Carswell and the Short money? I could definitely see lawyers getting involved if Carswell decides to sit as an independent.
What a fantastic choice for Leader Of The Opposition!!
Musing on the (hopefully temporary) absence of Jack W earlier, I was reminded that one of the PB Kinnocks asked for a list of people who had ever posted EMWNBPM
Did anyone compile such a roll of honour? Should it appear at the head of every thread?
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
Indeed. Last time the public was asked (regarding AV not PR) we chose by two to one to keep FPTP.
I see no groundswell of support to change the voting system to cater to those who find they can't win a plurality of votes.
Indeed. If anything, that circumstances have made it appear so difficult for someone to now win a majority, if anything may make the current system a bit stronger appealing to the public - they know if someone can actually manage, well, fair play to them, but otherwise it is no longer at all improbable that hung parliaments could happen, and as such parties will have to work together in a way reflective of more proportionality than before anyway.
I still support a more proportionate system, but people didn't change it when the alternative was AV, and the government has no mandate to or reason to change it again, so I cannot see it being on the horizon.
Re city devolution: what happens to those of us who don't happen to live in a city? Could Hampshire, for example, ask for devolved city status (with or without Soton and Pompey?
Anyone on the Better Off Out side must be fuming. Farage's bizarre decision not to resign has unleashed a wave of disagreement and dissent in the party, and it's going to bring the whole operation down. They look like a group of complete amateurs. In a serious party:
- The national executive would accept the resignation of the leader - The leader would carry on with a resignation if he promised to do so - An MP disagreeing over short money would make the case behind the scenes, but accept it was a decision for the party as a whole - One of the chief spokesman would disagree with the leader in polite language that would allow a conciliation
Farage needs to either admit his unresignation was a mistake and stand aside, or he needs to promise that he will change his style of leadership to be more team-based. The current situation where every senior member of the party just does things on the fly is a joke.
Its not even as if this is a sudden change of heart or new idea either. He wrote about wanting Short Money - and the idea of state funding for parties in general - phased out years ago.
Carswell is a man of principle, even people from his ex party say that (unlike TPD). To be fair to Carswell, if even a single MP from UKIP had been elected besides him this wouldn't be an issue - and if he hadn't defected it wouldn't be an issue either. So it seems unfair on Carswell to expect him to abandon his principles just because his party failed to win anything other than the seat he brought with him.
Re city devolution: what happens to those of us who don't happen to live in a city? Could Hampshire, for example, ask for devolved city status (with or without Soton and Pompey?
Without Portsmouth! Without Portsmouth!...let that city rot in its own flestering hole!!!
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
Except....that would give Carswell plenty of time to start moulding the party in a direction which causes apoplexy amongst UKIP's senior troughers....
Quite. Carswell is the one accountable for the Short money and wants to see it spent responsibly. Fair play to him for standing his ground and sticking up for the taxpayer.
Its not even as if this is a sudden change of heart or new idea either. He wrote about wanting Short Money - and the idea of state funding for parties in general - phased out years ago.
Yet Carswell has joined a political party, and he needs to accept that, regardless of formal control of the short money, he needs to go with the party's decision. If you devolve into this formal responsibility idea, then you'll end up with endless turf wars between different offices in the party. The whole point of forming a party is that you compromise on some issues to make collective decisions.
If carswell resigns from UKIP surely by his own code, he should need to step down and have a by-election, after he did that when he resigned from the Tories.
If carswell resigns from UKIP surely by his own code, he should need to step down and have a by-election, after he did that when he resigned from the Tories.
Mr. Brooke, maybe. But Balls is out, and Miliband's not leader anymore. I can see why Cooper might be livid, but with Miliband gone, who would she be livid with [in the sense of a top rank feud]?
Gossip on here about in fighting is just people that don't like the party in question taking a free hit and venting their dislike, with no chance of any comeback as no kne knows what's really going on.
On the short money, I repeat that Carswells constituency contains the most rundown area in the uk, Jaywick. I would think those people living it that hell hole, would be better off with an MP that has 650k to spend in staff than 350k.
If I were Carswell I would hire staff to do my errands that were also fantastic builders, road repairers and gardeners and encourage them to tidy up the cesspit that some of his clacton residents live in. That would be a 'change' to the usual way of doing things in politics., you might even call it direct democracy.
I like Carswell and campaigned for him last year but also found the need to question why a destitute place like Jaywick existed in the same constituency as Frinton and was moved to write to him passing on the desperation I heard from it's residents. Much as I was happy for Ukip to have an Mp, and in particular a thoughtful free thinker like Carswell, i did wonder what he had done to help those people in the decade previous.
If O'Flynn goes, so does the Desmond money. If Carswell goes, so does the Short money.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
Is that true about Carswell and the Short money? I could definitely see lawyers getting involved if Carswell decides to sit as an independent.
Yes, you have to have at least one MP and 150k votes at the election to get the Short money, which is allocated based on the quantity of MPs and votes received. It is specifically for "Parliamentary Business".
Carswell''s point is that he as the MP is accountable for spending it reasonably, and that the money on offer (around 650k I think) is more than enough to cover his staff and he needs only half of it.
Farage seems to be of the view that they should take every penny of the allowance and spend it as he sees fit on UKIP's head office - as would happen with eg. EU Parliament allowances.
If carswell resigns from UKIP surely by his own code, he should need to step down and have a by-election, after he did that when he resigned from the Tories.
That would be fun - particularly if Farage ran against him under the Ukip banner.
As much as I'd like to believe that Hodges piece on Labour's internal fantasies, I can't. Some of it seems a bit apocryphal to me.
An advisor screaming over and over again at the telly? Nah.
Miliband was proved to be misguided but he had a right to believe the polls and I'm pretty sure his top team - by that point in the campaign - would've been together and confident.
If carswell resigns from UKIP surely by his own code, he should need to step down and have a by-election, after he did that when he resigned from the Tories.
That would be fun - particularly if Farage ran against him under the Ukip banner.
I reckon Carswell would win .
The Conservatives might fancy their chances of coming through the middle.
I did not realise that other EU countries had put in place legal defence mechanisms against this happening. [SNIP]
Yes, it's something that a few journalists, most notably Christopher Booker, have been going on quite heavily over the past couple of years. Former MP John Hemming also raised individual cases in the Commons under Privilege. It does seem that at least the secrecy in some of these cases is being lifted, but Social Services certainly seem to have far too much power to act unrestrained, with parents often having no way to be represented within the system.
Remember how social services used to be so poor at getting children adopted out, babies would languish in care despite no realistic chance of reunting with their parents. Wonder why adoption happens much more quickly now?
Targets introduced by Blair. But surely professionals wouldnt make their decisions against their judgement just to meet targets? Dont you believe it. When your job, your career and that of your entire department is determined on meeting a target, you will do whatever you need to do it.
Carswell represents the people of Clacton, those who voted for him and those who didn't.
People who voted UKIP in other constituencies are represented by other MPs from other parties.
You are thinking about it as narrowly as Carswell. Strictly speaking you are right. But the de facto position is that as UKIP's sole paliamentary representative, he speaks for all UKIP members. Caroline Lucas represents ALL green party members in the HoC. For local matters, they only speak for Clacton/Brighton Pavilion. For party specific matters, they speak for all their members across the country.
The amount he is entitled to is only do high because. 3.8 m voted for Ukip. If it were just clacton voters that were used to decide the amount it would be about half as much if that
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy. The LDs are not doing anything worthy right now: has Farron accused Clegg of being a buffoon, for example?
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
On the day that Tim Farron has announced he's running on the leadership election, for which many people are placing bets, if the LibDems aren't doing anything newsworthy that's a tad concerning!
You think it newsworthy that Tim Farron - skin stretched taut over ambition - is making a bid for power?
If carswell resigns from UKIP surely by his own code, he should need to step down and have a by-election, after he did that when he resigned from the Tories.
That would be fun - particularly if Farage ran against him under the Ukip banner.
"This is tough stuff and it is hard to see how both Farage and O’Flynn can continue in the same party. One of them surely has to go."
Correct and if it happens it will be O'Flynn.
For anybody senior in the party who willfully undermines the party by this sort of interview, they are clearly putting their own views ahead of wider party loyalty. . Why on earth did the blessed Carswell join the party if he is seemingly prepared to undermine its hard won legal entitlement to the short money, and seems to have an issue with just about everything UKIP stands for. He would do us all a favour if he just legged it to independent for the life of me I cannot see anything on him that even remotely resonates Kipper. Too many people have joined the party over the years simply to advance their own political profile and ambitions, Kilroy Silk being the case it point.
If Farage is to be criticised for anything, it is perhaps his judgement in embracing people into the party, who seem to simply want to use the 20 years of our lives we have given to build up the party as a shortcut to doing it the hard way themselves, it would seem if anything he is to trusting. If they are not committed then they and any others hiding in the shadows should just pi** off, we have survived other self important nobodies leaving, we will survive and grow whatever they do.
The fact so many of the crystal ball gazing gobsh*tes are still trying to undermine Farage, is because they see him as the real threat, which he is, we would be lunatics to get rid of him in preference to nobodies like O'Flynn and Carswell.
Rubbish. Carswell and O'Flynn and people like them should be the future of UKIP if the party has any sense. Farage did a fantastic job pulling UKIP up from insignificance to being the third party in British politics in terms of votes. But he has also made it almost impossible for UKIP or BOO to advance further whilst he remains in charge.
There is a huge list of good honest Eurosceptics who have been driven away by Farage because he cannot or will not accept that he is just one man and cannot run everything just as he likes.
He should have gone when he lost in Thanet. All he is doing now is damaging both the party and the Eurosceptic movement as a whole.
If O'Flynn goes, so does the Desmond money. If Carswell goes, so does the Short money.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
Is that true about Carswell and the Short money? I could definitely see lawyers getting involved if Carswell decides to sit as an independent.
Yes, you have to have at least one MP and 150k votes at the election to get the Short money, which is allocated based on the quantity of MPs and votes received. It is specifically for "Parliamentary Business".
Carswell''s point is that he as the MP is accountable for spending it reasonably, and that the money on offer (around 650k I think) is more than enough to cover his staff and he needs only half of it.
Farage seems to be of the view that they should take every penny of the allowance and spend it as he sees fit on UKIP's head office - as would happen with eg. EU Parliament allowances.
But UKIP's lawyers would insist they did get at least one MP and 150k votes at the election, regardless of whether Carswell later defected. How would that be resolved, do they need to have an MP at time of payments or at the time of the election? Its a messy situation that would be a lot clearer had anyone other than Carswell won.
Carswell might be a nobody - but he is a nobody who isn't so toxic he fails to get elected as an MP 8 times.
That snipe at Farage is a bit cheap. He was a massive outsider in all bar one of those (7?) elections, standing for a party with no MPs. If he was a Tory he would have been an MP for 15 years in all likelihood because of the party machine
If carswell resigns from UKIP surely by his own code, he should need to step down and have a by-election, after he did that when he resigned from the Tories.
That would be fun - particularly if Farage ran against him under the Ukip banner.
If carswell resigns from UKIP surely by his own code, he should need to step down and have a by-election, after he did that when he resigned from the Tories.
That would be fun - particularly if Farage ran against him under the Ukip banner.
I reckon Carswell would win .
..or labour wins on ~25% of the vote.
'twould be funny.
I suspect a Farage (UKIP) vs Carswell (Ind) vs everyone else by-election would be a Tory Gain. The Conservatives nearly took the seat at the election despite it (supposedly) not being a targeted seat.
I've just caught up on Miliband stitching Balls up by not warning him he would lose his seat. That is truly appalling.
Does thsi start another of Labour's famous fault lines ? Can't see Mrs B being the type of person who would let it go.
This is almost certainly scuttlebutt - how many people would have to be polled to get a margin of error of 1%?
The results were way outside their margin of error, you could have asked every single person in some constituencies and you still wouldn't have been accurate.
If O'Flynn goes, so does the Desmond money. If Carswell goes, so does the Short money.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
Is that true about Carswell and the Short money? I could definitely see lawyers getting involved if Carswell decides to sit as an independent.
Yes, you have to have at least one MP and 150k votes at the election to get the Short money, which is allocated based on the quantity of MPs and votes received. It is specifically for "Parliamentary Business".
Carswell''s point is that he as the MP is accountable for spending it reasonably, and that the money on offer (around 650k I think) is more than enough to cover his staff and he needs only half of it.
Farage seems to be of the view that they should take every penny of the allowance and spend it as he sees fit on UKIP's head office - as would happen with eg. EU Parliament allowances.
But UKIP's lawyers would insist they did get at least one MP and 150k votes at the election, regardless of whether Carswell later defected. How would that be resolved, do they need to have an MP at time of payments or at the time of the election? Its a messy situation that would be a lot clearer had anyone other than Carswell won.
An interesting point to keep lots of lawyers busy! What would be the scenario if a party's single PM defects with regard to the Short money allocation? Would this be reviewed after one year if the money is awarded annually?
Carswell's unlikely to trigger another by-election on himself out of the mess, most likely he will resign the UKIP whip and sit as an "Independent Conservative" or Independent Libertarian" in the Commons rather than formally rejoin the Tories.
If O'Flynn goes, so does the Desmond money. If Carswell goes, so does the Short money.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
Is that true about Carswell and the Short money? I could definitely see lawyers getting involved if Carswell decides to sit as an independent.
Yes, you have to have at least one MP and 150k votes at the election to get the Short money, which is allocated based on the quantity of MPs and votes received. It is specifically for "Parliamentary Business".
Carswell''s point is that he as the MP is accountable for spending it reasonably, and that the money on offer (around 650k I think) is more than enough to cover his staff and he needs only half of it.
Farage seems to be of the view that they should take every penny of the allowance and spend it as he sees fit on UKIP's head office - as would happen with eg. EU Parliament allowances.
But UKIP's lawyers would insist they did get at least one MP and 150k votes at the election, regardless of whether Carswell later defected. How would that be resolved, do they need to have an MP at time of payments or at the time of the election? Its a messy situation that would be a lot clearer had anyone other than Carswell won.
At best, the lawyers might get the Short money for 2015/16 - but not the subsequent years. Because they wouldn't have an elected MP in subsequent years.
It is admirable that Carswell wants to be frugal, and wants to be seen to be frugal. If the party were wealthy, and this money were immaterial, it would be fine statement. But UKIP is not in that position. Carswell is our only MP, representing 4 million of us. Why he thinks that would be easier to accomplish with 5 support staff, rather 15 remains unclear.
Carswell has said that poliicians need to keep promises made to electors. The Farage "unresigning" situation is playing around with the actualite. Farage and his close supporters may think it gets him off the hook from the promise to resign but I suggest that Carswell sees it as breaking an electoral promise.
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. .
Perhaps they don't?
They will come to regret it. Cameron is not going to get the EU reforms he wants and may then be faced with having an EU referendum, where he recommends that the UK still remains part of the EU. Could be a farce, which splits the Tory party and they may not recover. It could be difficult getting legislation passed in the HOC and they face a massive battle in winning votes in the HOL's anyway.
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
Do you want to frame a bet on that? I'd take the other side.
Gossip on here about in fighting is just people that don't like the party in question taking a free hit and venting their dislike, with no chance of any comeback as no kne knows what's really going on.
On the short money, I repeat that Carswells constituency contains the most rundown area in the uk, Jaywick. I would think those people living it that hell hole, would be better off with an MP that has 650k to spend in staff than 350k.
If I were Carswell I would hire staff to do my errands that were also fantastic builders, road repairers and gardeners and encourage them to tidy up the cesspit that some of his clacton residents live in. That would be a 'change' to the usual way of doing things in politics., you might even call it direct democracy.
I like Carswell and campaigned for him last year but also found the need to question why a destitute place like Jaywick existed in the same constituency as Frinton and was moved to write to him passing on the desperation I heard from it's residents. Much as I was happy for Ukip to have an Mp, and in particular a thoughtful free thinker like Carswell, i did wonder what he had done to help those people in the decade previous.
Sorry Sam but your common sense has gone out of the window over this. The wealth or otherwise of Carswell's constituency is immaterial. Not one penny of the Short Money could be spent to improve the conditions of his constituents as that is not what it is for. What you are suggesting is basically fraud or at best extremely dishonest.
The problem here starts and ends with Farage. He should have stuck to his promise and stood down when he lost. He is losing whatever credibility he had left and is damaging the party (which doesn't concern me as much) and the Eursoceptic movement (which does) a huge amount.
If O'Flynn goes, so does the Desmond money. If Carswell goes, so does the Short money.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
Is that true about Carswell and the Short money? I could definitely see lawyers getting involved if Carswell decides to sit as an independent.
Yes, you have to have at least one MP and 150k votes at the election to get the Short money, which is allocated based on the quantity of MPs and votes received. It is specifically for "Parliamentary Business".
Carswell''s point is that he as the MP is accountable for spending it reasonably, and that the money on offer (around 650k I think) is more than enough to cover his staff and he needs only half of it.
Farage seems to be of the view that they should take every penny of the allowance and spend it as he sees fit on UKIP's head office - as would happen with eg. EU Parliament allowances.
But UKIP's lawyers would insist they did get at least one MP and 150k votes at the election, regardless of whether Carswell later defected. How would that be resolved, do they need to have an MP at time of payments or at the time of the election? Its a messy situation that would be a lot clearer had anyone other than Carswell won.
An interesting point to keep lots of lawyers busy! What would be the scenario if a party's single PM defects with regard to the Short money allocation? Would this be reviewed after one year if the money is awarded annually?
Carswell's unlikely to trigger another by-election on himself out of the mess, most likely he will resign the UKIP whip and sit as an "Independent Conservative" or Independent Libertarian" in the Commons rather than formally rejoin the Tories.
Carswell could call himself a National Liberal which is about right for his views - then Clagg and Lamb can join him after Farron turns the LDs into the Liberal Socialist Worker Democrats (Unicorns for all)
Ashcroft poll - even adding on every single "refused" to the Conservative total you still don't get to a statistical minimum for the CON vote !
Ha ha - he spent how much on all these polls?
The polling industry looks as stuffed now as in 1992. From a bit of background reading and articles by Crosby and Messina, it seems that the internal polling the Tories were doing was way more comprehensive and detailed than typically gets done for the newspapers' polling.
Will the result of this be for example three or 4 papers getting together to produce one big poll every month, rather than commissioning their own smaller but less accurate polls? This is what the TV stations did for the election exit poll, which I guess with several hundred people involved would have cost close to a million to pull off. Also note that the output from these pols was in terms of seats, rather than in terms of vote shares. Is UNS as a concept now also dead as more political parties are involved in elections?
Richard out of curiosity what do you think the scenarios for Eurosceptics are following the referendum?
I currently see a few scenarios 1: Out wins. We leave, its over. There is no way there'd be a second vote to stay in. 2: England votes out, but Scotland votes in. Constitutional havoc ensues regardless of what the total is. 3: Narrow in vote. Eurosceptics keep pushing for "one more push" SNP style. 4: A significant in victory, say anything over 60%. This is what I see as most likely, but not sure how eurosceptics would respond?
If there's a significant in victory, would you consider the matter resolved for now, or would you keep agitating for out straight away?
Cameron is the luckiest general ever. All the other parties have utterly fallen apart, apart from the SNP which provide the perfect opposition for him as they are no risk at all.
Comments
I think the UK electorate made a massive mistake in giving the Tories a small majority, with only slightly more than one third of the votes. It makes it look like they don't want a system, where the votes are reflected in parties representation in parliament. FPTP is a daft system, which we will be stuck with, until people vote for the smallers parties in larger numbers in constituencies where they can win.
What a fantastic choice fotr Leader Of The Opposition!!
Did anyone compile such a roll of honour? Should it appear at the head of every thread?
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/id-rather-be-happy-than-right-2015.html
Was only two years ago, we finished third
But we gave the Lib Dems an absolute pasting. 9,000 majority
Lib Dems will be in a mess for 10+ years, as their local support bases have been demolished over the last 5 years and I think it will be difficult to get back to where they were in May 2010. Do the Lib Dems have a potential leader who is not seen as left of right politics wise ? The Libs need to appeal to as many people as possible.
Labour will I think elect Yvette Cooper, as I think it is time to see another Woman as potential PM. Also I think Cameron would struggle against her in PMQ's, as he would have to be really careful how he spoke to her.
Lets not forget this is the guy which came 4th in 2010 behind Ed Balls. That doesn't bode well. But then out of the top 4, there's little real talent. Liz Kendell is probably best, as she is at least most unknown, and so has the power to suprise. Andy Burnham is already known, and hardly stellar in any way shape or form.
The votes for both of the two main parties (and the SNP) increased significantly between 2010 and 2015. What collapsed was the Lib Dems and the BNP.
2010: LD, UKIP and BNP: 8.32 million voters
2015: LD, UKIP and BNP: 6.30 million voters
UKIP have gained from being the sole main party for protest voters. If the Lib Dems can recover a share of protest votes then UKIP may not be as relevant.
I see no groundswell of support to change the voting system to cater to those who find they can't win a plurality of votes.
Not convinced that this Tory government will last, as it could well be less stable that the coalition.
This just smacks of hubris, and him thinking he 'is' the party, which is uber dangerous for small parties. At least Caroline Lucus in the Greens realised that she shouldnt and couldn't be the only face of the party.
I do wonder if Cameron might shift to Out. I think it very unlikely, but it'd certainly make the vote more interesting.
So long as Cameron allows a free vote so that Conservatives can vote and campaign for Out - and he's said he will I think - what reason is there for the party to split?
During the AV Referendum there were Labour people campaigning for AV and Labour people campaigning for FPTP. The party didn't split on that.
The thing that is driving it is disillusion with the established parties. It is very likely this disillusionment still has a long way to go in those parts of the North that support Labour.
The other problem Labour has is the feedback I heard a few times that, if they thought UKIP could win, they would vote for it - that is likely to be a bigger drag for Labour in 2020
Considering Tristram Hunt lacks any credibility, the Blairite torchbearer seems to be Chuka who has these rather worrying social media skeletons.
On the traditional side, Andy Burnham's entry AD was all a bit embarrassing, so that leaves Yvette who I think stands a good chance.
Between Yvette and Chuka
I'm sure they'll try their hardest....
yeah, Tories only care about London.
The rise of UKIP has matched with a disillusionment in other protest parties. EG the Lib Dems and the BNP.
Yvette or Chuka will begin to create the winners narrative around them. Chaka has star quality and Yvette is very bright. Burnham lacks gravitas. And Tristram- the unmentionable.
It'll be interesting to see what approach they take. Blues and reds need a representative, of course, but what about the SNP? Will they get one as a matter of course?
Mr. 67, smaller businesses tied up by red tape and sick of the EU's bloody idiocy (I refer once again to the VAT nonsense) might disagree. That said, I concur it's very unlikely Cameron would shift from In.
I don't see how that can be justified anymore. Nor why the SNP should be denied one when they're now in the same position the LDs used to be.
EDIT: But I hope you're right and Carswell in your words decides to "pi** off" to be an Independent. Lets see UKIP "survive" as "self import nobodies" in a protest party with no MPs. Those who are in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Between the Nigel news and the Butcher candidacy it's all looking pretty good.
Hence he wont be going anywhere - expect a purge.
Palmyria are the ruins of the city that was capital of the short-lived Palmyrene Empire, latterly ruled by Empress Zenobia. It was brought back to the Roman Empire proper by Aurelian in the third century.
You really that happy to condemn UKIP to running eternal jumble sales?
Carswell might be a nobody - but he is a nobody who isn't so toxic he fails to get elected as an MP 8 times.
You are thinking about it as narrowly as Carswell. Strictly speaking you are right. But the de facto position is that as UKIP's sole paliamentary representative, he speaks for all UKIP members. Caroline Lucas represents ALL green party members in the HoC. For local matters, they only speak for Clacton/Brighton Pavilion. For party specific matters, they speak for all their members across the country.
I still support a more proportionate system, but people didn't change it when the alternative was AV, and the government has no mandate to or reason to change it again, so I cannot see it being on the horizon.
Don't f**k with the electorate in your campaigns if you don't know what to do when they believe and vote for you subsequently.
They have 4m people (now, perhaps, <4m by a fair bit but still) who they have a responsibility to represent, however formally.
Carswell I'm sure gets this although his abandoning ship attempt, if true, demeans him greatly.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
- The national executive would accept the resignation of the leader
- The leader would carry on with a resignation if he promised to do so
- An MP disagreeing over short money would make the case behind the scenes, but accept it was a decision for the party as a whole
- One of the chief spokesman would disagree with the leader in polite language that would allow a conciliation
Farage needs to either admit his unresignation was a mistake and stand aside, or he needs to promise that he will change his style of leadership to be more team-based. The current situation where every senior member of the party just does things on the fly is a joke.
Does thsi start another of Labour's famous fault lines ? Can't see Mrs B being the type of person who would let it go.
What a rollercoaster it's been for him so far.
On the short money, I repeat that Carswells constituency contains the most rundown area in the uk, Jaywick. I would think those people living it that hell hole, would be better off with an MP that has 650k to spend in staff than 350k.
If I were Carswell I would hire staff to do my errands that were also fantastic builders, road repairers and gardeners and encourage them to tidy up the cesspit that some of his clacton residents live in. That would be a 'change' to the usual way of doing things in politics., you might even call it direct democracy.
I like Carswell and campaigned for him last year but also found the need to question why a destitute place like Jaywick existed in the same constituency as Frinton and was moved to write to him passing on the desperation I heard from it's residents. Much as I was happy for Ukip to have an Mp, and in particular a thoughtful free thinker like Carswell, i did wonder what he had done to help those people in the decade previous.
Carswell''s point is that he as the MP is accountable for spending it reasonably, and that the money on offer (around 650k I think) is more than enough to cover his staff and he needs only half of it.
Farage seems to be of the view that they should take every penny of the allowance and spend it as he sees fit on UKIP's head office - as would happen with eg. EU Parliament allowances.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Money
I reckon Carswell would win .
An advisor screaming over and over again at the telly? Nah.
Miliband was proved to be misguided but he had a right to believe the polls and I'm pretty sure his top team - by that point in the campaign - would've been together and confident.
Targets introduced by Blair. But surely professionals wouldnt make their decisions against their judgement just to meet targets? Dont you believe it. When your job, your career and that of your entire department is determined on meeting a target, you will do whatever you need to do it.
'twould be funny.
There is a huge list of good honest Eurosceptics who have been driven away by Farage because he cannot or will not accept that he is just one man and cannot run everything just as he likes.
He should have gone when he lost in Thanet. All he is doing now is damaging both the party and the Eurosceptic movement as a whole.
Carswell's unlikely to trigger another by-election on himself out of the mess, most likely he will resign the UKIP whip and sit as an "Independent Conservative" or Independent Libertarian" in the Commons rather than formally rejoin the Tories.
The problem here starts and ends with Farage. He should have stuck to his promise and stood down when he lost. He is losing whatever credibility he had left and is damaging the party (which doesn't concern me as much) and the Eursoceptic movement (which does) a huge amount.
Ashcroft poll - even adding on every single "refused" to the Conservative total you still don't get to a statistical minimum for the CON vote !
The polling industry looks as stuffed now as in 1992. From a bit of background reading and articles by Crosby and Messina, it seems that the internal polling the Tories were doing was way more comprehensive and detailed than typically gets done for the newspapers' polling.
Will the result of this be for example three or 4 papers getting together to produce one big poll every month, rather than commissioning their own smaller but less accurate polls? This is what the TV stations did for the election exit poll, which I guess with several hundred people involved would have cost close to a million to pull off. Also note that the output from these pols was in terms of seats, rather than in terms of vote shares. Is UNS as a concept now also dead as more political parties are involved in elections?
I currently see a few scenarios
1: Out wins. We leave, its over. There is no way there'd be a second vote to stay in.
2: England votes out, but Scotland votes in. Constitutional havoc ensues regardless of what the total is.
3: Narrow in vote. Eurosceptics keep pushing for "one more push" SNP style.
4: A significant in victory, say anything over 60%. This is what I see as most likely, but not sure how eurosceptics would respond?
If there's a significant in victory, would you consider the matter resolved for now, or would you keep agitating for out straight away?
Ally of Farage: "Carswell is a c**t."
Tremendous.
Jim Pickard @PickardJE · 7s8 seconds ago
I need to be a bit careful with the phrase "ally of Farage" given that they are a diminishing crew.