politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP are doing a passable impression of ferrets in a sack a

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP are doing a passable impression of ferrets in a sack again

The above is a tweet from Douglas Carswell quoting an article about the UKIP donor Arron Banks, the rest of Douglas Carswell’s twitter feed over the past few days has been similarly entertaining about his disagreements and issues with Banks and his staff.

Read the full story here

logical_song

UKIP - A party with one MP, split down the middle. How did they manage that?

Plato_Says

How different countries feel about #Putin: 92% of French mistrust him, but look at #China... (via @conradhackett) http://t.co/vpCogUtV52

Cyclefree

Ils ne sont pas des hommes serieux.

HYUFD

The SNP saw their biggest rise in the months leading to indyref, until EUref actually draws near UKIP will not see any significant increase

Richard_Tyndall

I disagree with only one point of your thread header TSE. Whilst people leaving UKIP is bad for UKIP, that does not mean it is bad for the wider Leave campaign. Those people are not suddenly going to stop being Eurosceptic because they are not in UKIP. All they will do is redirect their energies elsewhere in the fight. Indeed the more Eurosceptic voices there are independent of Farage the better for the movement.

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Tyndall said:

I disagree with only one point of your thread header TSE. Whilst people leaving UKIP is bad for UKIP, that does not mean it is bad for the wider Leave campaign. Those people are not suddenly going to stop being Eurosceptic because they are not in UKIP. All they will do is redirect their energies elsewhere in the fight. Indeed the more Eurosceptic voices there are independent of Farage the better for the movement.

Yes Richard, you're right, I'll amend that bit now.

Plato_Says

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

HYUFD

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

CornishBlue

Plato_Says said:

How different countries feel about #Putin: 92% of French mistrust him, but look at #China... (via @conradhackett) http://t.co/vpCogUtV52

The Chinese people, due to their country's long-standing political culture, are very naive about, well, pretty much everything. Can't blame them. But in the end, also thanks to that very political culture, their views quite literally don't count.

Plato_Says

Yes, they've applied to EC to be wound-up. Jezza's said Trots and Commies are welcome to his fold.

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

AlastairMeeks

UKIP are looking to control the Leave campaign. That's the action of a party that is more interested in its own future electoral success than in winning the referendum.

HYUFD

Plato_Says said:

Yes, they've applied to EC to be wound-up. Jezza's said Trots and Commies are welcome to his fold.

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

Yes, Kinnock's reforms are already being unwound

DavidL

Is the growth of UKIP the best thing to ever happen to the Tories? Previous leaders had to waste so much time and effort appeasing or simply tolerating these people. Cameron is indeed a lucky general.

Pong

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

Surely George Galloway has to either retire from politics, or rejoin labour?

He must know the success of the whole corbyn project relies on khan not losing.

Plato_Says

Chris Snowden
This from @Demos shows how ridiculously optimistic the get-out-the-youth-vote strategy is for Labour. http://t.co/sF4Fwi2jiK

SandyRentool

Pong said:

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

Surely George Galloway has to either retire from politics, or rejoin labour?

He must know the success of the whole corbyn project relies on khan not losing.

Galloway can endorse Khan for second preferences, and then claim a key role in his success (if he wins).

HYUFD

Pong said:

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

Surely George Galloway has to either retire from politics, or rejoin labour?

He must know the success of the whole corbyn project relies on khan not losing.

He has tried

MP_SE

DavidL said:

Is the growth of UKIP the best thing to ever happen to the Tories? Previous leaders had to waste so much time and effort appeasing or simply tolerating these people. Cameron is indeed a lucky general.

If UKIP implode their members/supporters have to go somewhere. A significant chunk could return to the Tories and retoxify them.

HYUFD

DavidL said:

Is the growth of UKIP the best thing to ever happen to the Tories? Previous leaders had to waste so much time and effort appeasing or simply tolerating these people. Cameron is indeed a lucky general.

Under AV it would be more of a benefit than FTP

Plato_Says

IIRC He's been told he can't rejoin - maybe that will be reversed too since he's a pal of Jezza

Pong said:

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

Surely George Galloway has to either retire from politics, or rejoin labour?

He must know the success of the whole corbyn project relies on khan not losing.

JEO

DavidL said:

Is the growth of UKIP the best thing to ever happen to the Tories? Previous leaders had to waste so much time and effort appeasing or simply tolerating these people. Cameron is indeed a lucky general.

The idea that losing voters and activists is a good thing in a democratic system is ridiculous. We need to be a broad tent, and continuing to insult swathes of the electorate is not just elitist snobbery, but strategically foolish. I am appalled by the idea that we should not tolerate people with different opinions.

surbiton

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

Yes, they've applied to EC to be wound-up. Jezza's said Trots and Commies are welcome to his fold.

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

Yes, Kinnock's reforms are already being unwound

There is a big difference between the left like the CP and the LU vs the Militant.

The Militant's were more like an entryist party with some confusing ideology. The CP, LU and Green members are joining through the front door.

isam

Ah, the barely legible Sunday thread...

" Mark Reckless losing his is seat May "

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

MarqueeMark

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.

Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

DavidL

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Plato_Says

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11894360/Labours-next-leader-could-come-from-either-side-of-the-party.html

Everyone has their own pet theory for the rise of Corbynism. Here’s one of mine. Despite everything, I think the majority of Labour party members are political pragmatists who would like to see their party in power. The problem is that the last leadership election was presented to them as a council of despair. There was common agreement amongst shadow ministers, Labour MPs, Labour officials, commentators and seasoned Labour activists that whoever became leader would lose the 2020 general election. There was even talk of building in a rule change mandating a fresh leadership election half-way through the parliament.

I think the average Labour party member is still instinctively prepared to make compromises for electoral success. But what they are no longer prepared to do is make compromises for electoral failure. Presented with a scenario where the next election was already lost, they decided, “screw it. If we’re going to lose, we may as well lose in style”.

MikeK

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

surbiton

He is not named Reckless for nothing !

tlg86

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.

Maybe he thought Ukip reflected his values better than the Tories? Not all politicians think only about their career - he must have known that holding the seat at the election would be difficult.

tlg86

I agree with Richard Tyndall that the result of the EU Referendum does not depend upon Ukip. Mrs Merkel is doing a fine job for us thank you very much.

JEO

tlg86 said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.

Maybe he thought Ukip reflected his values better than the Tories? Not all politicians think only about their career - he must have known that holding the seat at the election would be difficult.

I regret Reckless leaving the Conservative party, but it does seem odd to criticise a politician for putting his beliefs before his reelection chances.

MikeK

antifrank said:

UKIP are looking to control the Leave campaign. That's the action of a party that is more interested in its own future electoral success than in winning the referendum.

Actually @antifrank the opposite is true.

surbiton

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

isam

tlg86 said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.

Maybe he thought Ukip reflected his values better than the Tories? Not all politicians think only about their career - he must have known that holding the seat at the election would be difficult.

It shows how partisan people can be when a politician is criticised for not being lazy, selfish and greedy

Plato_Says

Interesting to see this said outloud

Chris Leslie MP, the former shadow chancellor, has warned that Labour has a "deficiency" of people with business experience in its team.

Quote I think we do suffer from a deficiency of people who have business experience and business backgrounds. I think that is a problem and we do need to make sure we are broader.

"It worries me that when I look at the Conservative benches, that they have very carefully broadened out those who have come into parliament and so they have quite a diverse group who have come from various different backgrounds.

"Good for them, it's not the unrepresentative clique it used to be. So I think we've got quite a lot of work to do there.

"We have to be able to be comfortable to talk about the way business models work and that sometimes talking about profit is not always a bad thing. Its very uncomfortable in the Labour Party to say that."

JEO

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

DavidL

JEO said:

DavidL said:

Is the growth of UKIP the best thing to ever happen to the Tories? Previous leaders had to waste so much time and effort appeasing or simply tolerating these people. Cameron is indeed a lucky general.

The idea that losing voters and activists is a good thing in a democratic system is ridiculous. We need to be a broad tent, and continuing to insult swathes of the electorate is not just elitist snobbery, but strategically foolish. I am appalled by the idea that we should not tolerate people with different opinions.

Seriously? You don't think it is going to be a problem for Labour having people who think like the Shadow Chancellor? There are a whole range of views and activists that are positively damaging to a political party trying to win power.

The Tories gained the votes of ex Lib Dems and floating voters because they no longer had to pretend the views of those who write beneath the line in the Telegraph were in some way ok. It was a very profitable exchange for them. Labour are doing the reverse absorbing the loons to their left at the price of their centre. This will not go well.

surbiton

isam said:

Ah, the barely legible Sunday thread...

" Mark Reckless losing his is seat May "

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Please step forward, Sam !

SandyRentool

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

There was a presentation on how STV works at the Kipper conference. What I struggle with is how the Surplus Votes bit works. How is it decided which pile of votes is classed as the surplus?

MarkHopkins

SandyRentool said:

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

There was a presentation on how STV works at the Kipper conference. What I struggle with is how the Surplus Votes bit works. How is it decided which pile of votes is classed as the surplus?

"How is it decided which pile of votes is classed as the surplus?"

The ones not for Nigel?

isam

surbiton said:

isam said:

Ah, the barely legible Sunday thread...

" Mark Reckless losing his is seat May "

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Please step forward, Sam !

I didn't stand!

But Peter Whittle did, he is a perfectly decent candidate, and is a Londoner who did well at the GE in his seat. He is an able media performer and writes for Standpoint.

Suzanne campaigned in Shrewsbury 4 months ago on the basis of being a local girl. Looks a bit much to start wanting to be Mayor of London all of a sudden.

HYUFD

surbiton said:

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

Yes, they've applied to EC to be wound-up. Jezza's said Trots and Commies are welcome to his fold.

HYUFD said:

Plato_Says said:

The Greenies are in a churn position according to Caroline Lucas - losing some to Labour, but gaining more newbies.

There was some talk in the ST today that Ken Loach's Left Unity and a Marxist Party may disband to allow members to join Labour

Yes, Kinnock's reforms are already being unwound

There is a big difference between the left like the CP and the LU vs the Militant.

The Militant's were more like an entryist party with some confusing ideology. The CP, LU and Green members are joining through the front door.

The LU and so on have exactly the same aims as Militant just Corbyn is giving them a welcome mat, Kinnock pushed them out through the back door

HYUFD

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

PR would have certainly given UKIP at least 60 seats or so, AV would not have given them many more, but would have likely increased the Tory majority

Luckyguy1983

If Carswell had been prepared to accept the money that UKIP was entitled to, then it might be less beholden financially to this Arron person.

As for pointing and laughing, what have PBTories got to laugh at? Have you been elected? Are you in the cabinet? Congratulations on 'your' majority, whilst Osborne silently accedes to the EU's demands for cash and Cameron gets ready to offer a half baked 'renegotiation' package of things we could and should have done years ago. The only people pointing and laughing are Osborne and Cameron, at the droves of people they managed to scare into voting for them.

As for not voting on the biggest constitutional issue faced by this country for a generation because it might lead to a 'grinning Farage' - there really are no words.

Plato_Says

If you're enjoying advocating for a right-wing movement/Leave - there's still plenty of ways to add your energies over the next year or so with the EU ref.

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

isam

Luckyguy1983 said:

If Carswell had been prepared to accept the money that UKIP was entitled to, then it might be less beholden financially to this Arron person.

As for pointing and laughing, what have PBTories got to laugh at? Have you been elected? Are you in the cabinet? Congratulations on 'your' majority, whilst Osborne silently accedes to the EU's demands for cash and Cameron gets ready to offer a half baked 'renegotiation' package of things we could and should have done years ago. The only people pointing and laughing are Osborne and Cameron, at the droves of people they managed to scare into voting for them.

As for not voting on the biggest constitutional issue faced by this country for a generation because it might lead to a 'grinning Farage' - there really are no words.

"As for not voting on the biggest constitutional issue faced by this country for a generation because it might lead to a 'grinning Farage' - there really are no words"

...and they assume everyone else thinks the same as them too

tlg86

isam said:

surbiton said:

isam said:

Ah, the barely legible Sunday thread...

" Mark Reckless losing his is seat May "

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Please step forward, Sam !

I didn't stand!

But Peter Whittle did, he is a perfectly decent candidate, and is a Londoner who did well at the GE in his seat. He is an able media performer and writes for Standpoint.

Suzanne campaigned in Shrewsbury 4 months ago on the basis of being a local girl. Looks a bit much to start wanting to be Mayor of London all of a sudden.

Well said. It amuses me how much of an expert TSE is on the inner workings of Ukip.

DavidL

Having reread the thread my comments come across as arrogant and ignorant. There are of course many excellent people in UKIP, several of whom contribute to this site. I am not suggesting that their views are extreme or lunatic per se. I am suggesting that playing inside right is a very good place for the Tories. And some of UKIPs supporters do their party no favours.

TCPoliticalBetting

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.
Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Having got the EC referendum agreed, their defections to UKIP were a puzzle then and now. I absolutely accept that Cameron is mounting a trivial half hearted attempt at re-negotiation, just look at his europhile europe minister. That said what was the attraction of UKIP a party run by a dictator who changes his mind depending upon what bed he gets out of? Reckless (by name and action) is apparently chasing a welsh assembly seat.... Meanwhile Farage has fallen out with his deputy leader and his Express journo convert.

Richard_Tyndall

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

TCPoliticalBetting

isam said:

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Because she had a better chance of winning than the alternative UKIP choice and would increase the overall UKIP vote in London. But if purity of residence is your criteria rather than electability so be it.

Sean_F

DavidL said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

Is the growth of UKIP the best thing to ever happen to the Tories? Previous leaders had to waste so much time and effort appeasing or simply tolerating these people. Cameron is indeed a lucky general.

The idea that losing voters and activists is a good thing in a democratic system is ridiculous. We need to be a broad tent, and continuing to insult swathes of the electorate is not just elitist snobbery, but strategically foolish. I am appalled by the idea that we should not tolerate people with different opinions.

Seriously? You don't think it is going to be a problem for Labour having people who think like the Shadow Chancellor? There are a whole range of views and activists that are positively damaging to a political party trying to win power.

The Tories gained the votes of ex Lib Dems and floating voters because they no longer had to pretend the views of those who write beneath the line in the Telegraph were in some way ok. It was a very profitable exchange for them. Labour are doing the reverse absorbing the loons to their left at the price of their centre. This will not go well.

I think Labour do need the support of people like John McDonnell. They're just not sufficient on their own, to win.

JEO

DavidL said:

Having reread the thread my comments come across as arrogant and ignorant. There are of course many excellent people in UKIP, several of whom contribute to this site. I am not suggesting that their views are extreme or lunatic per se. I am suggesting that playing inside right is a very good place for the Tories. And some of UKIPs supporters do their party no favours.

Thanks for clarifying. That's a much more reasonable position. I (partially) disagree, but it's a much more reasonable position!

Mortimer

Plato_Says said:

Interesting to see this said outloud

Chris Leslie MP, the former shadow chancellor, has warned that Labour has a "deficiency" of people with business experience in its team.

Quote I think we do suffer from a deficiency of people who have business experience and business backgrounds. I think that is a problem and we do need to make sure we are broader.

"It worries me that when I look at the Conservative benches, that they have very carefully broadened out those who have come into parliament and so they have quite a diverse group who have come from various different backgrounds.

"Good for them, it's not the unrepresentative clique it used to be. So I think we've got quite a lot of work to do there.

"We have to be able to be comfortable to talk about the way business models work and that sometimes talking about profit is not always a bad thing. Its very uncomfortable in the Labour Party to say that."

I thought this interesting, too.

Leslie on manoeuvres? Can anyone imagine him defecting to LDs? If he wants to be the obvious successor leader, he could be - better communicator than Hunt without the glamour of Chuka...

DavidL

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

Sean_F

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

If Angela Merkel succeeds in procuring a Leave vote, I expect much of UKIP support would drift back to the Conservatives as a matter of course.

logical_song

HYUFD said:

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

PR would have certainly given UKIP at least 60 seats or so, AV would not have given them many more, but would have likely increased the Tory majority

That depends surely on how people would have voted if they weren't scared of 'wasting' their vote. One could argue that people scared into voting for one of the two main parties would have been felt free to vote for their real first choice. Those that wanted the coalition to continue may have voted LD, Tory. Those that wanted out of EU may have voted UKIP, Tory. In any case 'not many more' than one would still have been welcomed by UKIP.

Richard_Tyndall

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.

Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

If you would put personal dislike of one man ahead of your personal view on the most important constitutional question of your lifetime then you are, not to put too fine a point on it, a fool.

tlg86

isam said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

If Carswell had been prepared to accept the money that UKIP was entitled to, then it might be less beholden financially to this Arron person.

As for pointing and laughing, what have PBTories got to laugh at? Have you been elected? Are you in the cabinet? Congratulations on 'your' majority, whilst Osborne silently accedes to the EU's demands for cash and Cameron gets ready to offer a half baked 'renegotiation' package of things we could and should have done years ago. The only people pointing and laughing are Osborne and Cameron, at the droves of people they managed to scare into voting for them.

As for not voting on the biggest constitutional issue faced by this country for a generation because it might lead to a 'grinning Farage' - there really are no words.

"As for not voting on the biggest constitutional issue faced by this country for a generation because it might lead to a 'grinning Farage' - there really are no words"

...and they assume everyone else thinks the same as them too

I think it might make a difference - but only a small one. The thing is, time and again, when presented with the issue of Europe a good chunk of people in this country agree with Ukip. At the GE, Europe is a minor issue. But make no mistake, the referendum is all about the EU and to many people (i.e. much more than voted Ukip in May) Farage and Ukip are on the right side of the argument.

TheScreamingEagles

JEO said:

DavidL said:

Is the growth of UKIP the best thing to ever happen to the Tories? Previous leaders had to waste so much time and effort appeasing or simply tolerating these people. Cameron is indeed a lucky general.

The idea that losing voters and activists is a good thing in a democratic system is ridiculous. We need to be a broad tent, and continuing to insult swathes of the electorate is not just elitist snobbery, but strategically foolish. I am appalled by the idea that we should not tolerate people with different opinions.

Cameron has built a broad tent.

Think about it, a right wing/leaver like Casino Royale is very enthusiastic about Cameron and his government, but someone like DavidL or Scrapheap who are on the one Nation/Pro European wing of the Tory party are equally enthusiastic about Cameron and his government.

And what about the inverse snobbery that some Kippers refer to Cameron et al for being part of the Oxbridge metropolitan metrosexual elite?

TheScreamingEagles

tlg86 said:

isam said:

surbiton said:

isam said:

Ah, the barely legible Sunday thread...

" Mark Reckless losing his is seat May "

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Please step forward, Sam !

I didn't stand!

But Peter Whittle did, he is a perfectly decent candidate, and is a Londoner who did well at the GE in his seat. He is an able media performer and writes for Standpoint.

Suzanne campaigned in Shrewsbury 4 months ago on the basis of being a local girl. Looks a bit much to start wanting to be Mayor of London all of a sudden.

Well said. It amuses me how much of an expert TSE is on the inner workings of Ukip.

Becoming Mayor of London is less about party label and more about character.

Boris was the MP for that well known London seat of Henley and stood for Mayor of London and won.

Whenever I've seen Suzanne Evans I've been impressed by her. I might not agree with her but she comes across well.

TheScreamingEagles

Plus had Suzanne Evans had become UKIP London Mayoral candidate, it would have given Mike an excuse to run this picture of her in future thread headers, as he loves this picture.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPvuQeTWsAATJLy.jpg

tlg86

Sean_F said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

If Angela Merkel succeeds in procuring a Leave vote, I expect much of UKIP support would drift back to the Conservatives as a matter of course.

It's an interesting question. Personally what drove me away from the Tories was the help to buy scheme. Osborne's started to repair some of the damage with reducing the tax relief on buy to let, but they would still need to do much more to get me back.

Luckyguy1983

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Would that there were a 'Cameron orthodoxy'! At least (whether or not one agreed with it) one would be able to highlight inconsistencies. As far as I can see, all Cameronism consists of is a spin operation for whatever America or Brussels wants us to do at any one time.

Richard_Tyndall

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

In which case I also apologise. I can't blame the rugby however.

Sean_F

SandyRentool said:

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

There was a presentation on how STV works at the Kipper conference. What I struggle with is how the Surplus Votes bit works. How is it decided which pile of votes is classed as the surplus?

The surplus is the straightforward bit of STV. If say, a seat has 5 members, then one sixth of the vote is needed for a candidate to be elected. If say, one candidate won 25%, then that part of his vote which exceeds 16.67% is redistributed to his second choices.

I've never understood, though, how fractions of votes get redistributed.

DavidL

Richard_Tyndall said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

In which case I also apologise. I can't blame the rugby however.

Since when did the US even play bloody rugby? This is awful.

perdix

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.
Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Having got the EC referendum agreed, their defections to UKIP were a puzzle then and now. I absolutely accept that Cameron is mounting a trivial half hearted attempt at re-negotiation, just look at his europhile europe minister. That said what was the attraction of UKIP a party run by a dictator who changes his mind depending upon what bed he gets out of? Reckless (by name and action) is apparently chasing a welsh assembly seat.... Meanwhile Farage has fallen out with his deputy leader and his Express journo convert.

I might vote to leave in spite of the egotistical antics of Arron Banks.

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

In which case I also apologise. I can't blame the rugby however.

Since when did the US even play bloody rugby? This is awful.

This is the Scottish rugby team you're talking about. They make anyone look world class.

TCPoliticalBetting

The two key people planning the activity of Business for Britain are Mathew Elliott and Dominic Cummings. Elliott led the anti-AV campaign to victory and Cummings has worked with him on that and other activities. Cummings says he is not a member of the Conservative party. The puzzle is why Farage and his largest donor want to have something seperate to these two? Why describe them as westminster politicians when they are clearly not? Carswell clearly thinks they are far more credible and able than the Aaron Banks/ Farage show. Yet Carswell is attcked by his own party because Farage says that Elliott and Cummings are Conservative party stooges incapable of winning.... Again this seems more about Farage's weakness for always wanting to be top dog.

MP_SE

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.
Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Having got the EC referendum agreed, their defections to UKIP were a puzzle then and now. I absolutely accept that Cameron is mounting a trivial half hearted attempt at re-negotiation, just look at his europhile europe minister. That said what was the attraction of UKIP a party run by a dictator who changes his mind depending upon what bed he gets out of? Reckless (by name and action) is apparently chasing a welsh assembly seat.... Meanwhile Farage has fallen out with his deputy leader and his Express journo convert.

Quite worrying if what Guido says is true:

https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/647744417877610496

ThreeQuidder

Richard_Tyndall said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.

Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

If you would put personal dislike of one man ahead of your personal view on the most important constitutional question of your lifetime then you are, not to put too fine a point on it, a fool.

It's not just one man, but everything that he stands for.

malcolmg

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

Scotland really struggling here. 13-6 down is unbelievable.

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

In which case I also apologise. I can't blame the rugby however.

Since when did the US even play bloody rugby? This is awful.

This is the Scottish rugby team you're talking about. They make anyone look world class.

And Wales?

TCPoliticalBetting

"Business for Britain is led by its Chief Executive, Matthew Elliott, and Co-Chairmen Alan Halsall (Chairman, Silver Cross Holdings) and John Mills (Chairman and Founder, JML) and a strong Board of successful leaders, including: Neville Baxter, Harriet Bridgeman CBE, Dr Peter Cruddas, Robert Hiscox, Daniel Hodson, John Hoerner, Brian Kingham Adrian McAlpine and Jon Moynihan OBE."
http://businessforbritain.org/about/

SandyRentool

Sean_F said:

SandyRentool said:

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

There was a presentation on how STV works at the Kipper conference. What I struggle with is how the Surplus Votes bit works. How is it decided which pile of votes is classed as the surplus?

The surplus is the straightforward bit of STV. If say, a seat has 5 members, then one sixth of the vote is needed for a candidate to be elected. If say, one candidate won 25%, then that part of his vote which exceeds 16.67% is redistributed to his second choices.

I've never understood, though, how fractions of votes get redistributed.

Yes, but specially which votes? Let's say a LibDem gets elected, if their surplus votes come from a pile from a Lib-Con marginal ward they would break differently to those from a Lib-Lab ward. Or is it based on a statistical analysis rather than real piles of votes?

DavidL

malcolmg said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

Scotland really struggling here.

Too many changes. Given the short turn around you can understand why but we don't have the strength in depth to make that many.

tlg86

So I'm more political than betting, but when do we think the referendum will be? Not so long ago it sounded like 2016 was nailed on - in fact, I even heard one news bulletin refer to next year's referendum - but it's gone a little quiet. Currently, with Sky Bet, you can get 1/3 on 2016, 2/1 on 2017 with prices starting at 25/1 for 2018 onwards.

At what point will, say, a September 2016 date have to be confirmed by?

MikeK

Raheem Kassam @RaheemKassam
.@GuidoFawkes, "I was out with the PM's aides last week and they laughed about EU renegotiations. They're not even pretending it's real."
1:07 PM - 26 Sep 2015

Which is not surprising in the least. The whole Cammo referendum has always been a farce.

isam

tlg86 said:

isam said:

surbiton said:

isam said:

Ah, the barely legible Sunday thread...

" Mark Reckless losing his is seat May "

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Please step forward, Sam !

I didn't stand!

But Peter Whittle did, he is a perfectly decent candidate, and is a Londoner who did well at the GE in his seat. He is an able media performer and writes for Standpoint.

Suzanne campaigned in Shrewsbury 4 months ago on the basis of being a local girl. Looks a bit much to start wanting to be Mayor of London all of a sudden.

Well said. It amuses me how much of an expert TSE is on the inner workings of Ukip.

About as much of an expert as he is on betting

HYUFD

logical_song said:

HYUFD said:

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

PR would have certainly given UKIP at least 60 seats or so, AV would not have given them many more, but would have likely increased the Tory majority

That depends surely on how people would have voted if they weren't scared of 'wasting' their vote. One could argue that people scared into voting for one of the two main parties would have been felt free to vote for their real first choice. Those that wanted the coalition to continue may have voted LD, Tory. Those that wanted out of EU may have voted UKIP, Tory. In any case 'not many more' than one would still have been welcomed by UKIP.

The Tories would have won most UKIP or LD preferences, in the likes of Thanet South AV would have seen Labour preferences go to the Tories not UKIP

MarkHopkins

MP_SE said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.
Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Having got the EC referendum agreed, their defections to UKIP were a puzzle then and now. I absolutely accept that Cameron is mounting a trivial half hearted attempt at re-negotiation, just look at his europhile europe minister. That said what was the attraction of UKIP a party run by a dictator who changes his mind depending upon what bed he gets out of? Reckless (by name and action) is apparently chasing a welsh assembly seat.... Meanwhile Farage has fallen out with his deputy leader and his Express journo convert.

Quite worrying if what Guido says is true:

twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/647744417877610496

It just make Out more likely as the result.

isam

TCPoliticalBetting said:

isam said:

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Because she had a better chance of winning than the alternative UKIP choice and would increase the overall UKIP vote in London. But if purity of residence is your criteria rather than electability so be it.

Neither have any chance

Nice attempted smear though.. how clever you are

tlg86

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

isam said:

surbiton said:

isam said:

Ah, the barely legible Sunday thread...

" Mark Reckless losing his is seat May "

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Please step forward, Sam !

I didn't stand!

But Peter Whittle did, he is a perfectly decent candidate, and is a Londoner who did well at the GE in his seat. He is an able media performer and writes for Standpoint.

Suzanne campaigned in Shrewsbury 4 months ago on the basis of being a local girl. Looks a bit much to start wanting to be Mayor of London all of a sudden.

Well said. It amuses me how much of an expert TSE is on the inner workings of Ukip.

Becoming Mayor of London is less about party label and more about character.

Boris was the MP for that well known London seat of Henley and stood for Mayor of London and won.

Whenever I've seen Suzanne Evans I've been impressed by her. I might not agree with her but she comes across well.

She would have/will made/make an excellent leader of the party. Corbyn's got quite an affable personality - do you think he could have won the mayoralty were he to be running instead of Khan?

Sean_F

SandyRentool said:

Sean_F said:

SandyRentool said:

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

I can only say that it does not surprise me that UKIP has lost 10% of it's membership since the election.

After all the build up prior to the election by some kippers, including me, the outcome of the GE was a huge disappointment, and the ructions about Farage's resignation didn't help. That UKIP has not advanced since the elections is evident by the poor attendance at the recently completed conference..

One of my reasons for joining UKIP was that I wanted to see a vibrant right wing party exist in the UK, (and I don't mean a so called far right party) and the rise of UKIP in 2013/14 was such a chance.

I will not resign my membership, but will let it lapse come March if there is no improvement. Also perhaps, at the age of 81, I need to let younger people take up the fight.

Many on PB will laugh and chuckle at what I have written; so be it. All I can say to that is get stuffed!

Ironically, any system close to PR [ not necessarily PR ] would have given UKIP or your party of the Right reasonable representation. AV or d'hondt would have given UKIP many more seats.

Was there a motion in favour of PR at the Lib Dem conference ?

There was a presentation on how STV works at the Kipper conference. What I struggle with is how the Surplus Votes bit works. How is it decided which pile of votes is classed as the surplus?

The surplus is the straightforward bit of STV. If say, a seat has 5 members, then one sixth of the vote is needed for a candidate to be elected. If say, one candidate won 25%, then that part of his vote which exceeds 16.67% is redistributed to his second choices.

I've never understood, though, how fractions of votes get redistributed.

Yes, but specially which votes? Let's say a LibDem gets elected, if their surplus votes come from a pile from a Lib-Con marginal ward they would break differently to those from a Lib-Lab ward. Or is it based on a statistical analysis rather than real piles of votes?

Real votes.

Suppose in my example, the quota is 10,000 votes. The top candidate has 5,000 to redistribute. Suppose he's Labour, and Labour have fielded two more candidates, and Con, Lib Dem, and UKIP have fielded three each. Suppose his second preferences are 60% Labour, 20%, Lib Dem, and 10% each Con and UKIP.

That means 3,000 votes will be redistributed to the other Labour candidates, 1,000 to the Lib Dems, 500 each to Con and UKIP.

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

In which case I also apologise. I can't blame the rugby however.

Since when did the US even play bloody rugby? This is awful.

This is the Scottish rugby team you're talking about. They make anyone look world class.

And Wales?

Wales were due to win one.

But we've won a world cup and been to two other finals.

Besides I'm not a rugby fan.

HYUFD

New NBC poll

GOP

Trump: 21
Carson: 20
Rubio: 11
Carly: 11
Bush: 7
Kasich: 6
Cruz: 5
Christie: 3
Paul: 3
Huckabee: 2
Santorum: 1
Jindal: 1
Graham: 0
Pataki: 0

Democrats

Clinton 42
Sanders 35
Biden 17
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/nbc-wsj-poll-2016-gop-race-n433991

Sean_F

MarkHopkins said:

MP_SE said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.
Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Having got the EC referendum agreed, their defections to UKIP were a puzzle then and now. I absolutely accept that Cameron is mounting a trivial half hearted attempt at re-negotiation, just look at his europhile europe minister. That said what was the attraction of UKIP a party run by a dictator who changes his mind depending upon what bed he gets out of? Reckless (by name and action) is apparently chasing a welsh assembly seat.... Meanwhile Farage has fallen out with his deputy leader and his Express journo convert.

Quite worrying if what Guido says is true:

twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/647744417877610496

It just make Out more likely as the result.

I'm not bothered either. The renegotiations (such as they are) are obviously going nowhere, but events are helping Leave.

rottenborough

HYUFD said:

New NBC poll

GOP

Trump: 21
Carson: 20
Rubio: 11
Carly: 11
Bush: 7
Kasich: 6
Cruz: 5
Christie: 3
Paul: 3
Huckabee: 2
Santorum: 1
Jindal: 1
Graham: 0
Pataki: 0

Democrats

Clinton 42
Sanders 35
Biden 17
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/nbc-wsj-poll-2016-gop-race-n433991

Looking good for Fiorina.

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

In which case I also apologise. I can't blame the rugby however.

Since when did the US even play bloody rugby? This is awful.

This is the Scottish rugby team you're talking about. They make anyone look world class.

And Wales?

Wales were due to win one.

But we've won a world cup and been to two other finals.

Besides I'm not a rugby fan.

Modern rugby is just too brutal for my tastes. The rules were not designed for 20 stone men going at 20mph. The injuries in yesterday's game were alarming and this has been more of the same.

But this is still ridiculous.

MP_SE

MarkHopkins said:

MP_SE said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.
Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Having got the EC referendum agreed, their defections to UKIP were a puzzle then and now. I absolutely accept that Cameron is mounting a trivial half hearted attempt at re-negotiation, just look at his europhile europe minister. That said what was the attraction of UKIP a party run by a dictator who changes his mind depending upon what bed he gets out of? Reckless (by name and action) is apparently chasing a welsh assembly seat.... Meanwhile Farage has fallen out with his deputy leader and his Express journo convert.

Quite worrying if what Guido says is true:

twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/647744417877610496

It just make Out more likely as the result.

Yes, when In looked almost certain there would be no incentive to get any reforms. Now Leave is very winnable.

2017 for the referendum looks like a good betting opportunity if Cameron has done little work on the negotiation so far.

TCPoliticalBetting

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

isam said:

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Because she had a better chance of winning than the alternative UKIP choice and would increase the overall UKIP vote in London. But if purity of residence is your criteria rather than electability so be it.

Neither have any chance
Nice attempted smear though.. how clever you are

What smear? Purity of residence is often used on Lib Dem Focus sheets?

flightpath01

SNP business spokeswoman in a spot of ethical bother (Sunday Times). Property scandals.

rottenborough

The problem for UKIP surely is that this is a kamikaze mission? Win the Referendum and their party becomes utterly pointless and finished. Perhaps sub-consciously part of Farage doesn't want to win.

isam

TCPoliticalBetting said:

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

isam said:

As for Suzanne Evans and the mayoralty, why would UKIP want a non Londoner, who stood in Shrewsbury, as their London Rep when they have equally good people from London who stood in London?

Because she had a better chance of winning than the alternative UKIP choice and would increase the overall UKIP vote in London. But if purity of residence is your criteria rather than electability so be it.

Neither have any chance
Nice attempted smear though.. how clever you are

What smear? Purity of residence is often used on Lib Dem Focus sheets?

Oh fair enough I thought it was... and the fact you know what part I meant makes me think I was right!

TCPoliticalBetting

MikeK said:

Raheem Kassam @RaheemKassam
.@GuidoFawkes, "I was out with the PM's aides last week and they laughed about EU renegotiations. They're not even pretending it's real."
1:07 PM - 26 Sep 2015

Which is not surprising in the least. The whole Cammo referendum has always been a farce.

Yes it is. Something Daniel Hannon has continually pointed out. but if Cameron thinks that this will improve his cances of remaining he is mistaken. Look at the Business for Britain publications to see how they are setting things up for a coherent alternative by first listing what he used to say and what should be asked for as a minimum.
http://businessforbritain.org/change-or-go/

Streets ahead of Aaron Banks leave.eu

DecrepitJohnL

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.

Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Reckless -- well, yes, but how attractive is a backbench MP's life? £67,000 a year is a fair old wage for most people but these days, a senior manager or professional on the outside would be looking at six figures. And by now many MPs must realise they have fallen off the greasy pole: it is not just their ambition has been thwarted but that no-one is even listening to their plans to bring peace to the Middle East or sort out badgers and bees.

Carswell was the damn fool who turned down the Short money: did it never occur to him this would leave Ukip dependent on large donors, and on Farage to get them in the papers?

TCPoliticalBetting

malcolmg said:

DavidL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

JEO said:

DavidL said:

To develop my theme the mere existence of UKIP helps the Tories look more moderate, more centrist, more rational and less unpleasant. It has done more to detoxify the Tories than any single step that Cameron or Osborne have been able to take.

As Corbyn is about to find big tents with lots of lunatics and people whose views appall the majority of Britons is no recipe for electoral success.

Lots of views of UKIP are actually agreed with by large shares of the general public. I can't think of any policies they have which are lunatic. I would much rather the Right was not being split.

You have to bear in mind that as far as DavidL is concerned it appears that any view which is not in agreement with Cameroon othodoxy is ipso facto 'lunatic'.

Not so. I overstated my position and I apologise. I blame the rugby.

Scotland really struggling here. 13-6 down is unbelievable.

Scotland thought they could get away with reserves against the yanks but they lack the resources - however their try helps to close the gap.

Luckyguy1983

Sean_F said:

MarkHopkins said:

MP_SE said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MarqueeMark said:

Mark Reckless. Point and laugh. He'd be sat on a five figure majority and a seat for life if he hadn't been such a plonker.
Carswell must be thinking "what the hell have I done?" He needs to seriously consider pulling the plug on UKIP - and the funding that goes with his being their MP - if he doesn't want Farage to be the face of LEAVE. Seeing Farage's smirking face claiming all the credit for a LEAVE vote would be a sure way to have me sit on my hands on Referendum Day. I suspect I am not alone.

Having got the EC referendum agreed, their defections to UKIP were a puzzle then and now. I absolutely accept that Cameron is mounting a trivial half hearted attempt at re-negotiation, just look at his europhile europe minister. That said what was the attraction of UKIP a party run by a dictator who changes his mind depending upon what bed he gets out of? Reckless (by name and action) is apparently chasing a welsh assembly seat.... Meanwhile Farage has fallen out with his deputy leader and his Express journo convert.

Quite worrying if what Guido says is true:

twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/647744417877610496

It just make Out more likely as the result.

I'm not bothered either. The renegotiations (such as they are) are obviously going nowhere, but events are helping Leave.

But events, indeed indignity piled on humiliation, have never been enough, not enough so far even to give 'out' a solid polling lead. Like many situations in our public life, the boiling frog scenario applies. Throw a frog in boiling water and it will jump out. Gradually heat cold water and the frog will boil to death. Had people known what the EU was and how it would turn out when we joined, they would never have voted for it in a million years. Nowadays there is every possibility that people will be cowed into voting to stay.

viewcode

rottenborough said:

HYUFD said:

New NBC poll

GOP

Trump: 21
Carson: 20
Rubio: 11
Carly: 11
Bush: 7
Kasich: 6
Cruz: 5
Christie: 3
Paul: 3
Huckabee: 2
Santorum: 1
Jindal: 1
Graham: 0
Pataki: 0

Democrats

Clinton 42
Sanders 35
Biden 17
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/nbc-wsj-poll-2016-gop-race-n433991

Looking good for Fiorina.

(sotto voce)

fury...fury...fury...