Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Maybe Ukip could be doing to the Tories what the rump of th
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Maybe Ukip could be doing to the Tories what the rump of the SDP did to the yellows nearly a quarter of a century ago
This week there’s been a bit of focus on the creation of the Lib Dems which was formed by the merger of the old Liberal party and the SDP exactly 25 years ago.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Sorting out the kitchen layout will be far more important than deciding whether to vote UKIP or Tory.
UKIP have a much more obvious niche.
I hope.
Plenty of people in UKIP - not least Farage himself - were once Tory members. Strictly speaking, nobody in the continuing SDP had ever been a member of the Liberal Democrats.
When was there a "Tory-UKIP Alliance"? Equivalent to the Steel-Owen bandwagon?
When Owen was born, fairies gathered round his crib to shower every possible gift on him. He would be successful, intelligent, lucky, handsome, charismatic…
But, unfortunately, the bad fairy also turned up. And she said, ‘He will have all those gifts, and more. But he will also be… A shit
The 'Steel-Owen bandwagon' was more like a 1980s Lada with one wheel missing.
You're always doing this, Sunil - pretending that an analogy has to be 100% precise before it has any validity at all.
Tories have 4 South East MEPs. 3 of them (basically not Hannan) aren't in their youngest days. I don't think any of them announced retirement plans yet but I wouldn't be surprising to see some of them standing down. And 1 of them will risk a lot in a all members ballot anyway.
but how many seats will Con get in SE? It's currently 4 Con 2 UKIP 2 LD 1 Green 1 Lab
2009 Con 34.8 UKIP 18.8 LD 14.1 Green 11.6 Lab 8.2
Something like Con 28 UKIP 25 Lab 14 Green 11 LD 11 would give 3 Con 3 UKIP 1 Lab 1 Green 1 LD and a close fight for the final seat between Con, Lab and UKIP.
Well otherwise it wouldn't be an analogy, would it?
Er...yes it would.
If UKIP are to move into the mainstream of UK politics they need to become a more wide spread repository for the protest vote. And that kind of scatter gun approach will throw up some interesting results. UKIP have finally worked out that they appear to have a better chance of taking a Labour/Libdem held seat with tactical voting and support from Conservatives among others in much the same way tactical voting among Lab/Libdems kept the the Tories out in the past.
Its worth noting that this current UKIP boost in the polls has happened while its the Labour party who form the main Opposition alone, just as the SDP/Liberal Democrat parties were formed against the back drop of the last period that Labour were in Opposition. I find that a fascinating fact in the current political climate with a Labour polling lead, and with a growing assumption by some now that Labour are nailed on to win the next GE regardless of any intervening events.
These pro-EU Social Democrats (= Blairites) had taken over control of Labour and only recently have the anti-EU Socialists (= Brownites) come back into the ascendancy making Labour into a more overtly Socialist Party.
Much the same is true within the Conservatives. The upper-class 'Grandee' grouping (aka pro EU 'Wets' - or Social Democrats) were gradually purged from the upper echelons from 1979-1990, but then slowly regained power, until Cameron's victory over Davies (Dry, anti-EU conservatives) meant they were back in charge again.
The balance of power has swung decisively away from the Social Democrats, such that Downing St is now isolated and their next leader will be all but indistinguishable from UKIPs position on Europe and many other matters (ie truly conservative, seeking to roll back the 'ever more progressive' social agenda of recent decades)
The disengagement of most voters from the political class and political process should be the single biggest concern to all politicians and followers of politics, as it allows the rise of populist, 'single, simple solution' parties to gain traction and increasing credence, as the successive failures of ConLabLib Govts show that these parties have no answer to the problems that they created: borrowing more from the future to buy votes today. Respect and the SNP are two such parties: UKIP are a third.
That means that there MUST be a break with the traditional, post WW2, formula of more tax, more spend, more borrow, to one of bare need > minimum tax > efficiently enact, leading to a very much smaller State, with slowing decreasing taxes as the State shrinks at a much faster rate, thus allowing increasingly large Budget surplus' to be run (over decades) until we are net lenders, not net borrowers.
It'll take decades, but it'll happen - few rules and regulations. Harder work, for fewer benefits and less security (and wages): lower asset prices, too, as running 'a balanced Budget' becomes written into UK law, so that the mistakes of the past 50 years cannot be repeated.
In that respect, Benn was right: a UK Sovereign Wealth Fund would have been preferable to the large State (but lower taxes) nation that was the Thatcherite legacy: Brown's skill was in taxing areas that did not have an immediately obvious impact on the ordinary voter - slow-burn taxes which destroyed the UK and enslaved us to the State, but which were sugar-coated so we did not vomit them out of office in 2001 (or 2005).
Farage has tapped into that national discontent, and, as such, is going to do increasingly well until the breaking-point of the current mess, when all bets are off: events then will be truly cataclysmic in scale, though who/what will emerge from that as the dominant political forces is outside the scope of my crystal ball: simplistic solutions do not work when confronted with harsh reality, but they offer A Cause, An Enemy (the EU) , A Hope and A Future - which the current ConLabLib parties do not, and have not these last 30 years.
You would assume it was a Thatcherite Tory, in fact it was Danny Alexander. Who would have thought a senior LD would have spoken such words even 5 years ago?
UKIP support is comprised entirely of 'floating voters' and those disaffected with the three main parties. As UKIP have no MPs period, I fail to see how likening the “Owenites who refused to be part of (t)he merged party and would run candidates against it” enters into the equation.
Actually, I think they would have a better chance of taking some Conservative held marginals instead of Labour....but there won't be the Tory tactical support as the Tories hold the seat.
The Labour seats where they would have a chance (basically some white working class seats where Lab did badly in 2010) probably have the Tories in a strong second right now
Not so. UKIP took as many votes off the LibDems as they took off the Tories.
But this fact runs counter to the narrative, so it is repeatedly ignored.
Wise punters won't, however, have missed it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vauxhall_by-election,_1989
'You would assume it was a Thatcherite Tory, in fact it was Danny Alexander. Who would have thought a senior LD would have spoken such words even 5 years ago?'
I immediately thought 'Oor Danny', so we've evidently got used to the idea!
"@JamesKelly Eastleigh was a strikingly Richmond-like result.
Not so. UKIP took as many votes off the LibDems as they took off the Tories.
But this fact runs counter to the narrative, so it is repeatedly ignored.
Wise punters won't, however, have missed it."
For all the patronising abuse that Conservative voters have had on this site because they are not supposedly 'clever' enough to tactically vote etc. I reckon that its increasingly more likely that a first Westminster UKIP success would come from a Labour or Libdem held seat rather than a Conservative one due to tactically voting against the incumbent. And I think that is already a clear concern for both parties, and its also why UKIP are now turning their focus leftwards onto Labours lawn as they have finally worked this one out too.
I feel this should be corrected
"The disengagement of most voters from the political class and political process should be the single biggest concern to all politicians and followers of politics"
Voters haven't disengaged from the political class and process. The political class has disengaged from us and become almost a caste in their own right disassociated from the general run of society. Until we kick out career politicians and start electing people who actually know how the normal person lives disaffection will continue to rise
2010:
Lab 1869
Con 1682
Con 1614
Lab 1603
Lab 1562
Con 1551
BNP 1445
BNP 1346
UKIP 944
Residents 616
Res 509
Res 309
......
This week (one of the 2 Tories died)
UKIP 831
Lab 569
Con 280
Residents 227
BNP 202
Residents 24
...
here we also have a former strong BNP presence to complicate the picture. They topped the poll in 2006 locals. They collapsed this week. The Tories went considerably down. Labour didn't increase at all.
The ward is in Hornchurch & Upminster constituency.
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/current_issue.php?
Indeed so, but NOT IN EASTLEIGH.
People keep saying Eastleigh showed something which it didn't show. It's interesting to consider why 2010 LibDem voters in Eastleigh behaved so differently to what the opinion polls show.
I told you you would jinx it. I never modify bets after I've placed one
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2297743/The-spectre-Red-Eds-Thought-Police.html
what kind of constituencies do you have in mind?
Because voting tactically would imply that the Tories are out of the race in that particular constituency.
And in safe Labour results, I guess Rotherham may have showed how it would turn out.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100208655/the-salvation-army-captain-peacock-and-the-lefty-megabores-who-hate-michael-gove/
Pretty disappointing end to an otherwise successful day.
The writing was on the wall when they switched jockeys and the price began to drift.
AW racing is generally pretty low grade stuff and you do have to accept the rough with the smooth. You see some truly dreadful rides and plenty of reason to wonder why the non-trier rules aren't invoked more actively.
No matter. We did alright, and it cheered up a dull Saturday afternoon.
Now all we need is a brisk Compton century.....
Toodle pip!
There is no doubt that UKIP are taking more votes from the Tories than the other two, but make no mistake they are taking voters from them and they are worried about it. This is a bandwagon that will keep on rolling, I thought it may have lost momentum with Dave's 'brilliant' speech on Europe, but support is getting stronger.
I don't know a single Kipper who will vote tactically, not because as you think they are too stupid but because they are totally fed up with all three parties. To UKIP supporters they are one and the same, see Farage's speech today about them all being the same.
I see Clegg is now doing another U-turn, this time on immigration, Labour are apologising for the mistakes they made on immigration and Dave has promised a referendum that he will never have to carry out. Nobody believes a single word they say so why should they vote for any of them?
As for the EU they are now in the eye of a perfect storm. The disgusting treatment of Cyprus, more forced immigration to come in 2014 and the distinct possibility of gas being rationed thanks to the EU madness on green policies meaning we have to shut down our coal and oil power stations.
I'm sure the sensible among you now realise that the political landscape is now changing very quickly.
Why would anyone vote for any of the three pro-Europe parties?
It's wishful thinking on an epic scale. 2015 will be nothing like current polling.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21913356
Farage's message is neatly summed up as 'Yes we can!'
Anyone tried that one out?
Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky has died.
I would not like to be the one doing the autopsy.
Thanks Andrea.
Hornchurch is not so far from where I live and I can see it would be fertile UKIP territory.
The result is another straw in the wind suggesting that the Party has a tremendous opportunity to take votes from its three main opponents over the next two years or so. I've placed a number of bets on them doing so. It is true that it has a high propensity to self-destruct, but if it does not, it has to do little more than position itself as the 'We Ain't Them' Party' to reap huge rewards.
Yes, Obama employed it in 2008. Four years later he was almost as successful with 'Have You Seen The Other Guy?'
Farage could usefully adopt both.
I had better be very clear that this is a link to Wikipedia:
Boris Abramovich Berezovsky (Russian: Бори́с Абра́мович Березо́вский, 23 January 1946 - 23 March 2013)[6][7] was a Russian business oligarch, government official and former mathematician. He was assassinated by Russian FSB agents in London on the orders of Vladimir Putin.
No need for a police investigation, trial and jury verdict on Wikipedia!
http://bit.ly/ORTmnF
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/9950088/Boris-Berezovsky.html
I am from Hornchurch and live in Upminster. The sitting mp Angela Watkinson certainly no Cameroon in outlook from what I can see. a Monday club tory...maybe she would switch?
Gooshays is in Harold Hill which is very similar to Dagenham, ie a poor council house dominated rough neighbourhood. Not representative of the constituency as a whole.
I reckon Thurrock is the constituency where UKIP have the best chance round here. Similar in profile to Harold Hill/Dagenham, the locals cal the area of Chafford Hundred (Lakeside) 'Chafrica' due to immigrants, and Farage was at the Dartford crossing the other day talking about scrapping the toll charge.
Just back from an entertaining afternoon watching Middle England at the Daily Telegraph Cruising Show (no, not that kind of cruising !!). Average age in the 60s, overwhelmingly white, the bedrock of Conservative support planning its next holiday and if the queues to book trips were any guide, not much evidence of a recession either.
I remember Richmond and its aftermath. It was, in my view, the moment when the Liberal Democrats could have ceased to exist. Financially, the party was in a terrible state and morale was likewise low. Yet the Party survived due in no small part to Paddy Ashdown and the implosion of the Conservatives leading to the ousting of Margaret Thatcher in 1990.
Even then, it needed the presence of Neil Kinnock's Labour Party to help keep the fledgling Party alive. Stodge's Seventh Law of Politics states that all a Party needs to do to survive and prosper is to have opponents who are unwittingly determined to help.
UKIP is doing well because the parties facing are it are helping it to prosper by failing to adequately tackle the reasons why people are rushing to vote for it.
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1576/#Comment_1576
Poor Simon has still not got over the decimalisation of the currency in 1971. He probably thought the country started going to hell in a hand basket with the Great Reform Act of 1832.
He is truly a caricature.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/simonheffer/8320068/Decimalisation-picked-our-pockets-of-truly-beautiful-coins.html
5:06PM
I am a Blairite and I can't tell you how much I would prefer to see Ed Miliband win, than Cameron hang on in Downing Street. This coalition will have done enough damage to the country before May 2015. I thought that Ed gave a reasonable speech today, but Labour will have to provide much more detail about their policies ahead of the election to convince enough people to win a majority. Whoever is elected in May 2015 will have to implement real cuts, much more than Osborne has so far predicted in budgets. The public sector unions will not be happy that Labour will probably have to stick with the 1% cap on pay rises.
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1592/#Comment_1592
After reading your comment, I sometimes miss the 'like' button because it made me laugh so much.
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1593/#Comment_1593
That was quick!
Malaysia pre-race article, including a tip, is up here:
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/malaysia-pre-race.html
http://tinyurl.com/d2hars6
Must be something in the water in Surrey...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/9716536/Murder-or-mishap-The-mysterious-death-of-Russian-businessman-Alexander-Perepelichny.html
Edit: even bathing in it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/9950107/Russian-oligarch-Boris-Berezovsky-found-dead-in-his-bath.html
Best to avoid Surrey, I think.
http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/2985-heffer-and-farage-host-a-night-to-remember
https://twitter.com/RoyChubbsBrown/status/315020922400698368/photo/1
The toll charge is the kind of thing a good local Party could exploit.
It's a minor injustice, but a manifest one for which the main Parties cannot escape responsibility.
:-)
Just occasionally I do miss the like button.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21913356
http://news.sky.com/story/1068891/boris-berezovsky-russian-oligarch-found-dead
Interesting article. I agree with much of the diagnosis but not necessarily the cure. The challenge facing all political parties is globalisation. Globalisation has been sold to the electorate as an incontrovertible good. At the same time the result of globalisation here has been export of jobs, asset stripping of mid-scale businesses, and ultimately growth of massive corporations leading to massive loss of competition, and development of multinational trade/political alliances like the EU that conspire to set barriers to entry.
Globalisation has driven the economic holocaust that is now afflicting Europe and North America. Yet still all political parties seem to see no need to work to contain its worst excesses. The party that is prepared to confront the impacts of globalisation and present a modified or alternative vision of how we can engage with it, that puts its people first instead of multinational corporations, and truly supports entrepreneurial behaviour that delivers for the long term will get my support and that of many others.
Unfortunately I don't see any that do at the moment.
PS I don't understand what OGH means by commenting within vanilla?
In Leics the BNP had 12% of the vote in 2009, winning a seat in Coalville, and coming very near in a second. These are quite working class areas of the county, and not ethnically diverse. Historically these have been Labour areas in the old Leics coalfields.
With the collapse of the BNP electorally it will be interesting to see how things go. In 2009 UKIP did not compete, but now there are 2 county councillors for UKIP owing to defections.
There is a lovely interactive map here by constituency, must be a political map nerd at county hall, wish all counties did the same!:
http://www.leics.gov.uk/index/your_council/local_democracy/aboutthecountycouncil/useyourvote/election_results/election_2009/election_2009_division_results.htm
I still think that if Ed becomes PM it'll be with no more than about 33-34% of the vote. In general you can take about 5 percentage points off the mid-term rating.
I have never really given it much thought but i suppose it does seem unfair on someone from Essex working at Bluewater or someone from Kent who worked at Lakeside, paying £4 a day to drive to work. It's not exactly like the congestion charge as that is more to encourage public transport, although ukip want to knock that on the head as well...I don't think there is another way to get to Kent from Essex without going into London.
https://twitter.com/tobyhelm/status/315526675981033473
I think you can add 2 or 3 percentage points to whatever the LDs are registering in the polls due to the big personal votes that LD candidates tend to get, even those who aren't MPs.
The injustice is that when the new bridge was built the intention was that the toll was to be temporary until the construction was paid for and a sufficient maintenance fund established.
This was achieved by 2003, but the toll then became a charge, analagous to a congestion charge but without the justification. The collection of the charge adds to the already considerable congestion and represents nothing more than a covert tax.
UKIP could sweep the board in South East Essex if it were campaign on this issue.
BTW, that's a very nice picture for your Avatar. Which one is you?
yes, I agree, Thurrock fits in the type of seats I was thinking of
I'm thinking of 2015 as the 'pin the tail on the donkey' election. It could all come down to chance
In the short term, it's entirely obvious that UKIP hurts the Tories more than any other mainstream party. In the long term, who knows? But they need a further series of spectaculars to keep up the momentum, and oddly enough the Tories would be wise to hope Labour beats UKIP in the Euros. Should we look forward to Richard Nabavi and Avery casting Labour tactical votes?
One surprising but important voting pattern in the 2010 GE was the resistance of Tory voters to the idea of voting tactically. It saved Labour a good few seats and nearly got Brown back into No.10 as Coalition Leader.
I think we can safely assume that Richard and Avery will stay loyal to the tribe!
Sometimes BNP members enjoy their reputation. As one Coalvillian patient explained to me: "When you call the BNP Councillor to sort out anti-social neighbours, they pipe down quickly"
Thuggish perhaps, but classical pavement politics!
Thanks! Its not me... But one can dream... James Bond has a poster of Gunter Sachs on his wall I believe
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/8503379/Gunter-Sachs.html
The height of that bridge is like a tax on my nerves, nevermind the two quid!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9950083/Ukip-urge-Brits-to-withdraw-their-money-from-Spanish-banks.html
The Russians won't take it lying down and will exact revenge on Germany.
So the Cypriot banks suffered with the haircut the Greeks imposed, which totally f88ked up the Cyprus banks. However instead of the Greeks suffering a levy on deposits the poor Cypriots have to, even though it was the EU that forced the Greek bond haircut on them.
I can see massive problems with this and the Germans/EU will live to regret it, think this may be the tipping point.
Expect a run on the banks in Greece, Spain and Portugal this week.
Meanwhile Iceland continues to grow.
Looking at the tax and benefit tables in The Times they don't appear to be moving at all but can that be right? Quite hard to make the point clearly so illustrative numbers (not actual numbers). Someone with children:
Income £15,000 - Benefit £6,000 - Benefit rises next year by 1% to £6,060
Income £20,000 - Benefit £3,000 - Benefit rises next year by 1% to £3,030
Income £25,000 - Benefit £0 - Benefit next year remains £0
Now if benefits each year rise as above (at whatever rate) with inflation someone today earning £15,000 would in many years time earn £25,000 so get no benefit. Ultimately the benefit bill would fall to zero unless the income thresholds are also adjusted.
But The Times tables definitely show the income thresholds are not changing. Does anyone know exactly what is happening? All we hear is "benefits are going up by 1%" but this is almost meaningless without saying what is happening to the income thresholds.
I have been to both Lakeside and Bluewater in recent weeks and I have to say Bluewater is just so much more upmarket than Lakeside, which seems a little worse for wear nowadays. Maybe most people who used to go there now go to Stratford Westfield?
Anyway, to squeeze in a transport geek reference, you can go direct from Lakeside to Bluewater and back on the X80 bus which uses the Dartford bridge (southbound only of course). Return fare is 4.40. I'm guessing Ensignbus must have to pay some sort of charge to use the crossing but not at the point of use, the X80 is just waved through at the tolls!
But how would the average person say in the UK go about taking £100,000 out of their UK bank without transferring it into any other UK bank? I don't think the average person would know what to do and the bank is hardly going to give them £100,000 in notes.
Dart tags in the vehicle debit your account as you drive through.
yup, my dad was wondering the same this afternoon in case Italy is affected too (IIRC in 1992 the government actually did it).