My favourite lawyer's bills are the ones which read "To considering whether I needed to do anything, and deciding I didn't, £500 + £25 for the email saying I didn't need to do anything" (I paraphrase slightly..)
Well when you have to account for your working day in 6 minute blocks.....
Yes, especially when you need to find twenty 6 minute blocks per hour.
That's called multi-tasking.
Ah, so THAT's why the legal profession is being taken over by women!
@Richard_Nabavi "...THAT's why the legal profession is being taken over by women! " I thought that was women downgrading from the oldest profession to the second oldest? (in a PC and non sexist way)
I wouldn't presume to know what Ukip members want, but one things seems clear. They're not keen on the status quo because they feel that politicians currently ignore them and look down on them. And they are probably correct in that view. So every time that a politician insults them, their grievances are strengthened.
Policies are a secondary consideration and they're probably a mixed bag. An EU referendum will probably result in a biased discussion because the Great and the Good will talk over their heads and only allow one viewpoint - because they know best,
There you are = the problem in a nutshell (and probably over-simplified).
You seem to have a grasp of what has been happening
Probably the easiest way to describe what UKIP voters have in common is that in many different ways they all want a redistribution of power and in particular they want decentralisation. Decentralisation allows people more to 'do their own thing'. So for example if one area wants free prescriptions it can have it and has the money for it it can. If another needs a new hospital it can do so and in every case they do not have to go through all the lobbying and nonsense of persuading their masters in Westminster.
What that means is more people can fulfil their choices rather than the one size fits all solutions preferred by the establishment parties. Its little different to what Tories used to talk about before they got into power but they rather than delivering seem to have become establishment lackies just like Labour.
Now because UKIP believes in decentralisation it can allow for a wider range of viewpoints to be met because what people in Northern cities want to do doesn't have to effect what people in southern shires want to do and vice versa.
On the contrary centralist parties effectively demand that everyone wants the same thing which explains why the Tories are going through such traumas because without question Cameron is making them a centralist party with a single inflexible outlook when it was previously filled with decentralists with varying viewpoints
I couldn't resist adding my 2p re Capris. Haven't owned one - but was loaned one from a garage whilst they wrestled with my Spitfire. It was the most hilarious thing.
snip
In my Spitty, I'd always get let out, forgiven if I didn't indicate and never beeped once accept by others who were saying Hello as they flashed their lights in recognition. If I ever broke down, someone would always stop/offer help or a lift. I suspect in a Capri, I'd get propositioned instead.
A most peculiar contrast!
UKIP has what a mate of mine called the Ford Capri Problem, back when you saw those around. The Ford Capri is a nicely-styled well-appointed and sporty car, with a powerful engine and a bit of road presence. It looks like the kind of car you'd consider for yourself - right up until the point where you look at who actually drives them. And at that point, you realise you were on the verge of an appalling lapse of taste and judgement.
Plato - you've been outed as a ladette!
I don't know what Plato looks like but I now sort of imagine her with 1980s Afghan Hound bighair in an XR3i Cabriolet with pearlescent white paint. In a good way.
Farage goes on about wanting to hold the balance of power come May 2015. If so (very unlikely) what will his negotiating position be? Wanting the other parties to offer an in /out referendum? Surely that is the main aim for a party called UKIP? Well Farage should note he has already got the tories to offer this so what the heck is he doing trying to scupper it now!
I would go further than that and demand that the other party puts withdrawal firmly on the table and set the criteria for remaining at a level that fulfils UKIPs primary policies (end of Cap, end of CFP, end of free movement of labour, withdrawal from the social chapter, recovery of criminal justice powers, end of green energy subsidies, withdrawal from the ECHR and ECJ etc.) I'd also demand to have a veto on who sits on the negotiation team and as Europe Minister.
If you like it is the EU version of devomax!
After all there are plenty of Tories who would support that position.
As a matter of interest what 3 or 4 things do you find most objectionable in the ECHR?
I lived in the West Midlands in the late 80s for a while and was always charmed by the sight of two boys and two girls in an XR3, all four having bleached their hair out of the same bottle.
I also find Kippers on here generally more appealing than many of the Tories. Not all but many seem to be more down to earth, even if I disagree with them - and I get shed loads of stick from them too.
Why would you hate your allies ? they will lead you to government
And still the Tories don't get it. People are abandoning the Tory party because they don't like you. If you want to stop that happening stop alienating your natural support. You can't simultaneously claim that you can only win from the centre and then blame UKIP for costing you the election when they pick up the voters you have abandoned on the right.
Have you not noticed the rapidly growing economy, the reducing of unemployment and the record employment. Maybe people do hate the tories, but at least they are doing their best for the country.
You are not answering the point I made. If elections can only be won in the centre as do many Tories on here claim then how can they claim that UKIP are going to cost them the election by acting as a home for the voters on the right that the Tories have driven out?
You neatly ignore the fact that if all the Kippers in 2010 had held their nose and voted Tory, then David Cameron would have been a Conservative Prime Minister. Instead, they landed us with David Cameron, Coalition Prime Minister, without the Westminster votes to make any meaningful attempt to vary the EU settlement.
If he had been given that majority, and failed to use it over the past five years, you would have a point.
And people are not abandoning the Tory party. A few knuckle-dragging no-marks might be, with reckless disregard for putting Ed Miliband in Downing Street, but the Tory vote is holding up remarkably well from 2010.... It is the Libdems on the left that have been driven out.
Why should they hold their nose and vote for a party that does not hold their values and priorities. More to the point why should they vote for a party whose leader thinks they are lunatics and racists?
UKIP didn't steal the Euro sceptic wing of the Tory party. Cameron made a calculated decision to ignore them and drove them out. If he believes he can win with just the Wets then good luck to him but then he can't start moaning when another party benefits from his idiocy.
I wouldn't presume to know what Ukip members want, but one things seems clear. They're not keen on the status quo because they feel that politicians currently ignore them and look down on them. And they are probably correct in that view. So every time that a politician insults them, their grievances are strengthened.
Policies are a secondary consideration and they're probably a mixed bag. An EU referendum will probably result in a biased discussion because the Great and the Good will talk over their heads and only allow one viewpoint - because they know best,
There you are = the problem in a nutshell (and probably over-simplified).
You seem to have a grasp of what has been happening
Probably the easiest way to describe what UKIP voters have in common is that in many different ways they all want a redistribution of power and in particular they want decentralisation. Decentralisation allows people more to 'do their own thing'. So for example if one area wants free prescriptions it can have it and has the money for it it can. If another needs a new hospital it can do so and in every case they do not have to go through all the lobbying and nonsense of persuading their masters in Westminster.
What that means is more people can fulfil their choices rather than the one size fits all solutions preferred by the establishment parties. Its little different to what Tories used to talk about before they got into power but they rather than delivering seem to have become establishment lackies just like Labour.
Now because UKIP believes in decentralisation it can allow for a wider range of viewpoints to be met because what people in Northern cities want to do doesn't have to effect what people in southern shires want to do and vice versa.
On the contrary centralist parties effectively demand that everyone wants the same thing which explains why the Tories are going through such traumas because without question Cameron is making them a centralist party with a single inflexible outlook when it was previously filled with decentralists with varying viewpoints
You just think that's what UKIPpers want but like everyone else you've no idea really.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
If you want to continue posting on my site do so in non-offensive terms.
Please acknowledge and give me an assurance that you will comply.
Establishing themselves as the third biggest political party in the UK.
Exactly so - it's about their egos, not about actually achieving what they claim are their political goals (which in any case change from one day to the next).
Political goals will come once we are in government. It's not something you contract out to a leader of another party that hates you and has utterly failed to deliver in the past.
UKIP actually have had an achievement and that is to force the tories to offer a referendum . Its ironic that UKIP will now throw this away by splitting the anti-EU vote and allow in a labour government
True. The next question is why the UKIP Leadership do not want that referendum to happen? Is it because they fear that after a referendum there will be no point to UKIP and no point to their jobs? Have they become so reliant upon the money from the EC Parliament that they really do not want the relationship ended?
I suspect that UKIP do not want a referendum because they fear they will lose it. The establishment will be out in force saying that the sky will fall in if we leave the EU. A similar thing happened over Scottish independence. Like it or not this kind of thing is a powerful influence.
It does rather beg the question of how UKIP intends to get where it wants to be on the EU. I am genuinely interested to know.
I imagine that UKIP want to try and win a majority in Parliament and then simply leave the EU.
Is this likely to happen.
Well if labour win the GE they will not only fuck up the country but also their own party. So come the next GE (on 2020 or possibly sooner) who do voters choose.
Well, labour are reasonsible for the currant mess, the tories were useless and the libdems have ceased to exist.
Who is left.
Only UKIP.
Sultana Farage will be delighted at your raisin party morale.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
If you want to continue posting on my site do so in non-offensive terms.
Please acknowledge and give me an assurance that you will comply.
Oops, rebuke noted. I will try to behave better in the future.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
How pleasant.
Thanks for reinforcing every point I made about your Party so promptly though.
I've been wondering about that £9000. Have Rochester Tories *really* gone to press with material for next May which they'll need to scrap? None of the Broxtowe parties have even selected all the council candidates for next May, let alone preprinted leaflets about them. We'd be afraid that someone would die or whatever if we did it that far in advance.
Presumably it wouldn't be for next May, but for now. Quite possibly personalised letters.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
If you want to continue posting on my site do so in non-offensive terms.
Please acknowledge and give me an assurance that you will comply.
Oops, rebuke noted. I will try to behave better in the future.
"No. Try not. Do or do not. There is no try!" - Yoda
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
If you want to continue posting on my site do so in non-offensive terms.
Please acknowledge and give me an assurance that you will comply.
Oops, rebuke noted. I will try to behave better in the future.
"No. Try not. Do or do not. There is no try!" - Yoda
You neatly ignore the fact that if all the Kippers in 2010 had held their nose and voted Tory, then David Cameron would have been a Conservative Prime Minister. Instead, they landed us with David Cameron, Coalition Prime Minister, without the Westminster votes to make any meaningful attempt to vary the EU settlement.
If he had been given that majority, and failed to use it over the past five years, you would have a point.
And people are not abandoning the Tory party. A few knuckle-dragging no-marks might be, with reckless disregard for putting Ed Miliband in Downing Street, but the Tory vote is holding up remarkably well from 2010.... It is the Libdems on the left that have been driven out.
This is a flaw with the FPTP voting system, not UKIP voters.
I've been wondering about that £9000. Have Rochester Tories *really* gone to press with material for next May which they'll need to scrap? None of the Broxtowe parties have even selected all the council candidates for next May, let alone preprinted leaflets about them. We'd be afraid that someone would die or whatever if we did it that far in advance.
Presumably it wouldn't be for next May, but for now. Quite possibly personalised letters.
Postage would of that sort of order, but surely not printing!
Last Friday Steven Woolfe (UKIP Immigration spokesman) quoted a verse from this Kipling poem Norman And Saxon . Its probably as good as advice that could have been given to the Tories. Shame it's too late:
"My son," said the Norman Baron, "I am dying, and you will be heir To all the broad acres in England that William gave me for share When he conquered the Saxon at Hastings, and a nice little handful it is. But before you go over to rule it I want you to understand this:--
"The Saxon is not like us Norman. His manners are not so polite. But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice right. When he stands like an ox in the furrow--with his sullen set eyes on your own, And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
"You can horsewhip your Guscany archers, or torture your Picardy spears; But don't try that game on the Saxon; you'll have the whole brood round your ears. From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field, They'll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise, you will yield.
"But first you must master their language, their dialect, proverbs and songs. Don't trust any clerk to interpret when they come with the tale of their own wrongs. Let them know that you know what they are saying; let them feel that you know what to say. Yes, even when you want to go hunting, hear 'em out if it takes you all day.
They'll drink every hour of the daylight and poach every hour of the dark. It's the sport not the rabbits they're after (we've plenty of game in the park). Don't hang them or cut off their fingers. That's wasteful as well as unkind, For a hard-bitten, South-country poacher makes the best man-at-arms you can find.
"Appear with your wife and the children at their weddings and funerals and feasts. Be polite but not friendly to Bishops; be good to all poor parish priests. Say 'we,' 'us' and 'ours' when you're talking, instead of 'you fellows' and 'I.' Don't ride over seeds; keep your temper; and never you tell 'em a lie!"
Isn't the aim (fairly well known and admitted I would have thought) for supermarkets to get their customers spending more? Its not as if they said 'try and pickpocket the customers for an extra 50p) . They said ,effectively, try and provide 50p more of a service didn't they? Whats the problem?
Last Friday Steven Woolfe (UKIP Immigration spokesman) quoted a verse from this Kipling poem Norman And Saxon . Its probably as good as advice that could have been given to the Tories. Shame it's too late:
"My son," said the Norman Baron, "I am dying, and you will be heir To all the broad acres in England that William gave me for share When he conquered the Saxon at Hastings, and a nice little handful it is. But before you go over to rule it I want you to understand this:--
"The Saxon is not like us Norman. His manners are not so polite. But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice right. When he stands like an ox in the furrow--with his sullen set eyes on your own, And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
"You can horsewhip your Guscany archers, or torture your Picardy spears; But don't try that game on the Saxon; you'll have the whole brood round your ears. From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field, They'll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise, you will yield.
"But first you must master their language, their dialect, proverbs and songs. Don't trust any clerk to interpret when they come with the tale of their own wrongs. Let them know that you know what they are saying; let them feel that you know what to say. Yes, even when you want to go hunting, hear 'em out if it takes you all day.
They'll drink every hour of the daylight and poach every hour of the dark. It's the sport not the rabbits they're after (we've plenty of game in the park). Don't hang them or cut off their fingers. That's wasteful as well as unkind, For a hard-bitten, South-country poacher makes the best man-at-arms you can find.
"Appear with your wife and the children at their weddings and funerals and feasts. Be polite but not friendly to Bishops; be good to all poor parish priests. Say 'we,' 'us' and 'ours' when you're talking, instead of 'you fellows' and 'I.' Don't ride over seeds; keep your temper; and never you tell 'em a lie!"
If UKIP moan some immigrants are too wired to a book that is 1,400 years old (Koran) and should learn modern ways ,there is not much to say if they think the best advice is from 1066
I also find Kippers on here generally more appealing than many of the Tories. Not all but many seem to be more down to earth, even if I disagree with them - and I get shed loads of stick from them too.
Why would you hate your allies ? they will lead you to government
And still the Tories don't get it. People are abandoning the Tory party because they don't like you. If you want to stop that happening stop alienating your natural support. You can't simultaneously claim that you can only win from the centre and then blame UKIP for costing you the election when they pick up the voters you have abandoned on the right.
Have you not noticed the rapidly growing economy, the reducing of unemployment and the record employment. Maybe people do hate the tories, but at least they are doing their best for the country.
Wasn't the economy doing well in 1997? Wasn't unemployment falling? People didn't like Tories then and they had a lot more going for them (e.g. John Major always came as a half decent bloke) than the current lot do. Only in your mind are they doing the best for the country.
Uncontrolled immigration is only best for rich employers looking for cheap labour, its bad for employment, its bad for housing, its bad for the public sector. Cameron's foreign adventures have been pure globalist neocon narcissism. His International Aid policy is pure profligacy. His energy policies are insane daylight robbery. His attempts to rig the boundaries in the Tories favour were an affront to democracy. His sell out on freedom of the press was reprehensible His acquiescence to an AV referendum was pure waste etc etc Then people wonder why Osborne's spending plans failed and had to be reset and why this Government has borrowed more than every UK government between 1945 and 2009.
Not only do people no longer like the tories but there are a hundred arguments to suggest they do not have the country's best interests at heart.
So Mr Tyndall Kippers never respond with venom eh?
In a way I would just love UKIP to win a GE so the reality of running a country would hit home rather than just opposing everything at the euorpean parliament and smiling in a pub
Mr. Tyndall, drove them out? The defections came after the promise of a referendum.
I was talking about the loss of members and votes to UKIP rather than individual MPs. But on that point I would refer you to Carswell's claim that Cameron has made it clear he is only interested in getting the absolute minimum out of the EU to secure a referendum victory.
I also find Kippers on here generally more appealing than many of the Tories. Not all but many seem to be more down to earth, even if I disagree with them - and I get shed loads of stick from them too.
Why would you hate your allies ? they will lead you to government
And still the Tories don't get it. People are abandoning the Tory party because they don't like you. If you want to stop that happening stop alienating your natural support. You can't simultaneously claim that you can only win from the centre and then blame UKIP for costing you the election when they pick up the voters you have abandoned on the right.
Have you not noticed the rapidly growing economy, the reducing of unemployment and the record employment. Maybe people do hate the tories, but at least they are doing their best for the country.
Wasn't the economy doing well in 1997? Wasn't unemployment falling? People didn't like Tories then and they had a lot more going for them (e.g. John Major always came as a half decent bloke) than the current lot do. Only in your mind are they doing the best for the country.
Uncontrolled immigration is only best for rich employers looking for cheap labour, its bad for employment, its bad for housing, its bad for the public sector. Cameron's foreign adventures have been pure globalist neocon narcissism. His International Aid policy is pure profligacy. His energy policies are insane daylight robbery. His attempts to rig the boundaries in the Tories favour were an affront to democracy. His sell out on freedom of the press was reprehensible His acquiescence to an AV referendum was pure waste etc etc Then people wonder why Osborne's spending plans failed and had to be reset and why this Government has borrowed more than every UK government between 1945 and 2009.
Not only do people no longer like the tories but there are a hundred arguments to suggest they do not have the country's best interests at heart.
So Mr Tyndall Kippers never respond with venom eh?
In a way I would just love UKIP to win a GE so the reality of running a country would hit home rather than just opposing everything at the euorpean parliament and smiling in a pub
they even voted to oppose the budget cuts for the EU FGS. Joke of a party
The Tories can't win from the Right. There simply aren't the votes.
Cameron's modernisation was always skin-deep, but even so it was nearly enough to win (admittedly after a massive recession against Gordon Brown and a tired Govt).
Cameron's problem wasn't that he tried to drag the Party to the Centre, it's that he abandoned the project. He didn't follow up his centrist PR with the same energy of Kinnock, Smith and Blair, and the Party has retreated to it's tired, outdated Thatcherite comfort zone.
Labour are at least 20 years ahead of the Tories in terms of waking up and smelling the coffee. The Tories still show no sign of doing so.
I also find Kippers on here generally more appealing than many of the Tories. Not all but many seem to be more down to earth, even if I disagree with them - and I get shed loads of stick from them too.
Why would you hate your allies ? they will lead you to government
And still the Tories don't get it. People are abandoning the Tory party because they don't like you. If you want to stop that happening stop alienating your natural support. You can't simultaneously claim that you can only win from the centre and then blame UKIP for costing you the election when they pick up the voters you have abandoned on the right.
Have you not noticed the rapidly growing economy, the reducing of unemployment and the record employment. Maybe people do hate the tories, but at least they are doing their best for the country.
Wasn't the economy doing well in 1997? Wasn't unemployment falling? People didn't like Tories then and they had a lot more going for them (e.g. John Major always came as a half decent bloke) than the current lot do. Only in your mind are they doing the best for the country.
Uncontrolled immigration is only best for rich employers looking for cheap labour, its bad for employment, its bad for housing, its bad for the public sector. Cameron's foreign adventures have been pure globalist neocon narcissism. His International Aid policy is pure profligacy. His energy policies are insane daylight robbery. His attempts to rig the boundaries in the Tories favour were an affront to democracy. His sell out on freedom of the press was reprehensible His acquiescence to an AV referendum was pure waste etc etc Then people wonder why Osborne's spending plans failed and had to be reset and why this Government has borrowed more than every UK government between 1945 and 2009.
Not only do people no longer like the tories but there are a hundred arguments to suggest they do not have the country's best interests at heart.
So Mr Tyndall Kippers never respond with venom eh?
In a way I would just love UKIP to win a GE so the reality of running a country would hit home rather than just opposing everything at the euorpean parliament and smiling in a pub
Seriously? If you think that was venomous then you really do need to ignore about 50% of the posts on here.
A bit of a sensitivity recalibration is needed I think.
Mr. Tyndall, drove them out? The defections came after the promise of a referendum.
I was talking about the loss of members and votes to UKIP rather than individual MPs. But on that point I would refer you to Carswell's claim that Cameron has made it clear he is only interested in getting the absolute minimum out of the EU to secure a referendum victory.
He appears to behave within the parliamentary party as the leader of a faction, rather that the leader of the party.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
Hugh is probably a doctor, irritated about being asked to change decades old working practices, and interact with tax paying patients (aka customers) on the odd weekend, rather than play golf.
Isn't Hugh a farmer who runs an off licence in his "spare time" ?
The Tories can't win from the Right. There simply aren't the votes.
Cameron's modernisation was always skin-deep, but even so it was nearly enough to win (admittedly after a massive recession against Gordon Brown and a tired Govt).
Cameron's problem wasn't that he tried to drag the Party to the Centre, it's that he abandoned the project. He didn't follow up his centrist PR with the same energy of Kinnock, Smith and Blair, and the Party has retreated to it's tired, outdated Thatcherite comfort zone.
Labour are at least 20 years ahead of the Tories in terms of waking up and smelling the coffee. The Tories still show no sign of doing so.
You may be dead right in terms of shaping the party to public opinon. The exact opposite problem is true of Labour in terms of smelling the coffee on the real nature of our country's challenge. So Dave may struggle to get elected and therefore have power to do the right thing whereas Labour will find it relatively easier to get elected and thereby screw the country again. Ain't life a bitch!
Carswell also claimed he wouldn't defect, and that open primaries were the way to select MPs, and that he wants a referendum but has diminished the prospect of that occurring by his defection.
IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation To call upon a neighbour and to say: – "We invaded you last night – we are quite prepared to fight, Unless you pay us cash to go away."
And that is called asking for Dane-geld, And the people who ask it explain That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld And then you'll get rid of the Dane!
It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation, To puff and look important and to say: – "Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you. We will therefore pay you cash to go away."
And that is called paying the Dane-geld; But we've proved it again and again, That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld You never get rid of the Dane.
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation, For fear they should succumb and go astray; So when you are requested to pay up or be molested, You will find it better policy to say: --
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld, No matter how trifling the cost; For the end of that game is oppression and shame, And the nation that plays it is lost!"
The Tories can't win from the Right. There simply aren't the votes.
Cameron's modernisation was always skin-deep, but even so it was nearly enough to win (admittedly after a massive recession against Gordon Brown and a tired Govt).
Cameron's problem wasn't that he tried to drag the Party to the Centre, it's that he abandoned the project. He didn't follow up his centrist PR with the same energy of Kinnock, Smith and Blair, and the Party has retreated to it's tired, outdated Thatcherite comfort zone.
Labour are at least 20 years ahead of the Tories in terms of waking up and smelling the coffee. The Tories still show no sign of doing so.
The biggest problem facing the Tories is that of image, they have a tarnished reputation since the 90's and it's got worse over time. The Tory image is that of corruption, scandal, incompetence, out of touch wealthy aristocrats, and sociopaths. In my opinion they are unsalvageable, some people would support Tory policies but not if its proposed or supported by Tories, just because they are Tories. Now that problem can be solved if the Conservative party disbanded and created a new party under a new name in its place.
That is where UKIP gets into, they have Tory policies, but because they are not called Tories and they are not part of the Conservative party, they are instantly more believable.
The Tories can't win from the Right. There simply aren't the votes.
Cameron's modernisation was always skin-deep, but even so it was nearly enough to win (admittedly after a massive recession against Gordon Brown and a tired Govt).
Cameron's problem wasn't that he tried to drag the Party to the Centre, it's that he abandoned the project. He didn't follow up his centrist PR with the same energy of Kinnock, Smith and Blair, and the Party has retreated to it's tired, outdated Thatcherite comfort zone.
Labour are at least 20 years ahead of the Tories in terms of waking up and smelling the coffee. The Tories still show no sign of doing so.
It's worth remembering at this point that David Cameron's Conservative party won nearly 1.2 million more votes in the 2010 general election than the Tony Blair led Labour party in 2005.
And this wasn't just due to a slight increase in turnout. Gordon Brown's Labour party polled fewer votes in 2010 than Michael Howard's Conservative party did in 2005.
A fairer voting system - such as multi-member STV - that didn't penalise the Tories so much for what is an inefficient vote distribution under FPTP, would massively weaken the electoral success of the modern Labour party.
OTOH, the more fervent Cameroons make it clear that they absolutely detest the sort of people who vote UKIP, but on the other hand, they're astonished that they won't vote Conservative. It's not rocket science to work out that you don't get people to vote for you if you make it clear you don't like them. Nor do you get them to vote for you if you tell lies about them, by claiming that they want to carry out genocide against Muslims and ethnic minorities, for example.
Rather than crying over spilled milk, the Conservatives should try clearing it up.
It's worth remembering at this point that David Cameron's Conservative party won nearly 1.2 million more votes in the 2010 general election than the Tony Blair led Labour party in 2005.
Also remarkable is the comparison with the vote totals in 2001.
OTOH, the more fervent Cameroons make it clear that they absolutely detest the sort of people who vote UKIP, but on the other hand, they're astonished that they won't vote Conservative. It's not rocket science to work out that you don't get people to vote for you if you make it clear you don't like them. Nor do you get them to vote for you if you tell lies about them, by claiming that they want to carry out genocide against Muslims and ethnic minorities, for example.
Rather than crying over spilled milk, the Conservatives should try clearing it up.
Too late for that, the Tories are in full survival and revenge mood, they will insult, abuse and attack everyone who even thinks of voting for UKIP, like the SNP did to the NO. The result will be to drive off voters away from the Tories.
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke. Tories attract the retired who are no longer net contributors whilst the majority of people paying the pensions of such folk support neither of the 2 right wing parties!!!
This Tory conference resembles an enormo game of wink murder.
Who is the defector? We could go on all week.
The defection happened this morning I think. It wasn't an MP. In fact, Menchy's twitter has reminded me that it was someone called Barnes. JBriskin - your man in the know.
This Tory conference resembles an enormo game of wink murder.
Who is the defector? We could go on all week.
The defection happened this morning I think. I wasn't an MP. In fact, Menchy's twitter has reminded me that it was someone called Barnes. JBriskin - your man in the know.
Ah yes - the high profile defector being someone caught with his bits out on Twitter (or whatever it was) and who has clearly got no political career left as he keeps losing elections.
I am sure UKIP will be making him (and his bits) their new poster boy with that background.
Too late for that, the Tories are in full survival and revenge mood, they will insult, abuse and attack everyone who even thinks of voting for UKIP, like the SNP did to the NO..
More fantasy. I don't think I've ever heard of any Tory doing anything like that.
It's not unreasonable, however, to point out the consequences of voting UKIP. After all, it's precisely UKIP's target voters - the less affluent WWC - who have the most to lose from a Miliband government.
Think it's important to draw a line between insulting or being generally hacked off [if we can use that phrase without being associated with bleating hypocritical celebrities] with individual 'traitors/liars' and voters.
Insulting voters is moronic. Insulting turncoats may be another matter.
In my opinion they are unsalvageable, some people would support Tory policies but not if its proposed or supported by Tories, just because they are Tories. Now that problem can be solved if the Conservative party disbanded and created a new party under a new name in its place.
Some of the Scottish Tories have recently said interesting things about the Unionist Party in Scotland, and how things went downhill for the Conservatives in Scotland when they merged with the Unionist Party.
Perhaps victory in the referendum is a good time to relaunch an independent Unionist Party in Scotland?
In England & Wales I can't see a similar hook to base a new/rebranded party around.
I think winning in '92 has turned out to be one huge headache for the Tories. Like Labour in 2010 losing would've been a blessing in disguise. 92-97 cemented a lot of public opinion against them which they still haven't recovered from.
This Tory conference resembles an enormo game of wink murder.
Who is the defector? We could go on all week.
The defection happened this morning I think. I wasn't an MP. In fact, Menchy's twitter has reminded me that it was someone called Barnes. JBriskin - your man in the know.
Ah yes - the high profile defector being someone caught with his bits out on Twitter (or whatever it was) and who has clearly got no political career left as he keeps losing elections.
I am sure UKIP will be making him (and his bits) their new poster boy with that background.
I think winning in '92 has turned out to be one huge headache for the Tories. Like Labour in 2010 losing would've been a blessing in disguise. 92-97 cemented a lot of public opinion against them which they still haven't recovered from.
On the other side of the equation, the Major government cemented a lot of things that might otherwise not have happened - rail privatisation, Maastricht opt-outs (particularly on the Euro) - and it also ideologically neutered the Labour party so that it pretty much gave up on offering a distinct alternative - Tory defeat in 1992 means New Labour and Blair don't happen, Labour retains clause 4.
The centre of political gravity in the UK would likely be much further to the left if Kinnock had been PM in the 1990s.
"In a speech which got a standing ovation from the audience in Birmingham, she said: "In the end, as they have done before, these values, our British values, will win the day and we will prevail."
Really? Are the restrictions she is imposing on free speech etc really British values? It's a tricky one but the need to be seen to be doing something is pushing all our major parties down roads that don't seem particularly "British" to me.
"In my opinion they are unsalvageable, some people would support Tory policies but not if its proposed or supported by Tories, just because they are Tories."
There's tonnes of research done, that suggests that is precisely the case.
And I agree with the follow on point.
It's part of the reason I'd almost welcome PR or some similar alternative as the seismic changes to the parties that would follow could remove a lot of the silly, needless sniping baggage all the parties have.
David Cameron thinks he was born to rule, and the Tory Party generally oozes an arrogant sense of entitlement.
Instead of getting angry they should reflect on their many mistakes, not least shifting Right in a Lynton Crosby inspired attempt to out-Kip the Kippers.
When the Tories are booted out they should use the opportunity to modernise, move on from the outdated fringe Rightwing Thatcherism they're still hooked on, become a centrist one-nation Party again.
Otherwise they may never win an election again outright in any of our lifetimes. It's going to be at least 28 years since their last as it is. Does that not ring alarm bells for them?
Oh do shut up, Hugh.
Lefties like you are always mired in a slobbering nostalgia for some imagined Tory Party of yesteryear that wasn't all nasty and right wing. The type led by Heath, for example, that you could actually beat in elections without the gerrymandered boundaries.
You know perfectly well we now need four Conservative terms. Without the Tories in for that long there'll be no national prosperity for you deadbeat public sector to55ers to piss away and squander. How will you f>ck the economy if it's as skint as you left it?
So sod off back to the public sector and let the Tories finish fixing the economy you pr1cks wrecked, there's a good Student Gwant.
How pleasant.
Thanks for reinforcing every point I made about your Party so promptly though.
It´s interesting how it´s always those who hate the Tories who urge them to "modernise" or "detoxify". Like that will ever make them vote Tory. Except in the minds of ageless stoodents and the metropolitan trendies, the Tories did not lose in 1997 because of their attitude to blacks or s28. They lost because of their perceived loss of economic competence, division and sense of being out of control.
Too late for that, the Tories are in full survival and revenge mood, they will insult, abuse and attack everyone who even thinks of voting for UKIP, like the SNP did to the NO..
More fantasy. I don't think I've ever heard of any Tory doing anything like that.
It's not unreasonable, however, to point out the consequences of voting UKIP. After all, it's precisely UKIP's target voters - the less affluent WWC - who have the most to lose from a Miliband government.
It may be so if you have not burnt your bridges and might still be listened to but when your leader and others within the party are generally describing UKIP supporters in insulting terms and being thoroughly dishonest about what UKIP is you can pretty much take for granted those bridges are burnt. Tories have thrown away the right to make their case.
Nobody's listening and all those who keep talking are doing is further antagonising the situation. Tories would be better off just outlining what they intend to do policy wise and leave UKIP supporters alone
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke. Tories attract the retired who are no longer net contributors whilst the majority of people paying the pensions of such folk support neither of the 2 right wing parties!!!
Most pensioners have, of course, earned their pensions during their working lives.
I think winning in '92 has turned out to be one huge headache for the Tories. Like Labour in 2010 losing would've been a blessing in disguise. 92-97 cemented a lot of public opinion against them which they still haven't recovered from.
On the other side of the equation, the Major government cemented a lot of things that might otherwise not have happened - rail privatisation, Maastricht opt-outs (particularly on the Euro) - and it also ideologically neutered the Labour party so that it pretty much gave up on offering a distinct alternative - Tory defeat in 1992 means New Labour and Blair don't happen, Labour retains clause 4.
The centre of political gravity in the UK would likely be much further to the left if Kinnock had been PM in the 1990s.
Rail privatisation was rushed and disjointed. Maastricht opened the Europe wound wide open for the Tories which hasn't healed since.
Add to that Hesletine's pit closure debacle in '92, Cash for questions, Major resigning and fighting Redwood....Hardly a shining 5 years of government.
"In a speech which got a standing ovation from the audience in Birmingham, she said: "In the end, as they have done before, these values, our British values, will win the day and we will prevail."
Really? Are the restrictions she is imposing on free speech etc really British values? It's a tricky one but the need to be seen to be doing something is pushing all our major parties down roads that don't seem particularly "British" to me.
May is an authoritarian who tramples on British liberties and hands over powers to Brussels. Not much British about her values at all.
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke. Tories attract the retired who are no longer net contributors whilst the majority of people paying the pensions of such folk support neither of the 2 right wing parties!!!
Most pensioners have, of course, earned their pensions during their working lives.
Is that true for State Pensions? Is there any data available on the total payout of the state pension versus the amount of contributions made?
"In a speech which got a standing ovation from the audience in Birmingham, she said: "In the end, as they have done before, these values, our British values, will win the day and we will prevail."
Really? Are the restrictions she is imposing on free speech etc really British values? It's a tricky one but the need to be seen to be doing something is pushing all our major parties down roads that don't seem particularly "British" to me.
The British Vishinsky (who hopes to be a Labourite MP) long ago shut down free speech. Heard of students being banged up for making off colour (sic) jokes?
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
May is an authoritarian who tramples on British liberties and hands over powers to Brussels. Not much British about her values at all.
That's odd, I have been expecting you to come here and lavishly praise her speech:
To live in a modern liberal state is not to live in a moral vacuum. We have to stand up for our values as a nation. There will, I know, be some who say that what I describe as extremism is merely social conservatism. But if others described a woman’s intellect as “deficient”, denounced people on the basis of their religious beliefs, or rejected the democratic process, we would quite rightly condemn their bigotry. And there will be others who say I am wrong to link these kinds of beliefs with the violent extremism we agree we must confront. To them I say, yes, not all extremism leads to violence. And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act. And there is, undoubtedly, a thread that binds the kind of extremism that promotes intolerance, hatred and a sense of superiority over others to the actions of those who want to impose their values on us through violence.
The Tories can't win from the Right. There simply aren't the votes.
Cameron's modernisation was always skin-deep, but even so it was nearly enough to win (admittedly after a massive recession against Gordon Brown and a tired Govt).
Cameron's problem wasn't that he tried to drag the Party to the Centre, it's that he abandoned the project. He didn't follow up his centrist PR with the same energy of Kinnock, Smith and Blair, and the Party has retreated to it's tired, outdated Thatcherite comfort zone.
Labour are at least 20 years ahead of the Tories in terms of waking up and smelling the coffee. The Tories still show no sign of doing so.
The centre of public opinion believes in getting powers back from Brussels, cutting immigration a lot, cutting out of work benefits and being tough on crime. I would love Cameron to move to the centre.
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke.
No it isn't. For a man who has such a high intellect and is normally so clear and lucid, its incredibly stupid.
If you want to beat UKIP, or any other political party with more than 10,000 members, beat their arguments.
"Toffs" - regularly used by Kippers. They can dish out but can't take ?
Disappointing to who? To Clarke? Are his standards more relevant than any others. The arrogance of Clarke oozes from his every pore. I'm sure many of those voting UKIP are perfectly satisfied with their lives. It's only the likes of Ken Clarke that they are disappointed with.
There is no more despicable example of urban liberal elitism than Clarke and no more pernicious and repulsive a mantra than this UKIP are 'poor white thick and old' narrative that Tories seem to love so much. Its like catnip to Tory superiority and narcissism. It brings out their worst characteristics perfectly.
Beyond that its stupid because only those who are into narcissistic elitism will buy into it. Decent people on the other hand will recognise how offensive it is.
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke.
No it isn't. For a man who has such a high intellect and is normally so clear and lucid, its incredibly stupid.
If you want to beat UKIP, or any other political party with more than 10,000 members, beat their arguments.
"Toffs" - regularly used by Kippers. They can dish out but can't take ?
Disappointing to who? To Clarke? Are his standards more relevant than any others. The arrogance of Clarke oozes from his very pore. I'm sure many of those voting UKIP are perfectly satisfied with their lives. It's only the likes of Ken Clarke that they are disappointed with.
There is no more despicable example of urban liberal elitism than Clarke and no more pernicious and repulsive a mantra than this UKIP are 'poor white thick and old' narrative that Tories seem to love so much. Its like catnip to their narcissism.
Beyond that its stupid because only those who are into narcissistic elitism will buy into it. Decent people on the other hand will recognise how offensive it is.
UKIP are 'poor white thick and old' narrative
In truth this is the metropolitan media story. Not only KC´s.
I think winning in '92 has turned out to be one huge headache for the Tories. Like Labour in 2010 losing would've been a blessing in disguise. 92-97 cemented a lot of public opinion against them which they still haven't recovered from.
On the other side of the equation, the Major government cemented a lot of things that might otherwise not have happened - rail privatisation, Maastricht opt-outs (particularly on the Euro) - and it also ideologically neutered the Labour party so that it pretty much gave up on offering a distinct alternative - Tory defeat in 1992 means New Labour and Blair don't happen, Labour retains clause 4.
The centre of political gravity in the UK would likely be much further to the left if Kinnock had been PM in the 1990s.
Rail privatisation was rushed and disjointed. Maastricht opened the Europe wound wide open for the Tories which hasn't healed since.
Add to that Hesletine's pit closure debacle in '92, Cash for questions, Major resigning and fighting Redwood....Hardly a shining 5 years of government.
I'm not saying Major's government was a good one, far from it, just that the fact of its existence and the policies he implemented, acted to move the centre of political gravity of the country further to the right.
Objectively this is in the interests of Conservatives and it meant that the Thatcherite consensus was never challenged by Blair or Brown.
Establishing themselves as the third biggest political party in the UK.
Exactly so - it's about their egos, not about actually achieving what they claim are their political goals (which in any case change from one day to the next).
Political goals will come once we are in government.
I'd actually vote Labour to stop that happening.
There's an undercurrent of Right Wing stuff which is wholly unpalatable.
The UKIPpers vision for Britain is not one in which I would wish to live, particularly if it involves people like Neil Hamilton.
If it came down to a choice of government, I'd sooner vote Labour than UKIP.
1/ It is internationally acceptable to have a Labour government but it would an appalling international embarrassment to have a UKIP one 2/ The damage Labour inflicts is gradual, the damage UKIP would inflict would be instant and permanent 3/ people overseas would feel sorry for us if we had a Labour government, but would justifiably hate and despise us if we had a UKIP government 4/ per capita UKIP have the most corrupt MEPs of any British party, so assuming this applied to HoC MPs they would be the most corrupt British government since Blair's and perhaps of all time.
"Justifiably hate and despise"
You're demonstrating how overly emotional you are on matters of UKIP. Classic case of hatred affecting your judgment, as TSE says.
May is an authoritarian who tramples on British liberties and hands over powers to Brussels. Not much British about her values at all.
That's odd, I have been expecting you to come here and lavishly praise her speech:
To live in a modern liberal state is not to live in a moral vacuum. We have to stand up for our values as a nation. There will, I know, be some who say that what I describe as extremism is merely social conservatism. But if others described a woman’s intellect as “deficient”, denounced people on the basis of their religious beliefs, or rejected the democratic process, we would quite rightly condemn their bigotry. And there will be others who say I am wrong to link these kinds of beliefs with the violent extremism we agree we must confront. To them I say, yes, not all extremism leads to violence. And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act. And there is, undoubtedly, a thread that binds the kind of extremism that promotes intolerance, hatred and a sense of superiority over others to the actions of those who want to impose their values on us through violence.
That reads exactly like one of your better posts.
Obviously that paragraph is entirely sound and sensible. But actions speak louder than words.
I am not a Cameron hater, I think he comes across as quite a nice Guy.. and I have never and probably will never vote Conservative anyway, so Im no traitor for being a kipper.
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
Actually the more I ponder it, it is awful
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
UKIP attracts elderly male people who have had disappointing lives is a great quote from Clarke.
No it isn't. For a man who has such a high intellect and is normally so clear and lucid, its incredibly stupid.
If you want to beat UKIP, or any other political party with more than 10,000 members, beat their arguments.
"Toffs" - regularly used by Kippers. They can dish out but can't take ?
Disappointing to who? To Clarke? Are his standards more relevant than any others. The arrogance of Clarke oozes from his very pore. I'm sure many of those voting UKIP are perfectly satisfied with their lives. It's only the likes of Ken Clarke that they are disappointed with.
There is no more despicable example of urban liberal elitism than Clarke and no more pernicious and repulsive a mantra than this UKIP are 'poor white thick and old' narrative that Tories seem to love so much. Its like catnip to their narcissism.
Beyond that its stupid because only those who are into narcissistic elitism will buy into it. Decent people on the other hand will recognise how offensive it is.
UKIP are 'poor white thick and old' narrative
In truth this is the metropolitan media story. Not only KC´s.
I didn't say it wasn't (It comes from a rather dubious book by two academics called Goodwin and Ford) but its the Tories who are buying into it . Labour are not going to go around peddling it because they know how offensive it is. Labour recognise that talking down to people as if they are inferior will not win their votes. The Tories on the other hand are merrily going along alienating as many people as they can....
Obviously that paragraph is entirely sound and sensible. But actions speak louder than words.
Indeed.
I'm looking forward to your lavish praise of her actions, especially on stop and search. As a staunch defender of civil liberties you are no doubt delighted by her actions on this.
Comments
www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5TWutxQ0bo
"...THAT's why the legal profession is being taken over by women! "
I thought that was women downgrading from the oldest profession to the second oldest?
(in a PC and non sexist way)
Probably the easiest way to describe what UKIP voters have in common is that in many different ways they all want a redistribution of power and in particular they want decentralisation. Decentralisation allows people more to 'do their own thing'. So for example if one area wants free prescriptions it can have it and has the money for it it can. If another needs a new hospital it can do so and in every case they do not have to go through all the lobbying and nonsense of persuading their masters in Westminster.
What that means is more people can fulfil their choices rather than the one size fits all solutions preferred by the establishment parties. Its little different to what Tories used to talk about before they got into power but they rather than delivering seem to have become establishment lackies just like Labour.
Now because UKIP believes in decentralisation it can allow for a wider range of viewpoints to be met because what people in Northern cities want to do doesn't have to effect what people in southern shires want to do and vice versa.
On the contrary centralist parties effectively demand that everyone wants the same thing which explains why the Tories are going through such traumas because without question Cameron is making them a centralist party with a single inflexible outlook when it was previously filled with decentralists with varying viewpoints
I lived in the West Midlands in the late 80s for a while and was always charmed by the sight of two boys and two girls in an XR3, all four having bleached their hair out of the same bottle.
It was like Bucks Fizz from about 5 years before.
UKIP didn't steal the Euro sceptic wing of the Tory party. Cameron made a calculated decision to ignore them and drove them out. If he believes he can win with just the Wets then good luck to him but then he can't start moaning when another party benefits from his idiocy.
Please acknowledge and give me an assurance that you will comply.
Thanks for reinforcing every point I made about your Party so promptly though.
You have a point, but I think you have to admit that, outside of the Europe/immigration issue, UKIP's offering is very vague, if it exists at all.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29428361
Someone with a sense of humour?
"My son," said the Norman Baron, "I am dying, and you will be heir
To all the broad acres in England that William gave me for share
When he conquered the Saxon at Hastings, and a nice little handful it is.
But before you go over to rule it I want you to understand this:--
"The Saxon is not like us Norman. His manners are not so polite.
But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice right.
When he stands like an ox in the furrow--with his sullen set eyes on your own,
And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
"You can horsewhip your Guscany archers, or torture your Picardy spears;
But don't try that game on the Saxon; you'll have the whole brood round your ears.
From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field,
They'll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise, you will yield.
"But first you must master their language, their dialect, proverbs and songs.
Don't trust any clerk to interpret when they come with the tale of their own wrongs.
Let them know that you know what they are saying; let them feel that you know what to say.
Yes, even when you want to go hunting, hear 'em out if it takes you all day.
They'll drink every hour of the daylight and poach every hour of the dark.
It's the sport not the rabbits they're after (we've plenty of game in the park).
Don't hang them or cut off their fingers. That's wasteful as well as unkind,
For a hard-bitten, South-country poacher makes the best man-at-arms you can find.
"Appear with your wife and the children at their weddings and funerals and feasts.
Be polite but not friendly to Bishops; be good to all poor parish priests.
Say 'we,' 'us' and 'ours' when you're talking, instead of 'you fellows' and 'I.'
Don't ride over seeds; keep your temper; and never you tell 'em a lie!"
Its not as if they said 'try and pickpocket the customers for an extra 50p) . They said ,effectively, try and provide 50p more of a service didn't they?
Whats the problem?
UKIP are developing their 2015 platform, just like the other parties. If you're interested, you can view the speeches from the recent UKIP Conference.
http://www.ukip.org/speeches_from_annual_conference
In a way I would just love UKIP to win a GE so the reality of running a country would hit home rather than just opposing everything at the euorpean parliament and smiling in a pub
Cameron's modernisation was always skin-deep, but even so it was nearly enough to win (admittedly after a massive recession against Gordon Brown and a tired Govt).
Cameron's problem wasn't that he tried to drag the Party to the Centre, it's that he abandoned the project. He didn't follow up his centrist PR with the same energy of Kinnock, Smith and Blair, and the Party has retreated to it's tired, outdated Thatcherite comfort zone.
Labour are at least 20 years ahead of the Tories in terms of waking up and smelling the coffee. The Tories still show no sign of doing so.
A bit of a sensitivity recalibration is needed I think.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2008199/The-cruel-hounding-Mark-Pritchard-shows-Tories-failed-clean-politics.html
Surely a student with politics as one of his A level subjects?
Carswell also claimed he wouldn't defect, and that open primaries were the way to select MPs, and that he wants a referendum but has diminished the prospect of that occurring by his defection.
Plenty said that about Mrs T. in 1979. Far too right wing to win.
IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say: –
"We invaded you last night – we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."
And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!
It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say: –
"Though we know we should defeat you,
we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say: --
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!"
Two day wonder?
The Tory image is that of corruption, scandal, incompetence, out of touch wealthy aristocrats, and sociopaths.
In my opinion they are unsalvageable, some people would support Tory policies but not if its proposed or supported by Tories, just because they are Tories.
Now that problem can be solved if the Conservative party disbanded and created a new party under a new name in its place.
That is where UKIP gets into, they have Tory policies, but because they are not called Tories and they are not part of the Conservative party, they are instantly more believable.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/pm-david-cameron-new-royal-gaffe-about-the-queens-van-dyck-9764420.html
And this wasn't just due to a slight increase in turnout. Gordon Brown's Labour party polled fewer votes in 2010 than Michael Howard's Conservative party did in 2005.
A fairer voting system - such as multi-member STV - that didn't penalise the Tories so much for what is an inefficient vote distribution under FPTP, would massively weaken the electoral success of the modern Labour party.
OTOH, the more fervent Cameroons make it clear that they absolutely detest the sort of people who vote UKIP, but on the other hand, they're astonished that they won't vote Conservative. It's not rocket science to work out that you don't get people to vote for you if you make it clear you don't like them. Nor do you get them to vote for you if you tell lies about them, by claiming that they want to carry out genocide against Muslims and ethnic minorities, for example.
Rather than crying over spilled milk, the Conservatives should try clearing it up.
Cameron, Conservatives, 2010 = 10,703,654
Blair, Labour, 2001 = 10,724,953
Everyone is busy with UKIP.
Who is the defector? We could go on all week.
He's not having a good week, is he?
The result will be to drive off voters away from the Tories.
Tories attract the retired who are no longer net contributors whilst the majority of people paying the pensions of such folk support neither of the 2 right wing parties!!!
How pathetic. Don't journalists have anything better to do?
No it isn't. For a man who has such a high intellect and is normally so clear and lucid, its incredibly stupid.
If you want to beat UKIP, or any other political party with more than 10,000 members, beat their arguments.
I am sure UKIP will be making him (and his bits) their new poster boy with that background.
It's not unreasonable, however, to point out the consequences of voting UKIP. After all, it's precisely UKIP's target voters - the less affluent WWC - who have the most to lose from a Miliband government.
Insulting voters is moronic. Insulting turncoats may be another matter.
Perhaps victory in the referendum is a good time to relaunch an independent Unionist Party in Scotland?
In England & Wales I can't see a similar hook to base a new/rebranded party around.
:headshot:
UKIP @UKIP 30m30 minutes ago
William Cash Jr, the proprietor of Spears Magazine and the son of Bill Cash MP has announced that he is joining UKIP http://www.ukip.org/william_cash_jr_ukip_s_latest_recruit …
Just to remember it's not just MP's that are defecting.
The centre of political gravity in the UK would likely be much further to the left if Kinnock had been PM in the 1990s.
"In a speech which got a standing ovation from the audience in Birmingham, she said: "In the end, as they have done before, these values, our British values, will win the day and we will prevail."
Really? Are the restrictions she is imposing on free speech etc really British values? It's a tricky one but the need to be seen to be doing something is pushing all our major parties down roads that don't seem particularly "British" to me.
There's tonnes of research done, that suggests that is precisely the case.
And I agree with the follow on point.
It's part of the reason I'd almost welcome PR or some similar alternative as the seismic changes to the parties that would follow could remove a lot of the silly, needless sniping baggage all the parties have.
Oh dear. William Cash has "gone over" to UKIP. I shall have to revisit my Christmas card list. Again.
Edit: I didn't appreciate that William is Bill Jnr.
We are not amused, part II"
Is it possible to be an Old Etonian 7th Baronet and an oik?
PS when thinking of an archetypal UKIPer I imagine a cross between this
http://www.coolmarriedguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/old-man11-426x260.jpg
and Neil Hamilton
http://order-order.com/2014/09/30/not-so-pronto-ipso/
Except in the minds of ageless stoodents and the metropolitan trendies, the Tories did not lose in 1997 because of their attitude to blacks or s28. They lost because of their perceived loss of economic competence, division and sense of being out of control.
Nobody's listening and all those who keep talking are doing is further antagonising the situation. Tories would be better off just outlining what they intend to do policy wise and leave UKIP supporters alone
To be fair, the tories have probably had that image since the party first formed in the 18th century.
In 1845 tories split over whether to impoverish corn farmers or let the whole of Ireland starve to death.
I always feel the image is best deflected when either the leader or a group of senior subordinates are from humble backgrounds.
Add to that Hesletine's pit closure debacle in '92, Cash for questions, Major resigning and fighting Redwood....Hardly a shining 5 years of government.
The British Vishinsky (who hopes to be a Labourite MP) long ago shut down free speech. Heard of students being banged up for making off colour (sic) jokes?
I am also not that pro or anti Royal.
But that is pretty bad I think... twice in a week or two he has been caught now and this is much worse than the first
To live in a modern liberal state is not to live in a moral vacuum. We have to stand up for our values as a nation. There will, I know, be some who say that what I describe as extremism is merely social conservatism. But if others described a woman’s intellect as “deficient”, denounced people on the basis of their religious beliefs, or rejected the democratic process, we would quite rightly condemn their bigotry. And there will be others who say I am wrong to link these kinds of beliefs with the violent extremism we agree we must confront. To them I say, yes, not all extremism leads to violence. And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act. And there is, undoubtedly, a thread that binds the kind of extremism that promotes intolerance, hatred and a sense of superiority over others to the actions of those who want to impose their values on us through violence.
That reads exactly like one of your better posts.
The EMS crisis finished the tories. Some utterly crazy things went on to keep the currency pegs intact.
There is no more despicable example of urban liberal elitism than Clarke and no more pernicious and repulsive a mantra than this UKIP are 'poor white thick and old' narrative that Tories seem to love so much. Its like catnip to Tory superiority and narcissism. It brings out their worst characteristics perfectly.
Beyond that its stupid because only those who are into narcissistic elitism will buy into it. Decent people on the other hand will recognise how offensive it is.
For the Mail to turn this down shows how dodgy it was!
In truth this is the metropolitan media story. Not only KC´s.
Objectively this is in the interests of Conservatives and it meant that the Thatcherite consensus was never challenged by Blair or Brown.
It's always better to be in government than not.
You're demonstrating how overly emotional you are on matters of UKIP. Classic case of hatred affecting your judgment, as TSE says.
Having Millipede as PM would make us a laughing stock.
Ungentlemanly, a real faux paus
If Farage had done it, the part of me that thinks UKIP might not be able to cut it when it comes to the big time would be reinforced, and I would be embarrassed for him, proper cringe
I'm looking forward to your lavish praise of her actions, especially on stop and search. As a staunch defender of civil liberties you are no doubt delighted by her actions on this.
BBC Scotland News @BBCScotlandNews · 6m6 minutes ago
Coming up on Radio Scotland's Newsdrive, @LouiseMensch on english votes for english laws