Politics at Westminster | BREAKING: UKIP

Zak Smith said:
Whilst you may disagree with his opinions, surely people can agree that Farage is one of the most effective politicians in recent times. Comes across alot better than the majority of them, despite the mud slinging.
Click to expand...

He's got a pretty easy job really, seeing as UKIP haven't really had any power they don't have the whole problem of voters feeling disillusioned with them. Throw in the economic downturn and you're always likely to get a party like UKIP doing well.

No doubt if they do become a legitimate 4th party he'll start experiencing the problems the politicians from the other main parties get. Though I must say it amuses me how he's painted as some sort of anti-establishment figure. The public schooled stock broker.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
As a party they believe in coalition government, were their voters imply not aware of the likely consequences therein?
Click to expand...
Voters obviously thought that was going to be a coalition that would be reflective of the manifesto not a 'coalition' that involved junking Lib_Dem policies and simply propping up the Tories. Voters feel 'if we wanted Tories, we would have voted Tory' - massive betrayal with predictable revenge from the betrayed. All to do with Clegg's lust for a scrap of power.
 
Red Dreams said:
anyone think 'real' Labor has a chance to come back?
Click to expand...
of all the main parties they are potentially in the best position. For me it was always telling that the Tories failed to achieve a majority after 13 years of Labour culminating in a bumbling PR disaster gordon Brown, a recession, the Iraq War and Mass immigration. That being said if many of these UKIP voters shift (back) to the tories next year it might be enough. Think Labour need shot of millipede sooner rather than later.
 
Red Dreams said:
is everyone brainwashed over there?

....thought we would all have learned after Thatcher....
Click to expand...

The problem isn't the public; polls consistently show us to be majority social-democratic on all the big issues. The problem is that the Labour Party hasn't been a socialist option on the ballot for decades. The question is when the Labour Party will learn.
 
Racists, racists, everywhere.
Crono said:
The problem isn't the public; polls consistently show us to be majority social-democratic on all the big issues. The problem is that the Labour Party hasn't been a socialist option on the ballot for decades. The question is when the Labour Party will learn.
Click to expand...
They haven't been a socialist option for decades for good reason - they'd be annihilated.
 
Ubik said:
Racists, racists, everywhere.

They haven't been a socialist option for decades for good reason - they'd be annihilated.
Click to expand...

Murdoch and the majority right-wing media would throw everything and the kitchen sink at them, as they used to, but on the other hand, the public are biased to socialist policies that help them. As polls show. Ever heard of, I dunno, the NHS?

So yes, it would require something called 'politics' to navigate.

Do you believe that only Thatcherite policies can win a general election, forever more?
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Bad news for the Yes campaign?
Click to expand...

Bad news for both sides in a way. Bad news for Yes in that they'd have hoped for the SNP to get that 6th seat. Bad news for no campaign in that UKIP gaining a seat in Scotland in this, and their general rise in the UK, will convince a lot of left leaning undecided people in Scotland that this is the future if we vote no and may tempt them to vote yes. So depends on which way you spin it. I'm more just annoyed that they've gotten anything in Scotland.
 
Crono said:
Murdoch and the majority right-wing media would throw everything and the kitchen sink at them, as they used to, but on the other hand, the public are biased to socialist policies that help them. As polls show. Ever heard of the NHS?

So yes, it would require something called 'politics' to navigate.

Do you believe that only Thatcherite policies can win a general election, forever more?
Click to expand...
Of course not. But with the current electoral system and state of the electorate, you can't afford to go very far to the left of Blair in order to get a majority. Marginal constituencies just won't go for it, I'm afraid, and they hold the power.

peterstorey said:
Not if they got the poor people of England to get off their arses and vote.
Click to expand...
Would mainly boost their popular vote in already safe seats, unfortunately.
 
Cheesy said:
Bad news for both sides in a way. Bad news for Yes in that they'd have hoped for the SNP to get that 6th seat. Bad news for no campaign in that UKIP gaining a seat in Scotland in this, and their general rise in the UK, will convince a lot of left leaning undecided people in Scotland that this is the future if we vote no and may tempt them to vote yes. So depends on which way you spin it. I'm more just annoyed that they've gotten anything in Scotland.
Click to expand...
I was just thinking back to the aftermath of the result the other day, in England. Some pro-independence friends of mine were very much "look what the English are doing - we're not like them" which seemed a handy argument. I think it'll be harder to argue that, with Scotland having a UKIP MEP.
 
Ubik said:
Of course not. But with the current electoral system and state of the electorate, you can't afford to go very far to the left of Blair in order to get a majority. Marginal constituencies just won't go for it, I'm afraid, and they hold the power.


Would mainly boost their popular vote in already safe seats, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

If we redefined constituency sizes to accurately reflect the number of people living in them, you'd not get the current situation where, basically, a Tory vote counts for more than a Labour vote. That'd go a fair way to solving the problem.
 
Not a bad night for the Tories all in all. The LibDems look on their knees. That guy challenging Clegg live on air?! Felt bad for Danny Alexander. He is one of their good eggs.
 
Ryan's Beard said:
If we redefined constituency sizes to accurately reflect the number of people living in them, you'd not get the current situation where, basically, a Tory vote counts for more than a Labour vote. That'd go a fair way to solving the problem.
Click to expand...

That is bollocks. My constituency got gerrymandered at the last election. They broadened Hammersmith & Fulham to include more of Shepherd's Bush and it tipped it to Labour.
 
Jippy said:
That is bollocks. My constituency got gerrymandered at the last election. They broadened Hammersmith & Fulham to include more of Shepherd's Bush and it tipped it to Labour.
Click to expand...

And the Tories gerrymandered a few the other way this time.

Regardless of who it would actually help, it should be much more equal than it currently is.
 
Adam Afriyie - The Conservative's answer to the charisma of Ed Milliband.
 
Ryan's Beard said:
If we redefined constituency sizes to accurately reflect the number of people living in them, you'd not get the current situation where, basically, a Tory vote counts for more than a Labour vote. That'd go a fair way to solving the problem.
Click to expand...
It's actually kind of the other way round, in that less people can vote for Labour across the country per MP elected. A number of factors feed into that, notably the tendency of Labour supporters to be the unlikeliest to vote, and them having a relatively more efficient vote spread across the country (they lose big, win small more often than tories).
 
Jippy said:
Seems it works both ways. Tories typically win majority English vote though. You know Scottish independence will feck Labour.
Click to expand...

If we fixed constituency boundaries to be, say, 70000 electorate per constituency and ensured the electorate actually voted, Scottish independence wouldn't hurt Labour too much. The problem Labour have is that their voters typically don't vote, combined with constituencies like Manchester, where we have over 80000 potential peoples' votes counting for the same as a potential 50000 elsewhere in the country.

But you're right, as it is, Scottish fecking off would ruin Labour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.