| Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Ukip come within 600 votes of having TWO MP's at Westminster | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 10 2014, 05:46 AM (1,260 Views) | |
| johnofgwent | Oct 10 2014, 05:46 AM Post #1 |
|
It .. It is GREEN !!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Blessed are the alarm clocks that wake your missus, for they allow you first peck at the juicy headline ... I wake this morning to find that Clacton has a UKIP Member of Parliament. That isn't all that surprising, the man was clearly unhappy at Cameron's leadership, and over fifty per cent of the electorate turned out to demonstrate that they are not happy with him either, to the tune of a twelve thousand majority over the "official concervative and unionist party candidate" with the others in the running reduced to the status not so much of "also rans" but more "did they bother to leave the starting gate ?" What I find most entertaining, coming as I do from a constituency where the sitting (L:abour) MP has pissed her 10,000 + majority up the wall and wonlast time by a mere 1000 votes on a turnout higher than it has been for a while, is that the OTHER by election, in a constituency LABOUR have held comfortably since it was created in 1983, a by-election caused not by political discontent but by the death of the sitting MP, UKIP came to within SIX HUNDRED VOTES of winning. LABOUR held the seat with 11,600 and something the UKIP's Eleven Thousand. I shall REALLY enjoy voting UKIP in May 2015 in Newport East. |
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Lewis | Oct 11 2014, 10:45 AM Post #41 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No such thing as socialism! As for an example of spite we only need to read your deranged diatribes. Your incompetent lot quell ambition and destroy hope! The need to get them out is vital for the sake of this country! |
![]() |
|
| papasmurf | Oct 11 2014, 11:46 AM Post #42 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What Labour politics? There is only the Beast of Bolsover left. |
![]() |
|
| Stan Still | Oct 11 2014, 01:11 PM Post #43 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Now the three man parties cannot avoid the immigration issue to do so would be suicidal, if Labour try and censor or stifle debate as they did when in office they may as well not bother turning up for the GE, even many Scots have turned away from them. |
![]() |
|
| Marconi | Oct 11 2014, 04:13 PM Post #44 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Awkward pause today as a UKIP voter rings a radio phone-in about UKIP policies, but can't name one. http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/ukip-voter-rings-radio-phonein-about-ukip-policies-cant-name-one--gkGeRNjyLg This seems to be the case quite often when people I work with say they will vote UKIP, but when asked what their policies are, they don't even know. |
![]() |
|
| johnofgwent | Oct 11 2014, 04:41 PM Post #45 |
|
It .. It is GREEN !!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Speaking personally I support them because there is no way on earth they can possibly fuck my life up worse than blair brown and cameron have. |
![]() |
|
| Lewis | Oct 11 2014, 05:56 PM Post #46 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Blair and Brown didn't threaten to f*** up the lives of my friends and my family. Scammer's did and does! |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Oct 11 2014, 09:38 PM Post #47 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
When France recovers, and it will as it is far less weighed down with debt than us and is of course far more productive to boot, what will your excuse be then? |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Oct 11 2014, 09:38 PM Post #48 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I also detest them, 'kin vermin! |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Oct 11 2014, 09:49 PM Post #49 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't consider myself especially socialist being a business owner how could I be? It's just that unlike you I can see the damage Conservatism has wrought on our country and it's now fragile society, and yes Blair was Tory Lite before you get your surgical stockings in a twist, my local MP is a total Tory tosser and not even worthy of the steam of my piss, the neighbouring constituency also has a Tory MP who works hard and is unobtrusive and quietly effective, if he was my MP I'd vote for him. But as it is I'm going to play that Conservative game at the next GE, divide and rule, either that or draw a knob on the ballot paper again. |
![]() |
|
| somersetli | Oct 11 2014, 09:57 PM Post #50 |
|
somersetli
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And replace them with who? |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Oct 11 2014, 09:59 PM Post #51 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Just to point out that using vermin to rid oneself of worse pests is a legitimate tactic. I'm in no doubt at all that Ukip are as corrupt as the rest, but Westminster needs clearing out, and Farage can speed that up. Getting rid of Ukip will be childs play when the time for it does come. Edited by Affa, Oct 11 2014, 10:00 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Happy Hornet | Oct 11 2014, 10:02 PM Post #52 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But if Ukip are as corrupt as the rest how would putting them in power "clear out" Westminster? |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Oct 11 2014, 10:07 PM Post #53 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
When the boys club has got out of order and dipped it's hands in the till and failed to listen to the adults you introduce rougher and cruder boys to give them a hard time, the better ones will eventually see sense. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Oct 11 2014, 11:19 PM Post #54 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I get the same from so many of them with the usual refuge blurted out of "well they can't be any worse" The 3 main parties can safely rely on a sizeable number of UKIP supporters being unable to find a polling station let alone the right one or put an X in the right spot. |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Oct 12 2014, 12:48 AM Post #55 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
HH, I'm assuming your question is more rhetorical than as having any genuine curiosity. You read my post so read the last sentence too I guess ........ and although that wasn't explicit, it did carry an answer of sorts, and should not need an explanation as you request. Of course I could be entirely wrong, and your question properly asked from not having the faintest idea of how or why such an infestation should be removed. Then again it could be mischief ........ more suitable to the playground, or Twitter. |
![]() |
|
| Happy Hornet | Oct 12 2014, 06:51 AM Post #56 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Affa, my question was asked with genuine curiosity, if you don't want to answer you don't have to. |
![]() |
|
| somersetli | Oct 12 2014, 09:01 AM Post #57 |
|
somersetli
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes Papa, whatever happened to the likes of Earnest Bevan, Micheal Foot, Bessie Braddock, and Barbara Castle. These people must be turning in their graves at the demise of the present Labour Party. |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 10:08 AM Post #58 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, they didn't threaten to do it; they just did it. If you claim not one of your family and friends has seen their living standards fall because of immigration then you are lying. Or, your family and friends are all part of the very narrow narrow, very wealthy elite that do actually benefit from ever more immigration. So, which is it? All The Best Edited by Pro Veritas, Oct 12 2014, 10:11 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 10:10 AM Post #59 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That political prejudice runs deep doesn't it Steve? I'd bet that deep down you'd like to make it illegal for people to vote for parties you don't like, wouldn't you? All The Best |
![]() |
|
| Happy Hornet | Oct 12 2014, 10:18 AM Post #60 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
PV, with the greatest of respect I don't think your ad-homs are doing much for the quality of debate. |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 10:28 AM Post #61 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The government's own statistics show that living standards have dropped. There are numerous downward pressures on those living standards - the financial crisis being just one of them. Others are a glut of labour (caused by unsustainable immigration), spiralling house prices caused by too much demand (caused by unsustainable immigration), increased demand for utilities and other essentials driving up costs (caused by unsustainable immigration), lower levels of public services (also affected, if not caused, by unsustainable immigration) - this list goes on and almost all of the items on that list are adversely affected, if not caused, by unsustainable immigration. Unsustainable immigration is a, deliberate, product of Blair and Brown's inverted class-war ideology - the purpose of which was to make the majority even poorer and so ever more dependent on Labour governments. Anyone who claims that their friends' and family's living standards hasn't been adversely affected by immigration (and so by Blair and Brown) is either a liar, or a member of the narrow, rich elite who do benefit from immigration. There really is no other option. So my comments may indeed seem to you to be an ad-hom; but they are also true. And truth always increases the quality of debate, even when its is truth you'd rather not hear. All The Best Edited by Pro Veritas, Oct 12 2014, 10:31 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Happy Hornet | Oct 12 2014, 10:32 AM Post #62 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ad-homs inevitably provoke a response in kind and this then degenerates into a slanging match rather than debate. They are also against the rules of this place which you agreed to adhere to upon registration. |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 10:42 AM Post #63 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Then please feel free to report my post. If I state a truth, and that truth happens to be an ad-hom then tough. Once we become afraid to mention the truth, because it may offend someone then we have totally lost all ability to debate rationally anyway. My comment stands - there are ONLY two types of people who can claim not to have seen their living standards adversely affected by immigration - the rich elite and liars. I never called anyone a liar - I used a conditional clause (If) and pointed out the ONLY two options available. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Oct 12 2014, 10:43 AM Post #64 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well as ad homs go it's on the mild side ^ But does spectacularly miss the point. When people say they are voting UKIP but haven't read the manifesto, incorrectly quote their policies and statements and continually resort to the voting equivalent of "drink the drain cleaner as it has to be better than this wine" then I think it's fair for me to say I don't think such will find the right polling station and box on the ballot paper in large numbers. |
![]() |
|
| Happy Hornet | Oct 12 2014, 10:45 AM Post #65 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So PV, you have your view on this subject and anyone who does not share it is a liar or part of a rich elite. As far as I can see this leaves absolutely no room for debate. Also, some would say that reneging on an agreement to follow a set of rules is dishonest. |
![]() |
|
| krugerman | Oct 12 2014, 10:46 AM Post #66 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
As a former Lib Dem voter who intends to vote Labour, I am not too worried about UKIP for several reasons, firstly UKIP are without a shadow of doubt much more of a threat to Conservative held seats than they are to Labour held seats. Looking at the two by election results, Labour actually increased its share of the vote in Heywood & Middleton, and were down by 14% in Clacton, the Tories on the otherhand were down by 28% in a supposedly safe Tory seat, and down by 15% in the Lancashire seat. So, yes I accept that UKIP are going to take votes from Labour, but all the evidence suggests that they are going to take a lot more votes from the Conservatives. The European question I believe, is going to help Labour too, the point been that the pro and anti factions are around 50/50 ( according to polling ), we have one political party which is vehemently anti Europe, another which is moderately anti Europe, a smaller party which is very pro Europe, but which is now about as popular as a pig farmer in Jerusalem due to going into coalition with the "Nasty Party", which leaves only Labour as the credible pro European political party - the anti vote is split. I am actually quite pleased that UKIP are doing ok |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 10:48 AM Post #67 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Is that the same as people, among them you, who claim the BNP are "right wing" having never read a BNP manifesto because if they had they would have discovered the BNP are more left-wing than Michael Foot? How many Labour voters vote Labour having never read a Labour Manifesto? The same for the Conservatives, and Lib Dems? But their voters never get accused by you of being borderline retarded? So why just UKIP voters? That is why I, rather justly IMO, inferred some deep seated prejudice. You do understand that an ad-hom is a statement that says something nasty about someone, that plays the man, not the ball. You'll note I asked a question, I didn't make a statement. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 11:00 AM Post #68 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No. You misunderstand. My opinion is this: That there are only two types of people able to claim that they have not been adversely affected by immigration - the rich elite, and liars. You can hold a different opinion to me on this subject, that doesn't necessarily make you a liar or a rich elite - it makes you factually wrong. Most people in this country are demonstrably worse off because of the downward economic pressures applied by immigration. The few that are not are in the top 10% of earners - the rich elite. There's room for debate, you can attempt to prove my opinion wrong; you'd need to demonstrate that several year's worth of economic data is all wrong, but hey, if you do that I'll be forced to re-evaluate my position on this issue. I'm happy to do so if presented with such evidence. And as I said, if you think I have broken the rules - report me to a Moderator. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 11:03 AM Post #69 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Evidence suggests that UKIP are a significant threat to both Labour and the Tories. With 50% of the seats likely to swing to UKIP being Labour held seats. The Heywood & Middleton by-election proved beyond all reasonable doubt that UKIP are a significant threat to Labour. To keep pretending otherwise is, frankly, delusional. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| Happy Hornet | Oct 12 2014, 11:15 AM Post #70 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
PV, my standard of living has steadily increased in the last 10 years. So am I a liar, factually wrong, or part of a rich elite? And if it's the latter then why the hell am I living in Coventry? !!! |
![]() |
|
| krugerman | Oct 12 2014, 11:18 AM Post #71 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
History teaches us that very odd things often happen in by-elections I contend that most Labour / former Lib Dem voters in Labour held seats will realise that the only way of stopping the Tories is to vote for the only credible alternative, and that is not UKIP. Its a nice comforting thought for Tory supporters to believe UKIP are equally as much a threat to Labour as they are to the Conservatives, but its a comforting thought which is not true. Think about it - a rich former banker who wants to cut public services, cut taxes, and has senior members who have called for the total privatisation of the NHS, come come now, dosent sound very tasty for traditional Labour voters does it. ? |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Oct 12 2014, 11:20 AM Post #72 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh dear Pro V go watch the GP and get your brain in order and stop making up silly stories based on hopeful guesswork I read the BNP manifesto in 2010 and several times since. Please show me where I posted that the BNP were wholly right wing. Not getting confused between posters are we - again? In my experience most Lab, Lib and Tory supporters can correctly summarise their policies. Not so with UKIP. Of course that might be because UKIP have flip flopped on policies so often with Farage describing his own work as "drivel". An intellectually bankrupt party that'd bankrupt the UK Edited by Steve K, Oct 12 2014, 11:27 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| krugerman | Oct 12 2014, 11:20 AM Post #73 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Am trying to think how I have been adversely affected by immigration When I think of something, I will let you know |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 11:21 AM Post #74 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sounds like most of the Labour front-bench under Blair. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Oct 12 2014, 11:24 AM Post #75 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Has your cost of living increased? Your car insurance? Have your wages devalued over the last 5 years? Immigration has, in part, affected all these things. These things would, probably, still have happened had we not had the immigration we do but had we still suffered the financial crisis; but they wouldn't have happened to the same extent. Immigration has adversely added to the pressures caused by the financial crisis - that much is undeniable. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| krugerman | Oct 12 2014, 11:37 AM Post #76 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"The British National Party (BNP) is a far-right political party in the United Kingdom" (Wikipedia) 1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) (in Britain) a neo-Nazi political party. Abbreviation: BNP (The Free Dictionary) The British National Party (BNP) is a far-right political party (Answers.com) The British National Party (BNP) is a far-right political party in the United Kingdom. (Reference.com) |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Oct 12 2014, 11:44 AM Post #77 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Let's examine the facts, or rather the reality. There is a sizeable portion of the electorate that has the issue of immigration and EU membership as responsible in a large part for employment opportunities being scarce, wages being low, and for living standards falling. Opposed to to any change is corporate business, the political elite (unelected) in Whitehall. None of the three main parties are committed to doing anything meaningful (to correct the situation) about this complaint, this democratic desire of a possible voter majority. Ukip are committed to representing this voter group. A vote for Ukip is democracy in action, it is telling government that 'they do not act in my name'. A voice they cannot ignore and so must respect or be deposed ......... either way Westminster takes on a different shape, and once re-shaped is then reminded that they are made accountable. What I would expect is that PR is then considered instead of FPTP. And even that eventuality would cause the big three to revise their ethos, their ideology. Old values become obsolete. Ukip, once their efforts are felt then become irrelevant .... and so must change too. That is how Westminster is cleared out of the infestation it has. imo .......... |
![]() |
|
| krugerman | Oct 12 2014, 11:47 AM Post #78 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
My cost of living has increased (due to the fall-out from the world wide recession, financial crisis and governmet policy) My car insurance has increased, though how this could possibly be connected to immigration is beyond me, but no doubt you well explain it all to us. Many people s wages have devalued over the last five years, partly as a result of the fallout from the recession and financial crisis, and because the government has both frozen wages or kept increases below inflation - simple really. I also benefitted from the boom years before the financial crisis hit, and before the recession came, I enjoyed good business throughout most of Labours 13 years, prosperity meant that more and more British people were not taking up the cinderella jobs, unsocial working hours, low pay and labour intensive jobs, the migrants filled those vaccancies instead, and they fuelled the economy too. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Oct 12 2014, 11:48 AM Post #79 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Perhaps not, but the assumption that UKIP and other supporters must all be loons is misplaced. I think what we are seeing is a political fraction, of the right, that is daring to voice what it and many voters think. Cameron says he gets it, but who knows? Whereas Milliband is all at sea. The real debate is all on the this, the left are old school with nothing of interest on offer. So with the Tories taking up the NL_lite votes and UKIP picking up votes across the piece what now is Labour for? Will it just be for the clypto Trots, the Envy and Spite Brigade, the public sector union parameters? What is Labour for, it looks like a party without a constituency and nothing on offer that attracts. Yes Labour can still obtain power, but it cannot win it. The debate is all on the rhs. |
![]() |
|
| Happy Hornet | Oct 12 2014, 11:55 AM Post #80 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Affa, I see where you are coming from but I simply don't buy the notion that UKIP are any different to the other parties. Farrage is an establishment cliché IMHO.
Edited by Happy Hornet, Oct 12 2014, 11:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Register for Free |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |




![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




7:35 PM Jul 11