OT: Who is voting UKIP?

very dangerous but not for the two main parties who are streets ahead for them to ever make a difference. they dont have any policies apart from pulling out of the EU and the tories can give you that.

 

Not true. They do have other policies. Twitter folk started the myth they don't have other policies and let's be honest whilst lots of people praised the comet landing Twitter folk complained about some blokes shirt.

 

I wish nigel would tell us all about his policies because we only know one or two and that wont get him far..

 

He supports the privatisation of the NHS for one

I've never heard of a policy on education, transport, economic growth, taxes, jobs, wages etc.

 

Valley, this is what I recall reading re UKIP's view of Income Tax

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-27654958

 

Yeah but telling us the rest would put him backwards

 

interesting article


UK Labour extends opinion poll lead

This story was published: 2 days ago November 16, 2014 12:34PM



A BRITISH political poll suggests Labour has extended its lead to four points but just one in five people can imagine the opposition party's leader Ed Miliband as prime minister.

THE survey put Labour on 34 per cent, unchanged from last month despite speculation about Miliband's leadership, with the Conservatives down one point on 30 per cent.
The ComRes study for the Sunday Mirror and Independent on Sunday put UKIP on 19 per cent, the Liberal Democrats up one point on 8 per cent and the Green Party down one point on 3 per cent.
The proportion of people who said they could imagine Miliband as prime minister has fallen to 20 per cent, down from 25 per cent 12 months ago.

 

What a complete and load of utter nonsense and scaremongering lol. Your no better than what you claim UKIP are.

lol and the others are not? Come off it.

The other parties ignore what the people want anyway, so no change there.

Scaremongering.

As ex RN, I can say that I am not one of those who would **** themselves if they ever came to conflict. I would fight for my country. No questions asked, but then lets look at how many of the other parties would **** themselves at the sight of conflict. Oh its the same for all. So total crap.

Rubbish.

Have you seen all the legislation they have to adhere too as it stands? A lot is from the EU.

I feel the same about the other parties to be fair.

Haha total bollocks and scaremongering and you know it. Its regarding proper gun control licensing rather than a blanket ban. As the change brought in by Blair meant that our Olympic team could not train in the UK, they had to go to France to train.

Yet you continue to support governments who privatise everything? Great.

Interesting. The EU class these countries as eastern europe

Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Georgia, Hungary, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Ukraine.

Now those who are part of the EU are: (pop UN population division)

Bulgaria - 7,240,000
Croatia - 4,291,000
Czech Republic - 10,512,000
Hungary - 9,962,000
Poland - 38,501,000
Romania - 19,043,000
Slovakia - 5,445,000
Slovenia - 2,057,000

Total - 97,051,000

Don't know about you, but it seems your numbers are mostly bogus too

You say that like its any different now lol

You mean like scrapping 0 hour contracts which adds to workers rights, right?

Equal pay is crap, are you listening to that feminazi woman who attempted to discredit Farage on TV regarding his comments about equal pay in a certain sector, and only showed what an idiot she was in the process and proved him right.

Lol

For someone who complains about scaremongering, your doing plenty of it yourself.

Nope your just an idiot who labels everyone that might vote for UKIP as a racist homophobic, misogynistic, little endgander, bigoted, racist, hypocrite who believes dads army is a documentary.

Tell me, do you like to insult people off the cuff? Just because you don;t agree with them. See its people like you who shout out racist, homophobe at people that keep UKIP growing, because people are fed up with people like you who shout out such ludicrous crap at the mere mention of things like immigration control and the like.

 

No **** sherlock, but UKIP immigration isn't to have a complete blanket ban, but to have an immigration policy like that of New Zealand, Australia, Canada. Not this open door policy.

There is a very big difference to stopping all immigration, and having some control.

Yes you must try harder, but we already worked out that you like to scaremonger, so no surprise there.

 

The trouble with Ed is that he stabbed his iwn brother in the back. Had David Milliband won the leadership I honestly believe that David Cameron would have been overthrown by the Tories by now as a Labour Party under DM would be nailed on for a landslide victory. I will be surprised if Ed is leadibg Labour into the election.

 

I believe the UKIP phenomenon is an invention of the 3 main parties actually.
They suppressed the debate about pan-European politics in this country as it is a difficult complicated subject that creates divisions within their parties (especially the Tory party).
The political establishment of the UK (all 3 major parties) policy towards Europe has been to try and keep us in whilst putting off making a deeper commitment to the project for as long as possible.....what were people who were against "ever closer union" and indeed believed the UK would be better off outside the EU supposed to do?
Suck it up?

It was a group of academics from the LSE who founded UKIP (it was the anti-federalist league from 1991-1993).
I personally have been on the exact same journey as the founders....I am a Liberal. The party I will most probably vote for at the next election will be the Liberal Democrats as they have the most policies (and the best chance of having some of them implemented) that I agree with....not all of their policies and I won't defend everything they do. When it comes to voting I first inform myself and then vote for the party who best reflects how I think. I'm a floating voter.

The founders were not "racist homophobic, misogynistic, little endgander , bigoted, racist, hypocrites..." and nor am I.
We are just people who arrived at the conclusion that the whole project was either;
a) not desireable
or
b) doomed to fail.

Personally I think the idea of a European Super State (U.S.E) is a fantastic idea on paper, makes perfect sense, but was doomed to fail.

Who was I and others who felt like me supposed to vote for?
I, like many, opted to vote for a party to run the country in the general election and UKIP in the European Elections.....before anyone says that the UKIP vote was pointless unless it was in a general election, I know. I opted to vote this way though to voice my dissatisfaction with the status quo in Europe (1 foot in and 1 foot out).
What I was hoping for was not UKIP in power (anywhere), I was hoping for a national debate, some education on this matter for the general public (who get most of their uninformed opinions from The Sun and The Daily Mail), and a referendum.....now that enough people have voted UKIP there is a good chance that we will get a referundum.


I do understand your misgivings though Bob as the UKIP thing has become a bandwagon and a lot of ignorant xenophobes/racists have attached themselves to this bandwagon.

I can personally see me not voting for them again as there seems to be a referendum on the table....

re:Farage
He has been a good political leader of his party. He has grown their vote and will have achieved 1 of their main goals if we have a referendum.
He is very careful to point out that he is FOR immigration but is against open borders with the EU.
In truth the immigrants from the EU aren't the issue (the vast majority contribute economically and make us richer) but has been happy to play that card, including scaremongering re: Eastern Europe, because he knew it was a vote winner....it has been cynical (dangerous even) but if a referendum is secured he will have achieved the desired result and the Tory and Labour parties play exactly the same games, at election time they practically fall over themselves to appear tough on immigrants because it is a VOTE WINNER....they are just as cynical, no better.

 

UKIP founder: a genuine debate over Europe has been hijacked by racism and stupidity

Author: Alan Sked (Professor of International History at London School of Economics)
Alan Sked founded the Anti-Federalist League in 1991 before renaming the party as Ukip in 1993. He has most recently been developing his latest political project, a centre-left Eurosceptic Party called New Deal.


It wasn’t until 1997 that I became aware that issues of race or ethnicity could form part of the debate over Europe. The most recent round of European elections show that we are now at risk of these issues…

It wasn’t until 1997 that I became aware that issues of race or ethnicity could form part of the debate over Europe. The most recent round of European elections show that we are now at risk of these issues dominating the entire discussion.

I have always been a liberal. I suspect most educated people are. As a teenager I joined Jo Grimond’s Liberal Party and as a student in Scotland became Chairman of Glasgow University Liberal Club, President of the Association of Scottish Liberal Students, Treasurer of the Scottish Young Liberals and in 1970, Liberal parliamentary candidate for Paisley.

I continued to be a Liberal when I migrated to Oxford to do my D.Phil, and afterwards when I took up my lectureship in international history at LSE. I was, of course, an enthusiastic federalist on European affairs and voted yes in the 1975 Referendum.

Later, after a decade as head of European Studies at LSE (1980-1990), I came to believe the whole project was mad and became a resolute Eurosceptic. I was the leading spokesman for the Bruges Group (supposedly non-party in affiliation) and then in 1991 set up The Anti-Federalist League which in 1993 became UKIP. I led this until 1997 when I resigned from the party.

During my whole period of participation in the public argument, race or immigration was simply never an issue. I argued about national sovereignty, democracy, accountability, corruption, economic costs and benefits, agricultural, fishing and other policies, the nature of EU institutions and other matters.

Race was irrelevant and in my mind immigration did no harm. The very idea of discriminating against any fellow human being on practically any grounds was anathema to my Christian upbringing and liberal principles.

Today, however, since my party was taken over by Nigel Farage, politics has become obsessed with immigration – but also race and Islam – as the almost exclusive context in which to debate the EU.

There are several reasons for this. First, Farage is too dim to be able to debate sophisticated policies or political structures. He cannot handle data, statistics, theories or history. Second, the country has an ageing population part of which both resents and fails to understand the changes in British society and Britain’s world role since the 1950s. Such conservatives want a return to the 1950s, an era when Britain was a world power, before entry into the EEC and before mass black and Muslim immigration and the sexual revolution of the 1960s.


Third, pro-EU politicians and parties have also mentally remained in the 1950s. They blandly repeat the propaganda of the day: that the EU has brought peace and ever-increasing standards of living, while representing increased democracy. Since common sense indicates this is untrue, the arguments involved have stopped working. Yet the pro-Europeans find it impossible to review the recent history of the EU rationally. For most of them the cure to the problems of integration is simply more integration. Occasionally – like David Cameron – they suggest a cosmetic reform, but this (and he) lacks credibility and so that argument becomes a dead end.


A true debate would involve arguments about the nature of EU institutions, policies and their link to (or separation from) democracy.

However, since both sides are stuck with 1950s-style assumptions, the debate reduces itself to the lowest common denominator, which means Farage has traction. Maybe it cannot be otherwise. The EU is such a complicated set of institutions that any adult debate sounds academic. But for this the Europhiles have only themselves to blame. They have always offered – or rather forced – incomprehensible treaties on the people of Europe rather than offered a federal constitution, their real but unwanted solution.

So Europe is stuck with an irrelevant debate on race and immigration. The issues are emotive and apparently simple. Reason is absent. Meanwhile left and right, which should both be split on constitutional and economic issues, simply adopt clichéd stances on immigration figures or economic statistics in a debate about Europe’s future over which both have lost control.

I blame the Europhiles. They took success for granted, never developed their institutions democratically and never updated their case. They fixed the figures to get their euro and then they broke the rules they laid down for it. They have now, I predict, lost the democratic argument they always feared and avoided, and they have probably lost the EU along with it.

 

I agree with Alan Sked's analysis.
The only thing I disagree on is not giving Farage any credit.
Sometimes in politics (as in football and boxing and any activity that is fiercely competitive) you've got to fight dirty.
Yes he's not as bright as some would give him credit for, yes he's been cynical, yes he's happy to lure some of the more unpleasant right-wing voters but UKIP under his leadership has been the major factor in bringing a referendum within touching distance. If we have that referendum it is highly likely that we will vote to leave the EU, which is what Sked and the fellow founders of the party set out to achieve. Farage deserves some credit for his role in that.

 

But we don't have an open-door immigration policy. Apart from people from EU, it's quite tough to come to work in UK. Don't forget that we also have he right to work in the EU, so it works both ways. Stop them coming here and they'll stop us going there.

So, what's the difference between a Premier League footballer who's an immigrant and a lowly paid immigrant? Are you saying that only the well-off and rich should be allowed to come here, but the poor should stay put in their own countries and shut up? Why should we allow skilled immigrants in and not unskilled immigrants? Do you think the unskilled people should be treated like 2nd class citizens? There isn't much logic in what you say. Unskilled people also have the right to look for a better life. What makes footballers so special?

 

UKIP = stalking horse used to deflect YOUR attention away from YOUR lot and to cloud reality and muddy issues by shouting nothing, but shouting it with anger.

UKIP = A weapon of the Tory Arsenal whose sole purpose is to mop up the inevitable haemorrhage of Liberal votes and to stop Labour from doing so.

UKIP = NO POLICIES, unless of course you call screaming 'FIRE' at every given opportunity a policy.

UKIP Weapons = Incite personal opinions to block national debate.

What we should be talking about is:

The vertical drain of wealth from British individuals to the countries foreign investors and power brokers

The bankers, why have they been allowed to continue unchecked ?

The Levin enquiry, what happened to that, were its outcomes implemented, what were its outcomes?

Why have foreign media moguls so much control and power over our government?

What's happened to the Tory promises made to Scotland after they chose to stay British?

Why is the NHS continuing to be raped despite assurances from this administration that they are investing 'more' into it. Where is it all going?

Have the illegal austerity measures made a dent into the national debt. If not, then where has all the money gone?

Why has the national debt increased more under the Tories than it ever did under labour?

What is this administration steering our tiny little un-educated nation towards?

Why has the average spending power, (wealth should never judged on income, income is nothing, its what you get for your income that shows wealth) of the British people diminished by 20% over the last 4yrs? £1.00 four years ago only has a value of 81p now

The list of things we should be talking about is endless, but we should be talking about them, right?

 

Nigel and UKIP are a breath of fresh air that is needed in politics. I would never vote for them in a million years but he does stir up debate which very little but some proposals nevertheless i tend to agree with. As for ever taking power then he has no chance with his bizarre party. You have to have real policies that effect peoples lives and immigration is not one of them...Still i will look forward to him on the stage debating with the tories and labour come the election...

 

Lol your first line, is exactly why they want out of Europe, to have full control of our borders. Whether people come from Australia or Europe, it is still immigrants. We are not there to let every tom dick and harry in, we should only be letting those in that bring something to the table. Just like Australia, New Zealand, Canada and others do.

But if we are not allowed to say the word immigration because people think they want to ban it everywhere, should we also make sure not to say we want borders that we control, because people then say its only Europenas who we cannot stop. I mean really?

The fact is, they want to control our borders in every aspect, give equal chance to EVERYBODY, not just Europeans having special privileges, based on the EU's open border policy.

Lets open the borders up for every tom dick and harry then, let them all in, get rid of any border controls. Yes thats a good idea. Lets do that, ffs. Lets see if you can now have a go at our current border controls that do not involve Europe, and see if they differ from what UKIP want as a full controlled border. I think you will find its not, its just not ignored by Europeans, its a blanket border policy. So don't make out they are discriminating, our policies already discriminate. Thats life, get over it. But seeing as its UKIP, lets have a go, yet say nothing about current policies that are exactly the same for non europeans, that were not created by UKIP. The logic is great there.

 

UKIP have lots of policies, just like all parties. But the press only report what they want to, as with other parties. Read the manifesto of each party and you'll see all their policies. Just read the press and you'll be as ill-informed as you appear to be. You mostly talk a lot of sense Dai, but have a think about this. Don't believe only what you read in the papers. Some of their policies are actually ok, bit I'd never vote for a party that had such an any-immigrant stance.

 

The UK agreed to allow free travel in EU. It works both ways. I don;t see anything wrong with it. On a smaller scale, do you think Welsh people should be banned from working in England or vice versa. That seems to be wgat you are suggesting. If Wales ever became an independent country and England's borders were secured like you want hem, then the Welsh would be kicked out. I don't see what difference it makes if a French workers comes to UK and a UK worker goes to France. Much of it is balanced out. There are millions of Brits living and working (and claiming benefits) in other EU countries. Do you want them all send back to the UK?

The way great countries became great was through immigrants traveling to where the work was. Building nation states is a relatively new thing. What right do a group of people have to put up fences and ban everyone else. Everyone should be free to travel to anywhere in the world and live and work there. That's how it was for thousands of years and it worked very well.

UKIP just don't like foreigners. That is all there is to it.

I also don't agree with current immigration policies. Rich people can settle in UK wherever they are from. I just don't agree with one rule for the rich and another for the rest of us. The rich can live anywhere they want. The not so rich are basically stuck at home. My argument has perfect logic. Everyone treated equally and everyone free to travel. The world would be a much better place.

 

Dont be so daft and gullible plastic, Do you honestly believe that the press are deliberately not printing UKIP's policies ??? They would print the looney parties policies if they had any...Can you see nigel letting this happen in the first place.?? not in a million years he wouldn't.....The UKIP party votes use as a protest vote in by-elections and most sensible voters know that they cant do that in a general Election. they are a joke as they stand with a leader (ex tory) likes nothing more than spouting his rubbish in pubs with a pint in his hand thinking everyone spends all their time in pubs like he portrays....