Non-motoring > UKIP - Volume 6   [Read only]	Miscellaneous
Thread Author: VxFan	Replies: 149

New Mon 21 Apr 14 21:45   UKIP - Volume 6 - VxFan

***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 7 ***** Continued political chat. Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 27 Apr 14 at 19:15

New Tue 22 Apr 14 07:33   UKIP - Volume 6 - Dog

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10778187/Britain-must-quit-the-EU-to-win-back-its-self-confidence-says-Lord-Lawson.html

New Wed 23 Apr 14 02:14   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

Just been reading a BBC thing about UKIP, Farage and European elections. A while a go I said that I thought the value in UKIP was as a group to keep tbe other parties on their toes. Seems to me watching from afar recently that not only are they unlikely to do any harm within the EU, they may very well shake it up, which goodness knows it needs. So actually I hope that they do well. But then I wonder; what would a UKIP EU minister do if he saw a way to correct something in the UK which they believed needed doing. Would he shy away because they don't believe that Europe should Interfere in the UK.

New Wed 23 Apr 14 09:36   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

You do realise that UKIP MEPs do nothing? They don't participate . In reality a vote for UKIP is a vote for non intervention. Waste of space.

New Wed 23 Apr 14 09:39   UKIP - Volume 6 - CGNorwich

They do of course claim their expenses.

New Wed 23 Apr 14 11:43   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

I look forward with slightly worried interest to the results of the next Euro election thingy. It does seem that there are a lot of people who are not put off, as I am, by the manifest idiocy of UKIP's name, never mind its xenophobic blather. Of course when even the law is an obvious ass it's hardly surprising that the voters are even more asinine. Tension is also rising around this Jock plebiscite. Is the beskirted, sporran-wearing tartan horde going to run off with our money and nuclear weapons, perhaps to start a serious war and invest in a perpetual motion scheme? Seems quite possible. Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Wed 23 Apr 14 at 11:44

New Wed 23 Apr 14 12:00   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>Seems to me watching from afar recently that not only are they unlikely to do any harm within the EU, they may very well shake it up, which goodness knows it needs << Much as it is a nice idea, UKIP will pale by comparison to the predicted influx of extreme European parties that make the BNP look like the Girl Guides. The prospects of the FN in France and at EU level are one of the most striking developments so far, Le Pen is proving far more successful than many predicted. There are many elements that will start to shake things up, UKIP are only a small part in wider EU politics. >>You do realise that UKIP MEPs do nothing? They don't participate . In reality a vote for UKIP is a vote for non intervention.<< Roger Helmer has an 88% attendance record, pretty good for someone who 'does nothing'.

New Wed 23 Apr 14 12:46   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

As far as I can see the downside of leaving the EU occurs if the EU is a "good" thing. If all these idiots make the EU a "bad" thing, then leaving it should be considerably less significant. So, what we really don't need is a mediocre EU. We either need a "good" one with significant reason to be part of it, or we need a "bad" one we are comfortable to walk away from. And at the moment it is mediocre.

New Wed 23 Apr 14 12:55   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

What greatly gets up my nose is all the doom mongers saying we'll sink and die without being in the EU...there's plenty of other places that survive very well without it...and if we retain trade agreements, which let's face it is in everyone's interests...then we get the best of the lot, as in a place to trade favourably, without other people making our laws and taking great chunks of our cash to do very little with.       2

New Wed 23 Apr 14 13:03   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>>without other people making our laws For me that rather depends on whether or not they are good laws. If someone comes up with a genius law and inflicts it on us, then I'm pleased and certainly not bothered that it was the EU. On the other hand, if the UK Government comes up with a real boner, then I don't feel better about it because it was the UK Government. So for me the issue is not whether or not the EU passes laws which affect us, it is whether or not they pass pointless or ridiculous laws. My problem can be solved in either of two ways, and I'm not that fussed which; - Make the EU good, valuable and effective and I'm more than happy to be part of it. - Decide that the EU is rubbish and going to stay that way and I'm more than happy to get out. But my issue is, when its neither one nor the other, any decision has downsides which are not out-weighed by sufficient upsides - whether that decision is to stay or go; Because, as I'm sure we all know; "if I go there will be trouble....."

New Wed 23 Apr 14 13:26   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

>> What greatly gets up my nose is all the doom mongers saying we'll sink and >> die without being in the EU...there's plenty of other places that survive very well without >> it...and if we retain trade agreements, which let's face it is in everyone's interests...then we >> get the best of the lot, as in a place to trade favourably, without other >> people making our laws and taking great chunks of our cash to do very little >> with. >> Hmm So you think we can trade in financial services without obeying EU laws? Given that Financial Services = >20% of UK tax revenues and the UK is the EU's centre for financial services AND the main trading area for the Euro, I assume you think that will continue if we leave the EU? I don't. Frankfurt don't and I am sure the French don't either.. Our leaving the EU will mean almost certainly much of London's financial services will migrate to Frankfurt and UK tax revenues fall a lot (London represents >20% of ALL UK tax revenues). Strangely enough, no-one mentions this... AND we would still HAVE to obey EU laws on financial services.. Last edited by: madf on Wed 23 Apr 14 at 13:28       1

New Wed 23 Apr 14 14:35   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> >> AND we would still HAVE to obey EU laws on financial services.. AND we would still Have to obey EU laws on pretty much anything else we want to sell over there. That would include our motor manufacturing - in so far as any of it remained ater Brexit. And I don't think our home market is big enough for us to draw too far from EU spec (over which we then have no say) for other consumer goods. Furthermore do we really think those who whine about EU directives on working hours or air quality want us to have BETTER terms? Of course not, they're looking for a way to take more away form rest of us to line their own pockets even more deeply. But according to that failed Chancellor Lawson, cuckolded by his PM in favour of an even less pragmatic adviser, we would have pride again outside the EU. Why should the rest of the EU give us favourable terms as a departee after we've spent the last n years acting like the petulant relative? UKIP make Cameron's promise to 'do a Wilson' and secure supposedly improved terms look almost rational. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 23 Apr 14 at 14:38

New Wed 23 Apr 14 16:20   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

We are wasting breath - or rather bandwidth To suggest UKIP supporters are capable of rational thought on the matter is like suggesting that their posters on internet forums could not repeat the same meaningless slogans time after time after time.. Last edited by: madf on Wed 23 Apr 14 at 16:20

New Wed 23 Apr 14 16:27   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>>To suggest UKIP supporters are .... A bit harsh. To be honest they don't seem to stand out as much different from anyone else. It is unusual to meet anyone, of any political persuasion, who has actually taken the whole overall picture into account. If they did, then politicians would not still be getting away with their current and previous behaviour. Politics seems like it ought to be simple and easy to understand and to direct your vote towards someone you support. Part of the difficulty is that I may agree with a politician on 7 issues, but disagree with him on 3 others. I'm not likely to ever meet a politician who I agree with on everything, however hard that politician works to deliver on all of his promises. Even if I was the only voter I'd still not get a Government I was entirely happy with. Then make me just one of 30m voters, and it becomes complicated and ultimately hopeless. Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 23 Apr 14 at 16:28

New Wed 23 Apr 14 13:22   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

>> >> >>You do realise that UKIP MEPs do nothing? They don't participate . In reality a >> vote for UKIP is a vote for non intervention.<< >> >> Roger Helmer has an 88% attendance record, pretty good for someone who 'does nothing'. >> >> >> One swallow does not make a summer. tinyurl.com/kyu39hz Nigel Farage Plenary (whole Parliament) votes: 71% (ranked 708/752) Roll Call votes: 50% (ranked 743/752) Amount of legislation he has tried to amend or introduce: 0 (joint worst) Man speaks with forked tongue.. So to summarise , UKIP MEPs say one thing - and do nothing. Proven hypocrites... and those who vote for them are like sheep.. waiting to be sheared..

New Thu 24 Apr 14 09:15   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

OOOPS... tinyurl.com/mcslgwv "A KEY aide to Ukip leader Nigel Farage was last night at the centre of a sex scandal after explicit naked snaps of her emerged. Lizzy Vaid, 27, was photographed taking part in a series of lewd acts. Yesterday we told how she posed as a “voter” from Devon in the party’s manifesto — despite being a full-time Ukip employee."

New Thu 24 Apr 14 09:28   UKIP - Volume 6 - Cliff Pope

>> >> Proven hypocrites... and those who vote for them are like sheep.. waiting to be sheared.. >> >> I'm thinking of voting UKIP just because I feel like kicking someone. I don't like them, Farage is quite an engaging ass, there are probably nastier people hiding in their woodwork, but they aren't going to get elected to anything that matters. We're not allowed to throw rotten eggs at election candidates any more because of H&S rules, so voting UKIP once in a while is the next best thing.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 10:21   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

>> I'm thinking of voting UKIP just because I feel like kicking someone. >> >> I don't like them, Farage is quite an engaging ass, there are probably nastier people >> hiding in their woodwork, but they aren't going to get elected to anything that matters. >> >> >> We're not allowed to throw rotten eggs at election candidates any more because of H&S >> rules, so voting UKIP once in a while is the next best thing. >> I am going to do the same - as previously stated - for exactly the same reasons... But they are fruitcakes. Any suggestion that they could act semi competently as a Government - assuming they were elected (!) - is risible seeing how they make the Conservatives and Labour look paragons of efficiency and niceness...

New Thu 24 Apr 14 10:32   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

The Euro elections are PR so I can just vote for the party I want to be elected. In the general election, as we're in solid Tory territory, a tactical vote has to be considered. Would need a bit of amateur psephology to calculate best placed tactical vote but it might well be UKIP.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 10:53   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>> Would need a bit of amateur psephology to calculate best placed tactical vote but it might well be UKIP. Your thought being that perhaps UKIP are better placed to harm the Tories lead than Labour are? That's an interesting perception of the current position of the Labour party, because presumably if you felt that Labour had a chance then your best vote would be for them. I can quite understand how Labour have no chance in a Tory strong hold, or vice versa. But so likely to be 3rd to UKIP? Really?

New Thu 24 Apr 14 12:34   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> >> Would need a bit of amateur psephology to calculate best placed tactical vote but >> it might well be UKIP. >> >> Your thought being that perhaps UKIP are better placed to harm the Tories lead than >> Labour are? >> >> That's an interesting perception of the current position of the Labour party, because presumably if >> you felt that Labour had a chance then your best vote would be for them. >> I can quite understand how Labour have no chance in a Tory strong hold, or >> vice versa. But so likely to be 3rd to UKIP? Really? Labour will come nowhere in this seat (Daventry). They were third to Lib Dems in 2010 with UKIP and Eng Democrats getting 4% between them - the ED ahead of UKIP. LAbour were on 15%. Anything with a blue rosette will, in normal times, get elected. My thought was along lines of who might give the incumbent the greatest shock. Electorally though the only possible benefit of that would be push the Tories back into the schisms/unelectability of the nineties. What's needed for a result is for Tory votes to go to UKIP so AN Other gets in through middle. Given the LD's expected loss of votes next time it may even be Labour who come second. Too early to call current trends in next years GE, calculation to be made nearer time when opinion polls show intention on day.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 10:37   UKIP - Volume 6 - CGNorwich

I understand why you might want to express dissatisfaction but I cannot for the life of me see why you want in any way shape or form be prepared to vote for, and thus give a certain amount of credibility to, a bunch of people who include a large number of fruitcakes, xenophobes and worse.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 11:02   UKIP - Volume 6 - Alanovich

CGN has it. What on Earth are you thinking, Brompters? Shirley not?

New Thu 24 Apr 14 11:18   UKIP - Volume 6 - Dog

Lets hear it for the fruitcakes: www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-leader-nigel-farage-boasts-we-will-hold-balance-of-power-at-next-general-election-just-as-nick-clegg-did-9278972.html

New Thu 24 Apr 14 12:06   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

There are times when I wish I could talk candidly about the people I work with directly in UKIP but it would be bad form to discuss those personal relationships online. One reason you find many Kippers who are actually activists get annoyed at the perception of the party is that it genuinely isnt what you see from within. From what I see and hear, anyone who is a proper weirdo as opposed to an eccentric individual has no place in the party as a representitive. There have been a number of people who said stupid things but there are plenty of them in all the other parties, parties that those who claim they wont vote for a party with fruitcakes seem happy to turn a blind eye to. Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems, all have a steady stream of issues with various staff and members, it is well documented but so much part of the fabric of Westminster life that nobody pays much attention. In that sense, UKIP is no different, it suffers the same sort of issues because it is the nature of political parties to attract the odd weirdo or someone with an axe to grind that use a party platform on which to do it. It is no reflection on the Lib Dems that they had a member caught in a racist rant ( or the one that did that bombing campaign ), nor the Tories that a councillor got caught threatening someone with a gun, or that Labour have lots of ex-BNP members in their ranks in some areas. These things happen but to paint an entire party badly due to these individuals isnt even slightly sensible and nor is doing the same to UKIP as a party. Why not have the courage to go to one of the many public meetings set up and meet the candidates face to face, test your theories, see how odd they really are and report back. I would genuinely be interested, especially as I have met several of the East Midlands candidates personally and they seemed entirely sensible people with a great deal of knowledge.       1

New Thu 24 Apr 14 12:17   UKIP - Volume 6 - devonite

I've heard rumors that that Nigel farage has welcomed David Moyes into the UKIP herachy - apparently there's no-one to get us out of Europe faster!       1

New Thu 24 Apr 14 12:25   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

Well said, ^. In our branch we have a very wide cross section of people, from a retired miner to a retired RAF pilot and later, company administrator. We are not loonies: we have strong opinions, of course, but not once have I heard (among our paid up members) any view which could be described as objectionable - unless of course one is so consumed with hatred and bile of a different world view being held to one's own, as to find ordinary people's worries about the direction our country has taken as justification for excoriating them with inaccurate descriptions and epithets. I do worry, however by comments made on newspaper forums and the like, purportedly from UKIP members or supporters, using stupid and intemperate language to describe opponents and their desired fates. This does neither us, nor our party, any favours and are truly regrettable. Mind you ,there is much visceral hate directed at UKIP & its people on sites such as Hope not Hate and the Facebook page of North East Anti-Fascists. The far left do not need any lessons in blind prejudice - they have plenty already! Last edited by: Pigs-Might-Fly on Thu 24 Apr 14 at 12:26       1

New Thu 24 Apr 14 12:40   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

What PMF and Stu see/hear is one thing. UKIP do still seem to have more than their share of 'odd' people in elected office whether in Europe or Local Government. That may of course be a product of previous carelessness that Farage is now getting on top of but it still makes them look bad. And let's not play the straw man of the 'far left', by which I presume you mean the SWP and its ilk. They're not looking remotely like winning UK seats in Europe and are far too busy fighting themselves.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 13:24   UKIP - Volume 6 - Cliff Pope

>> wide cross section of people, from a retired >> miner to a retired RAF pilot >> All the way from deeply conservative to deeply conservative :)

New Thu 24 Apr 14 14:32   UKIP - Volume 6 - Pat

Can I make a suggestion to PMF and Stu please. It's my genuine belief that you both lost some following by changing your names thus many, (who may just read the forums) lost track of you both. I follow you views carefully too and would be pleased if you would consider keeping a name everyone can be familiar with. Pat       1

New Thu 24 Apr 14 14:37   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

I'd agree with that. I only worked out Stu in the last day or two.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 14:41   UKIP - Volume 6 - Clk Sec

>> I'd agree with that. I only worked out Stu in the last day or two. >> Same here.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 21:36   UKIP - Volume 6 - VxFan

>> I'd agree with that. I only worked out Stu in the last day or two. I did mention a while ago some of the previous handle's he's had. www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=16826&m=376010

New Thu 24 Apr 14 14:39   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>I follow you views carefully too and would be pleased if you would consider keeping a name everyone can be familiar with.<< Hows this?       1

New Thu 24 Apr 14 14:46   UKIP - Volume 6 - Alanovich

That's creative, stu. In a similar vein, perhaps PMF could try "Might Roger Pigs"? ;-)

New Thu 24 Apr 14 15:31   UKIP - Volume 6 - Dog

=>LOL<=

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:06   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

Pat - your wish is my command!

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:13   UKIP - Volume 6 - Pat

Thanks so much to you both! I may not be representative of many but then again I could be:) Pat

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:13   UKIP - Volume 6 - Pat

Thanks so much to you both! I may not be representative of many but then again I could be:) Pat

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:18   UKIP - Volume 6 - Pat

While I'm at it, I'd like to say that I'm particularly impressed with the way you both put your views forward without bitching at the other parties and also without offending others on here. Well done to you both. Pat       2

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:39   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>While I'm at it, I'd like to say that I'm particularly impressed with the way you both put your views forward without bitching at the other parties and also without offending others on here. Well done to you both<< I dont know about not offending, there are some who think we are offensive for breathing :-)

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:13   UKIP - Volume 6 - Manatee

>> Pat - your wish is my command! Roger Roger.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 12:38   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

If UKIP gained power, who would be Chancellor? Or Foreign Secretary? Or Health, transport, Education? What are UKIP's considered policies in those areas? At best, UKIP are incomplete.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 12:47   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

>> If UKIP gained power, who would be Chancellor? Or Foreign Secretary? Or Health, transport, Education? >> >> What are UKIP's considered policies in those areas? >> >> Well in education, they would stop the teaching of French or German (I am sure Mrs Farage would agree!:-) in school. In transport, close all flights to the EC.. especially inbound and ensure the Channel Tunnel carried no immigrants... legal or otherwise.. As far as Health, all foreign born doctors and nurses would be repatriated and the NHS closed as a result. They would not need a Foreign Secretary as they would not speak to the EC.. and no-one would bother to speak to us being outside the EC :-) Chancellor? They need someone who is British and knows how to spend wisely. Gordon Brown is available...

New Thu 24 Apr 14 13:13   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

UKIP will not "gain power" in 2015 nor do we reasonably expect to. What we hope for - in domestic politics, at any rate is a modest few seats in the HoC, where it is entirely possible that influence may be exercised out of proportion to our numbers. 2015 shows signs of being a fairly close run thing between the longer established parties. Of course, we may not win a single seat, such is the effect of FPTP voting. Our support is pretty much spread nationwide, instead of being concentrated in clumps where numbers can win. This does not lessen the fact that there is are quite substantial numbers of UKIP supporting voters across the UK who deserve to have representatives whom they want in Parliament. The Establishment, for want of a better word, has of course no real intention of deliberately changing the status quo, which favours "Established" parties.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 13:27   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>>Of course, we may not win a single seat, such is the effect of FPTP voting Yeah, FPTP, that'll be what will stop it; course, not being popular with enough people might not help, either. However, I wonder how it will be for the people in a UKIP consituency knowing that they're only going to be safe from the EU, and that everything else will probably go to hell in a hand basket.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:15   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

Well, in last year's County Council elections, IIRC and don't hold me to it definitely, UKIP obtained around 20% of all votes cast. That, of course is based on a low turnout, but is also politicised insofar as tribal Labour, Liberal Democrat & Conservatives do vote politically in these elections. Even if, as G.E. polls suggest UKIP, in 2014, get as little as 12% to 15% of votes cast, that means that there is a biggish chunk of the UK electorate who want to be represented by and have their views expressed by, UKIP MPs. Last edited by: Roger. on Thu 24 Apr 14 at 16:16

New Thu 24 Apr 14 13:32   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>If UKIP gained power, who would be Chancellor? Or Foreign Secretary? Or Health, transport, Education? What are UKIP's considered policies in those areas? At best, UKIP are incomplete.<< Stephen Woolfe, Economics: www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7URvdMe3XA Tim Congdon: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cuv5OlPTtk4 Heres one for you: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8__KC93unB0 Peter Whittle, Culture spokesman. Good starting point, from there you can browse the speeches from various people.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:22   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

I think you will find, before the GE time in 2015, that UKIP will not only have a properly costed series of proposals, but also have competent people in place to articulate them. Anyway, what are civil servants for, if not to work out the nitty-gritty, eh Bromp? ;-)

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:24   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>>I think you will find, before the GE time in 2015, that UKIP will not only have a properly costed series of proposals, but also have competent people in place to articulate them. I hope so, but I have my doubts.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:35   UKIP - Volume 6 - Manatee

>> I hope so, but I have my doubts. Me too. They'll be the same as the other three, bung full of it:)

New Thu 24 Apr 14 16:41   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

>> I think you will find, before the GE time in 2015, that UKIP will not >> only have a properly costed series of proposals, but also have competent people in place >> to articulate them. >> Anyway, what are civil servants for, if not to work out the nitty-gritty, eh Bromp? >> ;-) >> Anything that does not assume a 25% drop in tax revenues from Financial Services - as a minimum - is just a waste of time..

New Thu 24 Apr 14 18:28   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

@madf - as a matter of interest do you work in the financial sector?

New Thu 24 Apr 14 18:31   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

Roger Work? Me? Never.. Would not soil my hands... I used to be an accountant/FD and follow banking/financial Services as an investor.. I am now an OAP - like you.. Meanwhile... another fruitcake .. "A star of Ukip’s latest political broadcast has been suspended from the party after claiming Ed Miliband is “not British”. In a major embarrassment to Nigel Farage, Andre Lampitt, a Zimbabwean decorator and kitchen fitter who appeared in the party’s television broadcast, posted a string of "repellent" messages online. Africans should “kill themselves off”, Islam is “evil” and Nigerians are “bad people”, Mr Lampitt claimed." tinyurl.com/omv3uh3

New Thu 24 Apr 14 18:58   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>Meanwhile... another fruitcake ..<< Who was promptly suspended, unlike this guy: www.itv.com/news/update/2014-01-28/lib-dem-councillor-suspended-six-months-after-sex-trial Takes 6 months for a party of government to act on it so the prompt suspension from my lot suggests we actually deal with problems, unlike the so-called mainstream parties.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 19:07   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

Well UKIP haters - you can now officially despise me - I am now a confirmed UKIP candidate in the local district council elections taking place in our area concurrently with the EU elections. We, unlike the local Conservatives, are contesting every ward where there is a vacancy.       5

New Thu 24 Apr 14 20:14   UKIP - Volume 6 - Manatee

>> Well UKIP haters - you can now officially despise me - I am now a >> confirmed UKIP candidate in the local district council elections taking place in our area concurrently >> with the EU elections. >> We, unlike the local Conservatives, are contesting every ward where there is a vacancy. Good on you Roger - that's democracy. Our county councillor is a Lib Dem - a lot of people would vote for him whichever party he was in, he's very good on local issues which is what people want from a county or borough councillor. He gets twice the votes of the second candidate (Con) despite the fact the Herts CC as a whole is overwhelmingly Con. In my division UKIP is third with double the Labour vote. Never see the Labour people at local election time, maybe they've no expectation in which case it is a self fulfilling prophecy.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 21:18   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>>Well UKIP haters - you can now officially despise me - I am now a confirmed UKIP candidate in the local district I cannot imagine despising someone for their political beliefs. I doubt I would vote for you, but good luck to you and congratulations for getting up and doing something and taking part.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 05:41   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

>> Well UKIP haters - you can now officially despise me - I am now a >> confirmed UKIP candidate in the local district council elections taking place in our area concurrently >> with the EU elections. >> We, unlike the local Conservatives, are contesting every ward where there is a vacancy. >> Good luck Roger..

New Fri 25 Apr 14 08:01   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> Good luck Roger.. >> Ditto

New Fri 25 Apr 14 08:33   UKIP - Volume 6 - Dog

Well done Dodger - I wont wish you luck because it has nothing to do with luck of course. I have a "I'M VOTING UKIP" flyer in my window, but no one is going to see it up here apart from postie, and he's a died-in-the-wall Cornishman :) The UKIP candidates in the South West are: William (Earl of) Dartmouth, who is a chartered accountant. Dr Julia Reid, a research scientist. Gawain Towler, journalist and researcher and publicist. Tony McIntyre, retired teacher and company director. Dr Robert Smith, child and educational psychologist. Keith Crawford, businessman and former serviceman, like your good self - all swivel-eyed loonies and fruitcakes of course, according to some of the mugs on this forum.       1

New Thu 24 Apr 14 19:13   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

EE, I remember stunorthants and the Rastaman since they was knee high to a sparrer, lad, back in t'other place... They was fruitcakes then and they're fruitcakes now... but our kind of fruitcakes, got used to 'em like... I got a fruit cake in Tesco earlier on for breakfast tomorrow. Good stuff. (and well dome Rastaman, break a leg and so on, Yee-hah!) Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 24 Apr 14 at 19:14

New Thu 24 Apr 14 19:20   UKIP - Volume 6 - Clk Sec

I trust you'll be putting some literature through our letterboxes this time around. Perhaps even a knock on the door to introduce yourselves.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 21:29   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

>> I trust you'll be putting some literature through our letterboxes this time around. Perhaps even >> a knock on the door to introduce yourselves. Depends whether your ward is a target. With limited resources, hard choices have to be made on which wards to concentrate on. UKIP branches and candidates have to fund all their own publicity leaflets. There is no munificent central stationary store on which we can indent without charge! Target wards in our area will be leafleted and every registered postal voter should have an addressed envelope with the candidates leaflet enclosed, hopefully timed to arrive just before the postal voting forms hit his/her letter box. However, THIS year as part of the EU election, and at huge expense in postal delivery, every household will also receive the UKIP EU election statement. The generous (BIG) donation from Mr. Paul Sykes is assisting here. The party has raised a goodly sum of money from less wealthy donors (including my wife and I) , but still needs about as much again to fulfil all its plans. Advert/Commercial:- ukipdev.nationbuilder.com/donate ;-) (Grins sheepishly!)

New Fri 25 Apr 14 08:37   UKIP - Volume 6 - Clk Sec

>> >> I trust you'll be putting some literature through our letterboxes this time around. Perhaps >> even >> >> a knock on the door to introduce yourselves. >> >> Depends whether your ward is a target. >> With limited resources, hard choices have to be made on which wards to concentrate on. >> UKIP branches and candidates have to fund all their own publicity leaflets. There is no >> munificent central stationary store on which we can indent without charge! Thanks for your reply, Roger. Good luck!

New Thu 24 Apr 14 22:25   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>I trust you'll be putting some literature through our letterboxes this time around. Perhaps even a knock on the door to introduce yourselves << Instead of sitting by the front door, perhaps it is worth seeking out the street stalls and public meetings that are being held for the benefit of voters, yourself included. If you need specific info about your area I am sure Roger or I can source it.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 08:43   UKIP - Volume 6 - Clk Sec

>> Instead of sitting by the front door :-) >>If you need specific info about your area I am sure Roger or I can source it. Thanks, Stu. Last edited by: Clk Sec on Fri 25 Apr 14 at 08:46

New Thu 24 Apr 14 19:44   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> well done Rastaman, break a leg and so on And I wonder if Mrs stu is giving it another punt? I don't agree with the KIP but I do mean that in a specific way. Blood is thicker than water, knowImean? I'm an old-fashioned cat.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 20:20   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>And I wonder if Mrs stu is giving it another punt?<< Nope, the harassment in the street she got from an 'associate' of a sitting councillor was more than she was prepared to put up with, sending big men to intimidate a 5ft nothing woman because she dared to stand in an election had the desired effect. She said it was a compliment that little old she got them rattled but when people start approaching you at your home, best to get out. I will likely be standing, I wavered over xmas but I some people senior to me made a good case regarding certain internal changes so I agreed to stay on to see if they followed through, which I am pleased to say they seem to have. UKIP has certainly given me the opportunity to meet a great variety of interesting people, anyone who says politics is boring needs to get out more, I find it a decent intellectual challenge which valeting no longer is and for the most part it is good fun too.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 20:45   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> Nope, the harassment in the street she got from an 'associate' of a sitting councillor Good God, Tammany Hall stuff on our hallowed shores? I had no idea... Of course in Nigeria, I suddenly remember, the word 'local' is widely perceived as an insult. I trust you will be made of sterner stuff stu. Even the Kip deserves its shout.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 21:11   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>I trust you will be made of sterner stuff stu. Even the Kip deserves its shout.<< Ive known worse than this lot, as you know, so if they kick up a fuss because someone is challenging their status quo, I would consider it a compliment that the well connected mainstream parties were worried, they really dont like the idea of ordinary folk challenging their cosy club and for that reason alone it is worth standing your ground. It isnt my natural enviroment, I prefer a quiet life, but there are bigger issues at stake so I will do my best and let voters decide, not a handful of people who think they have some divine right to office, it is that very arrogance that so infuriates and alienates so many voters. My local team is superb, a massive wealth of talents, experience and support, I would expect to see more than a few Kippers knocking about at the council over the next few years, the Tories here are already worried, bless em.       1

New Thu 24 Apr 14 22:45   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> Ive known worse than this lot, as you know, so if they kick up a >> fuss because someone is challenging their status quo, I would consider it a compliment that >> the well connected mainstream parties were worried, they really dont like the idea of ordinary >> folk challenging their cosy club and for that reason alone it is worth standing your >> ground. >> It isnt my natural enviroment, I prefer a quiet life, but there are bigger issues >> at stake so I will do my best and let voters decide, not a handful >> of people who think they have some divine right to office, it is that very >> arrogance that so infuriates and alienates so many voters. >> >> My local team is superb, a massive wealth of talents, experience and support, I would >> expect to see more than a few Kippers knocking about at the council over the >> next few years, the Tories here are already worried, bless em. >> This is a serious question. Do you ever feel a tad guilty that by being successful you could split the vote and let the true opposition win the day?

New Thu 24 Apr 14 23:32   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>Do you ever feel a tad guilty that by being successful you could split the vote and let the true opposition win the day?<< Never guilt no, offering voters a choice isnt anything to feel guilty about, this is a democracy, it isnt the fault of UKIP that any other party looses, it is the fault of the loosing party to connect with a sufficient number of voters. In many areas UKIP has a good chance of winning - should the Tories feel guilty about letting Labour win with UKIP coming a close second and the Tories coming a distant third? This happens quite often in northern council by-elections but you wont hear us complain that the Tories split our vote, we re-double our efforts to convince more people to support us. In seats around my way there may be two council seats in a ward up for grabs so if UKIP only field one candidate, the voter could have the option of voting UKIP and then for another party. I am not saying it will happen but I can see the argument for it at council level. As far as the general election goes, you cannot change anything in Westminster unless you have seats and to win seats you have to fight seats. To fight those seats you need to build confidence and for that you have to be seen to fight whenever possible, momentum is crucial for 2015. Labour look set to win in 2015, they have an in-built advantage and most people I speak to have priced in a Labour win already looking beyond 2015.

New Thu 24 Apr 14 23:36   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

>> Do you ever feel a tad guilty that by being successful you could split the >> vote and let the true opposition win the day? >> I know that you, Westpig have a smidgen of liking for some of our policies, but I have to take issue with your remark about the "true opposition". I take it you mean the Conservatives , but of course there is so little difference between the overall policy leanings of the cosy old outfits that, from many points, of view it matters not whether the Labour or Conservative parties form the next UK government. Sure, Cameron has promised (ha!) a referendum IF the Conservatives are the next government. If they do not win an outright majority they may well form another coalition with a smaller party. If that is the LibDems, no way will that lot allow a referendum! It is also highly likely that a Cameron led referendum proposal will be couched in so many weasel words that a straightforward YES/NO vote will not be offered at all. In any event Cameron has said that he (and presumably the Tory party if he's still leader - a by no means foregone conclusion ) will campaign to stay in the EU. The only way to guarantee a referendum and a fair one, is for UKIP to get enough seats to influence the isue of (a) holding referendum in (b) plain English and with (c) a straightforward IN/OUT choice, not subject to any so-called re-negotiations (a chimera if ever I heard one). Even with a referendum is agreed it will be a hard campaign, as we can expect millions of Euros to be thrown at a YES vote by the European Union itself. (Hey it's OUR tax money paying for it, Mr Van Rumpoy & Mr Barroso, so lay off it)

New Fri 25 Apr 14 20:12   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> I know that you, Westpig have a smidgen of liking for some of our policies, I do, I agree with most of it. >> but I have to take issue with your remark about the "true opposition". >> I take it you mean the Conservatives , No. I meant the true opposition ought to be Labour, for many things, including gross over spending on a continuous basis and specifically opening the doors and allowing more people in who would more likely vote Labour, a sort of back door gerrymander...and that I don't see much difference between Tory and UKIP viewpoints....and if UKIP take too many votes from the Tories, they'll let Labour back in to power quite easily... as the only party that can beat Labour is the Tory party.       1

New Fri 25 Apr 14 20:20   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> No. I meant the true opposition ought to be Labour, for many things, including gross >> over spending on a continuous basis and specifically opening the doors and allowing more people >> in who would more likely vote Labour, a sort of back door gerrymander How are these people going to be even allowed to vote?

New Sat 26 Apr 14 00:06   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> How are these people going to be even allowed to vote? >> United Kingdom[edit] (CN and EU member) Since 1949, the United Kingdom, citizens of the Commonwealth countries and of Ireland have had full voting rights at all levels and can be candidates, as they could before 1949 as British subjects; they are not regarded in law as foreigners.[2][13] For local, supralocal (Greater London Authority) and regional (Scottish Parliament, National Assembly for Wales, Northern Ireland Assembly) elections, EU citizens, enjoy the same rights as Commonwealth citizens.[100] Under Elected Authorities (Northern Ireland) Act 1989, local electors in Northern Ireland were either Commonwealth citizens or citizens of the Republic of Ireland, the Representation of the People Act 2000 replaced that section by "a Commonwealth citizen, a citizen of the Republic of Ireland or a relevant citizen of the Union".[101] The Representation of the People Act 2000 also introduced a new system of electoral registration, with 2 electoral registers, one for parliamentary elections, one for local elections:[102] "A person is entitled to vote as an elector at a parliamentary election in any constituency if on the date of the poll he (...)(c) is either a Commonwealth citizen or a citizen of the Republic of Ireland"; "A person is entitled to be registered in the register of parliamentary electors for any constituency or part of a constituency if on the relevant date he (...) (c) is either a qualifying Commonwealth citizen or a citizen of the Republic of Ireland" "A person is entitled to vote as an elector at a local government election in any electoral area if on the date of the poll he (...)(c) is a Commonwealth citizen, a citizen of the Republic of Ireland or a relevant citizen of the Union"; "A person is entitled to be registered in the register of local government electors for any electoral area if on the relevant date he (...) (c) is a qualifying Commonwealth citizen, a citizen of the Republic of Ireland or a relevant citizen of the Union" "In this section “qualifying Commonwealth citizen” means a Commonwealth citizen who either" (a) is not a person who requires leave under the [1971 c. 77.] Immigration Act 1971 to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, or (b) is such a person but for the time being has (or is, by virtue of any enactment, to be treated as having) any description of such leave"

New Sat 26 Apr 14 08:05   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

@WP I found that bit too. So even accepting the suggestion that Poles etc. are more likely to vote Labour any 'back door gerrymander' would not affect General Elections - as EU Citizens they're vote is limited to local govt elections?

New Sat 26 Apr 14 08:26   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> @WP >> >> I found that bit too. So even accepting the suggestion that Poles etc. are more >> likely to vote Labour any 'back door gerrymander' would not affect General Elections - as >> EU Citizens they're vote is limited to local govt elections? >> ....until they become UK citizens.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 08:50   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> ....until they become UK citizens. And how many of the EU influx do that? I'd wager roughly the same number as that for ex-pat Brits taking French or Spanish citizenship.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 16:58   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> And how many of the EU influx do that? I'd wager roughly the same number >> as that for ex-pat Brits taking French or Spanish citizenship. >> Not many Brits like to give up their citizenship ..whereas the other way around, there are plenty of people for plenty of reasons who'd willingly take British citizenship and I don't blame them. If I were in their shoes I'd try the same if it meant food for your kids, an education, a relatively safe environment, religious and other freedoms, a fairish legal system, etc, etc. It's just that we are a smallish island that is already well populated, so we need some curbs.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:10   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> Not many Brits like to give up their citizenship ..whereas the other way around, there >> are plenty of people for plenty of reasons who'd willingly take British citizenship and I >> don't blame them. If I were in their shoes I'd try the same if it >> meant food for your kids, an education, a relatively safe environment, religious and other freedoms, >> a fairish legal system, etc, etc. You mentioned arrivals under Labour. The focus there is on Poles and others from the Baltic end of the EU rather than from Commonwealth or elsewhere in Asia/Africa. While a few EU migrants, perhaps those who marry UK partners, might take citizenship I don't think there's any evidence of them doing so in large numbers. Indeed, unless they wish to vote there's little to gain as they already have right to reside and work.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 09:09   UKIP - Volume 6 - Duncan

>> I got a fruit cake in Tesco earlier on for breakfast tomorrow. Good stuff. >> An Englishman's breakfast is a very private thing; but do you really eat fruit cake for breakfast? I fully understand if you don't want to answer, but.....

New Thu 24 Apr 14 21:34   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

>> Meanwhile... another fruitcake .. >> >> "A star of Ukip’s latest political broadcast has been suspended from the party after claiming >> Ed Miliband is “not British”. >> In a major embarrassment to Nigel Farage, Andre Lampitt, a Zimbabwean decorator and kitchen fitter >> who appeared in the party’s television broadcast, posted a string of "repellent" messages online. >> Africans should “kill themselves off”, Islam is “evil” and Nigerians are “bad people”, Mr Lampitt >> claimed." >> tinyurl.com/omv3uh3 Not that I have a persecution complex....but I wonder sometimes if these stupid pfd are not so dull, but joined UKIP out of malice just to cause trouble. Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 19 May 14 at 01:55

New Thu 24 Apr 14 22:16   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

I wonder which organisation is paying for this? www.eldis.org/go/jobs&jobID=61186&pageNo=1#.U1l6hPUVGG

New Fri 25 Apr 14 08:30   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

So a body providing resources on international development wants so spread it's message via social media? And the problem is???

New Thu 24 Apr 14 23:18   UKIP - Volume 6 - CGNorwich

"Not that I have a persecution complex....but I wonder sometimes if these stupid pfd are not so dull, but joined UKIP out of malice just to cause trouble." I think the real problem is that many of your supporters do see your party as an anti_immigrant anti all things foreign party. They see the line toted by Farage and yourself as a sort of official front but believe that deep down UKIP supports the views they hold. Make no mistake many of your supporters and voters views are much closer to Mr Lampitt's than they are to your's. Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 19 May 14 at 01:55

New Fri 25 Apr 14 09:21   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

>> Make no mistake many of your supporters and voters views are much closer to >> Mr Lampitt's than they are to your's. >> I understand that your political views are not mine: fair enough - neither of us are likely to be swayed by each other's arguments, but making a definitive statement about unknown people's views is about as logical (actually illogical) as my saying that all Liberal Democrats secretly espouse the views and values of the late and odious Cyril Smith. Similarly, I could - but would not, infer anything about Labour members and voters from the acts of the recently retired chairman of The Co-Operative Bank!

New Fri 25 Apr 14 10:56   UKIP - Volume 6 - Manatee

Once the fruitcake ball is is rolling (sorry) it's easy for the propaganda machines with the unwitting help of professional satirists (HIGNFY for example) to make mischief out of not very much. The audience is primed and ready to lap it up, as when Tommy Cooper only had to walk on to the stage to have them rolling in the aisles. The big parties have realised that ridicule is more effective than argument as a weapon against those challenging the status quo. There's not much that UKIP can do about it. Every clumsy obiter dictum from them (and there are always plenty in election campaigns) will be further proof of fruitcakism. Everybody likes a joke. It doesn't give much hope for a decent quality of debate come the GE. We can only hope that some of the novelty will have worn off by then, so UKIP had better get its ducks in a row if its policies are to stand up to close scrutiny. I'd eat fruitcake for breakfast, ideally with a bit of Wensleydale.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 13:07   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

Politician admits mistake, shock horror! www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10787246/Nigel-Farage-we-havent-got-a-monopoly-on-stupid-people.html I must say, myself and fellow members take the issue of the quality of candidates very seriously indeed and we make every effort to pick carefully, it is very much a main focus point for us at local level. Clearly still some weeds in the UKIP garden though, I wouldnt like to be the person who approved that candidate.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 19:20   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

One can't help feeling a little sympathy for Nigel Farage, ensnared in a whole mass of scandals, semi-scandals and racist and other barmy utterances involving prominent Kippers. So far he has batted each new one wearily aside, sometimes expostulating that political correctness has gone too far in this country and a chap can't even make a joke without being attacked these days, but to give the devil his due suspending and slapping offenders with a will. Many of us here will sympathise in particular with his point about political correctness. We are right of course, but wrong as well actually. It isn't easy. Interestingly, the scandals and barmy utterances haven't made any difference to UKIP's ratings and to people's voting intentions in the different elections, according to BBC this evening. Nothing like dumb dogged Brits for steadiness under fire.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 19:54   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

"Interestingly, the scandals and barmy utterances haven't made any difference to UKIP's ratings and to people's voting intentions in the different elections, according to BBC this evening. Nothing like dumb dogged Brits for steadiness under fire." I am going to protest vote. So will many others. UKIP are ideal for that... That's why the rating will not waver much... Many Labour voters are too fixated by hatred to protest vote..Well in 2010 they did ,, they voted LD and were surprised and upset when what they got was not what they expected. Quelle surprise! Last edited by: madf on Fri 25 Apr 14 at 19:55       2

New Fri 25 Apr 14 20:07   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

I find the anti UKIP rhetoric quite patronising...a sort of 'you don't really know what you're thinking you poor thing'....and it comes from people who think 'their' way is the only way. I think the terminology is narcissistic.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 20:23   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> sort of 'you don't really know what you're thinking you poor thing'....and it comes from people who think 'their' way is the only way. Not really Wp. Rabidly anti-UKIP opinion can point, with chapter and verse, to an assortment of genuine fruitcakes, and say There, that's what these people are like. In reality all parties represent mixed bags and it isn't always a good idea to look too closely at their front men's reputations. But the parties also occupy more or less definable positions in the political spectrum or whatever you call it. Obviously UKIP isn't the BNP but it is in the right wing quartile so to speak and has by definition a certain xenophobic slant. It's up to the members and representatives to show how harmless, or harmful, that is.

New Fri 25 Apr 14 21:06   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>In reality all parties represent mixed bags and it isn't always a good idea to look too closely at their front men's reputations. But the parties also occupy more or less definable positions in the political spectrum or whatever you call it. Obviously UKIP isn't the BNP but it is in the right wing quartile so to speak and has by definition a certain xenophobic slant. It's up to the members and representatives to show how harmless, or harmful, that is. << Very true, that is why I always challenge anyone with doubts to come along to a meeting and meet us face to face as many do, we make ourselves available on neutral territory for people to ask questions, judge us as human beings. I can tell you I get angry, genuinely, when I see some of these stories in the papers - sometimes angry at the press for making a story out of nothing like that poor Lizzy Vaid who is just a party employee and doesnt deserve the tabloids trashing her, other times, like with the most recent Twitter rant candidate, I am seething that this sort of thing happens because it drags down all the hard work and dedication of the majority and I genuinely feel for those activists, Farage included who puts more hours in than just about anyone. I would suggest that I am fairly normal, although I found myself talking to one of the Knights of Delingpole, which until today had passed me by! Learn something new every day, interesting bunch to say the least.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 00:10   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> Obviously UKIP isn't >> the BNP but it is in the right wing quartile so to speak Yes it is....and there's parties in the 'left wing quartile' so to speak. >> and has >> by definition a certain xenophobic slant. Depending on your viewpoint. The OED definition of Xenophobia is: 'Intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries' So in my view if it's not intense and is rational, then it's not xenophobic.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 01:53   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

Can't imagine why you are being defensive Westpig. It goes without saying that although the Labour Party isn't the Militant Tendency it is in the left wing quartile so to speak. As for UKIP, no it isn't a matter of viewpoint, the party is xenophobic by definition - its name alone bad cess to it - and the intensity and rationality of its xenophobia are neither here nor there.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 16:53   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> Can't imagine why you are being defensive Westpig. I see it more as on the offensive. >> It goes without saying that although the >> Labour Party isn't the Militant Tendency it is in the left wing quartile so to >> speak. My point is, that many on the 'left' sniffily refer to UKIP as being on the 'right' as if it's a negative....when in reality there's plenty of 'right' thinking people that think being on the 'left' is a negative. In other words there isn't only 'one way'. >> >> As for UKIP, no it isn't a matter of viewpoint, the party is xenophobic by >> definition - its name alone bad cess to it - and the intensity and rationality >> of its xenophobia are neither here nor there. I think you are wrong. I think you can have a perfectly rational respect for other people in the world ..and.. still not wish to have a completely porous border....as well as wishing others well, but wanting your own country to control their own affairs, not someone abroad.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:35   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> you can have a perfectly rational respect for other people in the world Yes. But it is often accompanied by a faint, irrational suspicion of 'foreigners'. I'm not pointing the finger at anyone here Westpig. We British are all a bit xenophobic in that sense. I am no exception. There may be a few loonies who think they aren't like that. Good luck to them but I would beg to differ.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:38   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> >> you can have a perfectly rational respect for other people in the world >> >> Yes. But it is often accompanied by a faint, irrational suspicion of 'foreigners'. The best way for me to put it is from myself. I don't mind anyone, none at all...as long as they are respectful of others, are truthful and are not dishonest...however, they cannot all live here. Simple as that. A bit of mild wariness of others is IMO perfectly normal..and in fact probably sensible.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:52   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> A bit of mild wariness of others is IMO perfectly normal..and in fact probably sensible. OK. Strike out 'irrational' if you like. It's still the foundation of xenophobia.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 18:38   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

>> >> A bit of mild wariness of others is IMO perfectly normal..and in fact probably >> sensible. >> >> OK. Strike out 'irrational' if you like. It's still the foundation of xenophobia. Which is engrained deep in the human (and other animal) psyche and not limited to any one race or nationality.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 19:10   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> deep in the human (and other animal) psyche and not limited to any one race or nationality. As you say Rastaman, and as I said (although I was talking about the British). Not so much ingrained, more a fundamental reflex. It's a thing to be mastered though, transcended, not indulged. Or exploited in the way some Ukippers can't resist.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 19:28   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> transcended, not indulged. Or exploited in the way some Ukippers can't resist. I don't suppose you will be too xenophobic in your own campaigning Rastaman. I hope you make a decent showing (provided you have moderated your stance on racism anyway... I'm sure you have).

New Sat 26 Apr 14 02:13   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>>'Intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries' >So in my view if it's not intense and is rational, then it's not xenophobic. Where that falls down for me is this; How can one like, or dislike, a person by virtue of the country in which they were born? I know good people and bad people from everywhere I've ever been, including the UK. Its certainly not a criteria I would ever use, and neither is it one I understand. There's loads of reasons to like or dislike people which might not be criteria of mine, but I understand why someone else may choose to do so, but the country they were born in? That's just silly. Could we, perhaps, further refine that by postcode? Or should we have a graduated scale by country classification of likeability? How can it *not* be xenophobia?

New Sat 26 Apr 14 08:45   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>Where that falls down for me is this; How can one like, or dislike, a person by virtue of the country in which they were born? I know good people and bad people from everywhere I've ever been, including the UK.<< It is of course not a case of whether one dislikes or likes someone from another country but simply where one draws the border. If one believes in smaller government the EU itself presents as an unwieldly giant that is too big to be accountable or responsive, when exiting that organisation it is natural to revert to previous borders. The border, both actual and in terms of citizenship represents the cut off between who falls under the care of a particular government and who does not. UKIP does not discriminate on grounds of race or country of origin, the only qualification to fall under the scope of the British government is that your are a citizen of this country ( or are permitted to be here through the immigration system ). It is simply about who is responsible for an individual citizen. What you have to ask yourself is, why isnt the current immigration system which clearly favours 27 odd chosen countries xenophobic? Why do they exclude Africa for instance? What do Europeans have against Africans? The EU operates on exactly the same principles as UKIP policy when it comes to borders, they simply draw the border in a different place, but they still do draw a border, UKIP simply believe that the nation state is a better model for drawing that border ( and running a government ) than the superstate model that the EU favours. I only favour an immigration system that offers an equal opportunity for immigrants from any country to come to this country with the criteria for entry decided by the UK government. Currently an Indian has to jump through different hoops to an Italian, I dont know how anyone who believes in equality of opportunity can support that.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 15:14   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

FWIW, I do not believe there should be any immigration controls anywhere in the world. Just two rules, whoever you are; 1) Break the law, get kicked out. No exceptions, any problems are the offender's problems. 2) *No* benefits, including education and NHS, until you've been here and earning/contributing for n years, or someone who has is prepared to sign their rights across to you. The EU, and membership or not, is a total red herring used by the media since it is a nice easy concept and a "bogey man" that they feel their readers can grasp and join in with blaming. The EU itself is not the issue, some of the things it does may be. Its a pity it not something we can take part in and vote, like a democracy or something. Oh.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 16:33   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>The EU itself is not the issue, some of the things it does may be. Its a pity it not something we can take part in and vote, like a democracy or something.<< MEPs who you can vote for cannot propose legislation, you know, like in a democracy and the people who do propose legislation are unelected, like in a dictatorship. Oh.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 18:08   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

>MEPs who you can vote for cannot propose legislation, you know, like in a democracy and >the people who do propose legislation are unelected, like in a dictatorship. Really? So no ability to oppose, discuss, amend or do anything? No potential to introduce via the formalised system which requires it to be submitted for you? Gosh. Well, I'll take your word for it. I assume you recommend that nobody waste their time voting for UKIP, or anyone else, in the upcoming European elections, and I also take it that since UKIP also understand your point so well they will not be contesting, standing or taking party in any way or doing anything else that might cost money? Why does it seem then, with the budget challenges mentioned before and the pointlessness of an elected official, that UKIP is contesting *ANY* European seat? Don't they understand it all as well as you? Really, try and pull the wool over elsewhere. This is exactly the sort of crap that completely devalues UKIP in my eyes. A single policy party, that mostly doesn't understand the bigger picture of that very well, and simply tries to use emotional smoke and mirrors along with overheard emotional sound bites to sway their naive audience..       1

New Sat 26 Apr 14 19:15   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>A single policy party, that mostly doesn't understand the bigger picture of that very well << You were calling for completely open borders earlier, completely disregarding the bigger picture where very few countries across the world would have any part of it, but good luck convincing the Americans etc of your fantastic idea. I love a bit of idealism but the reality is that you couldnt get a mandate for your ideas and if you want to talk about reality you have to look beyond your own views to something that more than a handful of people will support, otherwise you are just one man sounding off online. Start a political party, put your money where your mouth is as they say, see if people agree with you, who knows, you could be the next PM! My only recommendation is that you do what you think is right but please dont expect everybody to agree with you on the basis that you think you have all the answers.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 19:31   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

So what is your point? My opinions are irrelevant since others wouldn't agree? I guess that explains the motivation and thinking behind UKIP's populist policies.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 19:57   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>So what is your point? My opinions are irrelevant since others wouldn't agree?<< I suggested you start your own party, how did you take that to mean I thought you were irrelevant? It is because you are relevant that I suggested it, I tire greatly of consensus politics in this country and it is a richer, if more confrontational discourse that greatly benefits democracy because people are offered a distinct choice. I wish we had communists on TV trying to sell their wares, I think it is great when the Greens get some air time and I wish Left Unity a fair crack. I think that everybody deserves a voice but if you take a position with a minority of support, dont get annoyed because alot of people dont agree with you - hence the suggestion that you try and build on it through the democratic process.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 21:05   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

I love the way that if you don't like a question you simply pretend it wasn't asked. And if you can't or don't want to answer a question, then you misunderstand it. Its a pretty intolerable approach in parties of relevance, but it is laughable in a party pretending towards some relevance based on its self-declared straightforward approach. Exactly the reason why politicians or those pretending to such greatness are not the issue. The naive, gullible, simplistic, manipulable and media fed electorate is.       1

New Sat 26 Apr 14 18:33   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> MEPs who you can vote for cannot propose legislation, you know, like in a democracy >> and the people who do propose legislation are unelected, like in a dictatorship. And how different in practice is that from Westminster? OK, so a very small number of private members bills are introduced every year but none has a prayer unless they're utterly uncontroversial or govt gives them a 'fair wind'. The executive branch of government (Cabinet) is appointed by the PM - albeit mostly from constituency MPs. What they propose as legislation will be whipped through the Commons and excepting small majorities almost anything will be passed. Merkel and Hollande (or Obama for that matter) must be open mouthed at the untrammelled power of a UK Prime Minister. No constitution to worry about and a public largely persuaded that its proxy, the Human Rights Act, is no more than a charter for crooks and wasters. The elective dictatorship is alive and well.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 19:21   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>The elective dictatorship is alive and well. << Undoubtedly Westminster is ripe for reform too. When the public had the chance for Lords reform they rejected it, so it is quite certain that any reform has to be viewed as clearly better over what currently exists. My interest was grabbed by Bercow when he started talking about using far more technology in Parliament, suggestions like MPs voting online and I heard somewhere talk about video conferencing type technology being used so MPs didnt need to travel to London with all the associated expenses. I dont like the man but atleast he is thinking outside the box on this.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 04:03   UKIP - Volume 6 - Pat

>>Well in 2010 they did ,, they voted LD and were surprised and upset when what they got was not what they expected. Quelle surprise<< ...and I still am surprised and upset, so mock me if you like madf:) I'm indicative of true working class and have spent most of my life doing just that and been too busy to worry too much about politics and how it works. My P60 every year has been the indicator of how 'we're' doing, and that was as far as I wanted to know. Now I'm semi-retired I have more time and take far more interest. I expected a coalition to mean just that. I wasn't aware of the seats thing and which party gets most control. I expected them to do what it says on the tin and join forces for the good of the country. To me, neither party one so they would now join together in an equal partnership and we'd get the best bits of both parties and we'd all prosper. Naïve? Very, I'll admit to that but how many others just like me expected that? What I've seen is two parties trying to score points from each other, a bullying PM acting like a headmaster with his majority and pulling rank and no thought for anything other than personal ego from him. One thing is clear to this novice and her (late) interest in politics, this isn't what I want to see and ultimately it isn't good for the country. Pat

New Sat 26 Apr 14 04:40   UKIP - Volume 6 - Pat

Missed edit: one=won:) ....and there are an awful lot of voters out there who are like me! Pat

New Sat 26 Apr 14 06:36   UKIP - Volume 6 - madf

Pat I can understand where you are coming from but being old and cynical and having read a lot about politics over the years, power changes the way people think and act. And it happens everywhere. And if you think the UK is bad, by the standards of the US it's like a children's tea party. And by the standards of (say) the Ukraine, the US is like a children's tea party as well. My point about the Labour voters who voted LD at the last GE is mainly aimed at the many who shifted vote due to the LD stance on free university tuition.. - a policy which collapsed under economic reality.. (Don't get me started on whether it's correct or not!). The current elephant in the room in politics is the ageing population. No-one - but no-one - in politics stands up and says what the economic impacts will be. BUT ALL parties know it will be huge and will significantly change the economic and social landscape in such a way as to make today look like a time of plenty. Now the ageing population is a known fact. But no-one discusses its financial implications - which are going to be huge. Why not? Because the implications are that politicians today are storing up financial mayhem for the future . Austerity? We ain't seen nothing! Rant over. Last edited by: madf on Sat 26 Apr 14 at 06:37       1

New Sat 26 Apr 14 16:12   UKIP - Volume 6 - Cliff Pope

>> >> I expected a coalition to mean just that. I wasn't aware of the seats thing >> and which party gets most control. I expected them to do what it says on >> the tin and join forces for the good of the country. It's an easy mistake to make. I think what you were assuming we'd get was a National Government, which does largely do what you wanted, and we have had in the past. The two parties call a truce, and in any elections or by-elections that come along they put up the best single candidate and fight on a National ticket. Any MPs that didn't want to go along with that don't get adopted as official National candidate and have to fight as an independent, singly or as a small break-away party faction. A coalition just means I agree not to stab you while you are looking, I'll wait till your back is turned.       1

New Sat 26 Apr 14 16:48   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> Many Labour voters are too fixated by hatred to protest vote..Well in 2010 they did >> ,, they voted LD and were surprised and upset when what they got was not >> what they expected. Quelle surprise! Not sure I get the 'fixated by hatred' bit. Hatred of what? Sounds like the same level of analysis as the bit about northerners voting Labour by rote. On the face of it Labour lost seats and the Tories gained them - Lab to Tory swing was 5%. The election outcome was, as usual, determined by a relative handful of voters switching between the main parties in a few marginal seats. A list of seats held by Labour in 2005, ranked by majority and compared with 2010 outcomes shows that quite clearly. The oddity is Edgbaston which Gisla Stewart would have expected to lose but she actually held. Personal vote? Outcome of footwork by Labour members actually canvassing and getting their voters out on the day? Trends in a 3 party system can be difficult to track but I don't think there's much evidence of a Labour to LD swing or protest between 2005 and 2010. Clegg apparently 'won' on the leaders debates and maybe regained some territory that appeared lost in the early stages of the campaign. The Lib Dem national share on the night was pretty well the same both times and they actually lost a few seats. The most popular way of saying 'none of the above' was simply to stay at home. The coalition came about because Cameron, presented with what his advisers thought was an open goal created by Brown's personality and the downturn, failed to get the ball in the back of the net.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:17   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> The coalition came about because Cameron, presented with what his advisers thought was an open >> goal created by Brown's personality and the downturn, failed to get the ball in the >> back of the net. >> ...and the well known problems with the constituency sizes. In 2005 Labour had 9,552,436 people vote for them and had 355 seats, enough to form a govt. In 2010 the Conservatives had 10,703,654 people vote for them, but only got 306 seats and did not have enough for a majority, despite having 1,151,218 more votes than Labour did at the previous election. Same with the Lib Dems. In 2005 they got 5,985,454 votes with 62 seats. In 2010 they increased their vote by 850,794 to 6,836,248, yet lost 5 seats 57. Another stat: Labour's 8,605,517 votes in 2010 got them 258 seats, yet the Tory 8,784,915 votes in 2005, some 179,398 votes more, only got them 198 seats.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:21   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

If the Jockaroos get independence, it'll be mighty tough for Labour to win an election in England and Wales again.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:32   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> ...and the well known problems with the constituency sizes. >> >> In 2005 Labour had 9,552,436 people vote for them and had 355 seats, enough to >> form a govt. >> >> In 2010 the Conservatives had 10,703,654 people vote for them, but only got 306 seats >> and did not have enough for a majority, despite having 1,151,218 more votes than Labour >> did at the previous election. Constituencies represent recognisable bits of the country - all or part of towns or counties with some sort of unifying theme. Trying to divvy the country into equal sized constituencies ends up ignoring those natural (and local government boundaries) and invites gerrymandering on an industrial scale. The only reason the Tories want it is because it legitimises splitting up Labour constituencies, based in densely populated towns and mixing bits of them with rural areas/suburbs to create Tory fiefdoms. If you want to make representation match the popular vote then change the system properly. But when that was proposed people threw their hands up in horror, making up stories about unequal numbers of votes etc.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 17:40   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> If you want to make representation match the popular vote then change the system properly. >> But when that was proposed people threw their hands up in horror, making up stories >> about unequal numbers of votes etc. >> There needs to be a proper balance...and my figures show that there isn't any at the moment.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 18:19   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

Depends what you mean by a proper balance. You elect a Member to represent your 'town'. Towns vary in size, always have and always will. Obviously 'rotten boroughs, shouldn't be allowed to develop and the boundary commission tweak things as necessary. The ONLY reason for destroying the link to the locale is to gerrymander a couple of dozen safe Tory seats. Even as proposed it needed exceptions for certain communities including the very large constituency of Isle of Wight and the very small one of Na h-Eileanan an Iar in Scotland. Many other potential exceptions also exist.

New Sat 26 Apr 14 18:22   UKIP - Volume 6 - No FM2R

Bromp, You write as if you believe it is only the evil Tories who try to manipulate the system to do down the honest Labour party. Do you not think that they both do it equally, whenever they have the chance?       2

New Sat 26 Apr 14 18:36   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

I don't doubt both sides will manipulate given half a chance. The equal sizes constituencies thing though is on a new scale. It's dressed up to sound fair but in reality........

New Sat 26 Apr 14 23:04   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> The equal sizes constituencies thing though is on a new scale. It's dressed up to >> sound fair but in reality........ >> What you are really saying is it doesn't suit your team, so you're not in favour....otherwise how can it be fair to have say 90,000 people vote in one constituency for one seat....then 60,000 vote for an equal seat in another one? Last edited by: Westpig on Sat 26 Apr 14 at 23:05       1

New Sat 26 Apr 14 23:37   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

All governments engineer a bit of gerrymandering into 'boundary changes' when the opportunity arises. Human nature. Stands to reason.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 10:26   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

>> All governments engineer a bit of gerrymandering into 'boundary changes' when the opportunity arises. Human >> nature. Stands to reason. Human nature eh? Who'd a thought it. that "respectable" political parties would try to gain unfair advantage? :-)

New Sun 27 Apr 14 09:40   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

>> What you are really saying is it doesn't suit your team, so you're not in >> favour....otherwise how can it be fair to have say 90,000 people vote in one constituency >> for one seat....then 60,000 vote for an equal seat in another one? Since it's only being pushed because it benefits the Tories it's difficult to avoid the assertion that it doesn't suit 'my team'. However there are other arguments around retaining the county/community links of the current system. Evidence of that down your way the Cornish are up in arms because the proposed new boundaries straddle the Tamar. 60 and 90 thousand are extremes - the majority of current seats in England are in the 60-70 range. Big ones are significant towns represented as one or two seats. Watford for example has 80k but to split it involves mixing it either with bits of Greater London or smaller nearby towns with a very different identity. In Scotland and Wales physical geography comes into play. Places a handful of miles from each other as the crow flies are much more separate if you're not a crow.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 09:48   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

..........and if the Scots DO secede your team, Bromp., will be up the proverbial creek lacking a paddle.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 09:52   UKIP - Volume 6 - sooty123

The idea doesn't seem unreasonable, more than we have now. For example if we had the system now that is proposed and had for some time, then Labour proposed the system we have now, would anyone think it reasonable or a fiddling of the system. I believe the community link system is overplayed, a handful of noisey voters with a parochial outlook that shoudn't be pandered to, when there are bigger issues. Ask most people they won't have a clue what ward they are in nor who even there MP is. My council ward changed nearly at every election, frankly it's a none issue.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 09:54   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> Since it's only being pushed because it benefits the Tories it's difficult to avoid the >> assertion that it doesn't suit 'my team'. >> There are periodic reviews of boundaries...so in that context it's often looked at because it's the 'right thing to do' not just because it suits one political party. I happen to think it's right and proper to have a balance and if that balance has become skewed, then change it...regardless of which party 'gains'. In this case the Tory party would 'gain'...only it isn't really a gain, it would be re-dressing the balance back to equal again. >> However there are other arguments around retaining the county/community links of the current system. Evidence >> of that down your way the Cornish are up in arms because the proposed new >> boundaries straddle the Tamar. I don't have a problem with that, I'm not saying they all should be 62487....only, that they should be fairer than they are at present because of the numbers I posted higher up the thread, where 1,151,218 more people voted Tory than the previous Labour figures, but the Tories got 49 fewer seats and were not able to make a majority. I would like you to specifically address this point..and look at it from a balanced perspective, not tribally....what would you think if the numbers were the other way around and Labour had the short end of the straw? Last edited by: Westpig on Sun 27 Apr 14 at 09:56

New Sun 27 Apr 14 10:20   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

My previous, albeit short-lived, moniker of pigs-might-fly would have been wildly appropriate today. I would be airborne! The Daily Mail is having a go at "Britain's looniest party" and it's NOT UKIP! :-0 tinyurl.com/pzqlc9j Last edited by: Roger. on Sun 27 Apr 14 at 10:21

New Sun 27 Apr 14 10:38   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>The Daily Mail is having a go at "Britain's looniest party" and it's NOT UKIP! :-0<< Certainly Britain's most fractious party, I know local parties can have divisions but the role of a local chairman is to draw those factions together so they all pull in the same direction, clearly a failure in Brighton.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 10:56   UKIP - Volume 6 - Bromptonaut

WP, Agree system should more closely match elected number with votes cast. I suspect though that the distortion is implicit in FPTP itself and the racking up of 'wasted' votes in safe seats. The proper answer therefore is PR, probably on the Scottish model. Sticking with FPTP while devising amoeba shaped constituencies which still don't deliver real fairness is an act of folly. Out for most of today but will return to point later when I've had chance to do some projection of numbers.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 11:22   UKIP - Volume 6 - Cliff Pope

>> >> Agree system should more closely match elected number with votes cast. >> Only if you want your local representation to be decided by large numbers of people who don't live in your constituency?

New Sun 27 Apr 14 11:27   UKIP - Volume 6 - Manatee

Yes it struck me it was probably more to do with relative size of majorities rather than number of electors in each constituency. FPTP is flawed in that it leaves large minorities without effective representation. Occasionally even a majority. Unfortunately every other system is flawed in one way or another. But some form of PR would at least give more people a reason to vote, where under the present system many can predit it won't be worth the shoe leather.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 11:53   UKIP - Volume 6 - Armel Coussine

>> But some form of PR would at least give more people a reason to vote, where under the present system many can predit it won't be worth the shoe leather. There's the rub: 'some form' of PR will have to be argued out between rival systems and of course against those who are satisfied with the existing one. Voting is a civic duty, not absolute in this country of course, but I usually vote feeling I should. However predictable the result may be, the trend in poll figures usually means something. In Australia I understand voting is compulsory. There's something to be said for that.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 12:07   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>Voting is a civic duty, not absolute in this country of course, but I usually vote feeling I should. However predictable the result may be, the trend in poll figures usually means something.<< Of course with 34.9% of voters not voting in 2010, under a compulsary voting system it could be very different indeed, that is a huge number of people, views we simply dont know much about.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 12:09   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> FPTP is flawed in that it leaves large minorities without effective representation. Occasionally even a >> majority. I don't have strong views either way with FPTP or PR....however, if as it is now, we have FPTP there has to be a degree of general similarity in the size of constituencies*, because a win in a constituency = one MP...so whichever team does become first, they ought to have the same benefit as when the other team came first. In our current case, the team that came first last time had significantly higher voting figures than the previous team that came first..yet..had significantly less seats to show for it and not enough to form a government. That isn't right. *I'd accept an odd anomaly here and there.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 12:20   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

For the 2005 election the following is recorded: "The average electorate size was 68,492. In Conservative won seats the average was 72,715, Labour 66,665, LibDem 69,162, Plaid Cymru 44,296, and SNP 58,448". That means for example that Plaid Cymru have the best advantage, folowed by the SNP..and of the big three, Labour have a significant advantage over firstly the Tories, then the Lib Dems.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 12:28   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

Back to UKIP! A bit long, but here is a video of the Dudley UKIP public meeting. I guess that Nigel was, by and large, speaking to the converted, but it does give the thrust of UKIP's basic policies. www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Lik0o6-dMbs       1

New Sun 27 Apr 14 15:22   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

Strange that these two stories got little attention when apparently mainstream parties should expect more scrutiny, what does a Lib Dem have to do to make the news headlines? If a Kipper drops a sweet wrapper it will be on the 6PM news. www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News/Cambridges-longest-serving-city-councillor-Liberal-Democrat-Colin-Rosenstiel-appears-in-court-accused-of-hitting-a-7-year-old-child-20140426070032.htm www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-26952191

New Sun 27 Apr 14 15:50   UKIP - Volume 6 - Roger.

www.thecommentator.com/article/4903/telegraph_looks_like_pravda_in_its_anti_ukip_tirades       1

New Sun 27 Apr 14 18:08   UKIP - Volume 6 - Westpig

>> If >> a Kipper drops a sweet wrapper it will be on the 6PM news. I think you'll find some voters can see through that. I for example find that exceptionally irritating and find it endears me more to UKIP, because of the unfairness and unnecessariness* of it all. * is that a word, or have I just made it up?       2

New Sun 27 Apr 14 18:58   UKIP - Volume 6 - Dog

S'okay; dictionary.reference.com/browse/unnecessariness

New Sun 27 Apr 14 18:58   UKIP - Volume 6 - Stuu

>>I think you'll find some voters can see through that. I for example find that exceptionally irritating and find it endears me more to UKIP, because of the unfairness and unnecessariness* of it all.<< I think many voters do judging by the comment sections on the articles, I only take issue with the notion that UKIP is somehow more affected by these negative issues than any other party which is what the media are pushing, there is plenty of it for the media to feast on from other parties should they choose but it only makes it as far as local papers and blogs because it doesnt fit the current agenda. We have a national election coming up and the media have spent more time on UKIP candidate Twitter accounts than they have on the substantial and important arguments surrounding the election - on both sides of the argument. No wonder many of these newspapers have shrinking readerships.

New Sun 27 Apr 14 19:11   UKIP - Volume 6 - Haywain

When it comes to financial, sexual and general naughtiness, the lib/lab/cons have set pretty high standards to beat; the public will not stand for any mud-slinging from them.