Could UKIP win the General Election ?

[Westdene Seagull]

So rather than naming more ukip policy you :Facepalm: Ok move along nothing to see here #wanker

Ahhh, I see, swearing really adds to your point doesn't it ? I'm really not bothered about the other policies are ( although I have read them ), I'd actually prefer if UKIP were a single ( or two ) policy party. They've allowed themselves to be dragged into multi-policy politics by the main parties. As far as I'm concerned the policy of leaving the EU should be their focus.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Ahhh, I see, swearing really adds to your point doesn't it ? I'm really not bothered about the other policies are ( although I have read them ), I'd actually prefer if UKIP were a single ( or two ) policy party. They've allowed themselves to be dragged into multi-policy politics by the main parties. As far as I'm concerned the policy of leaving the EU should be their focus.

Thing is like all the other parties UKIP don't have an answer for everything. I think this is what people are expecting. This country is in massive debt but at least UKIP look at cutting it, it might only be small for example cutting Foreign Aid, abandoning this HS2 project but at least it's something. Obviously leaving the EU is the big one that could save this country billions.

 

[cunning fergus]

No I can't see why ukip is the solution. If you want an in out referenda vote green. Do you have any idea what other policies ukip have? Name them go and look at there manifesto and tell me what other policies they have. Voting Ukip is rank stupidly if you are anything other than the 1% but hey NF likes a fag and a pint

What about if I fundamentally disagree with this particular objective of Green Party doctrine?

"Objectives
NY300 We will work to create a world of global inter-responsibility in which the concept of a 'British national' is irrelevant and outdated."

You know what this means right?

You agree with this proposition.........cards on the table.

 

[Hastings gull]

No I can't see why ukip is the solution. If you want an in out referenda vote green. Do you have any idea what other policies ukip have? Name them go and look at there manifesto and tell me what other policies they have. Voting Ukip is rank stupidly if you are anything other than the 1% but hey NF likes a fag and a pint[/QUOTE]

Good Morning to you.
Other than the UKIP reaction to EU/immigration I do not have much idea what other policies they have. This is not to say, however, that they do not exist. The press do tend to concentrate on the "immigration bit" as this is the most dramatic and controversial element, and so your average punter with not too much interest in politics could be forgiven for not knowing much about their policy, to, say, devolution. Also, it has to be borne in mind, that traditionally, opposition parties tend to keep their alternatives close to their chest, as it easier to criticise the ruling government, than have your own policies open to scrutiny. In this respect, UKIP are no different to what has gone on before. Each of the major parties has accused the other of this.
I was rather intrigued with your last sentence, particularly the reference to 1%. 1% of what? Who are the 1%?

 

[Creaky]

What about if I fundamentally disagree with this particular objective of Green Party doctrine?

"Objectives
NY300 We will work to create a world of global inter-responsibility in which the concept of a 'British national' is irrelevant and outdated."

You know what this means right?

You agree with this proposition.........cards on the table.

Seems a perfectly reasonable objective - do you really disagree with the objective of making national self interest an irrelevancy?

Surely the ideal where all nations work as one to make a world in which an individuals place of origin is immaterial in regards to their quality of life has to be something worth striving for - 'pie in the sky' for the foreseeable future I would suggest but that doesn't make the final objective not worth working towards.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

No I can't see why ukip is the solution. If you want an in out referenda vote green. Do you have any idea what other policies ukip have? Name them go and look at there manifesto and tell me what other policies they have. Voting Ukip is rank stupidly if you are anything other than the 1% but hey NF likes a fag and a pint[/QUOTE]

Good Morning to you.
Other than the UKIP reaction to EU/immigration I do not have much idea what other policies they have. This is not to say, however, that they do not exist. The press do tend to concentrate on the "immigration bit" as this is the most dramatic and controversial element, and so your average punter with not too much interest in politics could be forgiven for not knowing much about their policy, to, say, devolution. Also, it has to be borne in mind, that traditionally, opposition parties tend to keep their alternatives close to their chest, as it easier to criticise the ruling government, than have your own policies open to scrutiny. In this respect, UKIP are no different to what has gone on before. Each of the major parties has accused the other of this.
I was rather intrigued with your last sentence, particularly the reference to 1%. 1% of what? Who are the 1%?

I don't think anybody really knows the policies of the other parties, because we have always voted for them on trust. For example I used to vote for the Labour party because they spoke for the working man, I didn't look indepth to what they where really doing, I wish I did and other people did because we wouldn't be in the situation we are in now.

What UKIP have done is something good, they have raised an issue that concerns a lot of people that has got the other political parties talking, UKIP have also turned in to bogey men, people just love to fine pick everything the media say about them so they can get offended.

 

[Hastings gull]

I don't think anybody really knows the policies of the other parties, because we have always voted for them on trust. For example I used to vote for the Labour party because they spoke for the working man, I didn't look indepth to what they where really doing, I wish I did and other people did because we wouldn't be in the situation we are in now.

What UKIP have done is something good, they have raised an issue that concerns a lot of people that has got the other political parties talking, UKIP have also turned in to bogey men, people just love to fine pick everything the media say about them so they can get offended.

I am sure you are right in that most voters tend to vote for their favourite party, without knowing the intricacies of their policies. I certainly couldn't claim to know what any of the parties stand for in terms of reading their total manifesto - in fact I have never looked at one, and am sure that I am not alone! Irrespective of what you think of UKIP, what we are witnessing is quite unique in terms of the depth of their vote in the three recent by-elections, even allowing for the fact that the "sitting" MP may have had some personal popularity. Naturally, one could say, that come election time, most punters will revert to the usual pattern, and this could clearly be the case. But, as you say, the issue of immigration has now become so important to so many people, I somehow can't see the current voting pattern being a flash in the pan. Time will tell.

 

[Hastings gull]

Seems a perfectly reasonable objective - do you really disagree with the objective of making national self interest an irrelevancy?

Surely the ideal where all nations work as one to make a world in which an individuals place of origin is immaterial in regards to their quality of life has to be something worth striving for - 'pie in the sky' for the foreseeable future I would suggest but that doesn't make the final objective not worth working towards.

Of course this is highly desirable, in theory, and if this were the case, presumably there would be no wars etc . You do acknowledge that this is currently "pie in the sky" and as such it is easy to have such goals and thus claim the moral high-ground. I am not suggesting that they are being deliberately cynical, just that it does not take into account the many pitfalls on the way. However, can you not be a proud British national and still want global co-operation? Are they necessarily mutually exclusive?

 

[Gwylan]

Irrespective of what you think of UKIP, what we are witnessing is quite unique in terms of the depth of their vote in the three recent by-elections.

Not really. The SDP made even more spectacular gains in the early 80s - and they were a brand new party, not one that had been going for 20 years. The SDP got 25% of the vote in the general election, just three years after their formation. I'd be shocked if UKIP got anywhere near that next year.

Seems a perfectly reasonable objective - do you really disagree with the objective of making national self interest an irrelevancy?

Surely the ideal where all nations work as one to make a world in which an individuals place of origin is immaterial in regards to their quality of life has to be something worth striving for - 'pie in the sky' for the foreseeable future I would suggest but that doesn't make the final objective not worth working towards.

I posted a link a couple of months ago about the end of nationality. It sounds like a good idea to me and I'm sure it's one that will come about in time. I don't expect it to be in my lifetime but probably my kids will see it. The whole notion of nationality seems strange in the 21st century. If British passports are available to anyone who wants to fork out a £1m, regardless of family history or cultural background (and other EU countries make passports available for a lot less) http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...to-buy-citizenship-super-rich-malta-passports then you're already doing away with the idea that there's anything particularly special about British citizenships. If it's OK for a Russian gangster with no cultural ties whatsoever to the UK can pick up a British passport, why is not all right for, say, an Indian software engineer?

 

[Creaky]

Of course this is highly desirable, in theory, and if this were the case, presumably there would be no wars etc . You do acknowledge that this is currently "pie in the sky" and as such it is easy to have such goals and thus claim the moral high-ground. I am not suggesting that they are being deliberately cynical, just that it does not take into account the many pitfalls on the way. However, can you not be a proud British national and still want global co-operation? Are they necessarily mutually exclusive?

You can still be proud of your heritage even when that heritage is irrelevant in terms of standing in the international community.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Not really. The SDP made even more spectacular gains in the early 80s - and they were a brand new party, not one that had been going for 20 years. The SDP got 25% of the vote in the general election, just three years after their formation. I'd be shocked if UKIP got anywhere near that next year.

The electorate didn't see the SDP as a brand new party though but more as a breakaway of the soft left from the Labour Party.

 

[Soulman]

I don't think anybody really knows the policies of the other parties, because we have always voted for them on trust. For example I used to vote for the Labour party because they spoke for the working man, I didn't look indepth to what they where really doing, I wish I did and other people did because we wouldn't be in the situation we are in now.

What UKIP have done is something good, they have raised an issue that concerns a lot of people that has got the other political parties talking, UKIP have also turned in to bogey men, people just love to fine pick everything the media say about them so they can get offended.

Spot on.

 

[cunning fergus]

Seems a perfectly reasonable objective - do you really disagree with the objective of making national self interest an irrelevancy?

Surely the ideal where all nations work as one to make a world in which an individuals place of origin is immaterial in regards to their quality of life has to be something worth striving for - 'pie in the sky' for the foreseeable future I would suggest but that doesn't make the final objective not worth working towards.

Yes I do.

And not because I don’t think it will be possible (which it isn’t), but because amongst other more serious democratic and economic points the world would be so f***ing boring.

Your argument should logically follow that we should remove the “self-interest” of our football league system, so any club’s supporters can enjoy the football as football fans regardless of their allegiance. Sounds like going to the domestic rugby union games to me…………turgid.

But really this is about your commitment to Marxism………….and if that’s how you roll politically then that’s fine with me, but you should accept that many many people in this country don’t want Marxism, including those who came to Britain (and the west in general) to escape that ideology elsewhere.

If people in this country felt the way you do then the current immigration debate in this country wouldn’t be registering as a serious political issue…………….but it is.

The truth for you is that it’s not an issue at all, because you don’t care how many people come here and what difficulties are caused, you have a longer term vision…………….uncontrolled immigration is merely an accelerant to that desired end.

At least we know that now.

 

[cunning fergus]

Not really. The SDP made even more spectacular gains in the early 80s - and they were a brand new party, not one that had been going for 20 years. The SDP got 25% of the vote in the general election, just three years after their formation. I'd be shocked if UKIP got anywhere near that next year.



I posted a link a couple of months ago about the end of nationality. It sounds like a good idea to me and I'm sure it's one that will come about in time. I don't expect it to be in my lifetime but probably my kids will see it. The whole notion of nationality seems strange in the 21st century. If British passports are available to anyone who wants to fork out a £1m, regardless of family history or cultural background (and other EU countries make passports available for a lot less) http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...to-buy-citizenship-super-rich-malta-passports then you're already doing away with the idea that there's anything particularly special about British citizenships. If it's OK for a Russian gangster with no cultural ties whatsoever to the UK can pick up a British passport, why is not all right for, say, an Indian software engineer?

Notwithstanding your view that it is a good idea, how about consulting the electorate about this policy as a political aim?

The UK has naturalised close to 3m in the last 10 years, and frankly this is just a means of hiding the real numbers of immigrants in the UK.

For all the bluster we get about benefits or otherwise of immigrants and the laziness of Brits, where do these people sit?

They aren’t native Brits, but don’t appear on the immigration numbers either.

Our Govts’ (of whatever colour) in the last 15 years have never explained why this policy of handing out the passports so readily is beneficial to the country or to what political end it serves.

The fact that you don’t value your own nationality does not mean many many others who do value their nationality dont find such a policy grossly offensive.

 

[pastafarian]

No I can't see why ukip is the solution. If you want an in out referenda vote green.

Never in a million years.

I like a beer,their policy to increase alcohol taxes by 50% is hatstand mental and will be disastrous for the UK pub industry

 

[Hastings gull]

Not really. The SDP made even more spectacular gains in the early 80s - and they were a brand new party, not one that had been going for 20 years. The SDP got 25% of the vote in the general election, just three years after their formation. I'd be shocked if UKIP got anywhere near that next year.



I posted a link a couple of months ago about the end of nationality. It sounds like a good idea to me and I'm sure it's one that will come about in time. I don't expect it to be in my lifetime but probably my kids will see it. The whole notion of nationality seems strange in the 21st century. If British passports are available to anyone who wants to fork out a £1m, regardless of family history or cultural background (and other EU countries make passports available for a lot less) http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...to-buy-citizenship-super-rich-malta-passports then you're already doing away with the idea that there's anything particularly special about British citizenships. If it's OK for a Russian gangster with no cultural ties whatsoever to the UK can pick up a British passport, why is not all right for, say, an Indian software engineer?

Thank you for your reply. I had forgotten about the SDP, and you are right in that they made huge headway, electorally. But I am not sure that this is the same, as it was a result of a split in the Labour Party, was it not? With modern communications and ease of travel, I can certainly see that in theory, nationality may become less of an issue, though flogging off for a huge profit passports to some rich people, or gangsters, as you put it, isn't really proof of anything, other than an undignified rush for dosh. I fully agree in that it devalues the idea of your heritage and there is no difference between the two people, as you say. You do say that this may come in time, though I think we would have to see more evidence of this - the recent elections in Europe would suggest that folk do prefer an element of "nationality" and of course this can mean all things to all people.

 

[midnight_rendezvous]

Anyone mentioned Farage wants to put breastfeeding mothers in a corner yet?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Anyone mentioned Farage wants to put breastfeeding mothers in a corner yet?

Nobody puts baby in the corner.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Anyone mentioned Farage wants to put breastfeeding mothers in a corner yet?

Did you listen to the whole Phone Farage interview on LBC this morning? If you didn't please do. Once again the media have decided to take only part of what he said and twist this in to something bad. You sound like an intelligent person and surprised you would be sucked in like that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30342953

 

[Seagull on the wing]

So rather than naming more ukip policy you :Facepalm: Ok move along nothing to see here #wanker

See what I mean about the left throwing insults...see post 728