The big 3 parties 3500 seats, UKIP 157...

[Kalimantan Gull]

Which seats do they realistically have any chance in?

Sky News did a projection of Thursday's results onto the general election and predicted that UKIP would win one seat, Castle Point in Essex

 

[looney]

If your only objection is the extradition of barmy imams and hijackers, as I mentioned above, then you will throw a lot away for the tiny percentage of daily mail headline worthy stupid exceptions that the law throws up. Go on, chuck out all the protection you get for that. Watch in awe as the Tories and UKIP put back all those protections with a far superior British Bill of Rights that is better than the combined nations can deliver After all British people do need a different kind of human right to others. I'm sure you won't be let down.

this kind of post shows how out of touch you and others are. Throwing out foreigners who want to do us or our way of life harm isnt an option in some kind of weird trade of. Its not negotiable, these scumbags must go, if its tied to EU human rights then those laws must go, if those laws are tied to the EU then the EU must go. Its a line in the sand so to speak for a lot of people, you dont understand them hence being out of touch.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

To get a sense of how far Mr Farage’s party has come, consider this. In the 2010 General Election, Ukip won just 3 per cent of the vote.

It does not have a single MP, its last election manifesto was wildly incoherent and, with the exception of the ebullient Mr Farage, its representatives are utterly obscure.

Yet for the second consecutive year, Ukip has won around a fifth of the national vote.

Defying all the predictions, it has gained more than 150 council seats. In Essex, it denied the Tories victory in Basildon, Castle Point and Southend.

And in Rotherham, supposedly a working-class Labour bastion, its candidates averaged a whopping 47 per cent of the vote.

By any standards this represents a political earthquake.

The really extraordinary thing is that this has been the achievement of one man.

UKIP's vote share dropped from 22% to 17% in one year. They've won under 2% of 10,000 council seats up for grabs, and 17% of the national vote corresponds to about 6% of the voting population considering the woeful turnout. As an earthquake, its an incredibly mild tremor, but the press are doing their best to make it seem much bigger than it really is.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Your analysis of the economy is well articulated and not too far off my position. I've tried to engage you on this question several times before, but you just wimp out, so here's hoping that such terminology might provoke you this time:
Your analysis of the economy is a million miles away from UKIP's. They're bankrolled by precisely the kinds of people who are getting richer (yet their support tends to come from the poor), and their economic policies will be merely to encourage the financial sector, and privatise what remains of the public sector, thereby creating more extremes in wealth and income inequality alongside employment (and wider) insecurities. Where will their poor supporters turn to once that's inflicted on them?

Sorry for not engaging on this. In that respect I would agree there will be nowhere for people to turn too, but with the numbers of people currently entering the UK every year, wouldn't privatisation happen anyway regardless of what government is in charge. I just can't see how this country is going to be able to afford it.

 

[thisistips]

this kind of post shows how out of touch you and others are. Throwing out foreigners who want to do us or our way of life harm isnt an option in some kind of weird trade of. Its not negotiable, these scumbags must go, if its tied to EU human rights then those laws must go, if those laws are tied to the EU then the EU must go. Its a line in the sand so to speak for a lot of people, you dont understand them hence being out of touch.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Firstly, they're not tied to the EU, it's a different institution. So leaving the EU has nothing to do with this. Secondly, I agree, we should be able to deport criminals and terrorists. Only thing is, there are 18 articles in the convention, I challenge you to name three, or even one protection, that you don't want as a personal protection for you, your family and your friends. If you bothered to understand my argument you'd see that I am saying don't throw these protections out. Deal with the issues, yes, but just because the daily mail gets upset because you can't deport Abu hamza and some afghani hijackers, don't be so stupid as to shoot yourself in the foot and get rid of things that protect you.

We made a major leap forward in 1998 for our own freedoms, and we're in danger of losing it because of three or four tabloid worthy news stories. It's not about deporting terrorists it about you. I might be out of touch with the sentiment of the 20 percent of people that beloved the Daily Mail enough to vote this way, but you are out of touch with the real power in the world. The Tories and UKIP cannot be trusted to build a bill of rights that is as strong as the European convention. That's my opinion. Believe that they will if you like, some did when they promised it in 1979, but they lied and didn't deliver.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Look at history. Tory manifesto 1979, cast iron promise of a bill of rights, never delivered, despite the power and time to do so. They reneged on the promise. Human rights are universal, not national, and they need to be protected above national governments, because state abuses of power are often the problem. Lead person drafting the original charter was British. First country to ratify Britain. Name three rights protected under the European charter that shouldn't be protected. Add to it by all means, but we scrap it at our peril. And they will scrap it, add you'll be less safe as a result.

You are right about Britain being a major player in CHR and right about the Tories reneging on on changing the bill,as they did with the Lisbon treaty,as Labour did with a referendum before their second term,like Clegg did on boundary changes,politicians in general are untrustworthy.
The scrapping of the CHR will not make anyone less safe in this country apart from terrorist and hate preachers,our own laws drawn up by our elected parliament,where we can have control over our own borders should make us more secure,instead of unelected lawyers imposing their will over our parliament...can you imagine the CHR telling Putin he must not expel terrorist or jail them as it's against their human rights. What about their victims human rights?

 

[thisistips]

You are right about Britain being a major player in CHR and right about the Tories reneging on on changing the bill,as they did with the Lisbon treaty,as Labour did with a referendum before their second term,like Clegg did on boundary changes,politicians in general are untrustworthy.
The scrapping of the CHR will not make anyone less safe in this country apart from terrorist and hate preachers,our own laws drawn up by our elected parliament,where we can have control over our own borders should make us more secure,instead of unelected lawyers imposing their will over our parliament...can you imagine the CHR telling Putin he must not expel terrorist or jail them as it's against their human rights. What about their victims human rights?

That's a good balanced post, thanks. I sincerely hope you are right and I am wrong about our safety in the UK because I fear we are going to go in this direction. The CHR does already 'tell' Putin he's wrong more than any other leader, because Russia is the worst offender. You are right, I'm sure he'd ignore rulings on terrorist deportation, as he does on gay rights. I just don't think we should give up on the CHR and our rights, just because there's a few occasions where it doesn't work. This isn't about sovereignty for me, more about the rights of the individual, and I believe this should be protected above the nation state; still not perfect, but better than by the state.

It's for sure that the CHR isn't perfect, but I trust it a lot more than anything Farage or Cameron would build. Actually, it's really just Cameron and the Tories that matter, because they'll be the ones in power.

 

[looney]

Sorry, but you're wrong. Firstly, they're not tied to the EU, it's a different institution. So leaving the EU has nothing to do with this. Secondly, I agree, we should be able to deport criminals and terrorists. Only thing is, there are 18 articles in the convention, I challenge you to name three, or even one protection, that you don't want as a personal protection for you, your family and your friends. If you bothered to understand my argument you'd see that I am saying don't throw these protections out. Deal with the issues, yes, but just because the daily mail gets upset because you can't deport Abu hamza and some afghani hijackers, don't be so stupid as to shoot yourself in the foot and get rid of things that protect you.

We made a major leap forward in 1998 for our own freedoms, and we're in danger of losing it because of three or four tabloid worthy news stories. It's not about deporting terrorists it about you. I might be out of touch with the sentiment of the 20 percent of people that beloved the Daily Mail enough to vote this way, but you are out of touch with the real power in the world. The Tories and UKIP cannot be trusted to build a bill of rights that is as strong as the European convention. That's my opinion. Believe that they will if you like, some did when they promised it in 1979, but they lied and didn't deliver.

On what grounds are you claiming the EU and the European Court are totally seperate institutions? You are obviously not paying attention to what I said. Defending Terrorists makes it all null and void, not fit for purpose. It doesnt matter how not worthy some of the rest is its got to go.

Secondly if you wish to be taken serious by me and not ignore cut out the casual attacks on the free press. You mentioned the Daily Mail twice in your post, this acheives nothing, its boring at best and at worst makes you look like a leftwing moron that just parrots cliches.

First is the Mail, then Mail Readers then its people who share the opinions of those said readers. If you dont want me to dump a ton of verbal shit on your head knock it of.

Also try not to shoot the messenger. If it takes years to get rid of hook but worthy immigrants can be thrown out straight away then something is seriously wrong. Getting rid of the human rights act would revert to the older forms of protection. Now if there is other good stuff in there the onus would be on the supporters to draw up[ a new act that doesn't give advantages to our enemies.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

On what grounds are you claiming the EU and the European Court are totally seperate institutions?

I think you might be confusing the European Court of Justice ( an EU body ) with the ECHR which is not an EU body. The ECHR existed long before the EU and is only linked by the fact that to become an EU member now you have to agree to sign up to the Human Rights Act and ECHR jurisdiction.

 

[looney]

EU member now you have to agree to sign up to the Human Rights Act and ECHR jurisdiction.

So thats the relavent link then?

 

[thisistips]

Looney, no attack on the free press intended, I think it's an essential part of a democracy. Part of having any press is that people should critically evaluate what they are reading. To be more specific about the Mail; they present cases in an unbalanced manner, they have an anti-European bias, and it is important to understand that when reading it. It's the same with all press. In this case they highlight where the ECHR is wrong, but it's not as newsworthy when it helps protect us.

 

[Soulman]

UKIP's vote share dropped from 22% to 17% in one year. They've won under 2% of 10,000 council seats up for grabs, and 17% of the national vote corresponds to about 6% of the voting population considering the woeful turnout. As an earthquake, its an incredibly mild tremor, but the press are doing their best to make it seem much bigger than it really is.

Sorry my mistake, i thought going from 1 seat to 157 seats was more an earthquake, you are right it is just a mild tremor.
I wonder whether there will be another mild tremor in the EU results today.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Make that 156

Nigel Farage is dealing with fresh allegations of racism and homophobia in his party only days after the local and European elections as Ukip was forced to launch an investigation into comments made by one of its newly elected councillors.

Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".

In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".

 

[Don Quixote]

Sky News did a projection of Thursday's results onto the general election and predicted that UKIP would win one seat, Castle Point in Essex

They are really going to shake up the commons then.

 

[Soulman]

Make that 156

Nigel Farage is dealing with fresh allegations of racism and homophobia in his party only days after the local and European elections as Ukip was forced to launch an investigation into comments made by one of its newly elected councillors.

Dave Small, who was elected to Redditch borough council on Friday, faces being kicked out of the party for referring to gay people as "perverts" and African immigrants as "scroungers".

In comments posted on Facebook, he also attacked BBC broadcaster Clare Balding and singer Elton John over their sexuality and referred to "our sworn enemies in the Muslim world".

Great another one weeded out. I daresay the candidate will be sacked immediately, unlike the other parties who normally back their candidates until the clamour and evidence become so strong that they are pushed into sacking them.
I see that Diane Abbott is still about eh.

 

[joeinbrighton]

UKIP will always stand the best chance of making an impact in an Election that sees a low turnout. I would anticipate that the turnout for the Euro Elections was ridiculously low. That won't be the case so much when it is a General Election.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Sorry my mistake, i thought going from 1 seat to 157 seats was more an earthquake, you are right it is just a mild tremor.
I wonder whether there will be another mild tremor in the EU results today.

there has to be perspective. In isolation, its fantastic for UKIP, of course.