Vote UKIP...

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
CREPELLO
Posts: 5559
Joined: 29 Nov 2008, 12:55am

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by CREPELLO »

The problem with the situation we find ourselves in with regard to a EU referendum is that it is only an 'in/out' question. This tends to be what happens in politics when views get polarised. There is often no middle way. So come a vote, we will never get nuanced debate, just black and white statements and appeals. What about a third question - 'reform'?

I'd like to ask the ukip voters, apart from withdrawal from Europe, do they expect or want the rest of Europe to remain whole and unbroken? Because there is a huge risk that it could break up (which may happen anyway)and I think that would be a very dangerous process, if nationalism plays a dominant roll (think Ukraine).

If we don't like what Europe is at the moment, why not campaign to reform it's roll from within? I think the union is far from perfect. Now that all this disparate far right parties have gained MEP's, the EU process has undoubtedly been unsettled, although they won't vote coherently as a block.
I hope the EU leaders will realise that they have to reform and perhaps rein in the project a bit. But that is not the same as getting out, which promises a far more dangerous and uncertain outcome.

BTW, here's a very insightful article by the founder of UKIP, Alan Sked:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ns-monster
User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 11536
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: Think Cheddar and Cider
Contact:

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by al_yrpal »

Heres one for all you UKIP haters:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 9760_n.jpg

And… the above post highlights precisely what many UKIP voters are seeking…. Reform!

Al. :lol:
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by Bicycler »

Mick F wrote:Personally, I'd have preferred Lab or Con to have formed a minority government, then called another general election maybe a year later. By that time, the electorate may have been more decisive.

Well, it would have been a Conservative minority government. A Labour one would have been implausible with the way things were. Problem is that it wouldn't work. We'd just have ended up with a government which couldn't get its own policies through parliament.

The whole system is far too adversarial. It encourages each party to drift to the centre to cater to the swing voters. Despite arguing over the same centre ground they spend their time trying to exaggerate how different they are to each other. There is the implication that the other parties and their voters are self-serving and morally inferior, where (of course) this particular party is no such thing and just believes in doing the best thing for everybody :roll: Sadly, many voters believe that rhetoric. This results in a situation where people dislike people who vote differently to themselves and in which parties cannot allow themselves to be seen to agree with each other on virtually any policy. We need a proportional system which would encourage people to vote and stand for what they believe in and also encourage government through consensus rather than confrontation
Psamathe
Posts: 17646
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by Psamathe »

Mick F wrote:Clegg will be lucky to even keep his seat after the next general election, let alone still be leader. It he could turn the clock back, would he have taken the LDs into a coalition?

Personally, I'd have preferred Lab or Con to have formed a minority government, then called another general election maybe a year later. By that time, the electorate may have been more decisive.

I don't think the LD problem was going into a coalition and gaining some power (i.e. no longer "outsiders"). I think it was what they did when they got there. e.g. the student fees was an extreme form of breaking a written promise and almost immediately on gaining office. One day they were pledging to vote against student fees, the next voting for a massive increase. People quickly lose credibility when something is so blatant.

And since then they have become little more than cheer leaders for Conservative policies. And they have pretty well failed at getting their own really important things through (e.g. Westminster reforms). the only thing they can really "claim" is the £10k tax threshold yet those in real need dream of a £10k income (who are seeing their support dramatically cut). I suspect that they would have been better going into coalition with Labour, but Clegg seems to be a closet Tory so I don't think he would every have allowed it.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/26/nick-clegg-and-lib-dems-face-battle-for-survival Seems an "internal" (now leaked) opinion poll for the Lib Dems shows their expected obliteration and that Clegg would lose his seta.

Ian
Psamathe
Posts: 17646
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by Psamathe »

Bicycler wrote:The whole system is far too adversarial. It encourages each party to drift to the centre to cater to the swing voters.

Also, the system has become too "leader centric". I have an MP. (S)he is meant to be in Westminster to represent (or as a delegate for) his/her Constituency; which means for everybody not just those who support his/her ideology.

So when I vote for an MP I do not want somebody who will just do what he is told be the party whips. Because such a system (as ours has now become) is little more than voting for a party leader. Party leaders, whips, etc. have too much power.

Ian
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by OnYourRight »

mjr wrote:Really what all parties except UKIP need to do is to neutralise the BBC-led UKIP marketing campaign and promote their own distinctive positive narratives. Most of them are looking a bit punch-drunk at the moment.

Agreed. The wall-to-wall media coverage of Farage and UKIP (but mainly Farage) over the last year has been incredible. And not just on the BBC.

The only way for other parties to counter that is to give the media an equally compelling vision, and preferably one that’s more hopeful, generous, and realistic – though Farage proves you don’t need those things if you have a cheeky grin and can think on your feet.

Despite Farage’s omnipresence, most people – including UKIP voters! – know surprisingly little about UKIP’s policies. They know UKIP hates the EU, and that seems to be enough for them. If you counter that UKIP’s disjointed soundbites don’t add up to much, they tell you: “but that’s the very point! The time for overarching ideologies is over. I don’t care about left or right. I care about specific problems. Let’s get out of the EU so we can solve these problems one by one.”

If you boil it down a bit further you find that many UKIP voters don’t care strongly about any policies except one: stopping immigration.

I think Farage and UKIP should be treated more seriously than their buffoonish appearance suggests. They have a lot of common ground with Le Pen’s far-right Front National in France, another party that sells an impossible dream of a re-industrialised and contentedly isolated country, just like the good old days. Parties that pander to people’s worst fears are not healthy for democracy.

CREPELLO: if the rise of the anti-European parties has the unintended consequence of accelerating reform of the EU, that may ironically be their undoing. Perhaps that’s the least harmful outcome we can hope for here (though it’s hard to see how reform could limit free movement of labour while preserving the other three EU freedoms of movement: goods, services, and capital).

However, the pro-European parties shouldn’t panic unduly. Anti-European parties have ‘only’ won roughly a fifth of the vote, and their MEPs cannot agree among themselves. Already UKIP has distanced itself from the Front National, not because there’s much difference in their views, but because in the UK even racists are polite, and Le Pen doesn’t sound polite to British ears. They won’t be an effective anti-European force while they remain factional and unmanageable.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by thirdcrank »

The choice for Clegg was between an eternity in the political wilderness or five years as Deputy Prime Minister. For people who can see no further than the end of their own snouts, that's a no-brainer. Harold Wilson is reported to have said that a week is a long time in politics and horizons have shortened even more in the intervening half century. Five years = 260 weeks. They do say that he has a cushy number lined up in Europe when it comes to time for a career move. And it's just the same further down the pecking order with the likes of Huhne, who conveniently created a vacancy for the ambitious pack snapping at his heels. (With apologies for the mixed metaphor. :oops: ) Another who landed on his feet was D Alexander: who'd heard of him till there was an unexpected vacancy at the Treasury through the expenses scandal?

Mention of Inverness reminds me that they've got the referendum coming. As I've posted before, if they vote "Yes" and consign the Labour Party to oblivion in England, they may be in for a surprise when UKIP effectively becomes the EIP (NB "E" doesn't stand for "Europe" :wink: )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OnYourRight got in before me. I suspect that the single UKIP policy they mention could equally apply to people from Scotland as the rest of the world.
OnYourRight
Posts: 283
Joined: 30 Jun 2013, 8:53pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by OnYourRight »

thirdcrank wrote:I suspect that the single UKIP policy they mention could equally apply to people from Scotland as the rest of the world.

You mean preventing immigration from Scotland to England after Scottish independence? (I may have completely misunderstood you!)

I should mention I have benefitted enormously from immigration, and not just in the roundabout way everyone has benefitted whether they realise it or not. My mother is Finnish; my father is British; I had a peripatetic upbringing; I have a Romanian girlfriend (hopefully soon-to-be wife); and I live in France.

And my story is commonplace these days. At thirty-two I am younger than some of you, but many of my friends are similarly international.

It’s no merit of mine I was born in a rich country, and no fault of any immigrant that he or she was born in a poorer country. And it strikes me that if ever there were an inalienable human right, it would be to freely roam the globe upon which you find yourself.

Racism makes me feel ill.

This doesn’t mean I don’t recognise there are risks and downsides to immigration, especially in the short term. But human populations have always migrated. It’s natural and good.
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by beardy »

The only difference between the established parties and UKIP on that issue is where they draw the borders, ie which countries are in and which are out.

Traditionally racism is viewed as a colour/race thing, UKIP is doing their discrimination on more of a Nationality basis. Nationalism is considered "good" by all the parties.
User avatar
Trigger
Posts: 1459
Joined: 6 Aug 2010, 11:54am
Location: Derby/Notts

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by Trigger »

Psamathe wrote:
Bicycler wrote:The whole system is far too adversarial. It encourages each party to drift to the centre to cater to the swing voters.

Also, the system has become too "leader centric". I have an MP. (S)he is meant to be in Westminster to represent (or as a delegate for) his/her Constituency; which means for everybody not just those who support his/her ideology.

So when I vote for an MP I do not want somebody who will just do what he is told be the party whips. Because such a system (as ours has now become) is little more than voting for a party leader. Party leaders, whips, etc. have too much power.

Ian


Unfortunately those MPs with strong views and forthright opinions just get laughed out of any serious debate, my MP is Dennis Skinner, I like his no nonsense approach and that he speaks his mind but does anyone take him seriously or do they all just point and laugh at the dinosaur?
Psamathe
Posts: 17646
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by Psamathe »

I wonder if the prospects for the "massive change" persisting depends on the press more than much else. I suspect that UKIP's success is due to a large part to the press continually feeding us all the propaganda about how bad immigration is and how terrible the EU is. If the press propaganda continues then the General election might be "interesting". But I suspect the press will move-on, UKIP only get air-time as each of their elected people spouts some daft rubbish and has to step down.

Unfortunately, they have pushed Cameron into this stupid "re-negotiation" and referendum (basically created an environment giving Conservative loony right a stronger voice). For anybody to believe any real "re-negotiation" can happen in such a short space of time is just daft. So any referendum will basically be about the situation as now (maybe with a few trivial tweaks).

I personally think that the EU is more of a help than a hindrance, even if only in that it moderates our own somewhat incompetent out-of-touch Westminster boys. Most of the rules that EU "forces us to adopt" would actually be rules we would have to make for ourselves anyway and there are great benefits from being the same as the rest of the EU. And EU business regs (e.g. CE marking, product safety, chemicals, etc.) would all still need to be used by any business wanting to sell its products in Europe anyway (so better to be part of it and influence such decisions that just be told what must be done for a product to be imported into the EEA).

Ian
Psamathe
Posts: 17646
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by Psamathe »

Trigger wrote:
Psamathe wrote:
Bicycler wrote:The whole system is far too adversarial. It encourages each party to drift to the centre to cater to the swing voters.

Also, the system has become too "leader centric". I have an MP. (S)he is meant to be in Westminster to represent (or as a delegate for) his/her Constituency; which means for everybody not just those who support his/her ideology.

So when I vote for an MP I do not want somebody who will just do what he is told be the party whips. Because such a system (as ours has now become) is little more than voting for a party leader. Party leaders, whips, etc. have too much power.

Ian


Unfortunately those MPs with strong views and forthright opinions just get laughed out of any serious debate, my MP is Dennis Skinner, I like his no nonsense approach and that he speaks his mind but does anyone take him seriously or do they all just point and laugh at the dinosaur?

A classic example is Prime Ministers Question Time. Questions asked are not the important ones but anything that might "embarrass" the other party. And even when relevant, a question is never answered but rebuffed with some irrelevant gibe. It is a National Embarrassment. One would have hoped that the very expensive education they Boys from Bullingdon got given would have provided them with better behaviour, intellectual and social skills - but it seems all that money their parents spent was just wasted.

Ian
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by beardy »

It is due to the press but the electoral outcome is ALWAYS due to the press.

Normally all they ever report about is the big two, so the population know they are the only credible options. However at the last general election they gave Clegg plenty of extra air-time "The Clegg Effect".

Which is why the big two keep their candidates' mouths very, very firmly controlled as the press can be very unpredictable about who they are favouring and who they are going to hound to resignation.
User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 11536
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: Think Cheddar and Cider
Contact:

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by al_yrpal »

Another dinosaur : Blair: UKIP 'unpleasant and nasty' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27585260 Joins in the chorus… But, UKIP has put the EU firmly on the polictricians agenda. What has sunk Clegg is clinging desperately to his principles. He will end up in Brussels sinecure quite soon if the LDs are to avoid a total wipeout. Some seem to have forgotten that there was a referendum about proportional representation, and it was firmly rejected so its dead. UKIPs 30% of 33% is a tiny proportion of the electorate, less than 10%, but, that could be enough to elect Labour or the Tories at the general election. Will it make any difference who is elected, no! Marie le Pen is riding a steed of anti anglo saxon feeling in France flavoured by a little dose of racism, racism isnt the paramount thing for many of her supporters. Lots of people across the continent are disalusioned with the EU, it needs to change but is such an unweildy behemoth capable of the reform to satisfy them?

Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Vote UKIP...

Post by mjr »

@Psamathe - Most of the rules that EU "forces us to adopt" are actually rules started by the European Commission appointed by the national governments, or the Council of Ministers appointed by the national governments... actually, I don't think the MEPs can start rules yet, but can only review directives started by the others. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/e ... tions.html makes me think that's still the case, although I think changing that has been discussed in the past, but I think national government ministers would have to agree and they're a bit scared of the directly-elected MEPs getting much power.

And then some rules are so-called gold-plated (adding extra bits not required by the EU) when implemented by our national government. I wish the UK government were honest about what the EU directives actually said and where they've added more rules to them. The one I've looked at most closely is the anti-money-laundering one, which is actually fairly bland and vague at EU level, then gold-plated by the UK, then further gold-plated by almost every UK bank to become a fiddly set of rules about sending in passports and so on.
beardy wrote:The only difference between the established parties and UKIP on that issue is where they draw the borders, ie which countries are in and which are out.

Traditionally racism is viewed as a colour/race thing, UKIP is doing their discrimination on more of a Nationality basis. Nationalism is considered "good" by all the parties.

Whereas xenophobia is not and I'd say that UKIP crosses from nationalism into xenophobia. There were also two glaring inconsistencies even in this core UKIP policy last time I saw it: they are against localism(Con)/regionalism(Lab) and want to centralise almost everything in Whitehall far away from most of the electorate that it affects; and they support the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) treaty that would give US companies wide-ranging powers to direct the UK government and challenge our laws in secret hearings on a wide range of topics - so why are UKIP against being run by Brussels and county halls (although we elect people to these) but in favour of being run by unelected-by-us Wall Street? And are their supporters voting for this or ignorant of it?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Post Reply