Nick Griffin & the BNP

[stony]

You may be right. Two bannings then.

I might end up banning myself :-)

Don't do it Cheesy, you'll end up going on .nob and everyone will pick on you 'cos you're new.

 

[Anonymous]

I might end up banning myself :-)

Don't do it Cheesy, you'll end up going on .nob and everyone will pick on you 'cos you're new.

I'm on there & they do :-(

 

[blueonblue]

Wheres your evidence?

NEW STATESMAN 08/02/2010

Tory MPs tend to represent larger constituencies and Labour MPs smaller ones. As a result, in the 2005 election, it took just 26,906 votes on average to elect a Labour candidate, but 44,373 to elect a Conservative one.

That being over the whole country, if you look at Manchester, ALL the overspill estates were built in tory area`s* by the labour council , that along with boundery changes gives the bias to labour.


*Langley...........Middleton
Wythenshawe.........surronded by Hale, Gatley, Northenden, ect
Race course estate........Sale
plus Chorlton, wally range, an a few others, get the picture now?

 

[Skashion]

Wheres your evidence?

NEW STATESMAN 08/02/2010

Tory MPs tend to represent larger constituencies and Labour MPs smaller ones. As a result, in the 2005 election, it took just 26,906 votes on average to elect a Labour candidate, but 44,373 to elect a Conservative one.

That being over the whole country, if you look at Manchester, ALL the overspill estates were built in tory area`s* by the labour council , that along with boundery changes gives the bias to labour.


*Langley...........Middleton
Wythenshawe.........surronded by Hale, Gatley, Northenden, ect
Race course estate........Sale
plus Chorlton, wally range, an a few others, get the picture now?

Can you quote the whole article to me because I still see no evidence that it is anything other than the nature of FPTP plus higher turnout amongst tory voters in safe seats. Boundaries are decided by the Boundary Commission not the governing party. Now, if that process has been subverted then you have a case.

 

[SWP's back]

The BNP will take a lot of tory votes.

On that basis only I am glad they are standing.

Shit assumption there as usual.

I would tend to think they will get a large chunk of Labour voters.<br /><br />-- Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:45 am --<br /><br />

The BNP will take a lot of tory votes.

On that basis only I am glad they are standing.

I think you're wrong there mate. Any progress the BNP has made is in traditional Labour strongholds. Areas of high unemployment where it's easy to radicalise the poorly educated and give them something or someone tangible to blame.

Yeah but TMQ is quite dim and can only see Tory's are the enemy and as such, he tries to link them with any old shite.

 

[Skashion]

The BNP will take a lot of tory votes.

On that basis only I am glad they are standing.

Shit assumption there as usual.

I would tend to think they will get a large chunk of Labour voters.

They will but I'd be amazed if the BNP won a seat. A lot of people on here don't seem to understand that political parties do not give two shits about your vote unless it will help them get a seat. I really do think most of the people on here do not understand at fundamental level how our electoral system works. I'm going to go back to the 1983 election just because it's the most extreme example I have. The SDP-Liberal Alliance won 7,780,949 votes but got only 23 seats. That's 338,302 votes per seat compared to the tories' 33,194. Numbers of votes count for very little. It's how concentrated they are that matters, and specifically, how you get those votes in those key marginal constituencies. To a political party, a swing vote in a marginal is worth a hundred or a thousandfold more than a safe vote in a safe seat.

 

[SWP's back]

The thing is most Tory strongholds have few ethnics in those wards, I mean would you want to live next door to one?

I would rather fellate Bin Laden than live next door to a tory. Spineless, slimy little cretins.

Most of the 'tories' on here aren't real tories to be fair. They're just politically ignorant and think that to change things you have to vote for the opposition. Most of the same posters voted labour in 97 and will vote the opposition in the next election anyway.

What a cock you are. That is not funny on any level. I shall say no more as I can do without a warning for breaking the CoC

-- Thu Apr 08, 2010 12:03 pm --

not sure if banning a political party is your opinion or your just throwing it in to discuss, but , no offence meant, its a ridiculous and dangerous idea. for centuries upon centuries we have been known as a tolerant and democratic country. to start criminalising and banning people for there opinions is fuckin wrong!
whether you agree with the bnp's ideas or not they ARE a legitimate party who SHOULD have as much air time as, say, the communist party.

i just dont agree full stop with this whole 'thought police' thing. if i decide i dont like people from norway, why is it wrong to express my feelings?as long as i dont go roun beating norwegians up what offence am i commiting?
surely thats what free speach and democracy id all about?

So what if they said this is a white country, and non-white people should be forcibly removed? Millions of people living in fear because of a bunch of people whose sanity is deeply questionable? If free speech costs lives, then it ain't worth it.

Not sure you understand a democracy mate. For that to happen, the majority would have to want it. If that was the case, I would want to be a resident of that country anyway. Would you?<br /><br />-- Thu Apr 08, 2010 12:06 pm --<br /><br />

As you know mate ;-) I'm merely trying to make the point that generalisation of people by the way they vote is sheer stupidity.

I predict 20 pages and another banning for maineman.

Has maineman been banned? Gutted ;)

 

[tommyducks]

SWP a party does not have to be elected to be given the right of free speech, e.g. a party political broadcast. I'm just questioning whether a party such as for instance Hitler's National Socialists should have been denied the opportunity to advertise itself in a public forum, thereby gaining recruits.

 

[cyberblue]

not sure if banning a political party is your opinion or your just throwing it in to discuss, but , no offence meant, its a ridiculous and dangerous idea. for centuries upon centuries we have been known as a tolerant and democratic country. to start criminalising and banning people for there opinions is fuckin wrong!
whether you agree with the bnp's ideas or not they ARE a legitimate party who SHOULD have as much air time as, say, the communist party.

i just dont agree full stop with this whole 'thought police' thing. if i decide i dont like people from norway, why is it wrong to express my feelings?as long as i dont go roun beating norwegians up what offence am i commiting?
surely thats what free speach and democracy id all about?

It is not my opinion just a topic that comes up now & again .My view is to ban nothing.everyone is old enough & big enough to think for themselves

 

[SWP's back]

Shit assumption there as usual.

I would tend to think they will get a large chunk of Labour voters.

They will but I'd be amazed if the BNP won a seat. A lot of people on here don't seem to understand that political parties do not give two shits about your vote unless it will help them get a seat. I really do think most of the people on here do not understand at fundamental level how our electoral system works. I'm going to go back to the 1983 election just because it's the most extreme example I have. The SDP-Liberal Alliance won 7,780,949 votes but got only 23 seats. That's 338,302 votes per seat compared to the tories' 33,194. Numbers of votes count for very little. It's how concentrated they are that matters, and specifically, how you get those votes in those key marginal constituencies. To a political party, a swing vote in a marginal is worth a hundred or a thousandfold more than a safe vote in a safe seat.

No - I am well aware of that mate but it will be Labour heartlands that BNP focus on for reasons given above in terms of the general DNA of a BNP voter.<br /><br />-- Thu Apr 08, 2010 12:12 pm --<br /><br />

SWP a party does not have to be elected to be given the right of free speech, e.g. a party political broadcast. I'm just questioning whether a party such as for instance Hitler's National Socialists should have been denied the opportunity to advertise itself in a public forum, thereby gaining recruits.

I think everyone has to be given the opportunity or you go towards a society the self-censors. I find that a scary thought indeed.

Hitler could never have gained power in a modern Germany, all opther things being equal. The night of the long knives etc would have left them under sanctions, expelled from the UN and with NATO knocking on their door. This would have stopped a build up of arms/men etc. LOng winded but you get my point.