Rochester And Strood By-Election

[Ancient Citizen]

Which is it, The Mail or The Sun?

Could be the Mirror.
They're Labour supporters and Miliband and Cooper need media support for their new anti-immigrant stance.

My money is on the Sun. Sun readers are Farage's target.

Could be the New Statesman, they don't like Miliband.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

It's very amusing that some Ukip supporters seem to under the impression that they are going to poke the eye ( or whichever part of its anatomy ) of the "establishment".
The two MPs they have now are right wing Tories who would find it difficult to be more "establishment" if they tried.
The whole ethos of Ukip is the spiritual home of large numbers of right wing , wealthy ,xenophobic Tory "establishment"who find that their current party is not quite establishment enough ,which is obviously the type that ukip are aiming to attract to represent them.
All those who think that these , in some way , are closer to the "common voter" than any of the others are in in for the kind of disappointment that they are used to from the other political parties. They will say anything , just like the others , to get your vote ,they will themselves become the "establishment, and will end up looking no different from the others when the expenses forms are getting filled in. After all , they are all filling their boots already in Europe with their expenses claims.
Interesting too that Mr farages list of potential Tory defectors whom he would like two see in his party , are advised by him to defect "to save their political careers" rather than change on the grounds of their political convictions and their heartfelt belief in the Ukip philosophy.
Rats deserting a sinking ship to save their political careers and keep up the lovely standard of living they enjoy at the taxpayers' expense ?
Sounds like a real blow to the "establishment"!

I agree up to a point. I absolutely agree that building a UKIP base from MPs who used to represent other parties is not going to deliver the change that I want to see. However, what's happened in recent weeks is by-election politics and Carswell and Reckless have at least shown that MPs standing for UKIP can be elected and that changes the whole outlook compared to a time when UKIP had no MPs. It will make a positive difference next May. But it's daft to extrapolate from those two that 630 MPs from other parties are going to stand for UKIP at the general election. Yes there's room for one or two more but by and large, UKIP's general election candidates won't be former MPs of other parties.

As for the more general point you make, for far too long the same people in politics have cosied up to the same people in finance, the press and the police. This applies equally to Labour and the Conservatives; just look at who Rebecca Brooks and Rupert Murdoch have been close to over the last 20+ years. The only ways you are I can change that situation are (a) be very picky where we spend our money and (b) to seek to unseat members of the club at every opportunity. As little as ten years ago the idea that politicians, the police, the judiciary, big business chiefs and the press were in each others' pockets to the extent that everyone has now seen laid bare would have been written off as a daft conspiracy theory. Now though, you're one of only a few people who are left dismissing it at such, given that so much of their disgusting behaviour has been proven beyond any doubt at all.

Any member of the old guard parties who is replaced by someone new to Westminster will make a positive change to the mix in parliament. Of course, in time, if UKIP stay around as long as the current lot, they may succumb to the same failings but right now that is not an issue and won't be for long time. When it is an issue then it will be time for change again.

And xenophobia. Where are you getting this from? Given that Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems, Scottish Nationalists, UKIP and others all say there should be limits on immigration, why do single out UKIP as xenophobes? Two of the four main parties' leaders are married to people who are not British. Do you know which ones? Xenophobia?

By - election politics indeed . Low turnout and protest votes - actually the biggest protest was the low turnout- are hardly a reliable barometer of a party's future success.
I stand by my point that simply bringing in defectors from the Tories, and Ukip's entire political presence in Westminster is made up of these , and then gleefully going about trying to recruit more of the same , telling them it's the only way to save their political careers , is hardly going to inspire any sense of change or improvement, in the view of the electorate.
Indeed, these new found heroes of Ukip's election success , were accused by their new leader, of being out of touch with the common man , and were derided and sneeringly accused of being members of the "political elite" when they sat on the Tory benches. Obviously taking off a blue rosette and replacing it with a purple and yellow one , causes some kind of metamorphosis in their political views ( except that those views do not seem to have actually changed) in fact , they have gone to a party which echoes those views . Out of touch in one party - friends of the common man in another,without having to change!
I think it is a triumph of hope over experience for you to think that any political group In this country , or any of the developed western nations, that ever gets near holding the reins of power, could be immune to the pressures and inducements of the bankers and their vested interests, or the popular press who have it in their gift to make or break democratically elected governments. There is a thread elsewhere on this forum about the cover-up in the child abuse case involving some pretty high up people - and you can be fairly sure that the "important" people involved will remain untouched. This should give you some idea of the power and influence wielded by the " establishment" and how they control the political and political levers , and they are not going to let upstarts like Ukip stop them. Welcome to the world of " realpolitik"
I also think that it may be possible to be married to a foreign individual , and still harbour a fear or mistrust of foreigners as a grouping , particularly in a political sense. I single ukip out as xenophobic because of some of the things I hear members saying , I can only judge as I find.

 

[Len Rum]

Andy Hamilton got it right - " most UKIP voters are people who blame their failings on someone else"
Nice one.

 

[smudgedj]

Andy Hamilton got it right - " most UKIP voters are people who blame their failings on someone else"
Nice one.

Polly Toynbee: “The trouble is the sort of people who vote UKIP don’t watch BBC or read newspapers"

 

[Chancy Termites]

It's very amusing that some Ukip supporters seem to under the impression that they are going to poke the eye ( or whichever part of its anatomy ) of the "establishment".
The two MPs they have now are right wing Tories who would find it difficult to be more "establishment" if they tried.
The whole ethos of Ukip is the spiritual home of large numbers of right wing , wealthy ,xenophobic Tory "establishment"who find that their current party is not quite establishment enough ,which is obviously the type that ukip are aiming to attract to represent them.
All those who think that these , in some way , are closer to the "common voter" than any of the others are in in for the kind of disappointment that they are used to from the other political parties. They will say anything , just like the others , to get your vote ,they will themselves become the "establishment, and will end up looking no different from the others when the expenses forms are getting filled in. After all , they are all filling their boots already in Europe with their expenses claims.
Interesting too that Mr farages list of potential Tory defectors whom he would like two see in his party , are advised by him to defect "to save their political careers" rather than change on the grounds of their political convictions and their heartfelt belief in the Ukip philosophy.
Rats deserting a sinking ship to save their political careers and keep up the lovely standard of living they enjoy at the taxpayers' expense ?
Sounds like a real blow to the "establishment"!

I agree up to a point. I absolutely agree that building a UKIP base from MPs who used to represent other parties is not going to deliver the change that I want to see. However, what's happened in recent weeks is by-election politics and Carswell and Reckless have at least shown that MPs standing for UKIP can be elected and that changes the whole outlook compared to a time when UKIP had no MPs. It will make a positive difference next May. But it's daft to extrapolate from those two that 630 MPs from other parties are going to stand for UKIP at the general election. Yes there's room for one or two more but by and large, UKIP's general election candidates won't be former MPs of other parties.

As for the more general point you make, for far too long the same people in politics have cosied up to the same people in finance, the press and the police. This applies equally to Labour and the Conservatives; just look at who Rebecca Brooks and Rupert Murdoch have been close to over the last 20+ years. The only ways you are I can change that situation are (a) be very picky where we spend our money and (b) to seek to unseat members of the club at every opportunity. As little as ten years ago the idea that politicians, the police, the judiciary, big business chiefs and the press were in each others' pockets to the extent that everyone has now seen laid bare would have been written off as a daft conspiracy theory. Now though, you're one of only a few people who are left dismissing it at such, given that so much of their disgusting behaviour has been proven beyond any doubt at all.

Any member of the old guard parties who is replaced by someone new to Westminster will make a positive change to the mix in parliament. Of course, in time, if UKIP stay around as long as the current lot, they may succumb to the same failings but right now that is not an issue and won't be for long time. When it is an issue then it will be time for change again.

And xenophobia. Where are you getting this from? Given that Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems, Scottish Nationalists, UKIP and others all say there should be limits on immigration, why do single out UKIP as xenophobes? Two of the four main parties' leaders are married to people who are not British. Do you know which ones? Xenophobia?

By - election politics indeed . Low turnout and protest votes - actually the biggest protest was the low turnout- are hardly a reliable barometer of a party's future success.
I stand by my point that simply bringing in defectors from the Tories, and Ukip's entire political presence in Westminster is made up of these , and then gleefully going about trying to recruit more of the same , telling them it's the only way to save their political careers , is hardly going to inspire any sense of change or improvement, in the view of the electorate.
Indeed, these new found heroes of Ukip's election success , were accused by their new leader, of being out of touch with the common man , and were derided and sneeringly accused of being members of the "political elite" when they sat on the Tory benches. Obviously taking off a blue rosette and replacing it with a purple and yellow one , causes some kind of metamorphosis in their political views ( except that those views do not seem to have actually changed) in fact , they have gone to a party which echoes those views . Out of touch in one party - friends of the common man in another,without having to change!
I think it is a triumph of hope over experience for you to think that any political group In this country , or any of the developed western nations, that ever gets near holding the reins of power, could be immune to the pressures and inducements of the bankers and their vested interests, or the popular press who have it in their gift to make or break democratically elected governments. There is a thread elsewhere on this forum about the cover-up in the child abuse case involving some pretty high up people - and you can be fairly sure that the "important" people involved will remain untouched. This should give you some idea of the power and influence wielded by the " establishment" and how they control the political and political levers , and they are not going to let upstarts like Ukip stop them. Welcome to the world of " realpolitik"
I also think that it may be possible to be married to a foreign individual , and still harbour a fear or mistrust of foreigners as a grouping , particularly in a political sense. I single ukip out as xenophobic because of some of the things I hear members saying , I can only judge as I find.

Like I say, I agree with the first point but rest assured there won't be many more. UKIP are far more likely to win seats at the next election now that there are a couple of MPs, even though they are former Conservatives. As it goes, I think Carswell is a cut above the average MP but frankly I'd never even heard of Mark Reckless. Dan Hannam (MEP) would be welcome to join UKIP as far as I'm concerned. In fact I don't understand why he hasn't as his views on Europe are exactly in line with UKIP's. Honestly though, I can't think of a single Labour MP I would like to see defect. Actually no, I have some respect for Simon Dancuk as he is actually prepared to scale out the Labour Party for the metropolitan toffs that they are. He's bonkers remaining in the Labour party given his views on that.

But come the next general election, expect to see people like Paul Nuttall, Steven Woolfe, Suzanne Evans and Amjad Bashir standing in winnable seats. And winning them too.

 

[Chancy Termites]

Andy Hamilton got it right - " most UKIP voters are people who blame their failings on someone else"
Nice one.

Polly Toynbee: “The trouble is the sort of people who vote UKIP don’t watch BBC or read newspapers"

I'm trying to imagine her groping around in the mental fog that envelops her tiny brain trying to put two and two together.

Actually nah, that's way over her head.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

I agree up to a point. I absolutely agree that building a UKIP base from MPs who used to represent other parties is not going to deliver the change that I want to see. However, what's happened in recent weeks is by-election politics and Carswell and Reckless have at least shown that MPs standing for UKIP can be elected and that changes the whole outlook compared to a time when UKIP had no MPs. It will make a positive difference next May. But it's daft to extrapolate from those two that 630 MPs from other parties are going to stand for UKIP at the general election. Yes there's room for one or two more but by and large, UKIP's general election candidates won't be former MPs of other parties.

As for the more general point you make, for far too long the same people in politics have cosied up to the same people in finance, the press and the police. This applies equally to Labour and the Conservatives; just look at who Rebecca Brooks and Rupert Murdoch have been close to over the last 20+ years. The only ways you are I can change that situation are (a) be very picky where we spend our money and (b) to seek to unseat members of the club at every opportunity. As little as ten years ago the idea that politicians, the police, the judiciary, big business chiefs and the press were in each others' pockets to the extent that everyone has now seen laid bare would have been written off as a daft conspiracy theory. Now though, you're one of only a few people who are left dismissing it at such, given that so much of their disgusting behaviour has been proven beyond any doubt at all.

Any member of the old guard parties who is replaced by someone new to Westminster will make a positive change to the mix in parliament. Of course, in time, if UKIP stay around as long as the current lot, they may succumb to the same failings but right now that is not an issue and won't be for long time. When it is an issue then it will be time for change again.

And xenophobia. Where are you getting this from? Given that Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems, Scottish Nationalists, UKIP and others all say there should be limits on immigration, why do single out UKIP as xenophobes? Two of the four main parties' leaders are married to people who are not British. Do you know which ones? Xenophobia?

By - election politics indeed . Low turnout and protest votes - actually the biggest protest was the low turnout- are hardly a reliable barometer of a party's future success.
I stand by my point that simply bringing in defectors from the Tories, and Ukip's entire political presence in Westminster is made up of these , and then gleefully going about trying to recruit more of the same , telling them it's the only way to save their political careers , is hardly going to inspire any sense of change or improvement, in the view of the electorate.
Indeed, these new found heroes of Ukip's election success , were accused by their new leader, of being out of touch with the common man , and were derided and sneeringly accused of being members of the "political elite" when they sat on the Tory benches. Obviously taking off a blue rosette and replacing it with a purple and yellow one , causes some kind of metamorphosis in their political views ( except that those views do not seem to have actually changed) in fact , they have gone to a party which echoes those views . Out of touch in one party - friends of the common man in another,without having to change!
I think it is a triumph of hope over experience for you to think that any political group In this country , or any of the developed western nations, that ever gets near holding the reins of power, could be immune to the pressures and inducements of the bankers and their vested interests, or the popular press who have it in their gift to make or break democratically elected governments. There is a thread elsewhere on this forum about the cover-up in the child abuse case involving some pretty high up people - and you can be fairly sure that the "important" people involved will remain untouched. This should give you some idea of the power and influence wielded by the " establishment" and how they control the political and political levers , and they are not going to let upstarts like Ukip stop them. Welcome to the world of " realpolitik"
I also think that it may be possible to be married to a foreign individual , and still harbour a fear or mistrust of foreigners as a grouping , particularly in a political sense. I single ukip out as xenophobic because of some of the things I hear members saying , I can only judge as I find.

Like I say, I agree with the first point but rest assured there won't be many more. UKIP are far more likely to win seats at the next election now that there are a couple of MPs, even though they are former Conservatives. As it goes, I think Carswell is a cut above the average MP but frankly I'd never even heard of Mark Reckless. Dan Hannam (MEP) would be welcome to join UKIP as far as I'm concerned. In fact I don't understand why he hasn't as his views on Europe are exactly in line with UKIP's. Honestly though, I can't think of a single Labour MP I would like to see defect. Actually no, I have some respect for Simon Dancuk as he is actually prepared to scale out the Labour Party for the metropolitan toffs that they are. He's bonkers remaining in the Labour party given his views on that.

But come the next general election, expect to see people like Paul Nuttall, Steven Woolfe, Suzanne Evans and Amjad Bashir standing in winnable seats. And winning them too.

But they are "former conservatives" in name only .
They have taken their political views , with which they went to the voters in their constituencies , at the last general election, and won as tories , and transferred them to a new home.
They haven't changed their views one iota, they have taken them to a place where they believe they are more suited and where they feel they are more likely to win votes.
Those same views , when they were members of the Tory party , were deemed by farage to be those of the kind of complacent party drones who were out of touch with the views of the "common man" and were just the kind of career politicians with just the kind of failed politics who needed to be ousted.
What's changed ?
Well , now they are espousing the same views but in a different ( or at least one with a different name) party.
So , nothing's changed , at least for the two MPs . In essence , they are still right wing Tory back-benchers with exactly the same views and exactly the same relevance to the ordinary voter as they had before this Damascene conversion to a view which may prolong their taxpayer funded careers , having now raised their media profiles hugely - always good for getting newspaper columns and tv appearances.
I would just like to know where the line is ,where an unacceptable view becomes an acceptable one, and where a career politician becomes a conviction one.Farage seems to be desperate to swell his ranks with Tory defectors which will surely demonstrate the complete hypocrisy of politics in general and in which Ukip , just like any other party , is partaking.
Perhaps we are just hearing exactly the same kind of empty political rhetoric from a new source.

 

[Balti]

Andy Hamilton got it right - " most UKIP voters are people who blame their failings on someone else"
Nice one.

Polly Toynbee: “The trouble is the sort of people who vote UKIP don’t watch BBC or read newspapers"

 

[smudgedj]

Andy Hamilton got it right - " most UKIP voters are people who blame their failings on someone else"
Nice one.

Polly Toynbee: “The trouble is the sort of people who vote UKIP don’t watch BBC or read newspapers"

I'm trying to imagine her groping around in the mental fog that envelops her tiny brain trying to put two and two together.

Actually nah, that's way over her head.

Pontificating from her villa in Tuscany.

 

[Len Rum]

Net migration back at peak 2010 levels.
The Tories talking the talk but never walking the walk.