Rochester And Strood By-Election

[City Hobgoblin]

The mainstream political parties have largely ignored the "working classes" ( whatever that now means) in recent elections because elections have been won and lost by getting the middle class vote on your side.

UKIP have re-awakened some of the previously disinterested voters largely by highlighting one issue - immigration- and tapping into the inherent parochialism and a distrust of Europe of many British people.

 

[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"!

 

[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?

 

[glyncity]

Whatever the voters think they're going to get by voting for ukip , in reality if they gain enough seats after the next election they will attempt to drag the tories to the right and the government will spend most of its time arguing over the rights or wrongs of being in the EU , for anyone old enough to remember , that sounds pretty similar to the tory governments of the early 90s ( the end days of mrs Thatcher and the John Major years )
The likelihood is they will win enough seats to do this , so i would fully expect a parliament where very little will actually get done other than a load of tory and ukip back benchers bickering and in fighting over the European Union , oh..... and to be fair the ban on fox hunting will probably get reversed , they may find time for the really important stuff like that

 

[BigJoe#1]

[The third party that has morals or principles..... Hmmmm.

The only reason they climbed into bed with Conservatives was to appease Cleggs vanity, he wanted a big job in British Politics and this was the only way he'd get it. He wanted to be deputy PM (a job which he has done relatively unnoticed) and he got it.

Sold out their supporters big time.

What would you suggest they should have done?
Joined Gordon Brown's rainbow alliance of all the smaller parties to keep a deeply unpopular government in power.
At least with the Tories they've made a start on reducing the deficit that Labour created.
If they had got in bed with Labour Clegg would have still been Deputy PM.

They didn't have to get into bed with anyone. Of all political parties, purely by definition alone the conservatives and liberals are not a good mix.... as has been proven over the last four and a half years.

 

[BigJoe#1]

The political parties have only themselves to blame for this, they have become far to detached from the electorate, I blame the rise of the professional politician and the media bubble they live in

Agreed, I have always maintained, and still do, that you should not be allowed to be an MP until you are over 40 and PM until you're over 50. The idiots in parliament do not understand real life and have no experience of it whatsoever... mind you, give them a theoretical scenario and a text book.....

 

[hilts]

The lefties are squirming that is for sure now they want a debate on it, erm wonder why? it has been on the agenda for at least a decade and for some reason it appears to be a issue all of a sudden

first they said hardly anyone would come

then they said they didn't know the numbers but it wasn't a lot

then they said anyone concerned about immigration was racist

then they said all immigrants were highly skilled workers that britain needed

then they said the nhs would fall apart and we couldn't support our pensioners

now they want to ban these nasty foreigners from claiming benefits for two years

nice to see people standing behind their principles

 

[dawlish dave]

Look at the turnout, piss poor considering the amout of effort put in by UKIP and the Tories.
Never voted Tory, plus not been in a betting shop since 1969 but Monday off to put £200 on Rochester and Strood having a Tory MP after the general election.

 

[cibaman]

Whatever the voters think they're going to get by voting for ukip , in reality if they gain enough seats after the next election they will attempt to drag the tories to the right and the government will spend most of its time arguing over the rights or wrongs of being in the EU , for anyone old enough to remember , that sounds pretty similar to the tory governments of the early 90s ( the end days of mrs Thatcher and the John Major years )
The likelihood is they will win enough seats to do this , so i would fully expect a parliament where very little will actually get done other than a load of tory and ukip back benchers bickering and in fighting over the European Union , oh..... and to be fair the ban on fox hunting will probably get reversed , they may find time for the really important stuff like that

According to The Times an unnamed UKIP source claimed yesterday that they might get as many as 10 seats at the election. I have read that if the media refer to an unnamed UKIP source its invariably Farage when he wants to be quoted off the record. All other UKIP sources tend to insist on their names being quoted.

I think 10 seats would be a reasonably ambitious target for them. Pollsters that have studied the pattern of their support reckon they'll struggle to get more than 6 or 7, even after yesterday's result, which will very likely be overturned at a general election.

UKIP's bubble will burst once they produce their manifesto. When they have to debate issues other than the EU or immigration. Like economic strategy, which tends to dominate general election campaigns.

Apparently they're currently frantically reviewing their candidate list. Trying to remove the nutcases that they didnt worry about before but now realise that a few of them could easily de-rail their general election campaign.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I understand the urge to stick two fingers up to the political classes who are, in the main, a pretty talentless, career obsessed, anodyne bunch - and I accept my views on the party are far from neutral - but I can't escape the thought that a goverment (presumably coalition) with UKIP at its heart would render this country to be one much less at ease with itself than is currently the case - which itself is very far from perfect.

It's all very well and good knocking the liberal metropolitan elite, but they wield enormous power and influence in this land. Wanting to piss them off for the sake of it is not without its potential complications.

People often assume because something isn't working, that any form of change will be an improvement.