Was the UKIP result a protest vote blip or will it translate into MPs at the general election?

(64 Posts)
VivaLeBeaver Sun 05-May-13 15:58:54

My mum reckons all the UKIP councillors were down to a lot of people voting for them as a protest not actually thinking UKIP councillors would get in. She reckons the people who voted for them won't vote UKIP at a general election.

I'm not so sure she's right and am worried now at the next general election more people will vote for them as they become seen as more of a mainstream party.

claig Sun 05-May-13 16:22:40

I'm not sure. I voted UKIP in this local election, but probably won't at general election. It really depends on how the Tories react and if they change and start listening to ordinary voters. It also depends on the economy. If it recovers, then people will vote Tory, if it doesn't and if the Tories keep the same policies with the same Old Etonians etc, then people may vote UKIP as a protest again.

Grant Schapps was on TV today and it seems to me that the Tories still haven't got the message. he said we have heard what people have said and we are "on it" i.e. just more of the same, they are doing the right things, it will just take time. That won't work if the economy does not recover.

The UKIP MEP, Geoffrey Bloom, was on TV and he said they would scrap most of the quangos and save £50 billion, they would stop what he called "bogus charities" and save £1 billion and they would save something like £10 billion in foreign aid. A lot of teh 25% of people who voted for them would agree with all those policies. The metropolitan elite wouldn't like it, but I think a lot of the public would.

I think Labour will not win the next election. The 25% of voters showed that they will not give them their trust and that they would rather vote UKIP.

It is really in the Tories' hands. If they start listening and carrying out the wishes of ordinary voters then they will still win.

claig Sun 05-May-13 16:32:41

In the European elections next year, UKIP will probably win hands down.

A rubicon has now been crossed. Thousands of voters who had never before voted UKIP because they felt it would be a wasted vote, finally decided to vote UKIP in these elections, because they are so disillusioned with the mainstream parties who do not represent them. Having voted UKIP once, it becomes much easier to vote for them again.

If they get airtime on TV and explain how they will cut foreign aid, quangos and some of these charities and salaries of the charity bosses, councillors and NHS Trust bosses etc, then lots of the public will vote for them as a breath of fresh air.

Chuka Umunna was on TV the other night and tried to challenge farage by saying why doesn't he believe in global warming, as if that would save New Labour. I think Farage replied something like "bring it on".

Bring it on, let the people have their say instead of the metroplitan elites, the quangos, the spinners and the liars.

claig Sun 05-May-13 16:36:14

I can just see New Labour fighting for more windmills, more carbon taxes and more solar panels against UKIP and the general public.

Bring it on, and bring them down!

StiffyByng Sun 05-May-13 16:51:02

The answer is no. They have virtually no chance of getting a Westminster seat.

1. Farage is the only one with a shot as things stand, as no one knows any others, and very few have the track record to run a campaign. The chances are that the next two years are unlikely to see any other party members rise to anything other than unwelcome notoriety. Farage will have to pick his seat very carefully. He needs a three-way marginal, preferably with a non-incumbent standing. The failure to win Eastleigh given the Huhne scandal was quite telling, and certainly Farage should have stood himself.

2. People use protest votes in local elections in a way they don't in general elections. The Lib Dems and Greens have been vastly more successful in local elections for a good couple of decades without making great inroads in Westminster. UKIP's best hope of an MP is a by election in the near future while they still have some momentum.

3. The first past the post system makes it much harder to win a seat in a general election. In addition, you'll have a higher turnout which may well dilute the UKIP vote. Even if Farage, and maybe a very small number of others, find and win seats, they will be a tiny minority in the Commons. There has been a UKIP MP already - Dr Bob Spink deferred when the Tories chucked him out before the last election. He made precisely no impression. A minority Government would be the only scenario where they would wield any power at all.

4. Their record in local government will be crucial. Most of the new councillors have no experience. In addition, their views on a range of social and political issues are unknown and untested. Based on the small sample so far, there will be skeletons in cupboards. There is far more reason for anti-UKIP people to do lots of digging now than before. By 2015, UKIP could have a very different reputation. The BNP 10 years ago was seen as a growing power in local government and a threat to Westminster. Now it is mostly dead.

5. UKIP had virtually no manifesto for these elections. Threads on here have also shown that people voted for them without knowing some of their more conservative policies and were a bit shocked. Crucially they avoided all economic discussion in detail. It isn't (shouldn't be?) possible to go into a general election with such an approach. Particularly if the other parties have immigration and EU policy which has moved towards UKIP's stance, their other policies are currently very weak.

claig Sun 05-May-13 16:54:55

As farage said, all 3 establishment oarties are nearly indistinguishable. They all believe in global warmimng and foreign aid and higher minimum pricing for alcohol and subsidies to rich landowners to erect inefficient windmills etc.

UKIP has emerged as a party that speaks for what the people really think (which is similar to the much derided by the metropolitan elite Daily Mail view) and which does not get discussed on the BBC.

UKIP is the party of the bourgeoisie and the working people and that is why the metropolitan elite call them "nutters" and "fruitcakes".

SirChenjin Sun 05-May-13 16:57:21

Agree with Claig - can't really add anything to her posts.

Great post stiffy, very reassuring. I've been concerned that we will end up with a Tory/UKIP coalition at the next general election.

chibi Sun 05-May-13 17:05:56

i am a working person, too.

i am not a metropolitan elite, whatever that is.

i am an immigrant.

i vacillate between nervous and afraid of what they will do to me, and people like me if/when they get in. likewise how the other parties will swing their manifestos to match ukip's.

but hey, i'm just that parasitical cockroach who teaches your kids. i probably have it coming.

claig Sun 05-May-13 17:11:50

I think UKIP's policies on immigrants who are already here are not clear and do seem unfair from what I have heard about them. I think that UKIP will need to make their policies much clearer to reassure people who are currently here.

presumably you've never claimed maternity leave claig and have no problem with UKIP's policy to abolish it?

chibi Sun 05-May-13 17:14:59

well. it is difficult to feel reassured by people who have made it amply clear they despise you and hold you responsible for the problems of the country. i can't imagine what they can say which will calm my nerves.

oh well.

anyway, as you say, the people have spoken! hurray! they hate my guts and wish me ill!

and that was just the 25% who could be bothered to vote!

claig Sun 05-May-13 17:17:59

I don't know what their policy on it is. I think their policies are all at sea at the moment and they will have to make everything much clearer and I think that a lot of their policies will change in the process.

UKIP have women mayors and councillors and candidates, so I don't think that their policies will be against the interests of women, when they are clarified.

If they are, then I won't vote for them and nor will millions of others. They are a new party and still need to firm up their policies. I don't think they will shoot themselves in the foot, unless they are a party that is not for real and is just a protest party.

I don't know what their policy on it is

says it all really, you voted for a party without having clue what they stand for.

StiffyByng Sun 05-May-13 17:20:39

I think this thread is already proving some of my points.

claig Sun 05-May-13 17:21:20

chibi, Farage's wife is German. UKIP are not against immigration and immigrants. As far as I understand it, they want controlled immigration rather than an open-door EU policy and want skilled immigrants rather than unskilled ones who compete for low-paid jobs when we have millions of people unemployed here.

chibi Sun 05-May-13 17:25:29

i love that my sense of security in this country shuld hinge on who is married to a party leader

she's german


i'll get her to put in a good word for me then, shall i? hmm

i'm not buying the whole 'it's just a protest vote'. is it pure coincidence that everyone who wanted to protest chose a party whose most famous platform is immigrants=ruining everything and must be stopped?

oh sure. nothing to worry about here at all.

claig Sun 05-May-13 17:28:38

'you voted for a party without having clue what they stand for'

Yes, I said so on another thread. I, like probably most of the other people who voted for them this time, voted for them without ever reading their manifesto or speaking to one of their candidates or looking at their website. I did it to make a protest, like many others did too.

As Farage rightly said, UKIP is not just about Europe or immigration, it is a mindset which is why its individual policies are not probably understood by most of its voters.

As the journalist from the New Statesman siad on the politics show today on TV, it is about "culture wars". It is about ordinary people not being represented by a metropolitan elite who take ordinary people's votes for granted.

The Daily Mail is hammering the Tories today telling them that they ignored the ordinary people with their metropolitan elite chumocracy.
But will the Tories listen?

If they really wanted to know what the people think, why don't they employ people like Richard Littlejohn - someopne who never went to Eton - as an adviser instead of members of the chumocracy?

Eeeeeowwwfftz Sun 05-May-13 17:35:25

The government of the day almost always performs badly in council elections. The media always portray it as being a crisis for the government. The last two governments won successive general elections. So the historical precedent would suggest there is nothing to worry about - but one shouldn't be complacent. As others have said, this party's inexperience will cause them great problems in a general election campaign, as it has done for the LibDems and Greens in the past (the traditional recipients of the protest vote).

Incidentally anyone who thinks the uk has an "open door" immigration policy has clearly never entered the country on a non-eu passport, let alone applied for a visa.

claig Sun 05-May-13 17:36:12

People know that they don't care what we think. They will spin it and hope that the first past the post system will get them back in. They won't hire advisers who understand why 25% of the voters turned to UKIP, they will carry on as usual, they say they they have heard us and that they are "on it".

Come off it, the people know they don't listen.

claig Sun 05-May-13 17:37:27

Eeee, I said open-door EU policy meaning open-door for citizens of EU member states.

StiffyByng Sun 05-May-13 17:38:36

75% of those who cared enough to turn out for the local elections didn't vote UKIP of course.

timidviper Sun 05-May-13 17:42:26

I think all that will happen is that the Tories will spin their policies to sound a bit more right wing, Shiny Dave will claim he has listened to the people and the general public will be too stupid to see through it.

Sorry if that sounds negative but I live in a retirement area where many people blindly vote Tory because they are scared of everybody else and are, generally, poorly informed on the issues.

claig Sun 05-May-13 17:43:20

Yes, but Labour got 29% and UKIP, a party that has come from nowhere, got 25%.

The door has been pushed open, now many more people will vote UKIP believeing that they can even beat Labour next time.

When we voted UKIP, we didn't know how well they would do. But now everybody knows that lots of people voted for them, and they may do the same next time. If the Tories listen and change then that won't happen. But can the Tories change? Can the chumocracy admit that they were wrong on certain issues, can they reverse their carts and meet the people halfway?

StiffyByng Sun 05-May-13 17:50:09

But that's not how it works, Claig. Euro-elections, yes, but they get even more of a protest vote than local elections. UKIP already have MEPs. Your own posts demonstrate the trouble UKIP will have at the next general election.

The UK electorate is currently generally centrist. Recent right wing Tory parties under Hague and Howard were electoral poison. Even socially liberal Cameron couldn't outright win an election. Moving to the right would be a bad thing in the long run for electoral hopes. Cameron backed gay marriage for example because the majority of the UK population has no problem with it.

Come the general election, should UKIP still have any sway, the party will struggle to produce a manifesto that doesn't alienate quite a lot of people who chucked an anti-politics vote at them last week. They can't opt out of 'politics'.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:02:28

'Recent right wing Tory parties under Hague and Howard were electoral poison'

But this is where Hague, members of the chumocracy, Portillo and the progressives are wrong. They say that Hague tried to be anti-Europe and it was a disaster. What they all fail to understand is that UKIP is much more than just Europe and immigration, Farage told them that it was a mindset

The chumocracy doesn't believe that, they think it is just about Hague's anti-Europe failed policies. It isn't. The people have been anti-Europe for years and years, but that is not their main concern, which is why Hague lost. The journalist from the "New Statesman" was right - this is about "culture wars", this is about a "mindset", this is people fed up of an elite of all parties and a chumocracy that does not represent them and not listen to them. This is the revolt of the plebs against the patricians. This is not about Europe. And if the chumocracy fails to understand the mindset then mpre plebs will vote against them and for UKIP.

The Daily Mail has it right. They say this is because of the "modernisation" of the Tory party, the "detoxification" of the party by progressives within it who believed it was in fact the "nasty party".
As Cecil Parkinson said when interviewed about Thatcher's funeral, it was a mistake for people to call their own party the nasty party.

Thatcher's funeral reminded Tories of Thatcher and how far-removed from Thatcher the chumocracy is. They looked at Farage with his anti-windmill, anti-global warming, anti-Europe , anti-immigration, lower taxes, cutting of quangos policies and thought that he rather than the chumocracy was the true inheritor of Thatcher's crown.

The people are fed up of not being represented. That is why they sent a message to the metropolitan elite and to Labour also, who pretend that they represent the working people.

Do you realise when you talk about UKIP representing working people that they want to abolish the minimum wage, paid holiday, 40 hour working week and increase taxes for lower paid workers while decreasing them for higher paid workers.

I don't think many average working people will support this.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:08:10

'The UK electorate is currently generally centrist'

This is what all the oundits and politicos always say. But it is not true. The UK electorate is basically rightwing, it shares the views of the Daily Mail. The Tories and UKIP got 48%, Labour and LibDems 43%.

If we had a party that adopted the views of the Daily Mail, it would win. But the chumocracy will never do that, because it disagrees with many of those views and instead believes in global warming, windmills, carbon taxes, foreign aid and minimum pricing levels for units of alcohol for working class people. It does not represnt the majority of the people, which is why so many people turned in desperation to a party whose policies they don't even know, they turned to UKIP.

StiffyByng Sun 05-May-13 18:09:12

Yes, Claig. I'll leave you to it.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:12:32

Cameron thought that promising a referendum on Europe would keep the plebs happy. But it didn't work, and the reason is because they don't believe him, but more importantly their concerns are about much more than Europe.

The chumocracy hope that if they throw some bones to the plebs, that they will be content and vote for them again.

No one really knows if that will work. We have witnessed the rise of a fourth party in UK politics. The chumocracy hopes it will just go away, but I am not sure it will.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:19:17

AKiss, you are right that their policies will come under scrutiny and they may end up being unpopular when people understand what they are. Now, most people don't really know what their policies are and if they are feasible.

If they fail to make a good case, then they will lose the support that they have recently gained.

Now, most people don't really know what their policies are

People who bothered to read their manifesto do. Does it not worry you at all that you voted for a party without knowing what they stand for?

TeWiSavesTheDay Sun 05-May-13 18:39:07

I hope not, because my town now has a UKIP councillor and I'd really rather not have a UKIP MP!

I'm really not sure to he honest, i can't really engage with the mindset of a UKIP voter, not being one personally and finding them generally repugnant.

TeWiSavesTheDay Sun 05-May-13 18:40:01

(I think UKIP are repugnant is what I was trying to get at there)

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:42:02

'Does it not worry you at all that you voted for a party without knowing what they stand for?'

No, because I did it to protest about the Tories who have abandoned their own voters. I think lots of other former Tory voters will have done the same. We all risked allowing New labour to make gains, which is not what any of us want, but we took that risk in order to be heard.

We didn't know how many others felt like us and did the same thing. It was only when we heard the results that we realised we were not alone, that Labour had fortunately not made many gains at our expense, and that we all felt the same.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:46:51

What happened is that the Tory party lost many of its traditional voters - the Thatcherites.

tiggytape Sun 05-May-13 18:47:13

The government of the day almost always performs badly in council elections.

That is true but normally it is the main opposition parties that clean up. Not some little party that was so minor, it didn't even have its own bar on the bar charts until now.

That said, UKIP will be hard pressed to get any MPs in 2015.
The PR voting system used for the European Elections favours smaller parties so they are expected to do well next year but, in 2015, first past the post system makes it hard for them to win even just 1 seat at Westminster.

Their aim is to be a catalyst for change. Like the Green Party support in the 1980s and 1990s forced main parties to adopt green policies and green issues became part of mainstream politics.
UKIP want to force Labour to rethink not supporting an in/out referendum on Europe and to get the Tories to shift to the right and not faff around with policies that nobody cares much about right now.

UKIP can't win a significant number of seats in a General Election just because the system is stacked against them, but they don't have to win seats to get what they want. They want to influence policies and changes in the ruling parties.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:54:26

If the Tories do not change, if the chumocracy carries on as usual, then the risk is that the Tories will not be able to get their lost voters back, and that may allow New Labour to get the 36% of the vote that they apparently need in order to form a government.

As tiggy says, with our current first-past-the-post system, it is very unlikely that UKIP will get many MPs themselves, but they can split the Tory vote and allow New Labour back in.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:55:57

The other possibility is that the Tories and UKIP form a pact. But that does not look very likely, because it would mean the chumocracy swallowing humble pie.

claig Sun 05-May-13 18:57:34

They were prepared to eat pasties for popularity, but can they really eat hunble pie?

gabsid Sun 05-May-13 19:13:35

chibi - I feel like you. I am an immigrant, have lived here for 20 years, my DC were born here, teach MFL and around here 1/4 of people voted UKIP. Today I walked through our village and at the back of one house flew a large English flag. I feel unwanted and paranoid.

claig Sun 05-May-13 19:15:25

'The UK electorate is currently generally centrist'

This is what the Tories believe and that is why they lost so many voters - they abandoned their core to try and appeal to the centre.

If the UK electorate was really centrist, then why did 25% of voters vote for a party that is more rightwing than the Tories, a party that the Tory modernisers themselves called "the nasty party"?

then why did 25% of voters vote for a party that is more rightwing than the Tories, a party that the Tory modernisers themselves called "the nasty party"?

Because they are too ignorant to bother finding out what they've actually voted for, as you yourself have admitted.

claig Sun 05-May-13 19:20:46

Yes, that is possible. But in general they also know that UKIP is more rightwing than the Tories.

claig Sun 05-May-13 19:22:06

But you are right that a lot of the vote is a protest vote and it will not last, and probably the majority will return to their usual parties.

Eeeeeowwwfftz Sun 05-May-13 19:33:31

The other possibility is that it will split the right wing vote and let Labour back in through the back door. Which wouldn't be a problem if we had voted to change the electoral system but as a nation we decided it was more important to give Nick Clegg a bloody nose than think carefully about the future of the country.

tiggytape Sun 05-May-13 19:59:31

If you mean the lack of AV - that wasn't just punishing LibDem.
PR had been part of their manifesto for a long time - nobody cared enough to vote for the only party that would offer them PR
AV is even less popular - too little change for many and too much for the rest.
Generally people are happy with a system that is supposed to create one winner and no coalitions

ttosca Mon 06-May-13 13:58:53

So sad.

JuliaScurr Mon 06-May-13 14:47:30
Xenia Mon 06-May-13 15:06:33

I am with claig on this. The hard workers of Essex with their taxi firms and hairdressing shops and grocers' shops in Grantham are a core group of voters wanting low taxes and less regulation whom no party that is likely to get in represents. The Tories could have become that party but they have chosen not to be it.

What UKIP may achieve as the SDP did years ago is to influence the policies of the main parties and therefore achieve success indirectly that way.

We always knew that whoever won last time would be unlikely to rule for a generation due to the recession and general mess so I suspect most people know it's fairly likely Labour will get in. The Tories will not do a deal with UKIP and the Tories will not bring to the fore any of the non -wet business people including women who would improve the cabinet and its policies.

EmmyFlavs Mon 06-May-13 19:59:13

Hello, new here, four kids youngest 6 years oldest 14, married bla bla!!!!

Voted UKIP in the Local Elections, they won 7 out of the 8 seats available, so, quite a lot of purple!! I like Farage, he has style, and does relate to the 'ordinary Brit' who have always ( at best) been handled by the Tory Elitists, but, all things considered, is he a one trick pony?

What we have done, ( all of us who voted UKIP) Whether by way of Protest, or just a belief in the Party itself, is force Cameron further to the right, whilst being dragged back to the left by the coalition Party!!! I won't hold my breath for a referendum anytime soon, and we might aswell accept the fact that we are going to be flooded with Bulgarians next year!!! Happy Days for this Clown, Fruitloop and Closet Racist ( as we are so affectionately described by Ken Clarke!!!)

claig Tue 07-May-13 01:14:58

'The hard workers of Essex with their taxi firms and hairdressing shops and grocers' shops in Grantham are a core group of voters wanting low taxes and less regulation whom no party that is likely to get in represents.'

I think we have a new party on the block - the party of the strivers i.e. UKIP. There are some reports in the papers that some of the elite advisers have called them "life's losers", but if that is what they think of us, then the only losers will be them at the next election.

We now have Labour - the party of welfare; UKIP - the party of the strivers and the Tories - the party of cuts, carbon taxes, windmills, foreign aid and the chumocracy.

We have Farage holding pints, and probably soon eating pasties, and wanting an end to the nanny state and talking about allowing people to smoke in rooms in pubs instead of having to stand out in the rain. He says "we want our country back" and all the chumocracy can say is there needs to be more scrutiny of UKIP's policies.

The trouble is the more scrutiny of UKIP's policies there is, and the more pints that Farage drinks in pubs and bars across the land, the more "life's losers", i.e. those born without a silver spoon and not part of the chumocracy, will probably vote UKIP.

UKIP have called the bluff of the chumocracy, this is democracy.

An article in the Mail says that the next election will now depend on what the 25% of voters who voted UKIP do at the general election. They will determine who wins.

"Life's losers" will determine the winners.

EmmyFlavs Tue 07-May-13 11:50:58

Hear Hear Claig

JuliaScurr Tue 07-May-13 15:36:07

oh, he is an ineresting man
and so is he

Have any of the UKIP supporters on here read what they think of women? Disabled people?

EmmyFlavs Tue 07-May-13 15:49:03

Not to mention Homosexuals!! The problem is that there never will be a Party who caters for everyone's needs, it has never happened and it never will, and on the basis that 'importance' is subjective to each and every individual, and there are 70 ish million individuals here in the UK , so what we really need is a Saint, and we wont get one. Any Political Party will change its Manifesto, pretty much every year, and especially towards a General Election, so I guess it's a case of watch this space with UKIP.

Not to mention Homosexuals!!

Sorry, confused Emmy, what do you mean?

EldritchCleavage Tue 07-May-13 15:57:23

There is Farage, and then there is UKIP. I think Farage (barrack-room lawyer with charisma) has far more appeal than his party (odd collection of weirdos, malcontents and single-issue obsessives, in the main. In that sense, UKIP have the potential to make the otherwise unpopular established parties look pretty good, if they're not careful). Farage probably has got a chance of winning a Westminster seat, particularly somewhere like Lincolnshire where UKIP has strong grassroots support.

But but but...in a general election there would be much more media and rival scrutiny of UKIP's manifesto and candidates, so they really would have to find better people and vet them more effectively. It is possible that even gaining 2-3 MPs would give UKIP a key role if there were another coalition, but Farage does not come across as a compromise-builder and I can't see anyone wanting to be in coalition with him.

I don't think there are enough votes in socially conservative policies like scrapping mat leave, rolling back gay rights etc to get UKIP very far.

EmmyFlavs Tue 07-May-13 17:38:45

Oh sorry, yes, Farage is anti Gay Marriage !! Should have elaborated!!! Stating that they should basically be happy with the rights they already have , which is a Civil Union!!

ironman Wed 08-May-13 10:53:50

Emmyflavs. Only 7 percent of gays want gay marriage, so its hardly an issue. UKIP have never said they want to get rid of any equal rights for gays.

The party is not full of malcontents, single issue obsessives,I've been a member for years, so I should know! I've been to plenty of conferences and meetings. UKIP despises the political elite and doesn't think (quite rightly) they represent the views of the vast majority of people.

UKIP supporters feel that all governments have changed the country and not for the better.

Nigel Farage is depicted as a 'cheeky chappie' by the press. He certainly is not. He is a very intelligent, disciplined man. One day he will be an MP.

UKIP's strategy is to change the other parties,( particularly on the EU) they know they will not form any government, (well not in the near future). They have a game plan and at present it is working. smile

StiffyByng Wed 08-May-13 11:36:57

Ironman, it is more respectful to talk about gay people rather than 'gays'. This is a rather interesting look at the statistics around the issue-where does your figure come from?


UKIP are masterful at being creative with statistics. The leaflet I saw during the campaign misused figures relating to both EU finance and legislation to a rather amazing and misleading degree. Someone I know challenged their local candidate on them and he didn't actually understand them when asked, could not explain them, and had never even heard of the Council of Europe. Seeing random statistics being waved around by all political parties is rather tiresome, but UKIP excels.

I find it rather troubling that people can excuse bigotry in political candidates on the basis that 'no one's perfect'. I realise I speak as one of the metropolitan elite (I live in London) but I would prefer my politicians, whether left or right wing, to be intelligent people without mindless prejudice, who think equality matters. This shouldn't be too hard to achieve, surely?

slug Wed 08-May-13 11:58:23

If it's any consolation, Plaid Cymru, despite standing in less seats than UKIP, still have far more seats.

I don't see them being touted as the next big electoral threat.

flatpackhamster Wed 08-May-13 15:19:56


Ironman, it is more respectful to talk about gay people rather than 'gays'.

Why yes, Ironman, didn't you see the latest draft from the Minority Grievance Council? Chapter 71, Section 338, Subsection 14(j) part ii.

UKIP are masterful at being creative with statistics.

As is anyone who knows what they're doing. The real skill is in being able to sift out the lies. Such as Nick Clegg's lies that we have 3 million jobs dependent on our membership of the EU.

I find it rather troubling that people can excuse bigotry in political candidates on the basis that 'no one's perfect'. I realise I speak as one of the metropolitan elite (I live in London) but I would prefer my politicians, whether left or right wing, to be intelligent people without mindless prejudice, who think equality matters. This shouldn't be too hard to achieve, surely?

What do you mean by 'equality'? It's one of those nice words that is trotted out and is used to imply that the person is reasoned and balanced and nice but in reality is used to disguise their particular prejudices. The idea that opposition to mass immigration is racism, for example, is a popular claim by left-wing politicians (eg Gordon Brown when he met Gillian Duffy) and is mindless prejudice.

EmmyFlavs Wed 08-May-13 16:25:41

Ironman, I haven't checked the statistics and I'm sure they vary from party to party, but 7 percent is too much if you are gay couple who want to get married!!!!

Oh the arrogance of the right wing posing as moderates!!!!

ironman Wed 08-May-13 16:40:24


Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now