to want to ask those who intend to vote UKIP a few questions about their policies?

[PdHeatonsingingfafafa]

Let me ask you this. Has anybody here actually looked at UKIP policies? If so, perhaps you can answer some questions for me.
1: UKIP say they want an amicable divorce from the EU. How smoothly do they believe that can happen?

1. UKIP want a 5 year hold on immigration. To do so, they think that it is essential to leave the EU as the EU allows citizens of member states to move freely. Ok, what happens to the 2.2 million Brits living in other EU nations? Do we force them to return? It has to work both ways. 3: A flat tax rate can never work. I imagine this is why the party cannot decide whether or not they should have 1 rate or 2. Their 2010 proposal was a rate of 31% for everybody. That is evidently a major tax break for the rich whilst the poor pay more. Is this something you support?

4: A return to the grammar school education model would see communities being ripped in half and children unfairly separated. Who here thinks that is a good idea? 5: UKIP want to increase defence spending to facilitate the building of extra warships and nuclear weapons. When a member or supporter asks why soldiers aren't paid more, be sure to also ask why they'd squander money on these projects? 6: UKIP oppose the HS2 because of the damage it would do to the countryside. However, they also support fracking which would cause even greater damage. How can there be such contradiction? They also oppose manmade climate change. On what evidence do they take this stance? 7: UKIP plan to double prison spaces. How do they propose to fund the building of new prisons and of keeping twice as many inmates? Who will take up these extra spaces? What crimes will become punishable by incarceration? Who will suffer from cuts made elsewhere to fund this? 8: UKIP is proposing "tens of billions" of tax cuts and had set out £77bn of cuts to public expenditure to deal with the deficit. Where will these cuts be made? After increased military and prison spending, the cuts in public spending will have to be a lot higher to compensate. 9: They wish to repeal the hunting ban. This appeals to a minority of people whereas the majority of the country supports the hunting ban. Can you guess which section of society would benefit from the repeal?

It seems to me that most of these policies were plucked from thin air to try and hide the fact that they are a one policy party. Perhaps, by answering these questions, you can change my mind?

Twirlyhot, 25% of the voters at English local elections voted UKIP.
There are bound to be lots on Mumsnet too. Some of them are probably too scared to admit it for now incase the progressives give them abuse, a bit like all of the posters on Mumsnet who apologise for linking to the Daily Mail and deny reading it when it is the world's most popular news website.

It's over for the progressives, their tricks and schemes are bound to fail, they haven't got enough fingers to stick in the dykes and their party membership is falling precipitatively.

And the majority of the public always say when surveyed that they want a return of capital punishment. And thousands of people watch the X Factor.

And I've always got a spare finger

'And the majority of the public always say when surveyed that they want a return of capital punishment.'

They do and so did Thatcher, but the political elite will not allow it They say they represent the public.

'And I've always got a spare finger'

You're going to need all your toes as well, because this is a political avalanche. This is the rise of the people against the condescending privileged elites.

And it's not just us, the ordinary people who have had enough, even some of the true blue elite have had their fill of it and are abandoning the Tories for UKIP. We have never seen the like of this and it has only just begun.

"As for her politics, like me she is the progeny and huge admirer of the late and great Tory thinker, T.E. Utley, whose judgment over matters of state I have never heard her question.
Indeed, after giving up nursing, she spent many decades working in and around Westminster as a secretary for various Conservatives ? at Central Office, at the Centre for Policy Studies and at the House of Commons itself, where she worked for a couple of the party?s MPs.

You may even have seen her, without realising it. For she appears in one of the most famous photographs of Margaret Thatcher, taken on election night in 1987. This is the one in which the victorious Prime Minister is shown leaning out of the window at Conservative HQ with Norman Tebbit, waving triumphantly at the crowds.
My sister can just be made out, peering over Mrs Thatcher?s left shoulder.
But this was Virginia?s one moment of celebrity on the national political stage. And, odd though it may sound to say this of someone with her CV, I wouldn?t really describe her as a political animal at all.
Though her links with the party have been much stronger than most, I would say that she is pretty much like most loyal, traditional Tory voters outside the Westminster bubble ? not much interested in the finer points of policy, but trusting the party best to represent her outlook on life (quietly patriotic, morally conservative, believing in free enterprise and self-reliance).
Indeed, until last week, she had never even joined a political party ? something else that she has in common with the huge majority of tribal Conservative supporters.

So you could have knocked me down with a feather when my wife returned from church on Sunday morning, with the startling news that Virginia had just joined . . . UKIP!
Blimey, I thought. If even my loyal old sister has parted with £30 to join Nigel Farage?s crew, then David Cameron really has got something to worry about."

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2337148/TOM-UTLEY-Shes-swivel-eyed-loon-sister-joined-UKIP-Why-wont-Dave-make-effort-woo-back.html

Representational democracy = filtering out the truly batshit stuff.

Some would say it is less about representing the people and more about representing the lobbies.

Give the people real proportional representation, then let's see who gets kicked out.

claig, you are a man! Didnt realise that.

No, I'm not!

But there is a genuine shame associated with the Daily Mail. They are vile. Last week, they reported a story about a French minister who declared that Hitler did not kill enough gypsies. In their MODERATED comments section, there were gems such as:

Have you ever thought perhaps he`s right?

• philip harrison, preston, 24/7/2013 1:54

Click to rate Rating 850

Just saying what many people are thinking.

• Cassandra44, London, Canada, 24/7/2013 1:18

Click to rate Rating 777

A lot of people will be agreeing with him next year

• AL, Birmingham, 24/7/2013 0:21

Click to rate Rating 751

Why do gypsies think they have an automatic entitlement to camp on other peoples land and destroy everything around with no regard to the locals? that's how much respect that have and that's how much respect they should be given...none And since they can give it but not take it...well, they can always go back home.

• Steven, Hartlepool, United Kingdom, 23/7/2013 23:43

Click to rate Rating 697

The war time bit may be excessive but a lot of people will agree the current crop are criminal. Just wait until the 2 million arrive here. Gates on your front garden today gone tomorrow.

• Ted, Donny, United Kingdom, 24/7/2013 0:15

Click to rate Rating 660

Tell the truth and outrage will always follow.

• Samuel Pickwick, Anywhere BUT London, United Kingdom, 23/7/2013 23:53

Click to rate Rating 554

Might not be politically correct but Hitler was right on a lot of things - history written by the victors often obscures that. The failed experiment in Europe and the social catastrophes it is bringing will prove him right on many more fronts and as unpopular as that view is at present it will have its time again when the EU fractures as historically it is bound to do.

• Graham Casey, Perth, 24/7/2013 0:06

Click to rate Rating 473

If a Daily Mail moderator deems claims that support genocide acceptable, why should people not be ashamed to read it?

And this is the reason that UKIP is not likely to go away - if big City donors start switching to UKIP

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/10/tory-donors-switching-ukip-treasurer

Those are the views of individual readers, not of the paper.

Yes, but they were printed in a moderated comments section. They are hate crimes.

Also, how do you know they're not the views of the paper? 'Hurrah for the Blackshirts' and all that.

Nah. There hasn't been any revolution. It's the same now as its always been.

Bunch of guff.

'Also, how do you know they're not the views of the paper?'

Because I am a Daily Mail reader and know that the paper has no time for racism and does not support fascists of any form.

Please try to worry too much about this nasty little group of people. THe US Tea Party holds many of the same views. They made tons of noise through the last two elections. Obama won each time..handily. We know, thankfully, hear very little from them.

We NOW, even..

I suppose you worship Littlejohn and Moir then too?

I don't get time to read the whole paper.
My favourites are Melanie Phillips, Peter Hitchens and Littlejohn.

Doesn't mean that I agree with them all the time.

Do you not mind the mysogyny throughout?

What mysogyny?

Melanie Phillips is not a mysogynist

I meant the paper in general? Are you seriously going to deny that there's no mysogyny in the DM?

The majority of the Daily Mail's readership is women, and lots of its best commentators are women.
There is gossip in the paper and articles that criticise some stars' fashion choice etc, but I don't agree with the progressives who try to claim that the world's leading online newspaper is mysogynist