Do you know anyone in real life who votes for UKIP?

[puddingsforsandy]

And if so, do you judge them?

If you're a UKIP supporter yourself, are you happy to declare it in public/at work?

I haven't yet (well I think!) meet anyone who votes for this party. Someone from FB linked something from UKIP FB page disagreeing with it. This lead me to their page. The supporters of this party come across as thick (going by the FB page)

I can't believe this is the same party that was lead by that talk show host. Silk something.

Anyway that's my opinion but my questions above still stand.
Thanks.

Well, no, not really.

You are being ridiculous and doing nothing to help the point you have been trying to make.

Providing high quality state funded options for support for families who have children with LDs is showing that they are valued by society surely? The exact opposite of saying they are lesser or inferior.

Maybe my previous statement was too sweeping. On a local level I know there are people who do care. My local councillor has done a lot for my area and I have wrote to him several times, and he has taken the time to reply each time. However to a certain extent his hands are tied, his power is very limited. Very few people in my area vote, admittedly some people don't vote out of laziness, but I don't think that's the main problem.

No not really. Comments like that just have ignorance stamped right through them and show very little knowledge of the actual situation.

Then answer the point I made gobby. I admitted to having little experience, I'm not trying to pretend that I do have extensive knowledge of the actual situation.

I've given my perception because I'm someone who has a vote that is worth exactly the same as your vote.

So as your knowledge is clearly superior to mine, tell me why providing an option for families is a bad thing. Or show me where the UKIP policy states that anyone with a LD is going to be incarcerated in an asylum. Or, just accept that it's going to be impossible to take your opinion seriously, despite people trying to.

Wiki talks about congregate communities for the elderly in the US. They seem to be communities which support independent living designed for those who might need more support than people who have no special requirements either socially or clinically.

I don't have disabled children but I have friends who do who are desperately worried about them as they get older (them and the children) and increasingly need more independence but also need care. They are especially worried about the shortfalls in relation to "care in the community" which doesn't seem to be working very well. I think they would welcome congregate communities for their children who have special needs, who one day will no longer have their parents and who will be unable to cope alone, depending on private land and their care worker (continually changing) to sort them out.

I don't necessarily see congregate communities as a negative. I think it requires further debate. Nobody wants to return to institutional care but the dispersal and lack of joined up multiple agency thinking available at present doesn't seem to be working either.

High quality care is required for some people who are unable for whatever reason to live with family or in supported living. No compulsion has been suggested.

Dh has joined ukip. At first I thought it was grounds for divorce. Bringing back smoking in pubs annoys me. However they do not appear racist, the current govt wants to let all of Europe in whilst throwing out spouces from outside the eu and not letting in refugees.

Or show me where the UKIP policy states that anyone with a LD is going to be incarcerated in an asylum.

Here's the sort of shit that UKIP candidates spout, and which UKIP is perfectly happy to have them spout until it gets into the papers, when amazingly they decide that they don't like it after all.

"compulsory abortion when the foetus is detected as having Downs, spina bifida or similar syndrome which, if it is born, will render the child a burden on the state as well as on the family".

That's UKIP candidate Geoffrey Clark.

Here's Anne-Marie Crampton, another UKIP candidate:

“Holocaust means a sacrifice by fire. Only the Zionists could sacrifice their own in the gas chambers. The Second World Wide War was engineered by the Zionist Jews and financed by the banksters to make the general public all over the world feel so guilty and outraged by the Holocaust that a treaty would be signed to create the State of Israel as we know it today.”

They're a top lot, UKIP, and the people that vote for them show their true colours every time they open their mouths.

I don't necessarily see congregate communities as a negative. I think it requires further debate. Nobody wants to return to institutional care but the dispersal and lack of joined up multiple agency thinking available at present doesn't seem to be working either.

So, because it's not currently working as it should be, we lock 'em up.
That's UKIP's attitude. No choices are discussed.
Oh, I have a disabled dh and three of my four children have disabilities.

Geoffrey Clark and Anna-Marie Crampton were both local election candidates and were both suspended from UKIP. Both made ill judged and disgraceful comments publicly and got found out. That has happened to many local election candidates from all parties over the years and some have not been suspended and some have not been found out. UKIP did the right thing in suspending rather than defending. Anyone remember John Prescott?

Where does it say that those who live in congregate communities are locked up?

Does it not say something that those of us in the situation are dead against it?

Theorise all you like. Decide what's best for others all you like, after all it won't affect you.

Except one day it just might.

UKIP did the right thing in suspending rather than defending

It defended Clark for some days before suspending him. It allowed Campton to talk some shit about her "account being hacked" for several days before suspending her.

Odd, too, that an anti-Semitic holocaust denier should have been selected as candidate.

Or Susan Bowen, a member of the BNP.

It's odd just how many racist fuckwits congregate around UKIP. Perhaps they like the logo?

Then please articulate precisely why and set out the facts of why you are against supported by evidence based research please rather than simply providing one opinion. You infer that you are speaking for all people in situations similar to your own. Have you canvassed them all and have they all requested that you forward one opinion on their behalf?

There are two of us on this thread.

Fuckwits congregate around all political parties. I have sat on selection committees that have unearthed criminal records in relation to seemingly genuine candidates relating to BNP activities. They sometimes get through at the local level; the procedures for parliamentary candidates are significantly more rigorous and they don't. There are thousands of local candidates compared to hundreds of political candidates and it isn't surprising that all parties let the odd nutter through the net. You really can't generalise that it's only the case vis a vis the BNP.

Two -vs- all.

I am half Jewish by the way and I am inclined to support UKIP at present.

they were prospective candidates - you can't take their off the cuff remarks, as unsavoury as they were, and claim they are policy.

Elected MPS (not candidates) across all parties have to apologise all the time for their ill-chosen remarks.

My grandparents. I love them to pieces but they get all their 'factual information' from the DM and The Sun so you can guess what kind of shit they spout if you ever get into a conversation about it.
I find it easier to ignore politics with them.

Given other attitudes towards disability displayed by ukip candidates I strongly suspect that congregate communities will be only social care option offered and at worst will be compulsory. The lessons of history and of winterbourne view should teach us that any move to keep disabled people out of sight and out of mind is highly likely to facilitate abuse

Leaving aside ukip, massive cuts by the current govt and the new Care Bill are going to ensure chaos in social care shortly. What do you suggest?

I'm pro-European, but believe there is the "right" sort of european. We welcome with open arms the Dutch, the French, the Germans, the Spanish, the Irish etc. (all with Judeo-christian ethics)

That's a disgustingly racist post.

Near with regard to communities, nowhere in the manifesto is the word 'choice'.
As it happens, it is highly likely that my children will be productive members of society, they are intelligent and doing extremely well. As long as society doesn't judge them because of their disabilities but rather their capabilities, then all will be well. That however, is not what ukip have posited.

Nowhere in the manifesto is the word compulsory.

Yes, and all politicians are honest.

Does it not say something that those of us in the situation are dead against it?

It says something, which is why I began discussing it with you. But it doesn't say anywhere near enough for someone who has little real life experience of the situation to form an opinion based on it.

Presumably the families that use the resource I linked to earlier have a different opinion, one that is just as valid, and just as worthy of being listened to as yours. Shrieks of asylum, incarceration, and locked up do nothing to help put your POV across, and presumably you want your POV hear to stop a party you don't like getting any bigger.