Ukip 'Most Favourably Regarded Party'

[claig]

Is there a quiet revolution going on despite the insults aimed at UKIP and their voters by some people in other parties who refer to good people as nutters, fruitcakes and racists?

How has this happened, how has UKIP become so popular despite the wishes of the great and the good and the TV propaganda of the paid-for media puppets?

I am bafffled and

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/18/ukip-most-favourably-regarded_n_4623876.html

Pendeen….I’m not quite sure what percentages of a pitiful decline in the UK voting turnout figures tells anyone – but look at the 2010 General Election map on the link below (total voter 65% turnout versus 61% in 2005), the Conservative are THE political party of England.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010

In most of the other constituencies in England, Scotland and Wales, it would not matter how the Conservatives did with the economy or anything else, the Labour Party and their failed ideology of fat, expensive State and anti business declining private sector to pay for it, could issue a dictate to take everyone’s first born and the parents would STILL vote Labour.

Labour voters don’t examine their own party’s record too much, plus voters get bombarded with lies on the consequences of Labours administrations/policies AND lies on a made up class system when they have Labour have no coherent policies of their own – just look at ttoscas and others comments on this board, which don’t stand up under even under basic scrutiny and factual history.

The Conservatives as you point out, held office from 1979 to 1997 as voters (non core Labour voters) remembered both the state of the economy and what else they inherited from Labour in 1979, but by 1997 were probably getting a bit stale – and as the economy back then was fine, Blair & Brown promised New Labour was nothing like Old Labour, they were given the benefit of the doubt.

The only reason there was no Tory majority in 2010, apart from under (a total) of 30,000 Ukip votes over 20 key constituencies, was that New Labour 3-years after the crash they presided over, did not have the guts/honesty to detail what in order to keep their bit fat State, what else they would cut AND increase taxes to pay for it.

No State funeral for Brown, unless Blair sells his nine properties and uses his JP Morgan fees to pay for it, in Scotland.

So, the Conservatives lost power in 1997 because people had forgotten how crap Labour were in the 1970s?

So, nothing to do with sleaze, arms to Iraq, cash for questions, splits over Europe (exploited by the Referendum Party and Independence party), a weak and pathetic response to adopting the single currency, Victorian values, the abandonment of the IRA ceasefire in 1996, the ERM and/ or BSE then?

Don't forget, the Conservatives had a minority government by 1996.

I'd say the Conservatives did not win a majority in 2010 was that their message wasn't clear enough and they didn't campaign on certain issues for fear of looking like the nasty party. People didn't have the foggiest what the BIG society was, they didn't understand how free schools would work, NHS reforms were not clearly communicated. They didn't campaign on immigration, they spent too long attacking Labour rather than reassuring voters why they should trust them. Is it any wonder why people felt they couldn't vote Conservative in 2010? They didn't feel like they knew what they were voting for so they looked for a clearer message. Don't try and hold UKIP responsible for the Conservative's cock ups.

TheHammaconda…you make some good points on the failure of the Conservatives to get their message(s) across in 2010, but by and large, few people were listening (or reacting negatively) to the Conservatives on their core (unpopular) values e.g. getting the £158 bil annual overspend in control – and Labour dishonestly did not want to fight a 2010 election detailing their ‘fewer cuts, higher taxes’ promise.

In 2005, the Conservative bullet pointed several key issues within their manifesto as key policies, that did not get better under Labour e.g. ‘control (Labour's open door) immigration’, but who cared, remembered or bothered to vote at all.

Don’t also forget the extra Labour voices via the likes of huge parliamentary majorities from 1997 to 2010, a spin machine via Mandelson, Campbell, McBride and for the many years the briefed newspapers and BBC gives Labour such a huge benefit of any doubt, drowned out the Conservatives. Especially as Brown was taking the credit for the economy he inherited, low GLOBAL inflation and interest rates, booming home prices and throwing huge amounts of taxpayers money on (unreformed) services and benefits.

So the Conservatives in 2010, rightly had to attack Labour’s record - as unlike Ukip who issued an extreme manifesto/policy list (Farage now calls “drivel”) and was never going to get into power – Cameron had to explain in detail how they would turn around Labour’s incompetence on virtually every policy/issue. Many voters don’t find repairing the basics interesting, especially if they’re unaware how bad an economic and social situation we were in; enter an opportunist Ukip, no chance of government, just telling people what they want to hear, then and now.

As 1997 and the ‘heinous’ reasons you give (that I could pick holes in) for the Conservatives losing power by a landslide – Labour won 418 seats, the decimated Conservatives (lost 178 seats) only then held 165 seats – Labour did far worse than that over their whole administration and still held over 100 seat majorities for elections to come, based on luck and spending mentioned further above.

So any view that it was the Conservative policies in 1997, rather than false New Labour hopes that resulted in the huge swing to Labour is pure electoral ignorance, especially when ANYONE compares the economic and social conditions BELOW, when the Conservatives came to power.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent
The Labour Callaghan’s ‘Winter of Discontent’ in the winter of 1978/9, when the Trade Unions challenged governments with wildcat strikes i.e. mountains of rubbish on the streets and bodies left unburied?
www.spectator.co.uk/features/3665728/we-came-close-to-losing-our-democracy-in-1979/

Lord Ashcroft's analysis of the 2010 election is quite an interesting read. I think the Conservatives are, electorally, in a very difficult position. IMHO they need to attract votes from the right and the centre to win a majority. I don't see how they can tread this path.

UKIP had/ have the luxury of being able to produce a populist manifesto. Probably less so in 2015 as I would imagine there will be a greater degree of scrutiny of their policies.

I will never, ever be able to forget several things about the 1997 election:

1. The arms to Iraq/ Matrix Churchill case. In particular the Scott Inquiry (was that what it was called) summation of the govt's POV: ‘We know what is good for you. You may not like it and, if you were made aware of it, you might protest, but we know what is best.’ I cannot, and never will, forget the absolute disgust I felt for a government that could sell arms to a vicious and tyrannical dictator after signing a UN embargo and then engage in such a mendacious campaign of arse covering.
2. Accompanying a friend on a university visit to Roehampton and seeing a man dressed as a toe. IIRC he was standing as an independent candidate against David Mellor. This really summed up for me how sick and tired people were of Tory sleaze, especially after the whole Back to Basics campaign.
3. The division over Europe and the sense that, if Major couldn't manage his own party, how the hell would he manage the whole country.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up the WoD. I don't remember it (as I was a baby) and haven't read a huge amount about it. Obviously I'm aware of the OPEC crises in the 1970s, of inflation reaching 25% in 1975, of workers taking voluntary pay freezes for several (3?) years and then being told in 1978 (?) that the govt were going to introduce an income policy limiting pay increases to 5% against a rate of inflation of +/-20%. But, AFAIA, this occured against a backdrop of global cost-push inflation, I don't know what a Conservative govt would have done differently.

There's an interesting IFS review of Labour spending from 1997 - 2010 in which they compare Labour's fiscal management to the Conservative Party's record. I haven't read it for a while but I do remember being quite surprised by some of the points.

Hammaconda, judging by the posts upthread, I wouldn't imagine potential ukip voters will be putting their policies under a huge amount of scrutiny...

claig, you seriously support withdrawing all those Human Rights protections? With all your schtick about the little guy versus the power of the state and the metropolitan elite and the bbc and all the rest of it... you think what the man in the street needs is less protection from the powers that be?

The Hammaconda…I mentioned the Winter of Discontent, as similar to 2010, it shows what the Conservatives inherited. I find it intellectually amazing the complete ignorance of people that do not understand what the Tories inherit, completely shapes their early policies and any fiscal comparisons e.g. lower and raise taxes when can –especially as in correcting huge social and economic problems, by definition they will be unpopular.

On that note, re your question what would the Conservatives had done in the late 1970’s differently, the answer to those problems were Thatcher. I suggest you check on the “global cost-push inflation”, Corporate Tax rates and industrial relations of Japan and Germany, our main competitors back then, as I believe they did not have our problems and on most components of Productivity, we really was the sick man of Europe.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sick_man_of_Europe
“Throughout the 1970s, the United Kingdom was sometimes called the "sick man of Europe" by critics of its government at home, because of industrial strife and poor economic performance compared to other European countries,[10] culminating with the Winter of Discontent of 1978–1979.”

But again, re your Conservative ‘problems’ in 1997, you are in comparison with Labour’s last administration, knit picking from a tremendous record, having inherited a basket case.

So in comparison, lets compare New Labour’s record that BEGAN with the best inherited legacy, since god knows when – and you have the front to tell me that this was by design NOT social and economic vandalism – making your Ukip gripes against the Conservatives, look rather stupid, bearing mind only the Conservatives or Labour Party will form the next administration in 2015.

In Summary.

Labour were the most spun media controlled and corrupt administration in living memory with ‘Blairs cash for Lordships’ investigated by the police and MP expenses totally out of hand on THEIR watch and Labour’s Parliament Speaker Michael Martin running the show, Knighted for his services to MP’s expenses.

Pro EU without trusting the people to vote… pro swing door immigration from 2004 for personal gain AND without increasing home building to make room …with 580,000 under 25-year olds here already unemployed... pro dumbed down education results to make the thick feel better rather than raise standards…pro needless laws/police State… pro Human Rights Act in 1998 causing so many ‘rights’ problems.

Pro killer germ infested NHS hospitals hiring more managers than nurses.. pro saddling hospital with 25-year Private Finance Initiative debts….pro 24-hour drinking, gambling and declassifying drugs….pro expensive quangos costing over £70 bil a year to run.. pro expensive to run local government (with non jobs) leading to Council Tax hikes up 110% on their watch..

Pro raiding private pension funds from 1998 to near final salary extinction...pro screwing state pensioners with derisory annual State pension e.g. 75p in 2000….pro raising the lower band tax rate to screw the poor in 2007…pro sale of 40% of UK gold reserves under $300 an ounce versus $1.900 high…..pro relaxation of banking regulation to dangerous levels pre financial crash..…pro sending 1 million of our manufacturing jobs elsewhere by 2005 BEFORE the crash

Pro lying to go to war and without equipping soldiers with basic kit and helicopters... ….pro nuclear energy to stop lights going off in 2015, but didn’t get around to building any.…pro defence/Trident, who knows, let someone else get around to it….and leaving us less domestic food production secure than in 1997.

With a balanced budget in 2002/3 having adopted 1997 Tory spending plans, pro ANNUAL budget deficit MORE than £160 bil a year in 2010 and national debt of £1.5 trillion by 2015 needing unpopular austerity, or go the way of bankrupt Greece…….pro equality but left power in 2010 with more inequality than in 1997…and finally as mentioned in their 2010 manifesto, pro increased taxes to pay for ALL their incompetence (that will then kill economic growth), they never got around to telling us about in any detail, but like death, you know it is coming.

And you say the Conservatives had national scandals? Yeah right.

'claig, you seriously support withdrawing all those Human Rights protections? '

I believe in our own Parliament making laws that govern our rights. There are some rights I agree with the ECHR about and some I don't, so it is swings and roundabouts, but at the end of the day I believe in independence and national sovereignty rather than laws created or enforced by supranational bodies.

I do believe in the 'little guy' above the nanny big state with its Big Brother socialist biometric ID cards and DNA databases, and I also believe in the 'little guy' in terms of single independent nations above supranational entities created for and by elites who are not subject to democratic controls by the 'little guys'.

That is why I am voting UKIP.

We have seen what happened with the quangos and bureaucrats and 'Environment Agency' and how their policies affected the 'little guys'. The supranational EU will impose many more regulations and rules about what they call 'climate catastrophe' on the 'little guys' and it is best to vote against the supranational elite and bureaucrats now rather than wait before it is too late.

The floods are harming the 'little guys', and Channel 4 News sends its London reporters and Jon Snow out in wellies and pushes the usual 'climate change' crap while people rightly say that the out-of-touch metropolitan elite should have listened to what local 'little guys' told them to do and should have dredged the rivers.

There is a new flood in politics that will sweep away this out-of-touch metropolitan elite who ignored the needs of the people and catered to their metropolitan masters.

On Newsnight just now, we saw the ex-Labour bigwig Matthew Taylor saying that Miliband must change the 'statism' that Labour have for so long followed and that the usual levers of power will no longer work and that reforms of schools and hopitals for the past 20 years have not been successful.

Huge change is coming sooner or later due to the failure of the elites and their unaccountability.

The supranational EU representative told the Swiss that "it is not possible" about their vote to limit immigration.

We are witnessing a battle between the people, the populists and the metropolitan elites.

They will continue to say "it is not possible", "computer says no", no dredging, but as more people wake up they will start to vote for independence from supranational laws and regulations which work against them.

'Democratic controls', yeah right.

So you'd be happy for a party that got 40% of the vote, with a comfortable majority of seats, doing whatever they wanted? Putting tracker boxes in everyone's cars maybe? Monitoring everyone's Internet and phone calls? Maybe making you ask for permission to leave the country, in case you're up to something?

Because they have a democratic mandate, right? And you want to be safe from terrorists, right? If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, don't forget.

And if you took away those international protections, there'd be no-one to appeal to, you'll just have to lump it.

By the way, Switzerland is not a member of the EU as I suspect you know. The EU is pissed off because they are ditching their side of a reciprocal agreement, which buggers the whole thing up.

There's no need to go misrepresenting things by taking quotes completely out of context, you're not the Daily Mail

'Putting tracker boxes in everyone's cars maybe?'

You have to realise that there are puppets in Parliament who carry out the wishes of the supranational elite who are unaccountable to the people. It is the same with trackers in cars, climate change regulations, smoking, bins etc. etc.

The EU would not have saved us from New Labour's plans to introduce biometric ID cards and DNA databases for us because that is exactly what the supranational elite want and what the puppets will one day try to do again.

Here is a Guardian article on the trackers in cars. Puppets may implement these things on the people, but it is the supranational elite who pull the strings of the metropolitan elite.

"Big Brother is watching: surveillance box to track drivers"

...

"The government is backing a project to install a "communication box" in new cars to track the whereabouts of drivers anywhere in Europe, the Guardian can reveal.

Under the proposals, vehicles will emit a constant "heartbeat" revealing their location, speed and direction of travel. The EU officials behind the plan believe it will significantly reduce road accidents, congestion and carbon emissions ."

www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/mar/31/surveillance-transport-communication-box

This article was in 2009, when of course we had our New Labour government with those people who want to protect our civil liberties. Notice that there were "EU officials behind the plan" (but these officials are themselves merely puppets too) and notice that as usual under a nanny state socialist system, it is as always done for our "safety" and they always throw the "climate change" angle in whenever they can and it is said that it will "significantly" reduce "carbon emissions".

No EU supranational court can protect our civil liberties because it is not accountable to us. The only way to gain our independence and protect our civil liberties is to cut the puppets' strings and vote for independence and a populist party that puts the people first and the metroploitan elite and their masters second.

'Switzerland is not a member of the EU as I suspect you know. The EU is pissed off because they are ditching their side of a reciprocal agreement'

Yes, but this shows how the 'reciprocal agreement' agreed by some Swiss politicians and political elites with the EU supranational elite is against the wishes of the Swiss people. It shows the arrogance and inflexibility of the EU elite with their pronouncements that "it is not possible". They told the French and Irish to vote again once before until they got it right.

But the writing is now on the wall. The time of the supranational elite and their regulations and climate change policies and environmental policies and carbon emission policies and trackers in cars and biometric ID cards and DNA databses is coming to an end because people's parties have dared to say that the EU Emperor has no clothes.

Their puppets are panicking as the people start to ask what is going on and how their money is being spent.

At the end of the day, democracy and self-determination will always win out against an unaccountable elite that ignores the people.

There are cracks in their dam, their talk of 'carbon emissions' is hot air, and the flood of democracy will sweep the unaccounatble elite away.

So in comparison, lets compare New Labour’s record that BEGAN with the best inherited legacy, since god knows when – and you have the front to tell me that this was by design NOT social and economic vandalism...

This makes no sense. Are you trying to say that this "best inherited legacy" was achieved by "social and economic vandalism"? Or that Labour got this "inheritance" as a result of "social and economic vandalism"? WTF is "social and economic vandalism"?

– making your Ukip gripes against the Conservatives, look rather stupid, bearing mind only the Conservatives or Labour Party will form the next administration in 2015.

I'm not a UKIP supporter. I wouldn't vote for them even if they put a candidate forward in my EP consituency.

It's not exactly news that FPTP will deliver a Labour majority of +/-100 seats. UKIP are forecast to achieve around 15% of the vote.

Labour were the most spun media controlled and corrupt administration in living memory with ‘Blairs cash for Lordships’

Yes, it's disgusting how venal politicians can be.

investigated by the police

As were donations to the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties.

and MP expenses totally out of hand on THEIR watch.

Yes, blame the government for individual MPs claiming their duck houses, moat cleaning, husband's porn. It's not the MPs' fault at all.

and Labour’s Parliament Speaker Michael Martin running the show, Knighted for his services to MP’s expenses.

He wasn't knighted. He was made a life peer as all former speakers are. His elevation to the Lords was a formality.

Pro EU without trusting the people to vote

And, what's the problem?

… pro swing door immigration from 2004

One of the key provisions of the European Union is freedom of movement of citizens.

No government could have prevented people from within the EU from coming to the United Kingdom. Restrictions were placed on access to the labour markets for workers from the A8 countries. Most of this movement was from temporary workers rather than immigrants (only 12% of those coming from the A8 nations intended to stay for more than 12 months). There is no credible evidence that A10 migration has had any impact on unemployment and only a marginal impact on wages. (See Blanchflower & Lawton)

for personal gain

How have the LP gained personally from 'swing'[ing] door immigration? How can a politcal party gain anything 'personally'?

AND without increasing home building to make room

Between 1997 and 2010 over 2 million new homes were built (admittedly less than 1% were LA properties).

pro dumbed down education results

Grade inflation is a problem in the UK, IME this is down to competition between the examination boards rather than an edict from on high.

to make the thick feel better rather than raise standards

Are you aware of what a ridiculous and insulting statement that is?

…pro needless laws

Such as?

/police State

???

… pro Human Rights Act in 1998 causing so many ‘rights’ problems.

WTF are 'rights' problems? So the codification and legal protection of an individual's human rights is a problem?

Pro killer germ infested NHS hospitals

I'm afraid I don't know where to find information about the rates of hospital acquired infections under Lab/Con governments. I would certainly agree that there was an increase in media stories about HAIs during the Labour government. I'm fairly confident however that the DoH spokespeople were not bigging up the 'pro killer germ-infested hospital' side of the story.

hiring more managers than nurses

Evidence please

.. pro saddling hospital with 25-year Private Finance Initiative debts

PFI was first used in 1992, John Major was the first Chancellor of the Exchequer to use it.

….pro 24-hour drinking, gambling and declassifying drugs

Yes, large social costs arising from this.

….pro expensive quangos costing over £70 bil a year to run

Cost of QUANGOs less than £70bil pa. 10% reduction in QUANGOs between 1997 and 2010.

.. pro expensive to run local government (with non jobs) leading to Council Tax hikes up 110% on their watch..

Yes, there was a nominal 110% increase in CT, but closer to a 40% real term increase on average.

Pro raiding private pension funds from 1998

Do you mean the 'tax raid' on pensions?

to near final salary extinction

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

...pro screwing state pensioners with derisory annual State pension e.g. 75p in 2000

….pro raising the lower band tax rate to screw the poor in 2007

This should not have happened

…pro sale of 40% of UK gold reserves under $300 an ounce versus $1.900 high

Unless we're going back to a gold backed currency there's no need to hold gold reserves. I'm not sure how he was supposed to foresee the global financial crisis which caused massive hedging, forcing the price of gold up to $1,900 per oz. It's not like that $3.5billion (?) wasn't reinvested in other assets. Gold earns no interest.

Fascinating fact re gold reserves (not at all related to the above point :) ). The BoE is built on clay soil, there's actually a physical limit on how much the vaults can hold before it starts sinking.

pro relaxation of banking regulation to dangerous levels pre financial crash

Yes, as it turns out it was a monumentally huge mistake. Didn't meet much opposition from the Shadow Chancellor though.

pro sending 1 million of our manufacturing jobs elsewhere by 2005 BEFORE the crash

From The Guardian

'In a special report, the Ernst & Young Item Club said British factories had missed the chance to exploit the recent strength of the global economy by permitting excessive wage inflation in the late 1990s.

"UK manufacturers have been suffering," said Peter Spencer, chief economic adviser to the Item Club. "This is partly the result of Labour's fiscal expansion, which has kept interest rates and the exchange rate relatively high.'

Pro lying to go to war and without equipping soldiers with basic kit and helicopters

Shameful, I don't think anyone other than Mr A. Blair would disagree with you there.

pro nuclear energy to stop lights going off in 2015, but didn’t get around to building any

Agreed

pro defence/Trident, who knows, let someone else get around to it

Agreed

and leaving us less domestic food production secure than in 1997.
Food security has fallen since 1988, it's not just down to Labour. It's not an efficient use of resources to concentrate on food production. The UK should devote resources to the areas in which it has a comparative advantage. This will require a greater degree of food imports. At present the UK is 60% self-sufficient. (Soil Association).

With a balanced budget in 2002/3 having adopted 1997 Tory spending plans,

They pledged to follow Conservative spending plans for the first four years of any term. In reality there were unexpected departmental underspends. Real term increases in fuel and tobacco duty; fiscal drag; some budgetary changes, and higher than anticipated economic growth, there resulting in fiscal resulted in a budget surplus in 2000/01.

pro ANNUAL budget deficit MORE than £160 bil a year in 2010 and national debt of £1.5 trillion by 2015 needing unpopular austerity

To fund spending to boost aggregate demand

or go the way of bankrupt Greece

You're just being dramatic now

pro equality but left power in 2010 with more inequality than in 1997

Very vague. What kind of equality do you mean?

and finally as mentioned in their 2010 manifesto, pro increased taxes to pay for ALL their incompetence (that will then kill economic growth)

Oh yes, that chestnut. Global financial crisis caused by the incompetence of one government. Also, taxes cause economic growth to fall .

they never got around to telling us about in any detail, but like death, you know it is coming.

And you say the Conservatives had national scandals? Yeah right.^

"vote for independence and a populist party that puts the people first and the metroploitan elite and their masters second."

Sorry claig, but this is impossible in our current system. Getting elected as an MP - let alone getting enough MPs elected to form a government - requires huge amounts of money and contacts.

Now if you want to propose a revolution, I'll listen, but UKIP are just more of the same. Only worse, because they're not tempering their populism with any sense of how the world actually works.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that Nigel Farage is some sort of man of the people; because he drinks pints in pubs? That's not a massive feat, I can manage it myself when I get a babysitter...

The Hammaconda…I mentioned the Winter of Discontent, as similar to 2010, it shows what the Conservatives inherited. I find it intellectually amazing the complete ignorance of people that do not understand what the Tories inherit, completely shapes their early policies and any fiscal comparisons e.g. lower and raise taxes when can –especially as in correcting huge social and economic problems, by definition they will be unpopular.

Perhaps you should mention that when you post. Better still give the position of the economic fundamentals in 1979 rather than linking to Wikipedia.

On that note, re your question what would the Conservatives had done in the late 1970’s differently, the answer to those problems were Thatcher.

I ask a rhetorical question and your answer is: Thatcher. I'm going assume you mean the Conservative government would have enacted wide spread supply side reforms. I don't believe they would have been able to. The WoD legitimised many of Thatcher's policies.

^I suggest you check on the “global cost-push inflation”, Corporate Tax rates and industrial relations of Japan and Germany, our main competitors back then, as I believe they did not have our problems and on most components of Productivity, we really was the sick man of Europe.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sick_man_of_Europe^
“Throughout the 1970s, the United Kingdom was sometimes called the "sick man of Europe" by critics of its government at home, because of industrial strife and poor economic performance compared to other European countries,[10] culminating with the Winter of Discontent of 1978–1979.

You realise you're not actually making a point here, don't you? Are you trying to make a point about a lack of international competitiveness arising from low levels of labour productivity? If so, say that. Make your point explicit. Labour productivity in the UK was (and is) lower than Germany. The sources of low productivity are numerous, it's fatuous to imply that they're caused by union activity. IIRC wages were higher in W. Germany and capital investment rates were significantly higher.

But again, re your Conservative ‘problems’ in 1997, you are in comparison with Labour’s last administration, knit picking from a tremendous record, having inherited a basket case.

Are you seriously suggesting that nothing was wrong in the 1992-1997 government?

Sorry for the thread derailment...

'Sorry claig, but this is impossible in our current system. Getting elected as an MP - let alone getting enough MPs elected to form a government - requires huge amounts of money and contacts.'

You are right. But we have to make a start. Voters have to put people in power in councils or as MEPs and eventually as MPs who reflect the opinions of the silent majority rather than the Oxbridge educated think tanks and PPEs paid for by special interest tax-free foundations and hedge funds. We have to have proportional representation and reinvigorate our politics and make people believe that voting actually counts and that the politicians they vote for will actually listen to the people and carry out the promises that they make. We need real democracy - no phoney Labour "Big Conversations" - we need to vote in people who represent us.

Up to now, the Oxbridge educated elite of PPEs and PhDs in Classics or English Literature, followed by stints at Harvard and Timbuktu and then appointments as Baronesses and Lords, have been able to ignore the people because there has been no party that opposes their views.

Now, at last, there is a people's party that opposes their 'climate change' scam, that questions their 'ring-fenced foreign aid' of paying £4 million to the Ethiopian Spice Girls instead of spending £4 million dredging the rivers in the Somerset Levels, that opposes attacks on Syria and unnecessary wars, that opposes EU dictats and rule by unelected Brussels bureaucrats, and that promises to cut the quangos where an elite with PhDs in Origami are paid £100,000 per year for a 3 day week to make decisions that affect the lives of millions of people.

It doesn't matter if UKIP doesn't win a single seat in Parliament, they will still create an earthquake because they will make evident that the system does not reflect the wishes of the people. Injustice, hypocrisy and rule by an unrepresentative, unaccountable elite can only continue for so long. In the end, change will come.

Can ordinary people make a difference? Can we have our voice heard? Can we get change?

Yes we can!

'I'm not sure where you get the idea that Nigel Farage is some sort of man of the people'

I don't mind how posh anyone is as long as they listen to ordinary people, and so far Farage does.

I don't believe in everything that Farage or UKIP stand for, but no one can have everything. It remains to be seen how good they are, but for now, they are the best that we have got.

As far as I understand it, they will scrap tuition fees, they will protect the Royal Mail, they will cut taxes, they will slash quangos and bureaucrats, they will scrap the 'Climate Change Act', they will provide greater local decision-making in hospitals, they will cut foreign aid to countries that have more billionaires than we do and which have space programmes and they will give us a referendum to get out of the EU and away from rule by an unelected, undemocratic, unrepresentative technocratic elite of puppets who really work for the interest of plutocrats.

It's not everything we want, but it's a good start.

And as far as I know, UKIP will scrap the bedroom tax.

There was a very moving programme about people on Bedroom Tax on Channel 4 last night. We saw disabled people living in a purpose-built home that cost thousands to fit out, struggling to pay these charges and under threat of being moved out of their safe home.

It is disgraceful and it will save next to nothing.

People are giving up voting, they think there is no point because all the Oxbridge PPEs are the same. But it will eventually be parties like UKIP that will represent a real opposition rather than the phoney 'Big Conversation' parties who couldn't act fast enough to impose biometric ID cards and DNA databases on the British people.

The phonies in Parliament pretend they care about people's "safety". So they are all in favour of a nanny state ban on parents smoking in cars which contain children.

But hardly a week goes by without us hearing about children dying or being attacked by savage dogs. Why don't they do something about that?

Just today, another baby has been mauled to death by a 'pit bull' type dog

BBC - Blackburn baby girl killed by 'American pit bull-type' pet dog

"It doesn't matter if UKIP doesn't win a single seat in Parliament, they will still create an earthquake because they will make evident that the system does not reflect the wishes of the people. Injustice, hypocrisy and rule by an unrepresentative, unaccountable elite can only continue for so long. In the end, change will come."

Not, it seems without a fight...

www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/nigel-farage-the-wythenshawe-byelection-has-been-as-dirty-as-they-come-9122243.html

"But I wonder what Mr Alexander would make of the behaviour of the red rosette-wearing activists in Sale screaming into the face of Ukip-supporting pensioners, calling them “Nazi racist scum”? And will he back the view of his fellow party members who warned Ukip supporters who have boards up in their garden that they must be taken down because, “They’re our houses, they’re council houses”."

Seeing that the UKIP campaign team comprised of ladies, venerable gentlemen and a couple of youngsters my admiration for the tactics employed by labour activists knows no bounds. Quite why I escaped any form of abuse whilst wearing desert boots is beyond me. Maybe they viewed a 5ft septuagenarian as a more worthwhile target?

Spinflight…thanks for the Farage friendly quote from the newspaper he regularly contributes to, but the LAST party to whinge about dirty politics is Ukip, you have nothing tangible to offer but electoral chaos.

Now personally I would uphold the right for anyone to speak without physical intimidation, but no wonder you feel unloved by those that both realise you have nothing - and fear for their way of life.

Claig…is this a pre 2015 manifesto launch scoop? Is Ukip promising a nationwide dog pound, or are you barking up the wrong populist tree just to criticize the established party’s, yet again?

This is a sad story, surely beneath Ukip’s dog-whistle political strategists, or maybe not.

The left wing thugs abusing UKIP supporters at Wythenshawe, won't stop people voting UKIP. People are fed up to the back teeth with the other three parties; betrayed by Blair on mass immigration the economy etc;
let down by Dave, his foot soldiers called 'swivel eyed loons'. Clegg betrays his own voters on tuition fees. Who would want this shower!
The larger and stronger UKIP get the better I will feel.

'Who would want this shower?'

Isitmebut

Ironmaiden….I’m guessing that you (and those others, like Claig) will be ecstatic when you get instructions on why Ukip DESERVES a vote, rather than why others tell you that the current parties, do not – as obvious misplaced ‘disappointment’ with the Conservatives delivering on most fronts, is not adding to Ukip’s credibility – especially when you don’t have any policy alternatives, or credible politicians, with one day in Westminster between them all.

By the time a Ukip MP government found it’s way around Westminster, never mind implement a policy, all investment would disappear, unemployment & interest rates would rocket up, the economy would have crashed and widespread anarchy would hit the streets.

But to be honest, as a vote for Ukip is mainly a vote for Labour, who would then form the next administration in 2015, the same would happen with them.

isitmebut you say that UKIP 'does not have one day in Westminster between them'. I would think that a blessing.
Cameron, Clegg, Miliband, have never had proper jobs. They are career politicians. Unlike Farage, Nuttal, Akers, and others.
Farage is not a career politician, as he has often said 'he just wants his country back!'
What other party brought the problems of mass immigration to the discussion table, and also ensured a referendum on the EU?
UKIP has changed as a party. In the beginning they were a pressure group, continually trying to get a referendum on the EU, now that is a clear possibility, they want the party to have MPs in Parliament.
In the last election I believe most prospective PPCs were not investigated to much by UKIP, now it is very difficult to stand as an MEP, and I should imagine a PPC in the next election.
A vote for UKIP is not a vote for Labour. UKIP is now the new party of the working class, not labour, as is illustrated by two political scientists on UKIPwatch, from the Daily Telegraph.

IsItMeBut especially when you don’t have any policy alternatives, or credible politicians, with one day in Westminster between them all.

You are aware that Parliament is comprised of two chambers aren't you? You know UKIP have representatives in the House of Lords? Are they not credible politicians?

You really don't seem to grasp what the role of a political party is. They don't exist solely to form governments. They have a critical role in a democracy because they represent the views of the electorate (as well as scrutinising the govt and holding it to account). Democracy is better served when a plurality of voices are heard.