UKIP - The Future - Volume 2
Discussion
Wombat3 said:
Definitly a problem for Cleggie & Miliband. Cameron leads a party that is openly split on Europe and always has been - but then he already has an established position of committing to a referendum. In that respect he has the thing about as well covered as it can be.
How deluded you are.......do you really think many, except the gullible, believe his promise of if's, buts and maybes? If not a problem for Dave then why not kill UKIP off and debate with NF?mrpurple said:
Wombat3 said:
Definitly a problem for Cleggie & Miliband. Cameron leads a party that is openly split on Europe and always has been - but then he already has an established position of committing to a referendum. In that respect he has the thing about as well covered as it can be.
How deluded you are.......do you really think many, except the gullible, believe his promise of if's, buts and maybes? If not a problem for Dave then why not kill UKIP off and debate with NF?s2art said:
RedTrident said:
Why would the Prime Minister want to debate with someone who is not elected nor has any MPs? UKIP has to earn that right.
Because there needs to be a public debate before any referendum. Who do you suggest Cameron should debate with?
UKIP supporters should accept that the referendum itself is a victory. I wasn't under the impression that the PM is particularly pro Europe so I'm not sure why he would debate with NF on it. Its nothing like the Scottish independence campaign.
If for no other reason I think come general election time the Tory promise of a referendum will result in many potential UKIP voters ending up voting for the Tories. If we are to leave the EU in its current form then this is the way in which it actually can be achieved. Labour have fudged the question and the Lib Dems are pro EU.
Want the chance to be out of the EU, then vote Tory. And that's coming from a Labour party supporter, infact if the Tories campaigned using this I can see it swaying many Labour voters also.
s2art said:
RedTrident said:
Why would the Prime Minister want to debate with someone who is not elected nor has any MPs? UKIP has to earn that right.
Because there needs to be a public debate before any referendum. Who do you suggest Cameron should debate with?I can't see any mandate that requires the leaders to have televised or radio debates with their competitors, let alone anything that then requires a party with no seats to have a place at that table.
I personally think it would be great for them all to have a live debate, though I think a 4 way discussion would be too many to make it an effective one.
UKIP obviously have a disproportionate support level on PH (or within this subforum of PH), though on any sensible analysis there isn't a right for UKIP to be involved in anything ahead of the 3 largest parties (which may of course change after the election next year).
OK then just for a moment, a completely hypothetical fantasy island situation.
It's the morning after the 20xx election.
Dave or whoever is packing the moving van.
Brenda has summoned His Nigelness to the palace to ask him to form a Govt. (You see now why I said it was fantasy island and completely hypothetical)
Anyway a key part of the manifesto of the newly elected Govt was Out of EU. Unequivocally so.
Question. Is a referendum still needed, or can they give notice re Article 50 without one?
If they did would they get away with it?
It's the morning after the 20xx election.
Dave or whoever is packing the moving van.
Brenda has summoned His Nigelness to the palace to ask him to form a Govt. (You see now why I said it was fantasy island and completely hypothetical)
Anyway a key part of the manifesto of the newly elected Govt was Out of EU. Unequivocally so.
Question. Is a referendum still needed, or can they give notice re Article 50 without one?
If they did would they get away with it?
RedTrident said:
s2art said:
RedTrident said:
Why would the Prime Minister want to debate with someone who is not elected nor has any MPs? UKIP has to earn that right.
Because there needs to be a public debate before any referendum. Who do you suggest Cameron should debate with?UKIP supporters should accept that the referendum itself is a victory. I wasn't under the impression that the PM is particularly pro Europe so I'm not sure why he would debate with NF on it. Its nothing like the Scottish independence campaign.
If for no other reason I think come general election time the Tory promise of a referendum will result in many potential UKIP voters ending up voting for the Tories. If we are to leave the EU in its current form then this is the way in which it actually can be achieved. Labour have fudged the question and the Lib Dems are pro EU.
Want the chance to be out of the EU, then vote Tory. And that's coming from a Labour party supporter, infact if the Tories campaigned using this I can see it swaying many Labour voters also.
FiF said:
OK then just for a moment, a completely hypothetical fantasy island situation.
It's the morning after the 20xx election.
Dave or whoever is packing the moving van.
Brenda has summoned His Nigelness to the palace to ask him to form a Govt. (You see now why I said it was fantasy island and completely hypothetical)
Anyway a key part of the manifesto of the newly elected Govt was Out of EU. Unequivocally so.
Question. Is a referendum still needed, or can they give notice re Article 50 without one?
If they did would they get away with it?
If I understand it correctly, the previous UKIP stance was that on gaining power they would have a referendum - this was responsible for a major donor deciding to pull his funding. The chap in question ( Paul Sykes ) has recently returned on the basis that UKIP contest the EU elections on a simple OUT of EU message. He has stated he may not support them in the GE. It's the morning after the 20xx election.
Dave or whoever is packing the moving van.
Brenda has summoned His Nigelness to the palace to ask him to form a Govt. (You see now why I said it was fantasy island and completely hypothetical)
Anyway a key part of the manifesto of the newly elected Govt was Out of EU. Unequivocally so.
Question. Is a referendum still needed, or can they give notice re Article 50 without one?
If they did would they get away with it?
It seems sensible to me that for the EU elections UKIP keep it simple and say that a vote for them in these elections is a vote of OUT/NO to the EU.
When the GE comes around I think they will revert to a UKIP vote is a vote for a referendum because they will have to be contesting it on wider issues compared to the EU vote. In the May vote it is fundamental to the behaviour of the MEP's on election and in particular their lack of involvement in the evolution of the EU - UKIP MEP's are pro Europe and anti EU, not interested in trying to get the minimal reform that is possible, but in trying to act as a speed bump to further federalisation and power transfer.
RedTrident said:
Labour have fudged the question and the Lib Dems are pro EU.
LIBLABCON are all pro EU.If you have a pro EU government in power, as well as the undieniable bias of the BBC, then i dont believe that people would vote to leave.
You at least need an anti EU government to counteract the massive control the BBC has over the POV of most people.
Which is why, even if an referendum was called tomorrow, what with all parties in the HoC being pro EU, i dont believe that we would get the out result.
mrpurple said:
Wombat3 said:
Definitly a problem for Cleggie & Miliband. Cameron leads a party that is openly split on Europe and always has been - but then he already has an established position of committing to a referendum. In that respect he has the thing about as well covered as it can be.
How deluded you are.......do you really think many, except the gullible, believe his promise of if's, buts and maybes? If not a problem for Dave then why not kill UKIP off and debate with NF?None of it conditional on the output of any discussions.
The Tories are openly split on Europe, always have been &always will be. Most think it would be, on balance, a good idea if it was an efficient & trade based organisation but where the split/difference lies is how far away from that the thing is. Increasingly the view seems to be that we are a long way from it & I would suggest that the whole Tory party is moving to a more EU sceptic position.
Tory HQ is clearly betting that the electorate will "kill off UKIP" in May 2015 for them when the reality sets in that only one party can realistically deliver a referendum. There is therefore no need to have any great debate with UKIP. We will see if they are right.
UKIP will blitz the EU elections in May & the Tories will just say - "fine, it just demonstrates that we are right to be looking at a referendum, we are already on the case with it". They will then point out that they are the only party likely to be in a position to actually deliver it.
The big losers from UKIP doing well in May will be those that have refused to countenance a vote or those that say we only need it under very specific circumstances (i.e. Clegg & Miliband), so despite the fact that the Tories will probably come third it doesn't really put them under a great deal more pressure for 2015.
Not the same for Miliband though - it will just make him look well behind the curve. Clegg is just a "dead man walking" & has shot his bolt by having the debate with Farage. I was genuinely surprised he was stupid enough to take it on.
Its very simple stuff.
Guam said:
Wombat3 said:
Guam said:
Laurel Green said:
Listening to LBC this morning and two different politicians referred to UKIP as the anti-establishment party. Is this to be the new buzzword of the opposition I wonder.
I think that's a great handle for them, It leaves them free to pull from all the other parties as they cant be described as Tory light, or Labour light etc.
Given NF destroyed Clegg so utterly, it is clear that Cameron and Milliband are terrified to get in the ring with him, this will become increasingly evident to the man in the street
They are damned if they don't damned if they do, if they cancel the leaders debates it will be because of NF, if they have them and don't invite him, it will be because they are scared of him. If they hold it and invite him and do a Clegg on him, it will drive voters away
Lose, lose, lose, for them basically
Farage needs to be a bit careful around that because if he's advocating that we shouldn't wait for a referendum & should just exit the EU then the question as to be asked as to what's his problem with a bit of democracy?
Its a bit like Cleggs manifesto commitment in 2010, they aren't going to do it, only the diehard fan boys believe he will, the rest of us not so much.
Not sure where you are getting the Farage stuff from, advocating we should leave as soon as possible, does not preclude the belief that a referendum is needed to achieve it, is that the latest line from central office wombat?
The second funniest part is the continued (very weak) line that "he MUST be lying". Pointless to debate it, we will only find out in 2015 (maybe)
Note use of the word "if" with reference to whether Farage thinks we need a referendum or not.
Wombat3 said:
The funniest part of that is the idea that the electorate is "rational"
The second funniest part is the continued (very weak) line that "he MUST be lying". Pointless to debate it, we will only find out in 2015 (maybe)
Note use of the word "if" with reference to whether Farage thinks we need a referendum or not.
Its not funny even one little bit!!! Some people vote labour and some for labour lite led by a Blair clone !!!!! Oh well onwards and upwardsThe second funniest part is the continued (very weak) line that "he MUST be lying". Pointless to debate it, we will only find out in 2015 (maybe)
Note use of the word "if" with reference to whether Farage thinks we need a referendum or not.
Wombat3 said:
Ah this old crap. There is no need to debate anything with NF. The Cons position is simple & clear. Election 2015, legislation locked in before 2016 & referendum before end 2018.
None of it conditional on the output of any discussions.
The Tories are openly split on Europe, always have been &always will be. Most think it would be, on balance, a good idea if it was an efficient & trade based organisation but where the split/difference lies is how far away from that the thing is. Increasingly the view seems to be that we are a long way from it & I would suggest that the whole Tory party is moving to a more EU sceptic position.
Tory HQ is clearly betting that the electorate will "kill off UKIP" in May 2015 for them when the reality sets in that only one party can realistically deliver a referendum. There is therefore no need to have any great debate with UKIP. We will see if they are right.
UKIP will blitz the EU elections in May & the Tories will just say - "fine, it just demonstrates that we are right to be looking at a referendum, we are already on the case with it". They will then point out that they are the only party likely to be in a position to actually deliver it.
The big losers from UKIP doing well in May will be those that have refused to countenance a vote or those that say we only need it under very specific circumstances (i.e. Clegg & Miliband), so despite the fact that the Tories will probably come third it doesn't really put them under a great deal more pressure for 2015.
Not the same for Miliband though - it will just make him look well behind the curve. Clegg is just a "dead man walking" & has shot his bolt by having the debate with Farage. I was genuinely surprised he was stupid enough to take it on.
Its very simple stuff.
Yeah that old "crap" again. Why do you think it keeps coming back around wombers?None of it conditional on the output of any discussions.
The Tories are openly split on Europe, always have been &always will be. Most think it would be, on balance, a good idea if it was an efficient & trade based organisation but where the split/difference lies is how far away from that the thing is. Increasingly the view seems to be that we are a long way from it & I would suggest that the whole Tory party is moving to a more EU sceptic position.
Tory HQ is clearly betting that the electorate will "kill off UKIP" in May 2015 for them when the reality sets in that only one party can realistically deliver a referendum. There is therefore no need to have any great debate with UKIP. We will see if they are right.
UKIP will blitz the EU elections in May & the Tories will just say - "fine, it just demonstrates that we are right to be looking at a referendum, we are already on the case with it". They will then point out that they are the only party likely to be in a position to actually deliver it.
The big losers from UKIP doing well in May will be those that have refused to countenance a vote or those that say we only need it under very specific circumstances (i.e. Clegg & Miliband), so despite the fact that the Tories will probably come third it doesn't really put them under a great deal more pressure for 2015.
Not the same for Miliband though - it will just make him look well behind the curve. Clegg is just a "dead man walking" & has shot his bolt by having the debate with Farage. I was genuinely surprised he was stupid enough to take it on.
Its very simple stuff.
Heres the clue; We dont trust cameron.
The guy initially discounted the idea of a referendum, its only when he got a wobble on at the rapid rise of Ukip that he suddenly thought a bit of political manouvering was in order.
The guys not offering a referendum out of conviction because he believes in it, he's doing it because it represents a political opportunity, a cynical attempt to try and cut off Ukip and get his big pig face back in the trough for another five long fat years.
Why the F*ck! would anyone want to vote for a creep like that?
A totally represntative example of why parliaments busted and the system it representa along with it.
None of them are doing anything out of conviction or belief in the right thing, theyre doing it for political and personal advantage and we are bloody sick of the stink of it all.
I dont just say its cameeron, its not, its pretty much the entire lot thats gone bad.
Ukip, for all their flaws so far represent a chance to put the boot into the cosseted ar$es of the established partys and hopefully their system as well long term, why would anyone oppose that, unless of course they have vested interests in keeping things just the way they are.
@S2art- The reason minibrain isnt matching cameron is because like clegg, he's complicit in the destruction of our democracy, our freedoms and our rights to self determination.
He knows that services rendered to his eu paymasters will eventually be rewarded, why would he give a rats about us when he gets the chance to kick us some more and get a payoff after he's delivered us?
Scum utter scum the lot of them.
Wombat3 said:
Ah this old crap. There is no need to debate anything with NF..............
Its very simple stuff.
I eagerly await the day when any single thing that Cameron does is greeted by you as being less than optimal and cunningly planned ;-)Its very simple stuff.
My 12 year old asked who the two people having the EU debate on the TV were when it appeared on the news. I explained their respective roles. She then asked why the PM and Labour leaders weren't there. I explained that neither of them thought it was necessary and because it probably IS simple she asked if they agreed with one of the others or if they thought they'd lose the debate and look bad. In the words of a fine operator but fictional politician 'you might think that, I couldn't possibly comment'
If UKIP do well in the EU elections, the only Conservative MPs who will be genuinely better off are the post 2015 election leadership contenders like David Davis. IMO.
Guam said:
Wombat3 said:
Guam said:
Wombat3 said:
Guam said:
Laurel Green said:
Listening to LBC this morning and two different politicians referred to UKIP as the anti-establishment party. Is this to be the new buzzword of the opposition I wonder.
I think that's a great handle for them, It leaves them free to pull from all the other parties as they cant be described as Tory light, or Labour light etc.
Given NF destroyed Clegg so utterly, it is clear that Cameron and Milliband are terrified to get in the ring with him, this will become increasingly evident to the man in the street
They are damned if they don't damned if they do, if they cancel the leaders debates it will be because of NF, if they have them and don't invite him, it will be because they are scared of him. If they hold it and invite him and do a Clegg on him, it will drive voters away
Lose, lose, lose, for them basically
Farage needs to be a bit careful around that because if he's advocating that we shouldn't wait for a referendum & should just exit the EU then the question as to be asked as to what's his problem with a bit of democracy?
Its a bit like Cleggs manifesto commitment in 2010, they aren't going to do it, only the diehard fan boys believe he will, the rest of us not so much.
Not sure where you are getting the Farage stuff from, advocating we should leave as soon as possible, does not preclude the belief that a referendum is needed to achieve it, is that the latest line from central office wombat?
The second funniest part is the continued (very weak) line that "he MUST be lying". Pointless to debate it, we will only find out in 2015 (maybe)
Note use of the word "if" with reference to whether Farage thinks we need a referendum or not.
He will not give us a referendum unless HE FEELS he has a suitable alternative, if Germany and France dont provide it then NO referendum. His view was pretty clear on that.
Only the terminally deluded would believe he intends to do other than he stated in that radio Interview!
Unless you feel he was lying Wombat
Linky?
brenflys777 said:
Wombat3 said:
Ah this old crap. There is no need to debate anything with NF..............
Its very simple stuff.
I eagerly await the day when any single thing that Cameron does is greeted by you as being less than optimal and cunningly planned ;-)Its very simple stuff.
My 12 year old asked who the two people having the EU debate on the TV were when it appeared on the news. I explained their respective roles. She then asked why the PM and Labour leaders weren't there. I explained that neither of them thought it was necessary and because it probably IS simple she asked if they agreed with one of the others or if they thought they'd lose the debate and look bad. In the words of a fine operator but fictional politician 'you might think that, I couldn't possibly comment'
If UKIP do well in the EU elections, the only Conservative MPs who will be genuinely better off are the post 2015 election leadership contenders like David Davis. IMO.
We shall have to wait & see who is right on that.
Wombat3 said:
DC is much smarter than you give him credit for methinks. You don't agree (clearly)
We shall have to wait & see who is right on that.
No he is quite smartWe shall have to wait & see who is right on that.
But he is only intrested in the next election victory
Hence he keeps a nice get out clause to keep wombat and co voting for him.
And when he uses his get out clause you are dumb enough to support him.
If anyone isn't as smart as he thinks he is then it is yourself
Wombat3 said:
DC is much smarter than you give him credit for methinks. You don't agree (clearly)
We shall have to wait & see who is right on that.
He's not smart, he's cunning, dont confuse the two.We shall have to wait & see who is right on that.
The lesser of two evils means the tories need to be the next government for wombats litmus test of his leaders honesty to be tested but theres no way I'm going to help them do that.
If I'm honest, I'd hope they get *just * enough votes to be able to run things but no more, voting for the dibdums or labour is suicidal.
Wombats already said that if dave reneges on his referendum pledge that he'd be mightily miffed, I would suggest that not only will he be miffed mightily that its time to put the dunce hat on.
Youre going to be upset wombers, really, you are mate, duplicitous dave will do what he wants, pledge or no.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff