UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

[anonymous-user]

Guam said:

This is the view of Chris Leslie from a Grauniad article

"Labour will get the current budget into surplus and national debt falling as soon as possible in the next parliament," he will say, echoing Balls's pledge from last year's party conference.

Not much different from the kind of sweeping statements UKIP get hammered for, how exactly are Labour planning to achieve this?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/29/la...

I agree that that is baffling hyperbole from a party that is traditionally tax 'n' spend (and, IIRC, has said that that is how it would have pulled the country out of recession - not quite the same thing as cutting the deficit).

But as I keep saying, the fact that Party A makes pie-in-the-sky promises should not be a reason for Party B to do likewise; nor should either party's promises escape careful scrutiny just because they are both doing the same thing.

[brenflys777]

Greg66 said:

brenflys777 said:

I'd put Winston in the same category as Labours Diane Abbot and the conservatives Heseltine and Ken Clarke.

Heseltine and Clarke. Really? You know who they were, right? MP for 35 years, Secretary of State for Defence, President of the Board of Trade, Deputy PM, successful businessman in his own right; MP for 44 years, Chancellor, Home Secretary, Lord Chancellor, Education Secretary, Health Secretary.

Hell, even Diane Abbot manage to get elected as an MP.

This joker is a former hairdresser, letting agent and mechanic, who couldn't even get elected as a councillor. Although he had managed to retain his deposit. Once. In many attempts.

Seriously, you need to get a grip on reality.

Fully gripping reality thank you. Winston is IMO a poor representative for the party in general. Diane Abbott, Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine have all labelled UKIP and it's supporters to be ignorant, bigoted and racist. All three seem to be of similar ability to Winston in representing a reasoned thoughtful position.

I'm aware all three have had successful careers, what they do and say now makes them comparable to Winston's IMO.

[turbobloke]

brenflys777 said:

Winston is IMO a poor representative for the party in general. Diane Abbott, Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine have all labelled UKIP and it's supporters to be ignorant, bigoted and racist. All three seem to be of similar ability to Winston in representing a reasoned thoughtful position.

I'm aware all three have had successful careers, what they do and say now makes them comparable to Winston's IMO.

Agreed.

Still, it's politics, a deeply serious matter where you're only as good as your last soundbite.

[mrpurple]

2013BRM said:

longblackcoat said:

Guam said:

how exactly are Labour planning to achieve this?

That's for the Labour - The Future thread. Except that there's no point is having one on PH.

Point is, UKIP have come in with some pretty strong claims, and they have no track record. You might argue that Labour and the Conservatives don't have great track records, which is your right, but at least ththey have one. Each of those parties has achieved tangible things in their history that they can point to and demonstrate that yes, they have some credibility

UKIP haven't, hence the need to prove that their more outlandish claims are actually based on sane achievable policies rather than just being a wish list.

I'm puzzled as to how you can deny a Party a chance just because they are new, they need to make a few cock ups to gain experience surely? otherwise there is no chance for new blood
As for having a track record that is credible merely because it exists has got to be a bad thing because it shows that they have not learned from their cock ups

I don't think for one minute that UKIP will ever form a majority govt (not in my lifetime anyway) but do think I might just hear the Immortal words, from whomever does " we wanted to do XYZ but UKIP wouldn't let us"

[Disastrous]

Esseesse said:

mrpurple said:

Esseesse said:

Randy Winkman said:

I think Nihal is right - it just adds to the idea that UKIP is racist. Can they really not see that?

It treads close to the PC line in this PC obsessed road, indeed. But AFAIK UKIP did not commission this song? It appears to be created unprompted by a UKIP supporter who happens to be an ex DJ (I don't know him, I'm probably too young).

Personally I don't find it racist, in the same way I don't find people trying to speak with a French accent racist, or (was it) Vettel joking about Nigel Mansells (IIRC) accent at some award ceremony.

I don't think it is racists...just very very naff and not very well thought out.

UKIP may not have commissioned it but they are promoting it (I have an email from UKIP central). It was performed at the conference to entertain the troops and that is where it should have stayed IMHO....nothing like giving your detractors ammunition to fire at you but then again it is said all publicity is good publicity.

eta and putting Winston up to defend it is even less well thought out than doing the song in the 1st place.

Edited by mrpurple on Tuesday 21st October 11:30

Agree that it's pretty naff, however it says something that it exists and the novelty is that it exists not that it's an incredibly good song (though you hear worse lyrics daily, most popular music means absolutely nothing). Can't see anybody wanting to do the same for Cameron.

Also agree about the all publicity is good publicity point. The only thing detractors will possibly do is attack it from a thinly veiled racist point of view, which because it's plainly not to most, will most likely play into UKIP's hands. The best thing the would be detractors could do would be to ignore it.

Does anyone really think that 'all publicity is good publicity' any more? It quite plainly is not the case, and whilst I don't consider the song 'racist' in any classical sense of the word, it's tremendously poorly judged, and UKIP jumping on it, shows a remarkable lack of taste and sensitivity in a touchy media landscape.

I'd suggest that the best thing UKIP could have done was ignore it, not the detractors.

It's also st but let's not even touch on having a musical debate about it!

[Zod]

voyds9 said:

If Mike Reid singing in a Caribbean accent is racist.

Then should we also be debating black people playing Elgar.

Wow! You actually said that.


We're back to the days of Godfrey Bloom being defended over his Bongo-Bongo Land comments.

For the avoidance of doubt, I neither think all UKIP politicians and members are racist or that most of the UKIP-sympathising posters on this thread are. I am,however, surprised that any UKIP supporter defends this.

[Zod]

Guam said:

This is the view of Chris Leslie from a Grauniad article

"Labour will get the current budget into surplus and national debt falling as soon as possible in the next parliament," he will say, echoing Balls's pledge from last year's party conference.

Not much different from the kind of sweeping statements UKIP get hammered for, how exactly are Labour planning to achieve this?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/29/la...

The answer to that is that Labour are not planning it at all. They know there is no chance of it whatsoever and don't care, but they think there are sufficient voters around who will be taken in.

[Timsta]

Greg66 said:

Heseltine and Clarke. Really? You know who they were, right? MP for 35 years, Secretary of State for Defence, President of the Board of Trade, Deputy PM, successful businessman in his own right; MP for 44 years, Chancellor, Home Secretary, Lord Chancellor, Education Secretary, Health Secretary.

Hell, even Diane Abbot manage to get elected as an MP.

This joker is a former hairdresser, letting agent and mechanic, who couldn't even get elected as a councillor. Although he had managed to retain his deposit. Once. In many attempts.

Seriously, you need to get a grip on reality.

That huge list of government jobs is exactly the reason that people turn to UKIP. I'm sick of career politicians.

Edited by Timsta on Tuesday 21st October 12:56

[Zod]

Guam said:

Zod said:

The answer to that is that Labour are not planning it at all. They know there is no chance of it whatsoever and don't care, but they think there are sufficient voters around who will be taken in.

So the same Criticism leveled at the UKIP lot, now would you like to look at the Osborne links I posted and comment on those given that was reality rather than just wish lists?

I have several times in these threads said that I wished the government had stuck to its commitments on tax and spending. Even without the LibDems, they would have slipped on plenty of them, as all governments do, but the LibDems hindered the Conservatives constantly, as Clegg proudly proclaims.

[voyds9]

Zod said:

voyds9 said:

If Mike Reid singing in a Caribbean accent is racist.

Then should we also be debating black people playing Elgar.

Wow! You actually said that.

Did you miss the irony smilie.

And while we are on the subject perhaps the British should stop using the Americanism 'wow'.

[Zod]

voyds9 said:

Zod said:

voyds9 said:

If Mike Reid singing in a Caribbean accent is racist.

Then should we also be debating black people playing Elgar.

Wow! You actually said that.

Did you miss the irony smilie.

And while we are on the subject perhaps the British should stop using the Americanism 'wow'.

Ah, so if it was ironic, you must also think that it is in questionable taste and probably a bit racist (as well as being utterly st).

[eharding]

voyds9 said:

And while we are on the subject perhaps the British should stop using the Americanism 'wow'.

As an interjection, the term has its origin in 16th century Scotland....

[Mojocvh]

eharding said:

voyds9 said:

And while we are on the subject perhaps the British should stop using the Americanism 'wow'.

As an interjection, the term has it's origin in 16th century Scotland....

Really, wow. Duh!

[voyds9]

eharding said:

As an interjection, the term has its origin in 16th century Scotland....

Everyday is a learning experience on PH.

[BGARK]

Zod said:

probably a bit racist

Is this your standing argument for literally everything, just because most normal people (including black people) don't want to tow the pathetic PC line, it doesn't not make them somehow evil.

[BGARK]

eharding said:

'gay comedians'

Come on, please tell us a joke.

[Zod]

BGARK said:

Zod said:

probably a bit racist

Is this your standing argument for literally everything, just because most normal people (including black people) don't want to tow the pathetic PC line, it doesn't not make them somehow evil.

I'm just going to laugh at you for this.

[Wombat3]

Guam said:

Hannan on Barroso

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2800998/...

Good points well made. Its entirely good that this stuff comes to the fore IMO. You have to wonder how well briefed Barroso was before he opened his mouth.

[Zod]

Guam said:

Hannan on Barroso

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2800998/...

He's right on every point. The thing about Barroso is that he is an ex-communist from a country that was run by a military dictatorship until he was 18. Portugal has relevance only though it's membership of the EU and even then it has precious little. He just doesn't understand a country like ours.

[turbobloke]

Wombat3 said:

Guam said:

Hannan on Barroso

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2800998/...

Good points well made. Its entirely good that this stuff comes to the fore IMO. You have to wonder how well briefed Barroso was before he opened his mouth.

Eurodrones must think they can divine truth from the ether, either that or their will be done as speaking it makes it so. It would be surprising to read that Barroso still has any use for toilet paper, there must be so much talk coming out that there's no room or time for anything else.