UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

[XJ Flyer]

Esseesse said:

Guam said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2841686/Th...

Can someone just clear something up from the linked article for me...

"Since 2000, more than 2.1million migrants have acquired British citizenship."

I thought those from Poland or wherever were free to live and work here... why are they acquiring British citizenship? Or is it someone else acquiring British citizenship?

As far as I was aware a Polish citizens (ok we're all actually EU citizens) could not vote in national elections, is that right? Surely if we're giving 'real' British citizenship away, they certainly are entitled to vote in any national elections. Also what is the requirement to gain British citizenship? A period of time working in the UK (Switzerland want 7 years IIRC) or something else? 2.1M is a not insignificant amount of political influence (3.5% of 60M).

Nothing more difficult than filling in a form.

www.gov.uk/becoming-a-british-citizen

[Esseesse]

XJ Flyer said:

The way it looks is that UKIP are offering a referendum to leave the EU.Which going by past example will turn into a pro EU pro immigration media frenzy in order to get the result that the LabLibdemCon alliance wants.

I totally agree with your predictions of what an EU referendum is likely to look like.

XJ Flyer said:

From a UKIP vote point of view the big question is Farage a new Powell who is willing to stand up to all that and this time win out or not.So far all the indications are that he's not.So what does an anti EU vote actually mean and where does it actually get us in this case being that as I've said a non retrospective EU immigration barrier isn't worth the paper it is written on.Because by the time we're out all those who intend to come will have made sure that they are already here.

It wouldn't be retrospective if we said we're invoking Article 50, we'll be out in 2 years. Anyone entering from this point forward (i.e. during the 2 years) will be given a time limited work permit. I'm guessing your issue is people already here before that point?

XJ Flyer said:

As for Farage's position in caving in to media pressure to water down that future immigration policy the fact is New Zealand have already shown a similar example in the case of British immigrants there.IE some time ago their immigration rules were changed to allow Brit truck drivers to work there.

That policy was since reversed.No surprise the new ruling applies retrospectively so all those who were allowed in then had to leave the country.None of which resulted in any media so called racist witch hunt against the NZ government and no backing down regards same.

So where's the big difference in the case of EU immigrants allowed here to work then having to go home retrospectively 'if' we leave the EU resulting in their work permit here no longer being valid.The fact is Farage bottled out at the first hurdle,in the face of LabLibdemCon controlled media pressure,let alone the real fight next year and/or during a Brexit campaign.

This is too fluffy for me to pick apart, so... If you're happy with the retrospectiveness of things (not arguing for or against here) then it matters not if you imply that something wouldn't be done, because you can always retrospectively change your mind anyway.

Perhaps Powell (who I think was essentially right) was a textbook good politician, who had his opinions and argued for them till the end no matter what, using plain English. Perhaps he was too good for his own good though, because he couldn't bring himself to 'play politics' in that grey area where most these days reside where they word things to soften or distort their true meaning (not saying I like this). Perhaps if he was good at playing the spin game (softened his message) he would have better furthered his cause?

Edited by Esseesse on Thursday 20th November 11:52

[XJ Flyer]

Esseesse said:

Perhaps Powell (who I think was right) was a textbook good politician, who had his opinions and argued for them till the end no matter what, using plain English. Perhaps he was too good for his own good though, because he couldn't bring himself to 'play politics' in that grey area where most these days reside where they word things to soften or distort their true meaning (not saying I like this). Perhaps if he was good at playing the spin game (softened his message) he would have better furthered his cause?

That leaves the big question for the prospective UKIP vote is Farage just watering down the message to throw the opposition of guard based on the above and with the benefit of the hindsight that Powell didn't have.Ironically there is nothing to lose in giving Farage the benefit of the doubt in that regard.While on the other hand he knows that the establishment media campaign won't be appeased by that tactic anyway.So it is catch 22 in that regard and if he is ( hopefully ) really going to go for Powell's ideas then go for it and tell it like it is with the protests of the establishment only helping his cause in that case.

[Mojocvh]

Kk

FiF said:

Zod said:

FiF said:

Wasn't there some recent discussion saying ukippers were being silly for complaining that the main parties are all the same.

Are those with the blue placards 'kippers then?

You are not that simple, FiF. Read the blue placard again; it says LibDem and Tory are the same, i.e. Labour is different.

Nope not being simple but it's just a different shade of the same argument and as usual you eeither miss the point or are just a hypocrite.

It's seen on here time and time again. Some campaigning technique is quite OK when used by one of the big three in some variant, but when UKIP or another party use it, hands thrown up in horror.

As I say hypocrites. Time and again.

In reality all three are different in some way but there are specifics where they are too tight. If one or more of those specifics covers issues of high importance to a voter then they are probably viewed all the same.

Anyway good luck to your lot in the vote today, whatever the outcome, arses are being kicked. Good. About time.

Or to be more direct Zod,your beloved tory party is starting it's (hopefully swift)journey to political oblivion.

[FiF]

Zod said:

FiF said:

Nope not being simple but it's just a different shade of the same argument and as usual you eeither miss the point or are just a hypocrite.

It's seen on here time and time again. Some campaigning technique is quite OK when used by one of the big three in some variant, but when UKIP or another party use it, hands thrown up in horror.

As I say hypocrites. Time and again.

In reality all three are different in some way but there are specifics where they are too tight. If one or more of those specifics covers issues of high importance to a voter then they are probably viewed all the same.

Typical UKIP victim mentality: "hands thrown up in horror"!

You're not that simple either.

It was clear to anyone who was being referenced in terms of hands being thrown up.

You deliberately miss the point.

But please carry on behaving like this if you wish. I'm sure the UKIP supporters will be pleased to see others pronouncing that because of the attitudes of you and others more and more decide they will vote for UKIP.

Some people can't be helped, and that is a reference directly to you.

[don4l]

It's great fun watching all the wailing and gnashing of teeth while the voters in Rochester are sending a second UKIP to Westminister.

Will we see more defections on Friday?

[Wombat3]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/11/anoth...

Interesting point of view re coalitions, minority governments and the 14 day no confidence vote mechanism that would appear to trump the fixed term parliament. Didn't know about that.

[Zod]

FiF said:

Zod said:

FiF said:

Some people can't be helped, and that is a reference directly to you.

you lot are the ones who can't be helped; vote UKIP all you like, you'll never get what you want that way.

[FiF]

Zod said:

FiF said:

Some people can't be helped, and that is a reference directly to you.

you lot are the ones who can't be helped; vote UKIP all you like, you'll never get what you want that way.

Sorted out your quoting.

Not really sure why you include me in "you lot" and "vote UKIP all you like"

Clearly a goldfish memory. Read back.

[Mrr T]

It’s difficult not to love the Daily Wail.

wc98 said:

Guam said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2841686/Th...

The truth about East European migration: One in 30 Latvians are living in Britain, one in 60 Poles are also over here - and statistics don't even show latest influx
Statistics show 1.3 per cent of Eastern Europeans living anywhere in Europe are now in the UK

The figures for the A8 countries are going to be high because the UK was the only country not to impose work restrictions. Best to discuss that with T Blair.
The latest figures show A8 immigration is now about 80k per annum net.
If you want statistics then about 1 in 30 Brits live in other EU countries.

wc98 said:

Britain is giving citizenship to more migrants than any other EU country, figures show
Since 2000, more than 2.1m migrants have acquired British citizenship
Data compiled by independent Migration Observatory at Oxford University

Typical DW. Note the figures here do not refer to the EU citizens acquiring UK citizenship.
UK citizenship is expensive and the only benefit for an EU immigrant is easier travel to some countries and being able to vote in UK government elections.
I expect most getting British citizenship are Non EU immigrants.

[BGARK]

Zod said:

Oh, look, really old white people, the typical demographic of Labour supporters!

[FiF]

Guam said:

FiF said:

Sorted out your quoting.

Not really sure why you include me in "you lot" and "vote UKIP all you like"

Clearly a goldfish memory. Read back.

Thankfully I and most voters dont need Zods permission to vote "other"
We still live in a free society (for now at least).
frustration is clearly mounting with the "fanboys" of the main 2

Yep, around Rochester you can smell the fear.

[Zod]

FiF said:

Zod said:

FiF said:

Some people can't be helped, and that is a reference directly to you.

you lot are the ones who can't be helped; vote UKIP all you like, you'll never get what you want that way.

Sorted out your quoting.

Not really sure why you include me in "you lot" and "vote UKIP all you like"

Clearly a goldfish memory. Read back.

Trying to keep track of which of you is a supporter or voter and which is not a supporter/voter, but argues on UKIP's side in any case is not something for which I have time (like sorting the quote, for which, thank you).

[BlackLabel]

So what point is the Labour Shadow Attorney General trying to make? What a snob.

Edited by BlackLabel on Thursday 20th November 15:22

[Art0ir]

Labour party's utter contempt for the working class (the actual working class, not the benefit class).

[Axionknight]

Labour haven't been the party of the decent working man/woman for years - no wonder so many people turned against them at the Heywood/Middleton by-election, long may that tradition continue.

[BlackLabel]

Imagine the reaction if a Tory or UKIP politician had posted something like this. It's the same thing imo. What a cretin she is.

[hidetheelephants]

People have been accused of incitement for less than that.

[The Hypno-Toad]

Simply following The Common Purpose rules.

Anyone who flies the cross of St George is a racist and a football hooligan.

Except when the World Cup is on, when we want to encourage them to go out and buy as much booze as possible and we can ride the coat tails of any success the England team might have.

[Esseesse]

BlackLabel said:

So what point is the Labour Shadow Attorney General trying to make? What a snob.

Edited by BlackLabel on Thursday 20th November 15:22

http://order-order.com/2014/11/20/thornberry-ive-n...

Thornberry: It was a house covered in British flags. I’ve never seen anything like it before. My point is that it’s a remarkable image of a house completely covered in flags. There’s three of them.

Hmmm British flags?