Rochester By-Election. Consequences of UKIP Win on Tory/Lab

[GetCarter]

scenario8 said:

I don't understand what goes through otherwise intelligent peoples' minds when they subscribe to twitter. ...

Oh hang on...

Out of interest, I bloody hate Facespace, but I am on twitter.

Reasons:

I post one tweet a day with a photo from the north west Highlands, which people who miss the place look at every morning. It is extraordinary how much pleasure this gives to 'ex pats'.

I get the news as it happens, far faster than on the TV... and from a personal perspective from the correspondents I respect.

Social media is 99% crap, but there is always the 1%... if you look for it.

[WinstonWolf]

Digga said:

oyster said:

Which ones are ungrateful?

Very, very few thankfully, but surely you are not going to be so obtuse as to deny the fact there are British citizens - some of whom are recent immigrants - who, at home and abroad, plot against the West and this country specifically?

Clue: There have already been convictions, deportations and confiscation of passports. This much is fact.

Thank you for answering in my absence

People who escape from a war torn sthole and then try to turn the UK into a colder and wetter version of that same sthole, just stay on the plane...

[Yazar]

5pen said:

The Tories had probably not banked on having to find a candidate to replace a bloke with a 10k majority so soon.

They had a long list of candidates lined up. Unfortunately last minute decison for a local only candidate ruled out all the usual parachuted-in eton chums.

[mjb1]

Yazar said:

They had a long list of candidates lined up. Unfortunately last minute decison for a local only candidate ruled out all the usual parachuted-in eton chums.

Unfortunate, or deliberate - maybe they already knew it was an almost certain defeat? Wouldn't want any fellow ex Eaton pals to make themselves look silly, there'll be some safer bets come up for them in other constituencies (they hope).

A year ago, the main parties could say that a vote for UKIP is a wasted vote etc. With each victory they are picking up momentum from people that used to think it was pointless to vote for any other than Labour or Tory.

[Digga]

WinstonWolf said:

People who escape from a war torn sthole and then try to turn the UK into a colder and wetter version of that same sthole, just stay on the plane...

The people I always feel desperately sorry for are refugees who arrive here, only to discover their tormentors have had the red carpet rolled out for them. Them and the people already living here who have to live by some of the vile, criminal and barbaric individuals the open-door policy has granted access to.

Mind bogglingly daft.

[XJ Flyer]

WinstonWolf said:

XJ Flyer said:

Yazar said:

XJ Flyer said:

The fact is we need another Powell when all we've got in the form of UKIP is Cameron with more attitude at least in regard to the immigration question.Which leaves the question if UKIP has gone soft on immigration then what is to say it won't do the same in terms of a Brexit.

The reason for UKIP being the size it now is, if due to Farage having a intuitive grasp of the workings of the media.

What reckless said on the video i.e. deport after a period new migrants of little benefit but look sympathetically at a working migrant who has been here a while', mass media twisted into a 'deport them all' attack.

In the 10 seconds Farage had to reply, all he has is a soundbite that would then be repeated every half hour on the news on the day before the elections.

So there was no room of explanation in detail, the message had to be simple and ensure this was not the time that the 'racist' tag that the lefties have been trying so hard in vain for the last few years to pin to UKIP, would have any chance of sticking.

In this case that would be exactly the same issue as any Labour supporter,who supported Powell's policies in the day,had to deal with on a daily basis.IE deal with it don't surrender or pander to it.

No, what we need now is Farage. I'm not against immigration per-se, but it needs to be in the best interests of everyone who lives here.

Immigration can add to the Great in Britain, but it won't if we let ungrateful tossers in.

In which case there are three other parties which specialise in that policy and now obviously a fourth which has surrendered its principles to pander to that same cheap labour/socialist alliance vote.As I said the relevant figure is the 49% who have no electoral representation.At least unless/until the English democrats get their act together in finishing the job that Powell started.

[Yazar]

Hmmmm

FT Columnist said:

The Tories’ folly is not losing MPs such as Mark Reckless, the defector who now represents Rochester for Ukip, but admitting them in the first place. Their benches are peppered with cranks, zealots and the flamboyantly disloyal. A serious party must have a selection process that screens out candidates who are plausible defectors, as Mr Reckless always was. Mr Cameron began his tenure as leader by trying to recruit moderates – it helped if they were women or ethnic minorities – as parliamentary candidates. Traditionalists fought back and, as ever, he relented for the sake of quiet life.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/83aac20a-7149-11e4-b178-00144feabdc0.html

[XJ Flyer]

brenflys777 said:

XJFlyer - you seem to be desperately hoping that a party with such growing support agrees with you - they don't! I asked on one of the other threads you've posted to several times - why don't you back up your opinions of what you think Mark Reckless MP (UKIP) said with quotes of what he actually said?

I think the reason is you are clinging to any hope that there might be widespread support for your naive 'deport them all' views, that won't be found in UKIP. Without evidence you are just mashing at the keyboard. UKIP policy is not and will never be to retrospectively deport settled immigrants.

Which would explain why UKIP is just another party fighting over the same pro immigration 51% of the total electorate.The immigrant vote now obviously holding the balance of power over the indigenous one.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Friday 21st November 16:52

[rovermorris999]

Stevanos said:

I would have no idea on any of those.

I don't follow football or the spud-faced nipper but even I was aware of both. Don't you watch the news or browse a newspaper?

Edited by rovermorris999 on Friday 21st November 17:13

[Digga]

Yazar said:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/83aac20a-7149-11e4-b178-...

So that's the FT taking a slightly sideways approach to the established, Labour and Conservative-backed media stance of calling UKIP names. Superb.

It's liek everyone is suddenly hell-bent on playing Gordon Brown bigotgate-bingo without realising it.

[XJ Flyer]

The Crack Fox said:

jogon said:

Are you voting for this lot then..



Have a long hard think about just don't give yourself a headache.

I don't know why folks got shirty about that pic. It IS Rochester, isn't it? Our national flag should be treated with respect, not draped from a gutter like that, anyway.

While anyone who thinks that is really our 'national flag' wouldn't be voting for a party that is dedicated to the continuation and membership of the UK federation and union.

[johnxjsc1985]

wonder if the Libdems are still keen on PR after last night

[GetCarter]

XJ Flyer said:

The Crack Fox said:

jogon said:

Are you voting for this lot then..



Have a long hard think about just don't give yourself a headache.

I don't know why folks got shirty about that pic. It IS Rochester, isn't it? Our national flag should be treated with respect, not draped from a gutter like that, anyway.

While anyone who thinks that is really our 'national flag' wouldn't be voting for a party that is dedicated to the continuation and membership of the UK federation and union.

I don't understand your post. Not being clever. Could you explain what you mean?

(ETA.. it was in England

Edited by GetCarter on Friday 21st November 17:07

[Stevanos]

rovermorris999 said:

I don't follow football or the spud-face nipper but even I was aware of both. Don't you watch the news or browse a newspaper?

I read several news websites, I don't watch TV, I haven't done so for about 3 years.

Edited by Stevanos on Friday 21st November 17:42

[WinstonWolf]

XJ Flyer said:

WinstonWolf said:

XJ Flyer said:

Yazar said:

XJ Flyer said:

The fact is we need another Powell when all we've got in the form of UKIP is Cameron with more attitude at least in regard to the immigration question.Which leaves the question if UKIP has gone soft on immigration then what is to say it won't do the same in terms of a Brexit.

The reason for UKIP being the size it now is, if due to Farage having a intuitive grasp of the workings of the media.

What reckless said on the video i.e. deport after a period new migrants of little benefit but look sympathetically at a working migrant who has been here a while', mass media twisted into a 'deport them all' attack.

In the 10 seconds Farage had to reply, all he has is a soundbite that would then be repeated every half hour on the news on the day before the elections.

So there was no room of explanation in detail, the message had to be simple and ensure this was not the time that the 'racist' tag that the lefties have been trying so hard in vain for the last few years to pin to UKIP, would have any chance of sticking.

In this case that would be exactly the same issue as any Labour supporter,who supported Powell's policies in the day,had to deal with on a daily basis.IE deal with it don't surrender or pander to it.

No, what we need now is Farage. I'm not against immigration per-se, but it needs to be in the best interests of everyone who lives here.

Immigration can add to the Great in Britain, but it won't if we let ungrateful tossers in.

In which case there are three other parties which specialise in that policy and now obviously a fourth which has surrendered its principles to pander to that same cheap labour/socialist alliance vote.As I said the relevant figure is the 49% who have no electoral representation.At least unless/until the English democrats get their act together in finishing the job that Powell started.

UKIP are not the party for you, the BNP would better suit your aspirations.

[XJ Flyer]

Esseesse said:

brenflys777 said:

XJFlyer - you seem to be desperately hoping that a party with such growing support agrees with you - they don't! I asked on one of the other threads you've posted to several times - why don't you back up your opinions of what you think Mark Reckless MP (UKIP) said with quotes of what he actually said?

I think the reason is you are clinging to any hope that there might be widespread support for your naive 'deport them all' views, that won't be found in UKIP. Without evidence you are just mashing at the keyboard. UKIP policy is not and will never be to retrospectively deport settled immigrants.

^^^ This.

AFAIK Powell didn't support any forced repatriation/deportation anyway.

I'm guessing that you weren't there as part of the Powell supporting group of the Labour vote in the day.Which was exactly the message contained in speeches like Rivers of Blood etc etc.Which is why,like his supporters,he was,not surprisingly,branded as a racist by all the usual suspects in the cheap labour/socialist pro immigration alliance.

As for a supposed policy of withdrawal from the EU partly to at least stop the issue of cheap labour east European immigration.What is the point if that policy 'also' includes the idea of letting them all in and letting them all stay to the point where all those who were coming are already here on the date of withdrawal.As it stands UKIP is just more of the same LabLibdemCon immigration agenda dressed up in a false anti immigration message to get a few extra votes from those gullible enough to believe it.

[Yazar]

XJ Flyer said:

Which would explain why UKIP is just another party fighting over the same pro immigration 51% of the total electorate.The immigrant vote now obviously holding the balance of power over the indigenous one.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Friday 21st November 16:52

Apologies if you have stated before.

But in simple terms, what do you want?

Say day after UKIP got in power
- do you want all Eu migrants out?
- just Eu migrants with no jobs?
- eu migrants with a salary lower than x?

What is your position exactly? And what do you class as indigenous?

[XJ Flyer]

WinstonWolf said:

XJ Flyer said:

WinstonWolf said:

XJ Flyer said:

Yazar said:

XJ Flyer said:

The fact is we need another Powell when all we've got in the form of UKIP is Cameron with more attitude at least in regard to the immigration question.Which leaves the question if UKIP has gone soft on immigration then what is to say it won't do the same in terms of a Brexit.

The reason for UKIP being the size it now is, if due to Farage having a intuitive grasp of the workings of the media.

What reckless said on the video i.e. deport after a period new migrants of little benefit but look sympathetically at a working migrant who has been here a while', mass media twisted into a 'deport them all' attack.

In the 10 seconds Farage had to reply, all he has is a soundbite that would then be repeated every half hour on the news on the day before the elections.

So there was no room of explanation in detail, the message had to be simple and ensure this was not the time that the 'racist' tag that the lefties have been trying so hard in vain for the last few years to pin to UKIP, would have any chance of sticking.

In this case that would be exactly the same issue as any Labour supporter,who supported Powell's policies in the day,had to deal with on a daily basis.IE deal with it don't surrender or pander to it.

No, what we need now is Farage. I'm not against immigration per-se, but it needs to be in the best interests of everyone who lives here.

Immigration can add to the Great in Britain, but it won't if we let ungrateful tossers in.

In which case there are three other parties which specialise in that policy and now obviously a fourth which has surrendered its principles to pander to that same cheap labour/socialist alliance vote.As I said the relevant figure is the 49% who have no electoral representation.At least unless/until the English democrats get their act together in finishing the job that Powell started.

UKIP are not the party for you, the BNP would better suit your aspirations.

Obviously not for anyone who supports the breakup of the UK federation and giving England back to the English.Which also leaves the question as to racism v nativism/nationalism within its ranks.As I've said I think English Democrats maybe.

[andy43]

johnxjsc1985 said:

wonder if the Libdems are still keen on PR after last night

It used to be dead easy to wind a Manchester City supporter up as there was so few of them - "Do you know Bob - he's a City fan too. You must know him? Blue and white scarf?"
The lesser spotted Lib dems must be approaching the same situation. 349 votes

[Yazar]

XJ Flyer said:

What is the point if that policy 'also' includes the idea of letting them all in and letting them all stay to the point where all those who were coming are already here on the date of withdrawal

Retrospective legislation is unsettling and complicated.

You don't really need to do it either.

State any EU migrant caught homeless in the future will be immediately deported and that solves that.
State any low paid/'self employed' big issue seller EU migrant is not entitled to in-work benefits/housing benefit/free nhs/free schools unless they do a job with a severe shortage/worked for x amount of years and those on low incomes will leave themselves.
State all Eu residents to be checked for Criminal convictions in the past here and abroad and deport.

And so on.

Make a set of sensible rules going forward and the migrant that we don't need will leave themselves. There is no need to say 'deport first then points test on re-entry', makes no sense.