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

[Maxf]

NicD said:

Yes, there would be a belt tightening adjustment period, but having just read this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/112317...
while some is bks

there is an element of truth about governments taking the easy route instead of taking tough decisions for the future

The nature of politics is for the easy route to be taken - they don't want to upset too many people as they need votes in 4 years time. I agree (if thats what you're saying) that the current system is broken - however I really fail to see how UKIP can change it - to me it seems they have very few real policies, capitalise on fear and 'easy wins' by blaming recent immigration for problems which have been largely home grown over the past 30 years (at least).

I've been saying for years that the baby boomers fked my generation (I'm 37, although a false start and change of profession probably sets me in a peer group of early 30s) ever since I realised my uncle retired at 60 with a final salary pension, which no matter how hard I worked would never be available to me. But again, I don't see how UKIP can change this.

To me though, voting UKIP wouldn't be anything more than a protest - indeed I think they'd be worst placed to sort the many issues. What I hope is that the Tories get a huge kick up the arse and a bloody nose from UKIP - but don't end up in the gutter because of it, because UKIP in power genuine scares me.

I think the bigger question is what is the better system - what allows longer term decisions to be made, where politicians aren't eyeing the next election with every move?

[Negative Creep]

BooHoo said:

HarryW said:

If you filter to most liked comments on the BBC story, it's quite an eye opener

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30140747

It's the mood of the nation, captured in text. Interesting times.

And I note two of them have been removed overnight

[unrepentant]

johnxjsc1985 said:

I see David Cameron is adamant they will get back this seat in the GE, someone needs to tell him its not up to him its up to the people of Rochester and Strood.

You kippers really are deluded. By elections are about protest and are opportunities for fringe parties. General elections are about government and the centre ground. People might lend their vote to these xenophobic little Englander groups in the by elections but they will want it back in May. The tories will retake R&S, UKIP might hold on in Clacton where there is a preponderance of old white people but that will be it.

[johnxjsc1985]

unrepentant said:

People might lend their vote to these xenophobic little Englander groups

This is exactly why they are getting support because of comments like this.
Keep it up you are doing a fantastic job the more you slag people off the more UKIP will flourish. Well done.

[rs1952]

unrepentant said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

I see David Cameron is adamant they will get back this seat in the GE, someone needs to tell him its not up to him its up to the people of Rochester and Strood.

You kippers really are deluded. By elections are about protest and are opportunities for fringe parties. General elections are about government and the centre ground. People might lend their vote to these xenophobic little Englander groups in the by elections but they will want it back in May. The tories will retake R&S, UKIP might hold on in Clacton where there is a preponderance of old white people but that will be it.

On the one hand, there does appear to be something going on in attitudes to politics and politicians in the UK. As has been said by many commentators, according to history labour should be well ahead in the polls at this stage in this parliament. The fact that they are not tells us that something is going on that is unusual.

On the other hand, I feel that many UKIP voters are voting for the "none of the above" party. The lib dems were the "none of the above" party for many years, and you will recall that, whilst their fortunes have gone up and down in the last half century, the percentage of the national vote they get bears no relation at all to the number of seats they will get. UKIP will find itself in the same position.

However, should UKIP ever get a chance to get anywhere near power, the chances are that they will suffer the same fate as the lib dems, in no longer being the "none of the above" party. And when that happens, the fickle end of their supporters will take their votes elsewhere again.

My main concern is the absolute balls up that UKIP would make of running the country in the meantime.

[anonymous-user]

unrepentant said:

xenophobic little Englander groups

Has it occurred to you that it is precisely this sanctimonious attitude, dismissing peoples genuine concerns, that has people voting UKIP in the first place?

[PRTVR]

unrepentant said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

I see David Cameron is adamant they will get back this seat in the GE, someone needs to tell him its not up to him its up to the people of Rochester and Strood.

You kippers really are deluded. By elections are about protest and are opportunities for fringe parties. General elections are about government and the centre ground. People might lend their vote to these xenophobic little Englander groups in the by elections but they will want it back in May. The tories will retake R&S, UKIP might hold on in Clacton where there is a preponderance of old white people but that will be it.

Normally I would agree with you, but these are not normal by elections, both are standing Tory MPs who have given up on their party, now if MPs start changing their views, things are wrong somewhere, the protest vote you talk of may be more than that, it may be the voters are giving up on the Conservative party.

[XJ Flyer]

Maxf said:

NicD said:

I would much rather have a country that looks after its long term interests, that does not allow huge chunks of future prosperity (assets) to be sold off to foreign investors.

Hold on here - if you take away 'foreign investors' do you know what will happen to the value of assets? They will plummet - and so will the value of your pension!

I value property for a living (big commercial stuff) and the foreign investors are a major part of the cycle - take some of the largest shopping centres in the UK as an example - there are lots of foreign investors in that market with Sovereign Wealth Funds being major investors. If you remove the ability of non-uk investors to buy into that asset class the pool of investors will shrink, and values will drop significantly. Surely that is a long term interest? We are in a global economy, pandora's box is open and we can't reverse it, nor should we.

Then why bother with the idea of the nation state at all.When under your logic it is the Chinese Communist Party who call the shots and will actually own the country and take any return on investment on the money we gave them to invest here in the first place.

I'm sure that many people will regret that idea if/when the Chinese eventually own the nation's housing stock and farm land.In which case we'll be working for them for our rice ration while they take all our meat and dairy produce and get rich on the values of their assets here.You can bet that if anyone ever tries to take the country back we'll be facing the full force of the Chinese military.Which leaves the question why would anyone here support that situation and who gains from it.

[rs1952]

PRTVR said:

unrepentant said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

I see David Cameron is adamant they will get back this seat in the GE, someone needs to tell him its not up to him its up to the people of Rochester and Strood.

You kippers really are deluded. By elections are about protest and are opportunities for fringe parties. General elections are about government and the centre ground. People might lend their vote to these xenophobic little Englander groups in the by elections but they will want it back in May. The tories will retake R&S, UKIP might hold on in Clacton where there is a preponderance of old white people but that will be it.

Normally I would agree with you, but these are not normal by elections, both are standing Tory MPs who have given up on their party, now if MPs start changing their views, things are wrong somewhere, the protest vote you talk of may be more than that, it may be the voters are giving up on the Conservative party.

Its also worth bearing in mind that the candidates in Clacton and Rochester & Strood in 2010 held views so much at the kipper end of the tory party that UKIP didn't stand against them.

On a side issue, when I was listening to Any Questions on R4 this lunchtime I thought it, shall we say, a little disingenuous of the UKIP representative ( a mouthy woman who didn't like to hear anybody's voice except her own) when she said that in both by-elections UKIP had won from a standing start. But then she's a politician, and you would expect politicians to spin things wouldn't you?

Thankfully, we can all be confident that UKIP have a new brand of politics so we wouldn't expect the same old spin from them, would we? Oh - wait...

[unrepentant]

PRTVR said:

unrepentant said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

I see David Cameron is adamant they will get back this seat in the GE, someone needs to tell him its not up to him its up to the people of Rochester and Strood.

You kippers really are deluded. By elections are about protest and are opportunities for fringe parties. General elections are about government and the centre ground. People might lend their vote to these xenophobic little Englander groups in the by elections but they will want it back in May. The tories will retake R&S, UKIP might hold on in Clacton where there is a preponderance of old white people but that will be it.

Normally I would agree with you, but these are not normal by elections, both are standing Tory MPs who have given up on their party, now if MPs start changing their views, things are wrong somewhere, the protest vote you talk of may be more than that, it may be the voters are giving up on the Conservative party.

Not really. Back in the day some serious politicians - David Owen, Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins, Bill Rodgers - "gave up" on their party and formed a new one. These were serious politicians who had been Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Secratary, Home Secrtetary, Sec of state for Education, Sec of state for Transport etc, not nonentities like Carswell and Reckless. Who even remembers the SDP now?

[BlackLabel]

Nice to see the BNP spin-off Britain First only receiving 50 odd votes. That's pretty much the same level of support as the prostitute who was standing was given.

[XJ Flyer]

unrepentant said:

PRTVR said:

unrepentant said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

I see David Cameron is adamant they will get back this seat in the GE, someone needs to tell him its not up to him its up to the people of Rochester and Strood.

You kippers really are deluded. By elections are about protest and are opportunities for fringe parties. General elections are about government and the centre ground. People might lend their vote to these xenophobic little Englander groups in the by elections but they will want it back in May. The tories will retake R&S, UKIP might hold on in Clacton where there is a preponderance of old white people but that will be it.

Normally I would agree with you, but these are not normal by elections, both are standing Tory MPs who have given up on their party, now if MPs start changing their views, things are wrong somewhere, the protest vote you talk of may be more than that, it may be the voters are giving up on the Conservative party.

Not really. Back in the day some serious politicians - David Owen, Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins, Bill Rodgers - "gave up" on their party and formed a new one. These were serious politicians who had been Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Secratary, Home Secrtetary, Sec of state for Education, Sec of state for Transport etc, not nonentities like Carswell and Reckless. Who even remembers the SDP now?

The idea that any of the SDP and their Libdem offspring were/are serious politicians would depend on wether anyone is a full on believer in the Libdem cause and/or the Wilson Callaghan side of the Labour Party.As opposed to the Powell side of the Conservatives and the Shore side of the Labour Party assuming it is all about the definition of a 'serious politician'.

As for Reckless he seems in good company.IE a Party led by someone who is obviously no Powell and being that he obviously doesn't have the courage of Powell's convictions to stand for what he believes in himself,at least regarding the immigration issue.

[XJ Flyer]

BlackLabel said:

Nice to see the BNP spin-off Britain First only receiving 50 odd votes. That's pretty much the same level of support as the prostitute who was standing was given.

It is fair to assume that the idea of 'British' and Nationalist are a contradiction.In this case probably the similar to that which existed in Hitler's ideology being a so called Nationalist one but in reality an expansionist socialist racist type cause that recognises no borders.In this case obviously the English,Scottish,and Irish borders,flags and identity at least.

[rover 623gsi]

unrepentant said:

Not really. Back in the day some serious politicians - David Owen, Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins, Bill Rodgers - "gave up" on their party and formed a new one. These were serious politicians who had been Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Secratary, Home Secrtetary, Sec of state for Education, Sec of state for Transport etc, not nonentities like Carswell and Reckless. Who even remembers the SDP now?

The SDP created (indirectly) New Labour

[XJ Flyer]

rover 623gsi said:

unrepentant said:

Not really. Back in the day some serious politicians - David Owen, Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins, Bill Rodgers - "gave up" on their party and formed a new one. These were serious politicians who had been Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Secratary, Home Secrtetary, Sec of state for Education, Sec of state for Transport etc, not nonentities like Carswell and Reckless. Who even remembers the SDP now?

The SDP created (indirectly) New Labour

Not really they formed the Libdems.

New Labour was just the result of the mess that Callaghan and Healey started.IE their gullible followers thought that wage controls,staying in the EU,and joining the global free market economy were the best way to make the working class better off.

[rover 623gsi]

The SDP forming an alliance with the Lib Dems (and getting 25% of the vote) forced the Labour Party to begin to change - first with Kinnock, then Smith and then Blair.

[unrepentant]

rover 623gsi said:

The SDP forming an alliance with the Lib Dems (and getting 25% of the vote) forced the Labour Party to begin to change - first with Kinnock, then Smith and then Blair.

I agree, the split was the start of the change. Kinnock made the biggest moves by turning on Militant and Blair finished it off by abandoning clause 4.

David Owen was probably the best PM we never had.

If UKIP has any lasting impact on British politics it will be in puishing the Tories to the right, which may happen.

[XJ Flyer]

rover 623gsi said:

The SDP forming an alliance with the Lib Dems (and getting 25% of the vote) forced the Labour Party to begin to change - first with Kinnock, then Smith and then Blair.

That would depend on the idea that going from Callaghan to Blair was a change at all.IE both anti union pro EU and pro global free market economy.Shore would have been the real change and was the best PM we never had.

[XJ Flyer]

unrepentant said:

If UKIP has any lasting impact on British politics it will be in puishing the Tories to the right, which may happen.

I'd doubt it.Unless Cameron is about to announce an EU referendum before the next election and at least a policy of repatriation of all EU immigration since the accession east european members joined.

[rs1952]

XJ Flyer said:

I'd doubt it.Unless Cameron is about to announce an EU referendum before the next election and at least a policy of repatriation of all EU immigration since the accession east european members joined.

I have this sneaking suspicion that, whoever forms a government after the next election, even if UKIP are a part of it, you ain't gonna like it