The Rise and Rise of UKIP

[grumpyhack]

Al Murray to stand against Nigel Farrage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tADgYkAfXro

Although he'll be in the persona of the Pub Landlord, Murray actually has an MA in Modern History from Oxford.

Could be fun and his 'commonsense policies' in his party political vid could confuse a few Kippers. He might even get elected.

Edited January 14, 2015 by grumpyhack

[eFestivals]

I'm loving his manifesto.

[gary1979666]

Do you reckon it'll help or hinder Farage though? I can imagine him pulling votes away from the key competition.

[5co77ie]

Farage blaming the atrocities in France on a muslim "fifth column" based in Paris and London.

The little shit continues to beggar belief

The fact he already appeared on television and came through it well, makes me very concerned he's going to get airtime before the election. Edited January 15, 2015 by 5co77ie

[russycarps]

I cannot stand al murray. A public schoolboy mocking the working class with his pathetic "act", which had already been done much much more competently by alf garnett decades ago.

this posh tit was born into a familty of aristocracy, extreme wealth and privilege. His distant grandfather was william makepeace thackeray.

Him and farage will be roaring with laughter at the electorate behind closed doors.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

Do you reckon it'll help or hinder Farage though? I can imagine him pulling votes away from the key competition.

Have been wondering recently how the potential for voter fragmentation and a low turnout might help Farage ( with our ridiculous electoral method). There is the possibility that Al standing takes votes from all parties not just UKIP.

I console myself with the thought that I think we're past the high water mark for UKIP support and that Nigel and his xenophobic little chums have already shot their bolt. This election is about the deficit and the NHS. The rest is fluff and Farage is only going to be able to snipe from the sidelines.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

Trouble is many people believe the NHS and the deficit to be due to immigration due to benefits and overcrowding. Frogman will definitely play on that.

When push comes to shove the NHS vote will still come down to who's it safest with though.

Tories own polling shows they are still not trusted with it.

Which is right of course.

[eFestivals]

Do you reckon it'll help or hinder Farage though? I can imagine him pulling votes away from the key competition.

nah, the kippers won't vote for him. "Al Murray" sounds suspiciously Muslim.

[gary1979666]

nah, the kippers won't vote for him. "Al Murray" sounds suspiciously Muslim.

I didn't mean the Kippers - if anything he'll make them more adamant by mocking them. I can see tory/labour/whatever voters saying, 'let's vote for the guy off of the telly' and making a Kipper victory more likely.

[gary1979666]

Was reading an opinion piece in the Times yesterday about the TV debates. The main bit of the article was largely around whether Cameron should do them or not - i.e. would the damage from skipping them be better/worse than actually being there.

The guy writing the piece was tory chum Lord Fink, and he was saying that for the 2010 debates that although they agreed to the debate thinking it would be a good idea, once they started prepping for it, they realised that there would only be one winner....Clegg....the outsider. They were right.

But for this years debates, that outsider is now Farage. Yes, his policies will come under fire and bit more, but he'll also be able to come across as man of the people, not part of the politico, etc. So without the greens to do the same to Labour, would he be better to give them a miss?

Was an interesting piece and started with the call for debates in the 97 election, which Blair declined. So the Tory hire a man in a chicken outfit to follow him around, but in the end Fink had to have a chat with the chicken, as he was starting to be won over by Blair as he'd listened to so many of his speeches!

[eFestivals]

I didn't mean the Kippers - if anything he'll make them more adamant by mocking them. I can see tory/labour/whatever voters saying, 'let's vote for the guy off of the telly' and making a Kipper victory more likely.

they'll be a few of those, but mostly he'll get votes from the types who might otherwise vote Monster Raving Loony*.

There'll be many more who will hold their nose and vote tory, to keep Farage out.

(* did Lord Sutch know he'd be remembered for ever cos of that? He's not remembered for his pop success).

[eFestivals]

Was reading an opinion piece in the Times yesterday about the TV debates. The main bit of the article was largely around whether Cameron should do them or not - i.e. would the damage from skipping them be better/worse than actually being there.

Cosby has told Cameron he's not allowed to do the TV debates, and that's the only reason he's inventing excuses.

It was widely reported back in the summer that Cosby had said Cameron isn't to do them.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

(* did Lord Sutch know he'd be remembered for ever cos of that? He's not remembered for his pop success).

Au contraire Neil.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

Cosby has told Cameron he's not allowed to do the TV debates, and that's the only reason he's inventing excuses.

It was widely reported back in the summer that Cosby had said Cameron isn't to do them.

Surely Cameron is on a no lose here. The blather about a potential no show will die down long before the election - as it did with the chicken following Blair. Sky and the Beeb wont run the debates without him being there.

He obviously couldnt give a toss about the Greens being in the debate. And I dont think he's that naive to think that having them there will cause a significant fracture in the left vote. He introduced the Greens to keep the row going. Ed et al don't agree to it - they get seen as the intransigent ones. They agree to it - the row shifts to the SNP/ Plaid Cymru etc. arguing they've got a wider vote so they need to be in it. Then it all slides into chaos the TV channels pull out and its all forgotten about by the end of March. But for now we'll continue to hear from the Tory minions stoking the argument at least in the short term.

Cameron knows that essentially the TV debates are a side show - I tend to think they're managing this issue pretty well in Tory Central office. Turds that they are.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Ted Dansons Wig

[eFestivals]

Surely Cameron is on a no lose here. The blather about a potential no show will die down long before the election - as it did with the chicken following Blair. Sky and the Beeb wont run the debates without him being there.

I'd say he'll lose via it. It'll increase the disillusionment with the political process, and i'd say there's far more scope for that to further impact onto the tories than it does Labour from where we are right now. I'd say those on the left are long disillusioned, while it's only started to have that effect onto the tories in the last 9 months.

But ... I'd say you're right that it'll mostly be forgotten by May if Cameron can put it to bed now, and the lost votes from any that might still remember in May will be more than offset by the votes he won't lose by not doing the debates - as the incumbent he's the one most exposed in the debates.

Mind you, it's not the same dumb electorate as it was 10 years ago. I don't mean they're smarter towards policies and being politicked at, I mean they're smarter at seeing when they're being played. If our politicians run scared of trying to communicate with us, they're not "our" politicians.

He obviously couldnt give a toss about the Greens being in the debate.

Oh yes he does!

He knows that UKIP will split the tory vote, and that's a big danger to him, where the debates are likely to see him lose more votes than he would otherwise. If he can't find an escape from doing the debates then he needs the Greens in there to do much the same to the Labour vote.

However, that's not going to work for him as much as UKIP will work against him. UKIP voters don't in the main care about whether there's a tory govt or Labour govt, considering them both as objectionbable. A big chunk of potential Green voters, however, will be prepared to vote Labour to keep the tories out. Potential UKIP voters will mostly waste their votes by voting UKIP, but potential Green voters will make their vote count.

the row shifts to the SNP/ Plaid Cymru etc.

while the SNP and PC will try to do that, it won't get them too far. Their rejection will only outrage those who have already decided to vote for them.

Most people understand the big difference between a national party and a regional party, and so also national debates and regional debates.

[russycarps]

Yeh the SNP and PC have zero chance of getting involved, and quite right too. Who wants to listen to those dullards banging on about their tedious parochial issues at a national debate?

The SNP had their day in the sun and fucked it up. Now they can pipe down.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

I'd say he'll lose via it. It'll increase the disillusionment with the political process, and i'd say there's far more scope for that to further impact onto the tories than it does Labour from where we are right now. I'd say those on the left are long disillusioned, while it's only started to have that effect onto the tories in the last 9 months.

But ... I'd say you're right that it'll mostly be forgotten by May if Cameron can put it to bed now, and the lost votes from any that might still remember in May will be more than offset by the votes he won't lose by not doing the debates - as the incumbent he's the one most exposed in the debates.

Mind you, it's not the same dumb electorate as it was 10 years ago. I don't mean they're smarter towards policies and being politicked at, I mean they're smarter at seeing when they're being played. If our politicians run scared of trying to communicate with us, they're not "our" politicians.

Oh yes he does!

He knows that UKIP will split the tory vote, and that's a big danger to him, where the debates are likely to see him lose more votes than he would otherwise. If he can't find an escape from doing the debates then he needs the Greens in there to do much the same to the Labour vote.

However, that's not going to work for him as much as UKIP will work against him. UKIP voters don't in the main care about whether there's a tory govt or Labour govt, considering them both as objectionbable. A big chunk of potential Green voters, however, will be prepared to vote Labour to keep the tories out. Potential UKIP voters will mostly waste their votes by voting UKIP, but potential Green voters will make their vote count.

while the SNP and PC will try to do that, it won't get them too far. Their rejection will only outrage those who have already decided to vote for them.

Most people understand the big difference between a national party and a regional party, and so also national debates and regional debates.

Hmmm.

Not sure I agree over the impact of the TV debates. Cleggy got a boost without a doubt last time - at least in the first debate (and in public opinion terms - the first debate is the only one that matters). But did that as an isolated instance really affect the outcome in 2010 or the potential for the increased LIbDem vote? I genuinely can't see it - at most it gave impetus to something that was already there (gross dissatisfaction with the big 2 - especially Brown). The numbers of people who's minds will be changed by a few soundbites is low surely - the vast majority (UKIP voters aside) are too clever for that.

The debates favour the challengers and allows viewers to get to "know" them as figures - not significantly their policies. Cameron will keep the argument going because if he gets to a position where he has to consent - he'll want as many people there as possible on that first debate to muddy that view in the way its all received. Whether the SNP or Plaid Cymru (or Al Murray for that matter) get in or are rejected doesnt matter - all that matters is we keep arguing about it until the concept of a sensible debate disappears or we run out of time and the TV companies pull the plug (a possible outcome I think). If the TV channels agree to the Greens - the Tories will say "what about the SNP - they've got a right to be represented as well".

Is Dave worried about this row? Nah. Does he genuinely think Natalie Bennett will do a Clegg that is sustained until election day? Nah.

[eFestivals]

The numbers of people who's minds will be changed by a few soundbites is low surely

I'd say that they'll be less of that effect this time round than there was in 2010.

TV debates are a new thing, and it's going to take a few of them before the public as a whole learns how to sensibly react to them.

However, the Clegg thing last time will certainly have had many wise up to the fact that grand claims mean little at the end of the day, because reality comes into things.

If the TV channels agree to the Greens - the Tories will say "what about the SNP - they've got a right to be represented as well".

there's already a debate offer* on the table that includes the Greens, which everyone exceptr the tories have already agreed to in principle.

(*YouTube, the Telegraph & The Guardian [combined] are the offer-ers).

So we already know that he's not happy to debate, full stop.

It'll cost him votes to swerve it, tho likely to be fewer than being in the debates. Either way it's good for those who don't want another tory govt.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

I'd say that they'll be less of that effect this time round than there was in 2010.

TV debates are a new thing, and it's going to take a few of them before the public as a whole learns how to sensibly react to them.

However, the Clegg thing last time will certainly have had many wise up to the fact that grand claims mean little at the end of the day, because reality comes into things.

there's already a debate offer* on the table that includes the Greens, which everyone exceptr the tories have already agreed to in principle.

(*YouTube, the Telegraph & The Guardian [combined] are the offer-ers).

So we already know that he's not happy to debate, full stop.

It'll cost him votes to swerve it, tho likely to be fewer than being in the debates. Either way it's good for those who don't want another tory govt.

I didn't know that. Intwesting.

Every vote the Tories lose is a golden vote

Edited January 15, 2015 by Ted Dansons Wig

[LondonTom]

while the SNP and PC will try to do that, it won't get them too far. Their rejection will only outrage those who have already decided to vote for them.

And the expat Louise Mensch

She goes wild on twitter for the SNP!

[eFestivals]

And the expat Louise Mensch

She goes wild on twitter for the SNP!

because they're undermining the labour vote, meaning the tories might just win?

It'll be a wonderful irony, Scotland imposing a tory govt on England. They'll feel so proud of themselves.

Edited January 15, 2015 by eFestivals

[Ted Dansons Wig]

because they're undermining the labour vote, meaning the tories might just win?

It'll be a wonderful irony, Scotland imposing a tory govt on England. They'll feel so proud of themselves.

Oh for fucks sake - you've got a 287 page thread on this already. Dont go polluting this one as well.

[LondonTom]

Oh for fucks sake - you've got a 287 page thread on this already. Dont go polluting this one as well.

To be fair if you read her tweets, you can really tell the Tory's have the same thinking as Neil. Regardless if you want to blame the Scotish or not.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

Interesting blog from Stephen Ayres on voting intentions in 2015

http://commonslibraryblog.com/2015/01/13/voter-trends-in-2014-and-lessons-for-the-2015-general-election/

[eFestivals]

So, 'man of the people' Nigel has gone all UKIP aqain, and said again the NHS should be an insurance-based system, after first saying that, and then pretending to support the current model.

Very amusingly, the UKIP health spokesperson has said that Nigel's idea wouldn't be acceptred by the members. That health spokesperson is somehow under the idea that UKIP is a democracy and not a hedge-fund funded plaything for policies for xenophobic millionaires led by their man Nigel.

I'll give her about a week before she changes her tune to match Nigel or is sacked.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/20/nigel-farage-ukip-nhs-funding-insurance-louise-bours