The rise of UKIP can be attributed to the simple psephological phenomenon which is that during times of economic recession the far right does well. Why? Because Ethnic Minorities and Immigrants are easy targets - they are groups of people that by definition are minority, that are underrepresented in politics and the media and are often many different entities so can't create a coherent opposition group. The most extreme example of this is in 1930s Germany, but it is well documented in the UK too. When were the Blackshirts around? After the Wall Street crash. When did the National Front rise? After the 1973 OPEC oil crisis and again after the Winter of Discontent. When did the BNP and UKIP rise to prominence? Around 2007/2008.
Though UKIP may not be as extreme as some of the other parties on the far right, they do share watered down traits of many of the UK's extreme right parties. The reason all these parties become big over one or two elections is simply because they use 'diversionary' issues such as immigration, gay marriage, political correctness, health and safety etc. to gain populist support while at the same time having nothing to solve the big issues such as the economy, NHS, education etc.. This is where things such as health tourism (which actually costs each taxpayer less than the royal family - around 60p a year)come in to play as they are easy things to make ground on as there is so much misinformation in the press and they play on peoples biggest fears.
Furthermore, given UKIP's neoliberal 'Thatcherite' economic policy it is no wonder that they have to find somebody else to blame for unemployment. They can't use the hard facts which are that large areas of the country have high unemployment because Farage's 'hero' Maggie Thatcher decided to export those jobs to people in other countries, but instead have to pin the tail on the immigrants because it is easier to do that than look at the flaws in the beloved free market. It is interesting that some are delusional to believe UKIP will be the kingmakers given that it is the same logic as looking at the 1989 EU Election results and saying that the Greens will be the third largest party in the Commons next time or by looking at the mid-80s poll ratings and seeing the Liberal-SDP alliance on over 50% and announcing they will win the next election. It shows a lack of basic knowledge about the UK electoral system which doesn't work in favour of a party who are far more unpopular than they are popular, only show support in certain age groups and in a few one off areas.
Similarly, this works against the Greens who, while not having the same 'unpopularity' as UKIP do only have support in certain age groups (27% in 18-24s) and support in a few areas (Brighton, Universities and a few surprises like Lewisham). With a bit of targeted campaigning it would be possible for the Greens to actually win Bristol West and Norwich South and easily match UKIP's predicted number of seats. Luckily, for the Greens, the age group that supports them happen to be conveniently bundled together in little pocket constituencies which makes it easier for them to win seats with the traditionally left-wing age group. Unfortunately, for the Greens, this also happens to be the age group which are most likely to listen to Russell Brand's calls to not vote and given that Russell Brand and his supporters are basically ideologically identical to the Green Party it could have a dent in Green support.
Though the Greens (now a bigger party than the Lib Dems and UKIP in terms of members) could see a surge in support if invited to the debates. I'm personally in favour of this, as not only am I considering voting Green, but also the Greens are the only party to still call UKIP out on their crap and will totally destroy the 'UKIP are outsiders' vibe that Nigel has been spreading. This is why Nigel doesn't want the Greens in the debates - they are the only ones who aren't damaged by Nigel's 'comebacks' when you point UKIPs craziness out as their isn't really much overlap between UKIP and Green voters. Coincidentally this is the opposite reason to why Clegg and Miliband want the Greens off the debates - as the Greens will take the old SDP vote and old Labour vote given that they are the only mainstream genuine left-wing party in England (Some of us are jealous of you Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). Personally I also think that Nicola Sturgeon should go on representing the SNP and Plaid Cymru (as they are ideologically very similar and also form a single bloc in the Commons) as the debates are about the parties who could be forming the next government and the broadcasters say that they are allowing parties on who can demonstrate a significant increase in support - the SNP can. In fact, the SNP vote (according to latest polls) will have demonstrated a 231% rise in vote. UKIP will have demonstrated a 516% rise in vote and the Greens over 700%.
Pete wrote:Yes but there we have an NHS / life & death tie in between the joke and the issue being compared to.
Well yes, you'd expect a better tie-in from a comedian.
Regarding DTV's post, how certain are psephologists of the outcome of the 2015 election outside of the current top two parties? I've not heard anywhere that UKIP are predicted 2 or 3 seats (I couldn't tell if you were presuming that the Greens' current MP would hold) - I've heard a few "up to" predictions, but no certain figures.
Brighton Pavilion is number 19 on Labour's targets, it has a majority of 1252, requiring a swing of 2.4% or better. One recent news story I can find shows a shift to Labour of 3% net in local polling (Ashcroft) while another shows Lucas holding her seat (YouGov). Standing for the Tories? Clarence "McCann" Mitchell.
Greens also targeting Lewisham and a seat in the North West.
robschneider wrote:I hope the Greens don't get into the debates. The last thing we need is the tree-huggers taking a slice of the pie.
See now it's posts like this that make me think you're deliberately trolling us. However I can't tell the difference between Ukippers and trolls nowadays. So just in case, I've prepared two responses to this post.
Troll response : Fuck off you c*nt.
UKipper response: Yes, how dare a one-policy party have a national platform to espouse their narrow-minded views. Oh wait...... fuck off you c*nt.
Alexia wrote:Brighton Pavilion is number 19 on Labour's targets, it has a majority of 1252, requiring a swing of 2.4% or better. One recent news story I can find shows a shift to Labour of 3% net in local polling (Ashcroft) while another shows Lucas holding her seat (YouGov). Standing for the Tories? Clarence "McCann" Mitchell.
Greens also targeting Lewisham and a seat in the North West.
I believe that the North West seat could be Manchester Withington or a Liverpool seat - they do well in Liverpool (although so do the continuity Liberals) and Withington contains a lot of students. Regarding Brighton Pavilion the Greens are probably going to hold it. The latest poll from Brighton Pavilion gives them a 9/10% lead over Labour and while the local Green led council may not be particularly popular, Caroline Lucas is very popular.
Alexia wrote:See now it's posts like this that make me think you're deliberately trolling us. However I can't tell the difference between Ukippers and trolls nowadays.
Actually there is a big difference. Trolls say these sort of things to provoke arguments and for their own amusement. UKIPpers say these sort of things because they truly believe them.
There is a large proportion of their support who honestly believe that not-only will the win seats at the next election, but that they are on track to become the largest party in the whole parliament, and Farage is very likely to become the next PM. Their behaviour becomes more cult-like as the days pass.
dosxuk wrote:Actually there is a big difference. Trolls say these sort of things to provoke arguments and for their own amusement. UKIPpers say these sort of things because they truly believe them.
Well duh....but the point here is I can't tell if Herr Schneider is being deliberately provocative or if he actually believes the crap he's spouting. Either way he's deluded.
