I1L2T3 Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 Apologies if this has already been linked. The following is in an anti UKIP article in today's edition. They seem to have missed the point. This is why people are now supporting the party and it won't put anyone off voting for them... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/special-report-what-voters-should-know-about-ukip-8517997.html Thanks for posting this. It proves what I was trying to say earlier. UKIP have some fresh ideas worthy of discussion. It also shows that they do not have an integrated fully-costed set of policies. If they are not ready the the increased publicity of their policies will reduce their credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 I did the survey below and got 50% UKIP http://voteforpolicies.org.uk/ Well, well, well, I'm almost as Green as Kermit. Who knew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Thanks for posting this. It proves what I was trying to say earlier. UKIP have some fresh ideas worthy of discussion. It also shows that they do not have an integrated fully-costed set of policies. If they are not ready the the increased publicity of their policies will reduce their credibility. Do the main opposition Labour? Did the Cons have fully-costed policies in opposition? Arguably they do or don't depending who you support. What usually happens is one side will say what they will do and how they will fund it, the opposite party will dispute the figures, so ths idea of clear cut black-and-white no grey area fully costed fully funded policies is a myth even for the main three parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Do the main opposition Labour? Did the Cons have fully-costed policies in opposition? Arguably they do or don't depending who you support. What usually happens is one side will say what they will do and how they will fund it, the opposite party will dispute the figures, so ths idea of clear cut black-and-white no grey area fully costed fully funded policies is a myth even for the main three parties. Not always entirely fully costed but rarely with funding holes as big as the UKIP policies seem to have. The Independent article illustrates the gaps pretty well. It's an opportunity for UKIP to react and improve their policies. If they can do that and remain credible then it's a good thing for British politics because we need alternatives to the main parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Not always entirely fully costed but rarely with funding holes as big as the UKIP policies seem to have. The Independent article illustrates the gaps pretty well. It's an opportunity for UKIP to react and improve their policies. If they can do that and remain credible then it's a good thing for British politics because we need alternatives to the main parties. There would be little point in parties such as UKIP costing all their policies until they have victory in sight, all the electorate needs to know is their priorities, the policies they think are the most important. I imagine the electorate vote for policies they like and not policies that have been costed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Well, well, well, I'm almost as Green as Kermit. Who knew? Mine was 78% Green, 11% labour, 11% LibDem. Funnily enough, I've switched to voting for the Green Party ---------- Post added 07-03-2013 at 09:13 ---------- There would be little point in parties such as UKIP costing all their policies until they have victory in sight, all the electorate needs to know is their priorities, the policies they think are the most important. I imagine the electorate vote for policies they like and not policies that have been costed. I agree to a point. It's important to build momentum on key policy issues but also important to have sensibly costed policies too. For example if a tax policy indicates a funding black hole then the policy simply can't be right, no matter how valid the sentiments driving it are. No matter how good other policies are it creates a credibility gap. It's a chicken and egg thing. If policies get a party to within sight of victory then those policies turn out to be built on a lack of reality then the whole thing would just crumble away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Mine was 78% Green, 11% labour, 11% LibDem. Funnily enough, I've switched to voting for the Green Party Mine was multicoloured, not much between UKIP, Green, BNP and Conservative. I was surprised that BNP came first on education and the economy. My guess is that I would probably choose differently if I did it again. All it really told me was that under no circumstances should I vote labour because they always come last on these surveys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manlinose Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 There would be little point in parties such as UKIP costing all their policies until they have victory in sight, all the electorate needs to know is their priorities, the policies they think are the most important. I imagine the electorate vote for policies they like and not policies that have been costed. that's the key point - broadly the electorate vote on general ideas - they support the party they believe best represents their beliefs on a few topics and issues it would be a rare voter who agrees with every single policy of the party they voted for (or even was aware of some of the policies) the problem for ukip is that, as they become more popular, and the pressure increases on them to put more meat on the bones of their other policies, the scrutiny of those policies will increase Once the scrutiny increases, and the viability or otherwise is discussed, they could be at risk of losing a bit of credibility and, consequently, support their hope will be that they can make the EU one of the main issues for more voters - historically it hasn't been a big issue for the majority of the electorate - policies on the economy, education, crime, employment and health are usually what influence voters' decisions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Once the scrutiny increases, and the viability or otherwise is discussed, they could be at risk of losing a bit of credibility and, consequently, support I was once pro the EU, but I felt that it wasnt working properly. The Greens had an EU MP, yet none in the UK. I have now gone over to the other side, and I am anti EU, but I realise that it is still the ideal way of running a nation of countries. The EU are take the UK to court over poor air quality. A basic principle is to breathe clean air. We are a rich country yet our government allows unsafe food, products and dirty air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 The EU are take the UK to court over poor air quality. A basic principle is to breathe clean air. We are a rich country yet our government allows unsafe food, products and dirty air. The EU also forced the UK to stop dumping raw sewage straight into rivers and seas and forced them to clean up the beaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.