Ukip. All discussion here please.

[gwhite78]

The Tories cannot be seen to be doing any sort of a deal with UKIP. UKIP are a toxic brand to the vast majority of voters. If Cameron climbs into bed with them, he'll tear the party apart.

 

In any case, UKIP are hardly likely to be in a position to demand anything. They will have fewer MPs than Plaid Cymru, for example.

 

No you're wrong. Due to the bombardment of many successful corporate media anti-immigrant propaganda stories here in UK we're experiencing a 1930's Germany renaissance. All the necessary hatred mechanisms are in place for another holocaust, especially so in the north and Essex. UKIP are the Tories controlled opposition.

[Zamo]

I don't believe that any Con/UKIP pack would have anything near enough the amount of seats needed to form a government, it would probably be counter productive to the Tories as they undoubtably lose the support of the Lib-Dems.

 

Even Labour acknowledge they are in a fight in about 40 marginal seats. A pre-election Tory/UKIP carve up would get them a majority.

 

The Tories cannot be seen to be doing any sort of a deal with UKIP. UKIP are a toxic brand to the vast majority of voters. If Cameron climbs into bed with them, he'll tear the party apart.

 

In any case, UKIP are hardly likely to be in a position to demand anything. They will have fewer MPs than Plaid Cymru, for example.

 

The number of seats UKIP get is not the important number. It is how many seats will fall to Labour because UKIP has split the Tory vote.

 

UKIP are a toxic brand to those on the left only... more people voted UKIP at the European elections than any other party. Cameron needs to decide what is more toxic ie UKIP or Labour/SNP. If Farage calls his bluff he may still refuse a deal with UKIP but it will also stop the UKIP vote drifting back to the Tories because we'll all see who is risking a Labour/SNP government and what Cameron is really willing to do re the EU and immigration (the only demand UKIP would make as part of a deal).

[chalga]

Even Labour acknowledge they are in a fight in about 40 marginal seats. A pre-election Tory/UKIP carve up would get them a majority.

 

 

 

The number of seats UKIP get is not the important number. It is how many seats will fall to Labour because UKIP has split the Tory vote.

 

UKIP are a toxic brand to those on the left only... more people voted UKIP at the European elections than any other party. Cameron needs to decide what is more toxic ie UKIP or Labour/SNP. If Farage calls his bluff he may still refuse a deal with UKIP but it will also stop the UKIP vote drifting back to the Tories because we'll all see who is risking a Labour/SNP government and what Cameron is really willing to do re the EU and immigration (the only demand UKIP would make as part of a deal).

 

You've no idea how people are going to vote,whether deals made or bluffs are called.........people decide elections,and all you are doing is speculating on how they will vote,you have no idea how voters are going to react to any deals that may or may not be made,and neither have the parties,which is probably why they are all saying that their are no deals with anybody.

[L00b]

I love it how when it suits, you overplay the UK's influence, in order to characterise UKIP as squandering that influence, but then when it comes to redefining the rules of the EU and our relationship with it, you'll happily say there is no way the rest of the club will allow it (ie zero influence).

Let's see some posts of mine to support that, then.

 

Until then, I'm calling bullsht on your assertion.

So make your mind up, you can't have it both ways

My mind has long been made up about GB<>EU, UKIP, UKIP MEPs, and my posts are entirely consistent about these topics since the time dot.

 

Put up, in which case I will happily post apologies, or retract, in which case I will happily accept your apology.

Edited April 23, 2015 by L00b

[Zamo]

You've no idea how people are going to vote,whether deals made or bluffs are called.........people decide elections,and all you are doing is speculating on how they will vote,you have no idea how voters are going to react to any deals that may or may not be made,and neither have the parties,which is probably why they are all saying that their are no deals with anybody.

 

Of course I don't 'know' but we can look at the evidence and make informed guesses about what would happen.

 

There have been several polls examining where the UKIP vote has come from. It consistently shows that for every one vote by a former Labour supporter there are two from former Tory supporters. It is therefore reasonable to assume that a deal to endorse tactical voting in marginal seats (where Labour could win) would tip the balance in favour of the Tories/UKIP.

 

I have no doubt that Cameron doesn't want to do a deal because it would cement UKIP into mainstream politics and that is a threat to the Tories more than any other party. Farage should call his bluff because he needs to stop UKIP support going back to the Tories as the Tories press on with their Labour/SNP scare story - now a cornerstone of their election campaign. If Cameron refuses to do a deal it shows us he is more concerned about the threat UKIP poses to his party than the threat to the country he warns us a Labour/SNP government would pose. How will he sell it to the British public that the country comes second to the needs of his party?

 

The difficulty for Cameron is that he couldn't argue that UKIP policies were unpalatable because all they would ask for as part of a deal is an early EU referendum and changes to immigration policy/controls... and those policies are not unpalatable with the general public. He'd be left stumbling around trying to explain why policies popular with the public are somehow more of a problem than the heinous threat of a Labour/SNP government that he's been barking on about.

[LeMaquis]

Even Labour acknowledge they are in a fight in about 40 marginal seats.

 

At every election Labour and Tories are in a fight in that number of seats or more. Governments wouldn't ever change if there weren't marginal seats.

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 09:56 ----------

 

I have no doubt that Cameron doesn't want to do a deal because it would cement UKIP into mainstream politics and that is a threat to the Tories more than any other party.

 

Accepting that he changes his mind a lot, Farage has ruled out a coalition with the Tories in both 2013 and 2014. He portrays UKIP as being an anti-establishment party so it wouldn't be much use to him to ally UKIP to the main establishment party.

 

It's already been pointed out to you that the ballot papers have already been printed. For the Tories to ditch some of their candidates and policies in the last two weeks of a campaign in order to accommodate UKIP would be suicidal for them.

[I1L2T3]

Cameron won't need to do any deals with UKIP because once the election is done and UKIP only have a tiny amount of seats at very best they will be very junior partner in a coalition. Even if they got that then once campaigning started over a referendum the Tory policy is to stay in the EU. Tories will campaign for staying in and we saw how effectively the Tories snuffed out the LibDems over voting reform. In the case of UKIP it would force them to leave the coalition.

 

The trick is, for Labour and the Tories, to nullify UKIP as best as possible over the next two weeks. I suspect few people who vote UKIP really understand the disastrous implications of an EU exit. Unfortunately the Tories can't campaign using that because they are scared to advertise their policy is actually to remain in the EU.

[Zamo]

At every election Labour and Tories are in a fight in that number of seats or more. Governments wouldn't ever change if there weren't marginal seats.

 

Yes, so what? If the Tories don't want to lose marginal seats to Labour then they need UKIP votes back... hence the direct appeal to UKIP voters with the Labour/SNP warning.

 

Accepting that he changes his mind a lot, Farage has ruled out a coalition with the Tories in both 2013 and 2014. He portrays UKIP as being an anti-establishment party so it wouldn't be much use to him to ally UKIP to the main establishment party.

 

It's already been pointed out to you that the ballot papers have already been printed. For the Tories to ditch some of their candidates and policies in the last two weeks of a campaign in order to accommodate UKIP would be suicidal for them.

 

All politicians change their mind when it suits... and it should suit Farage to change his mind now.

 

As I've said, I don't think Cameron would want to do a deal but if Farage offered the deal it would counter the argument that the Tories are currently making about a Labour/SNP government being the biggest threat to this country. There would be a deal on the table to prevent a Labour/SNP government and on the price tag would be the introduction of policies that would be popular with most people. Not taking the deal would leave us all questioning whether the Tories really have heard our concerns about immigration. I think it would stop UKIP vote drifting back to the Tories.

 

Granted, it is unlikely to happen but I would love to see it. Anyone got Nigel's number?

[I1L2T3]

There won't be a Labour-SNP coalition.

 

The only thing that connects the two are a kind of wishy-washy lefty politics (note how both parties have happily been courted by the likes of Murdoch) and a desire to stay in the EU.

 

Wishy-washy left or right politics don't bind parties together. Won't bind Labour and SNP together any more than it will bind Tories and UKIP together.

 

Labour-SNP won't happen, nor will Tory-UKIP

[Zamo]

Cameron won't need to do any deals with UKIP because once the election is done and UKIP only have a tiny amount of seats at very best they will be very junior partner in a coalition.

 

That may be the case but not much consolation for the Tories if the votes UKIP take from them leads to a Labour/SNP majority.

 

The trick is, for Labour and the Tories, to nullify UKIP as best as possible over the next two weeks. I suspect few people who vote UKIP really understand the disastrous implications of an EU exit. Unfortunately the Tories can't campaign using that because they are scared to advertise their policy is actually to remain in the EU.

 

The Tories have openly said they will hold a referendum but campaign to stay in. I would also point out that a vote for UKIP doesn't mean EU exit but the possibility only of a vote on whether to exit... in that respect it is no different to a vote for the Tories.

 

Whilst the other parties might be able to nullify UKIP at this GE, it will not nullify the concerns that are behind the growth in UKIP support. Unless those concerns are addressed - by giving people a referendum on EU membership and introducing changes that address immigration concerns - UKIP will continue to grow.

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 11:16 ----------

 

There won't be a Labour-SNP coalition.

 

The only thing that connects the two are a kind of wishy-washy lefty politics (note how both parties have happily been courted by the likes of Murdoch) and a desire to stay in the EU.

 

Wishy-washy left or right politics don't bind parties together. Won't bind Labour and SNP together any more than it will bind Tories and UKIP together.

 

Labour-SNP won't happen, nor will Tory-UKIP

 

There might not be a formal coalition but if Labour and the SNP hold the majority of seats it is inevitable that Labour will form a government and it will have to cut deals with the SNP to function. IF we don't get a functioning government then we'll end up having to hold another GE.