Road rules1 min ago
Getting Things In Perspective
An awful lot of hot air has been expended about UKIP in the last 24 hours, and its worrying Cameron to death. But if we look at the actual numbers involved, perhaps it will help to calm things down a bit ::
The Tories and the LibDems lost 459 Councillors between them, and the Tories actually lost 10 Councils. Labour gained 291 seats and two Councils.
But UKIP only won 139 seats and still do not control any Councils. They also still haven't won a single Westminster seat and it doesn't look as they are likely to. Even if they do, the total is likely to be able to be counted on the fingers of one hand.
To listen to Farage you could be forgiven for thinking that he had achieved a victory on Thursday in line with 1945 or 1997 !
His party may well help to see the end of Cameron and our so-called Coalition Government in 2015 but UKIP are unlikely to achieve anything beyond a place for disaffected voters with a racist tendency to vent their bluster.
The Tories and the LibDems lost 459 Councillors between them, and the Tories actually lost 10 Councils. Labour gained 291 seats and two Councils.
But UKIP only won 139 seats and still do not control any Councils. They also still haven't won a single Westminster seat and it doesn't look as they are likely to. Even if they do, the total is likely to be able to be counted on the fingers of one hand.
To listen to Farage you could be forgiven for thinking that he had achieved a victory on Thursday in line with 1945 or 1997 !
His party may well help to see the end of Cameron and our so-called Coalition Government in 2015 but UKIP are unlikely to achieve anything beyond a place for disaffected voters with a racist tendency to vent their bluster.
Answers
UKIP are in the fine position of being able to promise lots of things they know they cannot deliver. The Tories best approach, when it comes to the general Election is simply to explain to people that a UKIP vote is a wasted vote, which given our (non-AV) voting system it will be. Actually Labour didn't do badly at all in the recent elections, especially bearing...
07:52 Sun 05th May 2013
I have always voted Labour, but like many people did not agree on their policies with regards to immigration and Gordon Brown frankly was an idiot ! I am not particulalry a big fan of UKIP (although my elderly parents are), so who on earth do I vote for in a General Election - will Labour let us down again ?
i didn't misconstrue your post, and now you consign me and more like besides to being uneducated, ta very much. That's the problem with being this blinkered, you can't see what's under your nose, that many people are very concerned about immigration and have been for a long time, and it's no good telling us that those who are, are racially motivated, because as been proven it doesn't wash.
So many of the electorate didn't vote? What's new?
The figures you quote would be not dissimilar to any other local elections in the past.
But, if the so called main parties continue scoffing at UKIP ( a la Ken Clarke) and ignoring the signs I reckon many will be in for a rude awakening at a general election.
I wonder how many of the benign electorate looked at last night's results and have suddenly taken an interest?
IMHO far more than you are ready to dismiss mikey!
The figures you quote would be not dissimilar to any other local elections in the past.
But, if the so called main parties continue scoffing at UKIP ( a la Ken Clarke) and ignoring the signs I reckon many will be in for a rude awakening at a general election.
I wonder how many of the benign electorate looked at last night's results and have suddenly taken an interest?
IMHO far more than you are ready to dismiss mikey!
My original post was only an attempt to put the UKIP results of last Thursday into some kind of perspective.
Organising the Party has been said to be akin to herding cats, and that was by one of their own officials. I doubt if they have the ability to organise themselves enough to win any useful number of seats in the 2015 General Election, and that is what will really count, not a few County Councillors scattered across the country. Arithmetic ...its not difficult you know !
Organising the Party has been said to be akin to herding cats, and that was by one of their own officials. I doubt if they have the ability to organise themselves enough to win any useful number of seats in the 2015 General Election, and that is what will really count, not a few County Councillors scattered across the country. Arithmetic ...its not difficult you know !
You and your fondness of "simple arithmetic". It's not nearly as simple as all that. Again, approximately equal numbers of people didn't bother to vote for Labour, or the Tories, etc. at this local Election. So the question is, why did so many people who would normally be expected to support the main parties stay away, or switch to UKIP?
When the General Election rolls around expect turnout to more than double. It's unreasonable to assume that no-one who didn't vote would not have voted for UKIP had they turned out. As a result the proportion of people voting for UKIP in 2015 could easily be close to 20% again. The next two years will see their party gain more exposure, which could be good or bad. It's a key test for UKIP to show thesmeves as credible and, if they pass it, they may weill be in a very strong position come 2015.
When the General Election rolls around expect turnout to more than double. It's unreasonable to assume that no-one who didn't vote would not have voted for UKIP had they turned out. As a result the proportion of people voting for UKIP in 2015 could easily be close to 20% again. The next two years will see their party gain more exposure, which could be good or bad. It's a key test for UKIP to show thesmeves as credible and, if they pass it, they may weill be in a very strong position come 2015.
You may be right jim, but do you think it likely that they will get enough seats in 2015 to win outright, in our first-past-the-post system ? Or even enough to be Her Majesties official opposition ? Many millions of people would need to vote UKIP before either of those two scenarios were to come to pass. Sorry to rely so heavily on arithmetic but its simple arithmetic that wins elections. No one remembers the guy who won Silver or Bronze.
Of course UKIP aren't going to win in 2105, and this may put people of voting for them. But the point is that they have been catapaulted into a position of prominence, of being a mainstream party for the first time. While not necessarily going to win, UKIP could have the impact of making a severe dent in the Conservative vote, and perhaps even the votes of all of the three major parties. That could lead to some UKIP seats, or none at all, but it will certainly not be negligible. You don't need to win to be an influence.
The Conservatives in particular are at risk because that party is already divided over Europe. If UKIP can come up with a serious Economic policy they could pull people on the right in over that. Just as possible, then, as a Con-UKIP coalition, or a continued Lib-Con coalition, is the possibility of a Labour Government, not because more people wanted them in power, but because the vote on the right becomes split.
The arithmetic is nothing like simple -- UKIP will not win, but how well they do, or not, could have a major impact on the fortunes of those who can win.
The Conservatives in particular are at risk because that party is already divided over Europe. If UKIP can come up with a serious Economic policy they could pull people on the right in over that. Just as possible, then, as a Con-UKIP coalition, or a continued Lib-Con coalition, is the possibility of a Labour Government, not because more people wanted them in power, but because the vote on the right becomes split.
The arithmetic is nothing like simple -- UKIP will not win, but how well they do, or not, could have a major impact on the fortunes of those who can win.
mikey, you need to stop sounding like Ken Clarke and maybe begin adopting the stance of David Davis:
http://
http://
You are quite right jim...its just that I thought, for one tiny little minute, that You thought UKIP might win in 2015 ! I'm glad we have sorted that out, although there may still be some people who think that Mrs Farage will be in Number Ten, measuring up for new curtains.
However, UKIP will eat into both Labour and the Tories vote. My prediction is that, as they are a right-wing party, they will take more votes away from the Tories than Labour, thus allowing Labour to win in 2015 by default. And I'm sure that their peculiar stance on smoking in public places will get them some of the nicotine-stained vote.
Its going to be an exciting 2 years !
However, UKIP will eat into both Labour and the Tories vote. My prediction is that, as they are a right-wing party, they will take more votes away from the Tories than Labour, thus allowing Labour to win in 2015 by default. And I'm sure that their peculiar stance on smoking in public places will get them some of the nicotine-stained vote.
Its going to be an exciting 2 years !
.mickey Speaking as one of those uneducated UKIP plebs I must admit I had some difficulty in understanding your logic especially as only a third of the seats were up for election so all your remarks about controlling councils and seats in westminster were totally irrelevant.
I don't know whether my Uni maths is up to your standard but I'll do my best.
You are obsessed with arithmatic . What did you say ?
Ah yes ! //Lets try some simple sums shall we ? Only about 7.1% of British people who voted on Thursday, voted for UKIP......hardly a landslide is it ?
When dealing with politics, you ignore plain arithmetic at your peril ! //
So !Labour, the Tories , UKIP , and the Lib/Dems all got about 7% of the 30% who voted .......hardly a landslide for anyone is it. ? OK I know you only mentioned UKIP but I expect that was an oversight.
Or as you said //Put another way, 69% didn't bother to vote at all, for UKIP or anyone else. // I wonder who 'anyone else ' refers to ?
If this was a general election only 50-60% vote or as you put it .
40-50% wont bother to vote , for UKIP or anyone else.
Should UKIP put up a strong showing, albeit not as good as in the local elections , none of the present main parties will be able to form a government on their own.
I'm not voting UKIP as a protest I'm voting for them as the only party who has any chance to force our government to bite the bullet on the EU and immigration.
I don't know whether my Uni maths is up to your standard but I'll do my best.
You are obsessed with arithmatic . What did you say ?
Ah yes ! //Lets try some simple sums shall we ? Only about 7.1% of British people who voted on Thursday, voted for UKIP......hardly a landslide is it ?
When dealing with politics, you ignore plain arithmetic at your peril ! //
So !Labour, the Tories , UKIP , and the Lib/Dems all got about 7% of the 30% who voted .......hardly a landslide for anyone is it. ? OK I know you only mentioned UKIP but I expect that was an oversight.
Or as you said //Put another way, 69% didn't bother to vote at all, for UKIP or anyone else. // I wonder who 'anyone else ' refers to ?
If this was a general election only 50-60% vote or as you put it .
40-50% wont bother to vote , for UKIP or anyone else.
Should UKIP put up a strong showing, albeit not as good as in the local elections , none of the present main parties will be able to form a government on their own.
I'm not voting UKIP as a protest I'm voting for them as the only party who has any chance to force our government to bite the bullet on the EU and immigration.
"Remember though Mikey that if enough people are deluded enough to think that UKIP might win... then they'll win. Simple arithmetic. "
Simple common sense says that not enough people will think that, for a variety of reasons. In which case, arithmetic does, in fact, matter :-)
To get back to the original question, UKIP's success is big news, in one sense - on the other hand I don't think it's "extraordinary". The success in these mainly tory shire county seats was hardly unexpected and they'll probably do even better (ironically) in the Euro elections next year.
I'd like to see UKIP taken seriously as a political party, which means treating them like other political parties, which means tackling them head-on and not treating them as some sort of "bad luck charm" or evil spirit that you need to propitiate partly by indulging them. Sadly that isn't going to happen becuae there are few votes to be had in the current climate by telling people that they won't be any better off if we leave the EU and/or drastically cut back on legal immigration
Simple common sense says that not enough people will think that, for a variety of reasons. In which case, arithmetic does, in fact, matter :-)
To get back to the original question, UKIP's success is big news, in one sense - on the other hand I don't think it's "extraordinary". The success in these mainly tory shire county seats was hardly unexpected and they'll probably do even better (ironically) in the Euro elections next year.
I'd like to see UKIP taken seriously as a political party, which means treating them like other political parties, which means tackling them head-on and not treating them as some sort of "bad luck charm" or evil spirit that you need to propitiate partly by indulging them. Sadly that isn't going to happen becuae there are few votes to be had in the current climate by telling people that they won't be any better off if we leave the EU and/or drastically cut back on legal immigration
Modeller
//Should UKIP put up a strong showing, albeit not as good as in the local elections , none of the present main parties will be able to form a government on their own. //
That is a major mistake
Firstly because UKIP are predominantly taking votes from the Tory Party
Secondly because of the way the electoral system works - A strong showing would have to translate into winning large numbers of seats and they are light years away from doing that.
If the referendum for PR had gone the other way - you'd be right - but it didn't and that means Farage has a mountain to climb
Kind of Ironic because I was kind of in favour of PR and I recall you were sort of against it
http://
I'm glad now the way the PR referendum went
//Should UKIP put up a strong showing, albeit not as good as in the local elections , none of the present main parties will be able to form a government on their own. //
That is a major mistake
Firstly because UKIP are predominantly taking votes from the Tory Party
Secondly because of the way the electoral system works - A strong showing would have to translate into winning large numbers of seats and they are light years away from doing that.
If the referendum for PR had gone the other way - you'd be right - but it didn't and that means Farage has a mountain to climb
Kind of Ironic because I was kind of in favour of PR and I recall you were sort of against it
http://
I'm glad now the way the PR referendum went
While yes, ichkeria, it's hard to see how enough people could support UKIP, it's still a (small) possibility. I was getting irritated at the "simple arithmetic" post. Elections with so many parties to choose from are anything but a matter of "simple arithmetic". The consequences of a UKIP vote are unlikely to be a UKIP government, but if it's any sort of size then where the votes came from could have all sorts of effects on the overall result. These effects will not be "simple".
jtp It would appear at the moment the Tories are the main losers but
Labour are also losing support also I dont think the electorate are ready for another Labour government, especially as Labour are pro Europe
and the working class are the greatest sufferers from immigration as well the greatest payers of tax. Much of which goes to support inefficient practices in Europe.
You are right I am against PR or AV . If we had it we would be destined to have permanent coalitions . Look at the problems this crowd are having.
For most of our history we have had strong parties but at the moment there is so little to pick between them , what's the point .
That is one reason why UKIP are doing well , they are different. They are positive.
Labour are also losing support also I dont think the electorate are ready for another Labour government, especially as Labour are pro Europe
and the working class are the greatest sufferers from immigration as well the greatest payers of tax. Much of which goes to support inefficient practices in Europe.
You are right I am against PR or AV . If we had it we would be destined to have permanent coalitions . Look at the problems this crowd are having.
For most of our history we have had strong parties but at the moment there is so little to pick between them , what's the point .
That is one reason why UKIP are doing well , they are different. They are positive.
UKIP are in the fine position of being able to promise lots of things they know they cannot deliver. The Tories best approach, when it comes to the general Election is simply to explain to people that a UKIP vote is a wasted vote, which given our (non-AV) voting system it will be.
Actually Labour didn't do badly at all in the recent elections, especially bearing in mind where they were held: largely in traditional Tory shire counties. They actually topped the poll, and made, albeit in most cases modest gains in terms of seats. and one important reason for that? UKIP! So the UKIP effect has benefitted Labour in the Tories' own backyard. And that's before you consider the more traditional Labour voting areas.
Actually Labour didn't do badly at all in the recent elections, especially bearing in mind where they were held: largely in traditional Tory shire counties. They actually topped the poll, and made, albeit in most cases modest gains in terms of seats. and one important reason for that? UKIP! So the UKIP effect has benefitted Labour in the Tories' own backyard. And that's before you consider the more traditional Labour voting areas.
//The Tories best approach, when it comes to the general Election is simply to explain to people that a UKIP vote is a wasted vote,//
They tried that this time and it didn't work. The main parties say the same thing about all the minority parties at every election and it doesn't work because people who vote for the minorities do so because they don't have faith in the Tories or Labour . S
They tried that this time and it didn't work. The main parties say the same thing about all the minority parties at every election and it doesn't work because people who vote for the minorities do so because they don't have faith in the Tories or Labour . S
When I said that UKIP were in a fine position, I meant that they know they will never have deliver on their promises, not that they can't. It's easy: you put lots of pie-in-the-sky stuff in your manifesto because you know that it will attract enough votes in the short term to freak out the Tories. That is UKIPs promary aim: spook the Tories, especially in these ough economic times and hope they'll lose their nerve. But it isn't serious. The fear that your vote is a wasted vote DOES matter in elections. Arguably it is actually a bit unfair on UKIP, but it's still a fact. I'm still a supporter of AV though, even if ironically it would have benefitted UKIP.
