First of the Ukip target seat polls is released (South Thanet)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Polls say otherwise.

Besides i've made this point before, aren't the two main parties more so protests in that it's one group of people voting party X who hate party Y and want to keep it out... and vice versa? The 'protest party' of Canada is now the Government - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadia...election,_1993

---

No, polls don't say otherwise.

People are protesting that they want to be out of Europe. So if UKIP gets this, what happens then? I mean, for a start, their entire name and brand will be irrelevant.. that £ sign? Pointless. The mission to be completely independent? Yeah, that'll happen so that'll become pointless too.

Ultimately, people don't necessarily vote to stop the others getting in - it's just because of the two main parties they prefer one (typically working class labour, middle class Conservative).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Payasam

No, polls don't say otherwise.

People are protesting that they want to be out of Europe. So if UKIP gets this, what happens then? I mean, for a start, their entire name and brand will be irrelevant.. that £ sign? Pointless. The mission to be completely independent? Yeah, that'll happen so that'll become pointless too.

---

Well that just proves you haven't read the polls as Europe doesn't top the major concern that drives Ukip voters. I think actually that Europe ranks third when it comes to Ukip voters, underneath immigration and the economy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Payasam

Ultimately, people don't necessarily vote to stop the others getting in - it's just because of the two main parties they prefer one (typically working class labour, middle class Conservative).

---

I'd disagree with that - look at the falling turnout, membership of the main parties and the events they hold. Years ago people used to look up to politicians, membership of the Labour and Conservative parties were in the millions and the events they held used to rally hundreds of people together. Nowadays they're generally loathed, people refuse to turn out for them, they can't hold events as normal, non-political people don't want anything to do with them and their membership is falling through the floor.

I'm interested to know what you think of the Canadian example I provided though, where the Reform Party (originally a protest party that scored 3% in the late 1980s) replaced, under a FPTP system, the Progressive Conservative Party and is now the ruling party of Canada. That to me shows that it can be done, and how a protest can become an alternative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Well that just proves you haven't read the polls as Europe doesn't top the major concern that drives Ukip voters. I think actually that Europe ranks third when it comes to Ukip voters, underneath immigration and the economy.



I'd disagree with that - look at the falling turnout, membership of the main parties and the events they hold. Years ago people used to look up to politicians, membership of the Labour and Conservative parties were in the millions and the events they held used to rally hundreds of people together. Nowadays they're generally loathed, people refuse to turn out for them, they can't hold events as normal, non-political people don't want anything to do with them and their membership is falling through the floor.

I'm interested to know what you think of the Canadian example I provided though, where the Reform Party (originally a protest party that scored 3% in the late 1980s) replaced, under a FPTP system, the Progressive Conservative Party and is now the ruling party of Canada. That to me shows that it can be done, and how a protest can become an alternative.

---

The issue of immigration in the UK IS about the EU though; people are wound up about Eastern Europeans; not Afro-Caribbean or Thai people (for example) - and that is the EU, directly or indirectly - that is the EU. Now let us take a look at UKIP's "What We Stand For" points, regarding the economy etc (Rebuilding Prosperity).

Quote:

---

• Outside the EU we will save £53m a day and we can give British workers the first crack at the 800,000 jobs we currently advertise to EU workers.
• No tax on the minimum wage.
• Local councils are to enroll unemployed welfare claimants onto community schemes or retraining workfare programmes.
• Scrap all green taxes, wind turbine subsidies and adopt nuclear power to free us from dependence on fossil fuels and foreign oil and gas.
• Develop shale gas and place the tax revenues into a British Sovereign Wealth Fund. Norway’s oil Sovereign Wealth Fund is now worth 0bn.
  Make real and rigorous cuts in foreign aid and replace with free trade.

---

1) Oh look, an EU issue.
2) No tax for a fair chunk of what people on minimum wage earn anyway, not sure I would want no tax on people earning minimum anyway.
3) Coalition already doing that one!
4) And replace them with other taxes...? They won't actually say they want to reduce overall taxation here...
5) No complaints on benefiting from Shale Gas.
6) You know my thoughts on cutting foreign aid; not sure it helps our global position (hasn't Britain always been proud of its global position?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Payasam

The issue of immigration in the UK IS about the EU though; people are wound up about Eastern Europeans; not Afro-Caribbean or Thai people (for example) - and that is the EU, directly or indirectly - that is the EU. Now let us take a look at UKIP's "What We Stand For" points, regarding the economy etc (Rebuilding Prosperity).

---

Actually people are wound up about uncontrolled immigration in general, just the subject matter at this moment happens to be EU immigration from Romania and Bulgaria at the moment. I agree with you though that we can't control immigration until we leave the European Union.

Quote:

---

1) Oh look, an EU issue.

---

So?

Quote:

---

2) No tax for a fair chunk of what people on minimum wage earn anyway, not sure I would want no tax on people earning minimum anyway.

---

It makes economic sense as a lot of money is put back into supporting people on lower wages, essentially meaning that the government is taking money off people and then giving it back to them in benefits - all of which costs money to the Civil Service.

Quote:

---

3) Coalition already doing that one!

---

Indeed, of all this government I think only the likes of IDS are trying to do something.

Quote:

---

4) And replace them with other taxes...? They won't actually say they want to reduce overall taxation here...

---

No, there wouldn't need to be replacement taxes as those programmes would be ended.

Quote:

---

5) No complaints on benefiting from Shale Gas.

---

Yup.

Quote:

---

6) You know my thoughts on cutting foreign aid; not sure it helps our global position (hasn't Britain always been proud of its global position?)

---

Since when did our global position rest on paying for the Indian space programme or funding the lifestyles of African despots?


...anyway not sure what all that solved? :P I said the three main concerns of Ukip voters in the polling was immigration, the EU and the economy. The general point is, that people now who want out of the EU, immigration controlled, grammar schools restored, foreign aid cut or even ended, cuts to waste in public services, deregulation and a less interventionalist foreign policy are drawn to Ukip as all of the old main parties virtually want the opposite of everything I have just said.

It's that simple. And if Ukip get in and do the opposite of what they've pledged then I won't vote for them again. Simple as.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

That's true that there's a flaw you have both pointed out, however there is some truth in the finding in that a lot of people voting Conservative or Labour are voting for them mainly (as they picked this option over 'I like there policies') because they've always voted for them. And that's true - how many times have you heard people say before that they're voting Labour or Tory solely to keep the one they dislike out of office? or that their Grandad voted x or y and thus they would. Voting in this country is hugely a tribal act, the polls confirm it when you look at attitudes on immigration, the EU, foreign policy, crime and lots more compared with the actual policies of the main two parties.

I think my Dad was right when I spoke to him today about it, and he noted that perhaps at first voting Ukip was a protest rather than a vote for their policies - but that's all changed now. That political tribalism is dying i'm very glad about. :P



- http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ories-cut-poll

---

That is true, simply because they are the main two parties. If UKIP ever reaches those heights, the same will be said about them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

That is true, simply because they are the main two parties. If UKIP ever reaches those heights, the same will be said about them.

---

Indeed, but years ago there used to be actual differences between the major two parties - something that is essential in a FPTP electoral system. While not everyone voting say Tory would have liked the entire manifesto, they'd at least be voting broadly for something and against the polar opposite policies of the Labour Party. The same can't be said nowadays which is why (slowly but surely) the traditional Tory v Labour voting pattern is breaking down.

On a side note, a YouGov poll out today on top of that Opinium poll that I posted earlier.

Quote:

---

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 7h

UKIP move to 15% in today's YouGov for S Times CON 30 LAB 38 LD 10 UKIP 15

---

Quote:

---

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 6h

Today's YouGov 30% CON share is lowest since June 10 The UKIP 15% is highest since Jun 10

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

I think my Dad was right when I spoke to him today about it, and he noted that perhaps at first voting Ukip was a protest rather than a vote for their policies - but that's all changed now.

---

People don't admit to protest voting in polls because they look like even bigger idiots than the people who vote for a party because they always have. Also what's the purpose of a protest vote? Protesting policies. Of course they'd vote policy first.