UKIP set to admit to being single issue

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cps...28913934-1.jpg

Quote:

---

UKIP is to dedicate its conference to its campaign for Britain to leave the EU ahead of the in/out referendum, leader Nigel Farage has said.


Party members and activists are gathering in Doncaster, with Mr Farage to deliver a speech at noon.


He told the BBC the conference would not be about UKIP - as it is "not my priority" - but winning the referendum.


He added there would be a "surprise" coming together of all anti-EU groups in the country in a "show of unity".


UKIP, which is committed to Britain withdrawing from the European Union, had launched its own No campaign for the referendum, which the government has pledged to hold by 2018.

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34352475

So it is strongly thought today that Nigel Farage will basically admit that UKIP really is only a one-issue party, something many of its critics have been suggesting for years. After the so called 'political earthquake' (didn't happen), UKIP's next move is to revert on its position of being a genuine force in British Politics and working on the only issue they actually give a damn about; the EU.

Thoughts?

Bit of an odd move to openly declare that he isn't interested in the party as a whole and is going to use it and its events to push just one issue. I guess when you've only got 1 MP and it's not you there's no need to worry about silly little things like having genuine policies until 2020 when he can just make up a load of figures again

Ukip is going to focus solely on the referendum at the moment as that is kinda what it was set up for bro. The next General Election is in 2020. I have said before I couldn't care less if the party disappears from the face of the Earth so long as it restores our national sovereignty/independence in the process.

The issue of who makes our laws triumphs over all other issues. It's so so so damn important. Country before party, something the Tories could learn!

Country before party sure, but it seems to be Farage before country here, first trying to use the electorate (which failed) and now trying to use the party that he's conned people into joining by making big political promises to just focus on one thing that he personally wants to bring about no matter the cost. We've already seen enough of his personal ambition rising above all else when he reneged on stepping down following his big defeat

Farage was apparently offered a safe seat years ago by your lovely Tory Party but he turned it down, rightly understanding that the way to change politics in this country is from the outside and not the inside. He's already forced your Conservatives to offer a referendum which they had to be dragged kicking and screaming into doing so and now he's fighting for something he got into politics for which is an issue he feels passionate about - after having a real job in the real world.

UNLIKE most of the Tory frontbench (who you voted for @FlyingJesus; ) who went into politics as a career choice and not to change anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

and now trying to use the party that he's conned people into joining by making big political promises

---

He's not conned anyone. I doubt anyone has joined the United Kingdom Independence Pary only to be later surprised that it strongly wants EU withdrawal. :rolleyes:

I never suggested that anyone would think that, but he spent a long and loud campaign trying to convince people that that wasn't his only goal (a state of affairs you tried selling us so often yourself) only to turn around and effectively say "cheers for the money and numbers, I'm going to use that and the rest of the party resources on one heavily divisive issue. Never mind that I shouldn't even be here. Auf wiedersehen! Byeeeeee!"

Good that @UKIP return to key policy 'to ensure UK vote to Leave the EU' All who want to leave will work together including Labour voters.

— Kate Hoey (@CatharineHoey) September 25, 2015

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

I never suggested that anyone would think that, but he spent a long and loud campaign trying to convince people that that wasn't his only goal (a state of affairs you tried selling us so often yourself) only to turn around and effectively say "cheers for the money and numbers, I'm going to use that and the rest of the party resources on one heavily divisive issue. Never mind that I shouldn't even be here. Auf wiedersehen! Byeeeeee!"

---

Mate, the General Election is now over, it passed in May. It's done. Dead. Buried.

Now there's a referendum campaign to fight which is x100 more important than any London, Welsh, Scottish, NI or Local Elections. Pretty simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

I'm going to use that and the rest of the party resources on one heavily divisive issue.

---

a) All party resources held before the GE2015 have been spent. The till is empty.
b) EU withdrawal is hardly a 'divisive' issue within the party itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Now there's a referendum campaign to fight which is x100 more important than any London, Welsh, Scottish, NI or Local Elections

---

...To a minority of voters

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

...To a minority of voters

---

Provide evidence for once, please.

Turnout for the referendum will be higher than any of those elections and is more important on a constitutional level given that important decisions that are taken nationally are affected/simply not allowed by the EU. The question of who governs Britain is more important than regional/local elections by any measure. An example would be that local elections generally only reach turnouts of 20% or lower whereas the Scottish referendum had a turnout of 80%+.

Unless of course you claim that when your bin is collected (an EU policy by the way) is more important than who we let into our country (also EU policy) ....?

The evidence is in UKIP's massive flop where they failed entirely to gain anything close to the membership and votes that they were expected to get even by the most sceptical of commentators. If everyone was as blinded by a single issue as you and ol' Nige they'd have all voted for him when they had the chance. As it actually happened, a minority of voters were in agreement with you.

btw hilarious that you ask for evidence of an obvious point and then right away leap into conjecture and fortune telling :P

@FlyingJesus; what are you talking about, you are all over the place. what's 2015 got to do with upcoming regional elections and a referendum? :S

http://www.ezimba.com/work/150926C/e...4061578700.png

they got what the polls were predicting in % share and held up pretty good in the run up from the election, dropping from around the 15% average mark to the 12% they recieved in the election - most media pundits predicted they've dive under the 10% mark when it came to it but they did not. 4 million votes. sure on seats under FPTP they missed and flopped but that was always a huge possibility with the voting system.

you seem determined to relive the last election. the next campaign is the referendum darling, which was the whole point of ukip back in 1993.

"What's the national public popularity of a single issue party got to do with the potential outcome of national public action on that same issue, pushed by those same people?" really like I know you keep asking for extra clarifications on obvious points and ignoring the main path of conversation but even so it's not that difficult to follow the general direction... especially since it's YOUR questions and misleadings that I'm responding to. For someone so hopelessly stuck in the past you sure are making a big effort to pretend that it no bearing on the situation here

@FlyingJesus;

you do realise there's people other than Ukip who want EU withdrawal, right? Like 50% odd of the population.

i know you'd love it allllll to be about ukip but it really isn't hence the reason why Farage is putting the party second behind the referendum campaign. get it son?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

For someone so hopelessly stuck in the past

---

eh what? what am i stuck on the past on, you're the one wanting to go over the 2015 GE results.

Your life and morals in general, and I never said that only UKIP want out of the EU. They are however the only party of any significant size/voice that focuses SOLELY on that issue, and so it's entirely logical to assume that the Eurosceptics who aren't 3 inches deep in Farage view a great many number of other issues to be of equal or greater importance, and so it's completely right to state that the people who believe a referendum is "x100 more important than any London, Welsh, Scottish, NI or Local Elections" are in the minority.

Follow the thread of discussion back, follow what it is I'm replying to, stop assuming that absolutely everything is a general statement when it's so clearly specific to the inflammatory parts of your posts that I'm responding to. It's really very important to know what it is you're replying to, and it's not especially difficult here because everything is written down available to be read and reread should you choose to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

Your life and morals in general

---

I often find that labelling someone's opinions as 'outdated' is just a lazy way of saying you disagree with some of their opinions.

@FlyingJesus;

Constitutionally and politically nobody can seriously claim (apart from you that is) that frequent party political elections to bodies such as Stormont, Holyrood, Cardiff and Liverpool Town Hall are equivilent to a once-in-a-lifetime vote on whether or not Westminster retains or surrenders its centuries old role as the supreme law making organ of this realm or whether that power is continued to be passed to foreign bodies on the European continent.

In fifty years time and constitutionally it matters not whether Plaid Cymru win a plurality of seats in Cardiff in 2015 or whether Labour retain control of the Liverpool council for the next two years. It does matter however whether or not Westminster surrenders or retains its centuries-old function as a sovereign parliament. It matters enormously and you stating otherwise doesn't alter those constitutional and political facts, not even when you keep trying to bring Nigel Farage into it in every sentence as though he's the be-all and end-all of arguments as to why this country may want to retain its national independence.

The Parliament Act of 1911 may not have interested everyone but who can argue that it wasn't a hugely important political and constitutional change?

Heaven forbid that Nigel Farage is mentioned in a thread about the actions of Nigel Farage... and you're still not getting that I haven't said that a referendum wouldn't be a big thing, just that it's not seen as the most important part of British politics by the majority of voters as shown by the fact that it wasn't a big enough selling point to make people defect in their millions to the party that has just that in its sights.

Also you seem to somehow actually believe that nothing in the UK ever gets done by British politicians and that we're genuinely ruled from afar. The reality of course is that it's just an extra layer of hierarchy like we've always had anyway, as opposed to Donald Tusk suddenly becoming our lord and emperor with absolute power

@FlyingJesus; oh yes it's always been a trouble getting people interested in constitutional issues, which is one of the reasons I admire Farage for successfully linking the immigration issue to the European issue: to win a withdrawal we have to show people how Europe affects them rather than dry constitutional arguments which don't cut the mustard with the man on the street. It's like I was talking with my mum yesterday on how the EU affects trade with Commonwealth and how we get higher food prices, and she didn't know that and said how like that needs to be shown to the public in a referendum as it's a relatable issue.

And on the final part, this really is unprecedented in our history to have the powers of Westminster limited. It's often said one of the reasons we've never had a revolution is because our constitution is so flexible and isn't rigid in that it's a product of it's time: I regard it as my right and as a guardian of this country for future generations to restore powers to Westminster so that we have accountable and flexible government for another thouand years (God willing). :angel: