Poll: which party are you going to vote in up coming elections?

[Narj]

wow! The loony left nut-cases are out in force today!

These must be the highly educated voters that people have been talking about?

 

[krooton]

I don't see why that's a useful distinction to make.

Certainly seems like a racist distinction to make!

 

[elmarko]

I'm not sure why the media is focusing on UKIP, Labour has made far more gains & has ten times the number of seats.

240 VS 138 gains is a huge difference, the swing towards Labour from disenfranchised Liberal Democrat voters is far more significant politically.

 

[Burnsy2023]

All the people protesting and attacking the ukip were labour supporters. Even the guy that egged him was a labour supporter. Most of the negative news articles have come from pro labour biased news organisations, the bbc, the sun and so on.

No, not all of the people protesting against UKIP were Labour supporters. Also didn't the Sun publicly support the conservatives in the last election? (That's a rhetorical question).

 

[robgmun]

Can you back that up? I'm fairly sure that I saw a study that showed that higher educated people vote for liberal parties.

Hang on. On one hand the left bang on about how wealthy people vote to the right, then the other hand you say thick people vote right wing.

That doesn't compute. Seeing that it's very unlikely that all wealthy people are thick as a brick and only inherent money. Most people who are rich are amongst the intelligent (and kindest) people i have ever met, and i've met loads in my life now. And they all are traditionally Conservative voters.

You can't have it both ways, which is it?

 

[elmarko]

All the people protesting and attacking the ukip were labour supporters. Even the guy that egged him was a labour supporter. Most of the negative news articles have come from pro labour biased news organisations, the bbc, the sun and so on.

The Sun is pro-conservative, not Labour.

But keep pretending that it's just the 'extreme left' who hate everything UKIP stand for if it makes you feel better.

Hang on. On one hand the left bang on about how wealthy people vote to the right, then the other hand you say thick people vote right wing.

That doesn't compute. Seeing that it's very unlikely that all wealthy people are thick as a brick and only inherent money. Most people who are rich are amongst the intelligent (and kindest) people i have ever met, and i've met loads in my life now.

You can't have it both ways, which is it?

The left don't bang on about wealthy people voting right wing - the usual complaint is that the democratic system is undermined by politicians listening to the wishes of large businesses (which isn't the same thing).

 

[Schlong&Stable]

But are they now? If not then why change the system if it's no longer a problem?

That is unknown I suppose. But if they are only making a minor contribution at most, then I'd still question their value to our society given the other negative implications.

I don't see why that's a useful distinction to make.

Well they are immigrants and the children of immigrants, so the distinction is very important as it allows us to see the long-term impact.

I'm not sure why the media is focusing on UKIP, Labour has made far more gains & has ten times the number of seats.

240 VS 138 gains is a huge difference, the swing towards Labour from disenfranchised Liberal Democrat voters is far more significant politically.

Because this is not a very big swing for opposition. Look at the 2007 elections when the Tory's gained 911 councillors, that is the sort of groundswell that Labour needed. Labour need 500+ for this to have been anything over that mediocre for them.

 

[scorza]

I'm not sure why the media is focusing on UKIP, Labour has made far more gains & has ten times the number of seats.

240 VS 138 gains is a huge difference, the swing towards Labour from disenfranchised Liberal Democrat voters is far more significant politically.

Because Labour should have won more seats from the Conservatives if they want to win the general election next year. Instead there seems to have been a significant swing from Tory to UKIP, which has unclear implications for the general election. There's no doubt that UKIP is the big story in these elections, going from essentially nothing to 140 councilors is an amazing achievement for what is in reality a one-man, one-policy party.

 

[robgmun]

I'm not sure why the media is focusing on UKIP, Labour has made far more gains & has ten times the number of seats.

240 VS 138 gains is a huge difference, the swing towards Labour from disenfranchised Liberal Democrat voters is far more significant politically.

They were supposed to get almost double that, 400+ seats, which as been denied them by UKIP, that's why UKIP is big news

 

[anything I don't mind]

The Sun is pro-conservative, not Labour.

But keep pretending that it's just the 'extreme left' who hate everything UKIP stand for if it makes you feel better.

The left don't bang on about wealthy people voting right wing - the usual complaint is that the democratic system is undermined by politicians listening to the wishes of large businesses (which isn't the same thing).

It doesn't make me feel better at all. I am just pointing out the obvious attack from pro labour media, the bbc, against the ukip. Which has obviously negatively affected the ukip vote.

What ukip need is its own media organisation like labour have with the bbc. UKip should create their own state run media organisation and then they can also run with bias news like labour does with the bbc.

I thought it was the sun, may have been one of the other tabloids that disguise themselves as news papers.

 

[robgmun]

T

The left don't bang on about wealthy people voting right wing - the usual complaint is that the democratic system is undermined by politicians listening to the wishes of large businesses (which isn't the same thing).

Yes they do, the left always bang on about the Tory's looking after there 'rich' mates. Tax cut for the wealthy etc etc etc, you can't deny this

Now all of a sudden they all have lower IQ's and are uneducated? remember Tim-nice-but-dim was a sketch show character, not real life!

 

[Burnsy2023]

That is unknown I suppose. But if they are only making a minor contribution at most, then I'd still question their value to our society given the other negative implications.

Other negative implications such as?

Well they are immigrants and the children of immigrants, so the distinction is very important as it allows us to see the long-term impact.

But if they're second generation immigrants and have British passports, they're British, so why make the distinction?

 

[Burnsy2023]

It doesn't make me feel better at all. I am just pointing out the obvious attack from pro labour media, the bbc, against the ukip. Which has obviously negatively affected the ukip vote.

What ukip need is its own media organisation like labour have with the bbc. UKip should create their own state run media organisation and then they can also run with bias news like labour does with the bbc.

Do you have an credible evidence to suggest the BBC has a labour bias? I stress the word credible.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

Other negative implications such as?

Social cohesion, higher crime rates amongst immigrants etc.

But if they're second generation immigrants and have British passports, they're British, so why make the distinction?

Because we're discussing racism, so race is the only distinction that matters.

 

[elmarko]

It doesn't make me feel better at all. I am just pointing out the obvious attack from pro labour media, the bbc, against the ukip. Which has obviously negatively affected the ukip vote.

What ukip need is its own media organisation like labour have with the bbc. UKip should create their own state run media organisation and then they can also run with bias news like labour does with the bbc.

I thought it was the sun, may have been one of the other tabloids that disguise themselves as news papers.

The BBC isn't pro Labour, it's pro-socio progressive values.

They are not the same thing.

Both Conservative voters & Labour voters complain about BBC bias which in my view indicates they are doing quite well at being neutral.

Yes they do, the left always bang on about the Tory's looking after there 'rich' mates. Tax cut for the wealthy etc etc etc, you can't deny this

Now all of a sudden they all have lower IQ's and are uneducated? remember Tim-nice-but-dim was a sketch show character, not real life!

When they use the term wealthy usually it's the top few 10%, not the majority of higher educated people who are comparatively rich to the rest of the population but not in the very top echelons of society.

If a political party makes changes to benefit wealthy donors or rich friends, that again isn't the same as making changes for above average earners.

What you are doing is constructing a straw-man to argue against.

While many high income earners share liberal attitudes, businesses (as an entity) have none - they core focus is the acquisition of profit.

 

[Westyfield2]

Have to say, it's pretty impressive how well UKIP have done given how biased against them the mainstream media is. Imagine how well they would have done if they media wasn't biased!?


For UKIP haters looking for an argument:

I totally get that there's some nutters in UKIP. There's also people doing bad stuff in the Conservatives, Labour, the Lib Dems, etc. All the parties have their bad eggs. And IMHO they should all be scrutinised equally by the media. Whereas currently any bad stuff from Conservatives, Labour, the Lib Dems, etc is glossed over and forgotten about, but any UKIP story is OMGZ TOP HEADLINEZ for days. Harriet Harman and Paedophile Information Exchange - how come that disappeared pretty quickly? Etc etc.

http://order-order.com/2014/05/21/ukip-candidate-stabbed-by-labour-supporters/

http://order-order.com/2014/05/20/labour-silent-over-councillors-holocaust-tweet/

http://order-order.com/2014/05/19/diane-white-people-abbotts-race-row-hypocrisy/

http://order-order.com/2014/05/19/tory-mp-mike-freer-reported-to-standards-commissioner/

http://order-order.com/2014/05/19/10-establishment-loonies-not-mentioned-by-the-mainstream-media/

http://order-order.com/2014/05/15/guy-news-special-would-you-really-vote-for-the-libdems/

http://order-order.com/2014/04/30/suspended-council-candidate-doesnt-make-national-news/

http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/local-news/harrow-labour-suspend-fraudster-candidate-7041822

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-26764022

http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/...es-select-former-bnp-activist-for-safe-seat

​

 

[scorza]

The BBC isn't pro Labour, it's pro-socio progressive values.

They are not the same thing.

Both Conservative voters & Labour voters complain about BBC bias which in my view indicates they are doing quite well at being neutral.

I always think that the BBC hate the Labour Party these days after the Greg Dyke/Dodgy Dossier fiasco. Certainly it struck me that John Humphreys gave Douglas Alexander a much harder time than he gave to Michael Gove on Radio 4 this morning.

 

[arknor]

Other negative implications such as?



But if they're second generation immigrants and have British passports, they're British, so why make the distinction?

are they raised as British? is their first language British?
I can tell you around here they are not and do not consider them self to be British
other implications such as 3 children in my sons class of over 30 pupils that speak english as a first language. (obviously you can see how this effects the level of education my son receives?)

and this is a north east school not london, they haven't even done a Christian or British themed play in years, always Hindu crap or Muslim even around Christmas

 

[anything I don't mind]

The BBC isn't pro Labour, it's pro-socio progressive values.

They are not the same thing.

Both Conservative voters & Labour voters complain about BBC bias which in my view indicates they are doing quite well at being neutral.

When they use the term wealthy usually it's the top few 10%, not the majority of higher educated people who are comparatively rich to the rest of the population but not in the very top echelons of society.

If a political party makes changes to benefit wealthy donors or rich friends, that again isn't the same as making changes for above average earners.

What you are doing is constructing a straw-man to argue against.

While many high income earners share liberal attitudes, businesses (as an entity) have none - they core focus is the acquisition of profit.

Thanks for that epic quote. Ive got a new sig now

 

[elmarko]

Because Labour should have won more seats from the Conservatives if they want to win the general election next year. Instead there seems to have been a significant swing from Tory to UKIP, which has unclear implications for the general election. There's no doubt that UKIP is the big story in these elections, going from essentially nothing to 140 councilors is an amazing achievement for what is in reality a one-man, one-policy party.

Not really, a party with such popularist views I'd expect to get a larger portion of the vote.

Labour have 46.7% of all the seats, with UKIP at 4.4%, it's not as huge as people think.