Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 4,503
- Location
- Darkest Worcestershire
Chances of UKIP winning General Election?
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,244
- Location
- Billericay, UK
So you cant guess, it was a joke
Yeah, sarcasm is hard to do on the internet.
We would also lose the £billions of EU subsidy's and grants the UK gets, Wales would be devastated by such action which is why it's baffling to most of us how the hell UKIP did so well here
So you cant guess, it was a joke
It really didn't come across that way.
We would also lose the £billions of EU subsidy's and grants the UK gets, Wales would be devastated by such action which is why it's baffling to most of us how the hell UKIP did so well here
Populism? Remember 2010 when the Lib Dems were going to rock the establishment? Their MP count actually went down even thoght Clegg was seen to have won the debates and wasn't tarnished by either being the tories or by being involved in the financial crash.
People keep saying this but unless they had enough MPs to actually make the difference why would the conservatives bother with a coalition? I mean if they have 10-20 MPs it would make some sense at least arithmetically but again the chances of that many MPs are basically nil given the way our electoral system works.
I've often thought first past the post was a terrible system, for example handing labour power based partly on success in devolved areas however if it helps keep this gurning nutjob away from my tax money then so much the better.
If they wound up with less than that (I think once you take the Farage personality politics away they might get 2 or 3?) they wouldn't hold the balance of power anyway, if I were cameron I'd just go minority seeing as I suspect the vote will go largely 2 ways, Lab/Con with a mish mash of fruitcakes at the edges.
You can't govern whilst having to keep single issue parties happy, really Clegg ought to go down (and go down it looks as if he will) as someone who really took one for the country 4 years ago. The Liberals actually delivered a stable government at a time of crisis and have been rewarded with the blame for things like tuition fees.
Last edited:
We would also lose the £billions of EU subsidy's and grants the UK gets, Wales would be devastated by such action which is why it's baffling to most of us how the hell UKIP did so well here
Not that I know the figures, but if it costs us EUR13b annually, if the subsidies are less than EUR13bn then from a purely financially perspective we would be winners for dropping out?
We need to go back to purely a trade union. If that is not possible, then come out entirely.
Because they have 0 experience in running a country, or even being an MP, they don't turn up to much in europe either so that experience will hardly help.
That and they won't have had chance to flush out all the loons by next year.
I voted for them because I agree breoadly with libertarian principles (though I don't have confidence in anyone running for government to implement them properly), I'm skeptical on climate change, and want out of the EU. I don't like any of their other policies at all.
Last edited:
Biggest con in the world. Of course it's changing, it is forever changing. Global warming was a farce, us as a race having any meaningful impact is also laughable imo.
The majority of the scientific community disagrees with you. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Global warming is very real it's just natural, it's man made climate change that's the unproven joke.
Why so?.
Are you saying that CFC's didn't have a meaningful impact on the environment? (a good example of a man-made global environmental problem over a short space of time).
As above.
Do you believe that pretty much all the scientists who are qualified to have an opinion on the matter are all in a huge conspiracy? - also the key scientists never said global warming, the term used was climate change back then - global warming is often used to refer specifically to a long average increase in temperature. (as below).
Climate change is used to describe the different aspects in which within some regions the climate will get warmer, others cooler - but with an overall potential shift towards warmer when looking in the long-term.
Last edited:
Yeah I think they'd definitely go with a minority government. They can usually rely on a few Ulster MPs, plus any UKIP MPs to join in with them though so they'd be able to get most things through assuming they don't lose too many MPs to Labour or the Lib Dems (lol). Don't forget Scotland might be well on the way to being an independent country by then too, there was talk about banning Scottish MPs voting on legislation in the event of a Yes vote in the referendum.
I think it'd be quite interesting if there was a Labour minority government next time - would the Lib Dems be willing or even able to join in a coalition with them given a) the kicking they've received for being in a coalition with the Tories or b) the kicking they've given out to Labour while in that coalition. Kinda completely undermines the point of the LibDems if they can't go into coalitions.
Of course, I still predict the most likely outcome next year as a Conservative majority government.
So the billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere over the last century and more have had zero impact in your 'opinion' ? Given that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, don't you find this contradiction unsettling ?
Surly it has to have an impact right ?The difference is the UK gives money to the EU and the EU gives a lot fo it back to the UK, if we kept the money then Westminister would simply spend it on southern England like it used to so the majority of the UK would be worse off, lol.
The majority of the scientific community disagrees with you. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
I haven't paid much attention to the finer details in it since it went from 'Global Warming' to 'Climate Change', as not everywhere was in fact warming up, and thus they changed their argument.
When all the nuts were screaming about the Antarctic melting and possibly flooding the globe, the Arctic was in fact increasing in size. Also its's common knowledge that melting floating ice does not increase water levels.
We are still coming out of an ice age in respect to the Earths life cycles so ofc the climate is changing.
The Earth produced harmful / hazardess gasses long before we were around and will continue to do so long after we have gone. It has also been looking after itself for millions of years, what ever 'man made pollution' we make it will look after itself.
Whenever I do come across a piece though, the scientists still seem pretty split. Both making cases for and against. I'm not convinced any of them know with any certainty what is going on, let alone how much mankind has attributed to this.
Last edited:
No, climate change is natural. It is global warming via unnatural sources that is the unknown.
I am certain that man has had an impact, and continues to do so. What is unproven is whether we would have been in a warming cycle anyway. Have we simply accelerated a natural process?
So the billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere over the last century and more have had zero impact in your 'opinion' ? Given that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, don't you find this contradiction unsettling ?
/Meh, in the last 2000 years the planet has been both hotter and colder than today, it has warmed/cooled faster than in recent times, I really see nothing to get alarmed over.
Climate change is probably the only thing UKIP are right on.
But it is not that simple. There are many benefits the UK receives from being part of the EU, many indirect financial benefits, many benefits that is hard to even put into financial terms.
No it's not that simple, the two paragraphs werent meant to be an 'in conclusion'.
I was just asking if that was the case from a purely financial view.
My reasons for wanting to come out of the EU are more than financial (if we even benefit financially at all?)
- Status