Reply to: Where's DimPrawn then?

[MicrosoftBob]

1. It's just that the fact they're a bunch of small-minded racists rather makes discussing their ability to run the country redundant.

Ah yes Bigot Gate, but enough about the Labour Party

[MicrosoftBob]

Dave might need the rump of the Liberals and UKIP to prop the Tories up next term, What would that give us...Klit?

Cue I am the Klit Commander speech from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back...

[DimPrawn]

Shouldn't he be crowing about UKIP (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29549414)? Maybe he's sleeping off the celebrations

?

Feck me that was a party, just starting to feel normal again....

[TheFaQQer]

Shouldn't he be crowing about UKIP (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29549414)? Maybe he's sleeping off the celebrations

He's busy updating the signs in Clacton-on-Sea

[Zero Liability]

Problem is, they're by implication calling the electorate which shares these concerns 'xenophobic' and 'racist'. With the Tories imitating many of UKIP's policies and Labour likely to do similar wrt immigration, the accusations wither away into the realm of hypocrisy and desperation.

But by all means, I hope they continue spewing this nonsense, as it seems to be the best they can do. Oh, and whine about treachery. If the Tories want to win, they had best get used to UKIP and stop whining.

If any party should enjoy stigma, it is the establishment ones. As for the Lib dems, who are they to speak of credibility? They're a laughing stock. As is Milliband. Hopefully the Tories will awaken to all this. I wouldn't mind Boris as PM.

None of the big parties would be as smug as they are without the protection of the first past the post system.

[alluvial]

1. The fact you object to the accusations doesn't alter their validity
2. No, that's not the only argument by a long shot. It's just that the fact they're a bunch of small-minded racists rather makes discussing their ability to run the country redundant.

1. I'm objecting to the fact that that is all anti-UKIPers can come up with.
2. You never seem to hear any other argument apart from the "Vote UKIP you get Miliband" argument.
3. Again you spout the usual insults without actually having any evidence apart from the fact that they want to get a handle on immigration.
4. Try changing the record and raise some real points rather than banging on with the same tired old rascism mantra.

[d000hg]

Here we go again. The only argument that people like yourself can come up with to address people's valid concerns is to throw objectionable accusations around.

1. The fact you object to the accusations doesn't alter their validity
2. No, that's not the only argument by a long shot. It's just that the fact they're a bunch of small-minded racists rather makes discussing their ability to run the country redundant.

[fullyautomatix]

UKIP is the only party vocal about curbing immigration. I can only assume that the masses of cheap labour flooding the UK and keeping wages low is the reason people are voting UKIP. The trickle effect of mass immigration from East Europe and cheap IT from India etc will take a bit of time but when it does people will get angry and vote strongly. I think UKIP is in the perfect position to take advantage if they play the cards properly.

[alluvial]

You keep pushing that line if you think it will help. Racism and xenophobia are still stigmatised in the UK.

Here we go again. The only argument that people like yourself can come up with to address people's valid concerns is to throw objectionable accusations around.

[d000hg]

You keep pushing that line if you think it will help. Racism and xenophobia are still stigmatised in the UK.

[alluvial]

Of course there is a stigma. The leaders of all the main parties have ostracised Farage and said UKIP is fundamentally unpalatable. Hitler was popular when he got in but that only meaned he tricked people, just as UKIP/BNP would do.

No, stigma is ascribed by society and the rising popularity of UKIP means that, in general, people are seeing through the lies and distortions (such as the last sentence in your post) that have been bandied around by the established parties, so that any stigma, if there ever was any, is fast disappearing.

[d000hg]

Of course there is a stigma. The leaders of all the main parties have ostracised Farage and said UKIP is fundamentally unpalatable. Hitler was popular when he got in but that only meaned he tricked people, just as UKIP/BNP would do.

[alluvial]

Shouldn't he be crowing about UKIP (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29549414)? Maybe he's sleeping off the celebrations

So if UKIP do get a significant number of seats in 2015, enough to allow one of the big two to form a majority coalition - would either of them actually do this? It seems there would be such a stigma associating with UKIP that you'd be slammed at the following election.

Is ConKIP a realistic prospect or would that be one step too far even for "get in power at any cost" politicians?

Why stigma? If UKIP has garnered enough votes to be in a position to form a coalition, then they will be one of the most popular parties in Britain and there won't be any stigma. It will be uniting with a shared vision or something.
The only blocker that may exist to a Con/UKIP coalition is Dave, but he's not really a Tory anyway and maybe he'd prefer a coalition with Labour?

[d000hg]

or KIPLIb???

Two minority parties aren't collectively going to even get into 3rd place.

Dave might need the rump of the Liberals and UKIP to prop the Tories up next term, What would that give us...Klit?

Can hardly see that happening. ConDem did VERY well to last the term.

[barrydidit]

Dave might need the rump of the Liberals and UKIP to prop the Tories up next term, What would that give us...Klit?