Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2014 18:32:36 GMT
Dependent on how the Labour government performed.....If they did well it could end up an 83 situation with the bickering going on within the right wing parties. Obviously conjecture. 83 was the perfect storm. You simply aren't popular enough for that and are still seen as incompetant. You could squeak a majority. No more.
|
|
Dan
Animal Welfare Party
Believes we need more localism in our politics
Posts: 812
|
Post by Dan on Oct 21, 2014 12:01:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 21, 2014 16:03:38 GMT
Dependent on how the Labour government performed.....If they did well it could end up an 83 situation with the bickering going on within the right wing parties. Obviously conjecture. 83 was the perfect storm. You simply aren't popular enough for that and are still seen as incompetant. You could squeak a majority. No more. Impossible to say, because it all depends on how the government performs in office and that isn't something it is possible to predict, at least without considerable assumption and bias. If UKIP and the Tories bicker their way through another parliament there could easily be a backlash against them - people will get bored with the same old, same old. Its those circumstances I was referring to - not the next election
|
|
|
Post by thirdchill on Oct 21, 2014 16:31:33 GMT
83 was the perfect storm. You simply aren't popular enough for that and are still seen as incompetant. You could squeak a majority. No more. Impossible to say, because it all depends on how the government performs in office and that isn't something it is possible to predict, at least without considerable assumption and bias. If UKIP and the Tories bicker their way through another parliament there could easily be a backlash against them - people will get bored with the same old, same old. Its those circumstances I was referring to - not the next election The bickering would likely give labour a majority. However for a landslide majority you'd have to keep people away from the lib dems and the greens as well. They may not take a huge amount of seats from you but could take enough of your vote to cost you others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 17:27:21 GMT
83 was the perfect storm. You simply aren't popular enough for that and are still seen as incompetant. You could squeak a majority. No more. Impossible to say, because it all depends on how the government performs in office and that isn't something it is possible to predict, at least without considerable assumption and bias. If UKIP and the Tories bicker their way through another parliament there could easily be a backlash against them - people will get bored with the same old, same old. Its those circumstances I was referring to - not the next election Ah fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Oct 21, 2014 18:21:01 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy...
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Oct 21, 2014 18:44:54 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy... Immigrants wanting to prevent/control future immigration are not exactly rare.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 20:54:28 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy... Immigrants wanting to prevent/control future immigration are not exactly rare. The word "former" is probably important here.
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Oct 23, 2014 7:00:25 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy... Their newly selected parliamentary candidate for Tooting is from Poland, here seemingly exercising his EU right to freedom of movement*. *Edit: or possibly not, see below - but I still think it's interesting he would seek to deny others' free movement.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 23, 2014 8:17:40 GMT
Presumably he is a UK citizen or he wouldn't be qualified to stand for Parliament
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 8:19:10 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy... Some years more stringent customs/ immigration checks were introduced on flights from Kingston, & a constituent who was born in jamaica got in touch to say she thought these were a good idea.
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Oct 23, 2014 8:36:08 GMT
It's interesting how these things happen. I'm friendly with a black Zimbabwean chap who moved to the south west so his kids didn't grow up around black people. I suspect this was to do with cultural differences with Jamaicans etc.
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,371
|
Post by Tony Otim on Oct 23, 2014 9:15:00 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy... Some years more stringent customs/ immigration checks were introduced on flights from Kingston, & a constituent who was born in jamaica got in touch to say she thought these were a good idea. I seem to vaguely recall that there was an organised crime dimension to those restrictions and that they had quite widespread support from law-abiding members of the Jamaican community here, but I may be making that up...
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Oct 23, 2014 9:15:29 GMT
Presumably he is a UK citizen or he wouldn't be qualified to stand for Parliament That is a very fair point. I was thinking of his right to stand for local/municipal elections (as he's been a council candidate before). He's apparently lived in the UK since 1999, which was pre-accession. It is possible that his immigration status is different now to what it was when he moved to the UK in 1999 though (which could have been work sponsorship, for example). Although, thinking about it, we don't necessarily know he's qualified to stand, either!
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 23, 2014 9:43:10 GMT
I assume that nobody could get on the approved candidates list if they were not legally eligible to stand for Parliament. I would like to be able to assume it anyway...
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Oct 23, 2014 18:52:20 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy... I take you think that naturalised citizens should be in favour of open immigration policy. Isn't that kind of like saying "I thought you'd be in favour of letting just anyone into the country, after all we let you in"? Seems a bit insulting to me.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Oct 23, 2014 20:15:18 GMT
An immigrant defecting to UKIP because of their immigration policy... I take you think that naturalised citizens should be in favour of open immigration policy. Isn't that kind of like saying "I thought you'd be in favour of letting just anyone into the country, after all we let you in"? Seems a bit insulting to me. Merely noting the irony of the situation - somebody joining a party because of policies which, if they'd been implemented when he was younger, would most likely mean that he wouldn't have even been in this country to join them.
|
|
|
Post by jonarny on Oct 23, 2014 21:16:17 GMT
Your comment is one which I've heard from people outside UKIP before, but never from inside the Party. UKIP members wouldn't see it as an issue or an irony.
Some might argue that there was a need for greater immigration in say the 50s and 60s, but that today there's a need for greater control. Or, that the levels of immigration at that time were sustainable but that current levels are unsustainable...
This kind of situation is hardly unusual, for example Amjad Bashir MEP who is a good friend of mine didn't speak a word of English when he came to the UK from Pakistan with his family at around the age of 8.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Oct 23, 2014 23:29:41 GMT
I take you think that naturalised citizens should be in favour of open immigration policy. Isn't that kind of like saying "I thought you'd be in favour of letting just anyone into the country, after all we let you in"? Seems a bit insulting to me. Merely noting the irony of the situation - somebody joining a party because of policies which, if they'd been implemented when he was younger, would most likely mean that he wouldn't have even been in this country to join them. It isn't ironic at all. It may be hypocritical, or not depending on the details of the persons views, but it isn't ironic.
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Oct 24, 2014 7:47:14 GMT
I assume that nobody could get on the approved candidates list if they were not legally eligible to stand for Parliament. I would like to be able to assume it anyway... Maybe you could ask them, would be embarrassing if they couldn't nominate!
|
|