Quote:
Originally Posted by blueblood1920
Why is this bad for the BNP? The media will forget about this after a couple of days and will focus on the elections at hand. If UKIP falls back in London and fails to gain any GLA members that is not good for them at all, especially if the BNP manages to gain members. Whether UKIP made the gains or not last time is irrelevent, they probably have little influence on this election if any at all especially not on the BNP vote.
They must of been popular MP's, from what I am reading about spink is that he has a few things coming out which may see his former voters vote against him. A persons character does in some places have a lot of influence, a good example is probably Steve Radford in Liverpool although I cant stand the man.
The BNP no longer say its impossible for them to win seats, they are actually getting ready to win seats at the next elections. Although I will agree in the past Nationalist parties have been too negative.
Also how does UKIP stand a chance to retain the seat if they can only stand one council candidate in the area? UKIP cant rely on this mans name recognition to win them the seat, especially if some not so nice things are coming out about this man.
I will admit I would of prefered BNP to get an MP first, we still can get the first ELECTED MP. However would I want spink? The answer is probably not, with the BNP's stance on the activities of certain MP's taking in this man would in my opinion be hypocritical.
|
First of all you can not seriously believe that the BNP would have turned Spink down or that the Party, including you, would not now be celebrating in a way that would make this thread look like a Presbyterian funeral by comparison.
The BNP has almost no chance of winning a Parliamentary constituency under its present leadership. This will be graphically demonstrated when they get thrashed in Crewe, which is a solid working class town suffering a flood of cheap Polish labour and should be as natural BNP country as Henley on Thames is Tory, just the other side of the the GLA elections. That Griffin is predicting MPs at the next general now is irrelevant, he knows that the Party cant get near Westminster as long as he is leader and Sainsbury's is full of food. As he admits if you listen carefully to what he says. Griffin has been predicting great things for almost ten years and the BNP's progress has been lamentable given the stricken state of our country.
Spink's defection gives UKIP credibility, it means that people might be inclined to think they have a chance. However more importantly it gives the UKIP membership hope without which their Party would have been unlikely to survive being eclipsed by the BNP in the GLA elections and in next years Euros. The BNP was rather relying on becoming the major Party to the right of the Tories or Labour (which ever is further to the right at the moment) in order to gain the middle class activists it desperately needs. Most importantly UKIP will undoubtedly retain the support of the guy who funds them.
How will UKIP hold this seat? On their weak civic nationalist ticket I have no idea. However it is certainly a lesser challenge than dragging Griffin's reputation and hangers on past the winning post first in some terrifying Northern town or miserable city suburb. At least it has the merit of being a novel problem rather than the perennial one the BNP is faced with.
As for the GLAs if those who voted UKIP last time don't come over to the BNP then the BNP will leave empty handed, again. Whether you or Nick Griffin want to admit it or not UKIP has been far more successful than the BNP, if it were not for their gutless stance on the colonization of the UK they would be a serious force by now. The fact that Griffin's Nazi clique are not still the obscure political freaks they deserve to be is entirely a product of this failure on UKIPs part.