Vortex

There is a wealth of difference between high hopes in a council ward seat and the contesting of a parliamentary by election. I've no doubt that the local BNP Branch is increasing in size, but for the reasons I stated the decision was taken not to enter the fray on this occasion. As to the party losing support in the North West, I would suggest that while the party's share has gone down in some places, Oldham for example, in others it has shot up (Liverpool for example). Overall there is a marked increase, citing a couple of boroughs is giving a false picture for a regional assessment of support.

prober

Admit it. BNP bottled out faraid that the UKIP result would humiliate them.

blueblood1920

How do you work that one out? The reason for not standing was due to time and resources, the party has never stood in parlimentary by-elections unless they feel they can put in a decent enough campaign. Due to the locals and London Elections only just finishing the party felt it did not have enough time to get ready for this election, which would of meant the party waisting money which could be put to better use.

Populist Lee

When it comes down to it no one will remember that the BNP were not here.
But people will remember if the party staking its claim to be Britain's Fourth Party crashes and burns.

Where's the guarantee the *UKIP result* won't destroy UKIP?
And with such a high profile candidate for UKIP as well.

Parliamentary By-Elections have a way of breaking smaller parties once in a while.

Three main parties and seven little ones there are contesting this.
Not everyone can be a *winner*.

As Britain's "Fourth Party"; now with an MP . . .
If they don't finish at least fourth, then what does it say about UKIP in truth?

Anthony Butcher

Well that looks like a political straw man argument to me

It is a by-election immediately following a poor overall local election showing (barring a few good results locally). Mike Nattrass is not high profile. In fact I bet you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the constituency who isn't a party activist who has heard of him.

I reckon 5-7% would be a reasonable result. UKIP has scored up to nearly 11% in by-elections in the past, so I imagine they will be disappointed with anything less than 9%. The lack of a BNP candidate should assist the UKIP vote, but there are nine other candidates, which is a big spread and will suck away some protest votes that UKIP might normally pick up. The Tory/Labour clash will also make it difficult for UKIP to get its message across. Gemma Garrett will suck up any spare column inches in pictures.

A poor results for UKIP (less than 5%) won't make any difference really, and certainly can't be worse than the London Mayoral result. In fact, anything over 1.98% will look like an improvement.

__________________
If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled!
Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

Populist Lee

Fact is, UKIP's result cannot be discussed in isolation.
The result for UKIP will have to be considered in relation to what the others get.

1.98% for UKIP will matter VERY much if Gemma Garrett scores 5% [for example].

And I know some UKIPers who post on this Board aren't always connected to political realism; BUT some of them have been talking about how UKIP's intervention in this By-election could be used to hinder Cameron's advance by denying the Tories this seat.

If UKIP can accomplish this then good.

If, on the other hand, the Conservatives take this seat - and take it well - then we return to an as yet unanswered question I asked elsewhere last weekend.
Namely, what becomes of UKIP's BOO Strategy at the next Election?

FredSucks

The English Democrats v UKIP battle will be interesting.

I suspect it will be very close in Crewe.

Populist Lee

Not long to wait now . . .

__________________
ENGLISH POPULISM
Stands as the only obstacle in the path of the Plutocrats
who seek to reduce all the Peoples of the World
to Economic and Political Slavery under Globalism


POPULISM MEANS WHAT YOU WANT IS WHAT YOU GET

ukip kipper

No; the English Democrats v Official Monster Raving Loony Party battle was very close.

blueblood1920

Shame the ED's beat the raving loonies .

But beating the raving loonies by 39 votes is hardly something to brag about