Will London lose it's UKIP MEP ?

indigo · 22-08-2008, 01:28 AM

Some people have a few highly optimistic ideas of what's going to happen for UKIP in 2009. I believe UKIP will cost the BNP multiple seats, but the BNP will still win a few.

Many UKIPpers won't be surprised at the continuation of the previous dismal vote (~2%). The optimists, with their heads still back in the glory days of 2004, will be crushed.

My guess is that UKIP's gradual deterioration will massively accelerate.

I've watched the death of minor parties before. Some catalyst (usually a dismal election result) sets off a chain reaction, whereby falling morale, membership numbers, and election results feed off each other, and a significant party can fall into obscurity within a year. (Though a small hard core will continue long after that.)

The battle between UKIP and the BNP for dominance of this part of the political spectrum will soon be over, and the winner will almost certainly be the BNP, who will then cannibalise UKIP's membership. I think that's going to be a bitter pill for some UKIPpers to swallow, after the squandered opportunities that came out of 2004.

gc · 22-08-2008, 09:13 AM

I agree with what Indigo writes. The country simply does not need a reactionary, retro-Thatcherite party in the early 21st century, and that is what UKIP has become. I maintain that all elections now are fought on local issues: the BNP and the Greens got that in London in June, UKIP didn't, and the result was no surprise to anyone (except the Thatcherites...)

The mantra is "The electorate will focus on UKIP come the Euros in 2009".

No they won't: Watch how the smaller parties mould their campaign on the ground around local issues, leaving Europe to the press offices and the most senior of spokesmen.

The political landscape in 2009 will be unrecognisable to anybody stuck in a 2004 mindset.

Shaun · 22-08-2008, 12:28 PM

"The BNP's vote in London on the party list system that is so favourable to small parties went up from 4.87% in 2004 to 5.13% in 2008 despite a much livelier campaign, a good leaflet, and far more activists to put it out. "To-morrow the world" that was not".

Whlist that is true Adrian, it's worth noting that turnout in 2008 was much higher than it was in 2004,so the rise in people actually voting BNP is more dramatic than that.

You may recall both Livingstone and Johnston remarking on just how high the turnout was.

Gregory Lauder-Frost · 22-08-2008, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adrian Davies

Much truth in that, especially given the very different socio-economic bases of UKIP and the BNP. I would however add that the Cameroon Tories, unappetising though they may be to me and many others on this forum, will on present trends eat into the UKIP vote.

Without proper unfettered access to the media the smaller parties don't have much hope in reaching 60 million people. I am all for freedom of information to be available to the political parties so that the parties can say, through the media, as much as they can afford to say. Otherwise the public will never know. The present rules on political broadcasts or ads in that form are exceptionally undemocratic and simply entrench the Westminster mafia.

Mikeuk · 22-08-2008, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

And we also need to bear in mind that the BNP is in fact much weaker than UKIP both financially and in terms of membership. Whilst it is very effective at targetting wards in local by-elections, when it is called to mount a wider campaign it simply hasn't the resources. This year's local elections is a case in point. Given how unpopular Labour was (and Labour voters are the BNP's target demographic) I would have expected the BNP to have picked up 40+ local council seats. However it managed only about 10. Presumably the effort in London resulted in a lack of resources elsewhere in the local elections. This is further born out by the fact that the party was unable to contest the Crewe & Nantwich by-election due to a lack of resources.

So how the BNP expects to be able to mount a national campaign, or even more than one regional campaign in next year's Euro elections is a question that needs to be answered.

I would expect that the BNP will virtually abandon every region but Wales in order to focus their efforts on getting Nick Griffin elected. I expect that they will also to a large extent abandon London, as Nick won't want it to become an alternative centre of power within the party.

All this is true but it also misses the point.

Despite all its recent upheavals the BNP remains centrally controlled and strongly focused. Alone out of all the parties it has members who are totally loyal not so much to Griffin but to the Nationalist/Fascist ideal.

Loyalty is supposed to be the Tories' secret weapon, but it was a tribal loyalty of total stupidity. That's all changing. The Tories are becoming more focused on their areas of strength. Bizarrely, and probably not intentionally, they are mirroring the successful strategy of the BNP, but in their case success will not mean a few council seats, MEPs etc. It will mean government, and David Cameron in No 10.

And as for UKIP...well, what can one say?

Freedom from the EU · 23-08-2008, 09:37 PM

I cant see Ukip winning a seat in London next year, I think they would be doing well to get half the vote they got last time.

Nick Griffin BNP is standing in the North West i believe and not Wales as earlier stated.

indigo · 27-08-2008, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freedom from the EU

I cant see Ukip winning a seat in London next year, I think they would be doing well to get half the vote they got last time.

They'd be doing well to get a quarter of the vote as well.

Is there any region where UKIP has a chance of winning?

prober · 27-08-2008, 11:20 AM

This is unduly and unjustifiably pessimistic. Its not enough to say the UKIP vote will drop. You have to explore the effect of where it will shift TO, AND the drop in Labour's vote, and static core Lib Dems. If you take the view that both drops will mainly shift to Tory but a significant shift from labour to Green & Lib Dem you have to check what that effect has on actually winning any MORE seats for those parties . In the S.E. for example in reasonable scenerios UKIP could suffer a sunstantial drop in vote % but still win 2 seats as last time.

Even if in 2009 UKIP abandons any attempt to either attack the EU and EU record of other parties and abandons trying to sell itself as a party worth a positive vote, it must still be assumed that ( as well as the Tory Party saying the same thing) UKIP will at least simply shout " Labour denied you a referendum on Lisbon, this is now your referendum". No matter what disappointments in UKIP, this is surely a powerful message to the population shafted by New Labour's broken promise. It depends on who lays it out more convincingly , UKIP or " trust me I'm nice " Cameron.

indigo · 27-08-2008, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prober

This is unduly and unjustifiably pessimistic. Its not enough to say the UKIP vote will drop. You have to explore the effect of where it will shift TO, AND the drop in Labour's vote, and static core Lib Dems. If you take the view that both drops will mainly shift to Tory but a significant shift from labour to Green & Lib Dem you have to check what that effect has on actually winning any MORE seats for those parties . In the S.E. for example in reasonable scenerios UKIP could suffer a sunstantial drop in vote % but still win 2 seats as last time.

It doesn't really matter where UKIP's vote goes. If UKIP gets the same ~2% it's been getting for a fair while now, then it won't get anywhere near winning seats. Whether Labour or the OMRLP wins them is irrelevant to UKIP.

The 2004 results have no bearing on what will happen in 2009. Some UKIPpers keep looking at the 2004 result, and thinking about how the 2009 result will be some variation of it. It doesn't work that way. UKIP has to go out and convince the voters all over again that it's the right party.

2004 was built on RKS. He's not going to be there this time. Unless some celebrity steps up, UKIP will likely be as invisible as it usually is.

Quote:

Even if in 2009 UKIP abandons any attempt to either attack the EU and EU record of other parties and abandons trying to sell itself as a party worth a positive vote, it must still be assumed that ( as well as the Tory Party saying the same thing) UKIP will at least simply shout " Labour denied you a referendum on Lisbon, this is now your referendum". No matter what disappointments in UKIP, this is surely a powerful message to the population shafted by New Labour's broken promise. It depends on who lays it out more convincingly , UKIP or " trust me I'm nice " Cameron.

It's not just a matter of being convincing with your argument, it's a matter of actually getting that argument into people's ears and in front of their eyes. UKIP is unrecognised by a significant portion of the population, and it doesn't have a well-known leader like it once did. It's internally disorganised, shrinking in membership, and continually fails to put up effective campaigns.

UKIP doubling its usual 2% to 4% is highly unlikely, and that's not even half way to winning a seat.

prober · 27-08-2008, 04:48 PM

Ind I think you are choosing the wrong baseline. In parliamentaries people are reluctant to vote UKIP cos of fear of letting Tories or Labour in in marginals and in non marginals seeing that UKIP has no relevance to MP elections. Hence 2%. In locals however where voting UKIP is harmless and is a mild protest vote against the cosy sitting establishment 6 to 12 % is normal and that vote seems to be holding up.

In MEP elections voters recognize that UKIP fits what the election is all about and has no effect on which MP or party is in Westminster. Hence despite no KRS and despite itself it is difficult to see the UKIP MEP vote falling from say 17 to 20% so far that it falls below its 2008 local election % vote.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

22-08-2008, 01:28 AM	#11 (permalink)
indigo Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 49	Some people have a few highly optimistic ideas of what's going to happen for UKIP in 2009. I believe UKIP will cost the BNP multiple seats, but the BNP will still win a few. Many UKIPpers won't be surprised at the continuation of the previous dismal vote (~2%). The optimists, with their heads still back in the glory days of 2004, will be crushed. My guess is that UKIP's gradual deterioration will massively accelerate. I've watched the death of minor parties before. Some catalyst (usually a dismal election result) sets off a chain reaction, whereby falling morale, membership numbers, and election results feed off each other, and a significant party can fall into obscurity within a year. (Though a small hard core will continue long after that.) The battle between UKIP and the BNP for dominance of this part of the political spectrum will soon be over, and the winner will almost certainly be the BNP, who will then cannibalise UKIP's membership. I think that's going to be a bitter pill for some UKIPpers to swallow, after the squandered opportunities that came out of 2004.

22-08-2008, 09:13 AM	#12 (permalink)
gc Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 568	I agree with what Indigo writes. The country simply does not need a reactionary, retro-Thatcherite party in the early 21st century, and that is what UKIP has become. I maintain that all elections now are fought on local issues: the BNP and the Greens got that in London in June, UKIP didn't, and the result was no surprise to anyone (except the Thatcherites...) The mantra is "The electorate will focus on UKIP come the Euros in 2009". No they won't: Watch how the smaller parties mould their campaign on the ground around local issues, leaving Europe to the press offices and the most senior of spokesmen. The political landscape in 2009 will be unrecognisable to anybody stuck in a 2004 mindset.

22-08-2008, 12:28 PM	#13 (permalink)
Shaun Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Gtr.Manchester Posts: 436 Party: None	"The BNP's vote in London on the party list system that is so favourable to small parties went up from 4.87% in 2004 to 5.13% in 2008 despite a much livelier campaign, a good leaflet, and far more activists to put it out. "To-morrow the world" that was not". Whlist that is true Adrian, it's worth noting that turnout in 2008 was much higher than it was in 2004,so the rise in people actually voting BNP is more dramatic than that. You may recall both Livingstone and Johnston remarking on just how high the turnout was.

23-08-2008, 09:37 PM	#16 (permalink)
Freedom from the EU Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 12	I cant see Ukip winning a seat in London next year, I think they would be doing well to get half the vote they got last time. Nick Griffin BNP is standing in the North West i believe and not Wales as earlier stated.

27-08-2008, 11:20 AM	#18 (permalink)
prober Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 852	This is unduly and unjustifiably pessimistic. Its not enough to say the UKIP vote will drop. You have to explore the effect of where it will shift TO, AND the drop in Labour's vote, and static core Lib Dems. If you take the view that both drops will mainly shift to Tory but a significant shift from labour to Green & Lib Dem you have to check what that effect has on actually winning any MORE seats for those parties . In the S.E. for example in reasonable scenerios UKIP could suffer a sunstantial drop in vote % but still win 2 seats as last time. Even if in 2009 UKIP abandons any attempt to either attack the EU and EU record of other parties and abandons trying to sell itself as a party worth a positive vote, it must still be assumed that ( as well as the Tory Party saying the same thing) UKIP will at least simply shout " Labour denied you a referendum on Lisbon, this is now your referendum". No matter what disappointments in UKIP, this is surely a powerful message to the population shafted by New Labour's broken promise. It depends on who lays it out more convincingly , UKIP or " trust me I'm nice " Cameron.

27-08-2008, 04:48 PM	#20 (permalink)
prober Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 852	Ind I think you are choosing the wrong baseline. In parliamentaries people are reluctant to vote UKIP cos of fear of letting Tories or Labour in in marginals and in non marginals seeing that UKIP has no relevance to MP elections. Hence 2%. In locals however where voting UKIP is harmless and is a mild protest vote against the cosy sitting establishment 6 to 12 % is normal and that vote seems to be holding up. In MEP elections voters recognize that UKIP fits what the election is all about and has no effect on which MP or party is in Westminster. Hence despite no KRS and despite itself it is difficult to see the UKIP MEP vote falling from say 17 to 20% so far that it falls below its 2008 local election % vote.