Where are the great and the good?

[Niall Warry]

If as I acknowledge UKIP is the Eurosceptic brand leader why are the great and the good who think the same not joining the party by the shed full?

[Gothmog]

who are the great and the good you refer to?

[Tallahassee12]

What on earth are you talking about?

[Baron von Lotsov]

If as I acknowledge UKIP is the Eurosceptic brand leader why are the great and the good who think the same not joining the party by the shed full?

Reason one: The UKIP is seen as rather superficial and lacks a core philosophy, so they don't really appeal to the thinking man that well. They are a populist party that tends to work a bit like the Daily Mail, in that one day they are all moralising about one issue and the next day they go on about the complete opposite, leaving the thinking man to conclude that you would have to defy reality to please such a group. It's like quantum mechanics where a particle can be both ‘spin up’ and ‘spin down’ simultaneously. I'm not joking, because this is possible on the microscopic level, but not in the macro world. For example you can't be both a capitalist and a socialist. You either believe in government subsidy or you do not. You cannot do the two at the same time because they are mutually exclusive. The UKIP tend to think they can on many issues, not just the example given.

Reason two: In recent times in the Tory Party there was a glimmer of hope. The 1922 Committee organised a big protest in the debate in the House of Commons and achieved a record rebellion on our membership of the EU. Soon after that, Cameron must have thought that this could lead to trouble, especially when sitting in talks demanding our country adopts “fiscal union”, which would have been so radical that I guess he must have calculated a veto was necessary to save his skin.

Now though that problem has been fixed and the recent elections of the 1922 Committee has filled it with socialist ‘loyalists’ (sic). This glimmer of hope is fading fast. Cameron has turned back on his word and is now instituting core socialist demands like their demand to destroy marriage and nanny state stuff. So reason two might fade as it returns to business as usual in the country’s second Lib Dem Party. Whether the UKIP can fix reason one is another matter. That requires intelligence and honesty.

[Niall Warry]

Reason one: The UKIP is seen as rather superficial and lacks a core philosophy, so they don't really appeal to the thinking man that well. They are a populist party that tends to work a bit like the Daily Mail, in that one day they are all moralising about one issue and the next day they go on about the complete opposite, leaving the thinking man to conclude that you would have to defy reality to please such a group. It's like quantum mechanics where a particle can be both ‘spin up’ and ‘spin down’ simultaneously. I'm not joking, because this is possible on the microscopic level, but not in the macro world. For example you can't be both a capitalist and a socialist. You either believe in government subsidy or you do not. You cannot do the two at the same time because they are mutually exclusive. The UKIP tend to think they can on many issues, not just the example given.

Reason two: In recent times in the Tory Party there was a glimmer of hope. The 1922 Committee organised a big protest in the debate in the House of Commons and achieved a record rebellion on our membership of the EU. Soon after that, Cameron must have thought that this could lead to trouble, especially when sitting in talks demanding our country adopts “fiscal union”, which would have been so radical that I guess he must have calculated a veto was necessary to save his skin.

Now though that problem has been fixed and the recent elections of the 1922 Committee has filled it with socialist ‘loyalists’ (sic). This glimmer of hope is fading fast. Cameron has turned back on his word and is now instituting core socialist demands like their demand to destroy marriage and nanny state stuff. So reason two might fade as it returns to business as usual in the country’s second Lib Dem Party. Whether the UKIP can fix reason one is another matter. That requires intelligence and honesty.

I agree with what you say.

So in summary the great and good avoid EUKIP like the plague because they don't take the party as a serious alternative.

Now whose fault is that I wonder???

[Steve Morson]

I agree with what you say.

So in summary the great and good avoid EUKIP like the plague because they don't take the party as a serious alternative.

Now whose fault is that I wonder???

Precisely, Niall.

Would you agree that the "churn" of quality people who've fully engaged with UKIP and left (for whatever reasons), act as a clarion call for like-minded people to avoid it like the plague?

[Niall Warry]

Precisely, Niall.

Would you agree that the "churn" of quality people who've fully engaged with UKIP and left (for whatever reasons), act as a clarion call for like-minded people to avoid it like the plague?

Yes and from my experience those that keep endorsing Nigel are predominately the old and bold members who aren't that political and just like Nigel because he sounds good on the telly. People like my own Mother for instance!

[rjt]

Yes and from my experience those that keep endorsing Nigel are predominately the old and bold members who aren't that political and just like Nigel because he sounds good on the telly. People like my own Mother for instance!

I would love to be a fly on the wall at family gatherings in your house when Mr Farages name comes up!

[Resigned Member]

AT a Bruges Group meeting a couple of years the speaker,I think it was Gerald Frost the former director of the Centre for Policy Studies ,said that UKIP was not succeeding and would not succeed unles it converted more of what he called the elite who were euscptic but not attracted by the then Farage Mark one leadership

[Baron von Lotsov]

AT a Bruges Group meeting a couple of years the speaker,I think it was Gerald Frost the former director of the Centre for Policy Studies ,said that UKIP was not succeeding and would not succeed unles it converted more of what he called the elite who were euscptic but not attracted by the then Farage Mark one leadership

I can well believe that. The Bruges Group tries to set high standards of intellectual debate. It agrees with the UKIP's position on the EU but keeps its distance. The only two it has any time for seems to be Gerard Batten and Tim Congdon.I watched video when Farage was invited to a talk at the IEA and it was embarrassing. I mean it was seriously gut wrenching to watch. The only expertise Farage had was with the wine glass in front of him.