Another disasterous result

mkpdavies · 27-07-2005, 08:51 AM

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...15e5d499b9.lpf

Quote:

The full by-election result is as follows: Ben Stafford, Lab, 829; Andrew Blackhurst, Lib Dem, 638; Steven Mastin, Con, 263; Albert Watts, UKIP, 42. Turnout for last Thursday's poll was 30.42 per cent.

Anyone who believes this party doesn't need a major overhaul, needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

Bellatrix · 27-07-2005, 11:20 AM

42! ****......

Britannist · 27-07-2005, 11:23 AM

I’ve looked at the result from the local council by-election in Cambridge (as provided by MKP earlier today - above). The percentage share of the vote secured by UKIP was 2.3%.

The full percentage shares of the vote that each of the participating political parties secured was: Labour 46.78%, Liberal ‘Democrat’ 36.00%, Conservatives 14.8% and UKIP 2.3%.

The UKIP vote share of 2.3% is exactly in line with the share it received across the UK at the May 2005 General Election (a calculation based on inclusion of the seats UKIP did not contest as well as those that it did).

It appears that whatever the character of the main battle of each local council or parliamentary by-election (whether it’s a Conservative – Labour, Conservative – LD or Labour – LD fight) UKIP’s minimum vote (‘core’ vote) is presently about 2% - 2.8%. Just under 3% of the vote is a base to build on. The old Liberal Party won 6 seats in the House of Commons on a national vote share of 2.3% (in the 1955 General Election).

UKIP obviously got squeezed at Cambridge (as did the Conservatives) by the two ‘main contenders’. I doubt if UKIP really ran a campaign ‘to win’ in the ward. I wonder if any serious canvassing was done at all. Despite the ‘squeeze’ affect and despite the fact that UKIP is presently orientated around one main policy (EU) – it (UKIP) seems to now have the guaranteed support of at least 2 in every 100 voters across the country. The minimum number of Liberal ‘Democrat’ voters that Kennedy could rely on in a very bad election for his party is thought to be 4 in every 100 voters.

I believe 2 voters in a 100 for a party (UKIP) which has only one well-known policy (quitting the EU) is a good starting point to start start expanding INTO phpbb_other policy areas (and to set up UKIP campaigning units for local government elections).

Development of an interesting range of domestic policies is important (for UKIP) because this Lie-bour government will probably hold the next General Election on the same day as the 2009 EU Elections – in order to deliberately push the ‘europe’ issue in the background (thus starving UKIP and other anti-EU candidates of publicity).

To keep under the spotlight, UKIP must now concentrate on local and national issues – as well as on the EU.

mkpdavies · 27-07-2005, 11:29 AM

2.3% is actually significantly below our average in local elections. If it was just this one result, I would ignore it. However in most local elections since the GE, we have done very poorly.

The party needs a revamp.

BASILDON BOY · 27-07-2005, 11:29 AM

This is what I have been saying in many of my previous posts - UKIP should not enter local Government council elections as an anti-EU pressure group. It should keep European issues on the shelf for use during European/General elections and fight hard on local issues!

Take a look at my previous posts on the issues of local council elections.

I am compiling a list of potetial publicity oppurtunities for local council candidates - just leave a message - will be ready in a week or two!l

Britannist · 27-07-2005, 03:18 PM

I don’t know if I can fully agree with you on this one, Basildon Boy (posting above). I hope that you might allow me to give a slightly different opinion.

Leaving the europe issue on the shelf in local elections is exactly what most of the other political parties do. Kennedy’s Laboural ‘Democrats’ (LD) particularly benefit from this – they are seen as ‘third party independents’ – when, in fact, all they are is a front organisation for the european movement in this country. The rest of their policies are just ‘window dressing’.

That’s why so many people who voted UKIP in the West Country in June 2004 (EU election) then went on to elect fanatically pro-euro LD MP’s at the General Elections 11 months later. Many of them thought that they were voting for the same sort of people as UKIP.

UKIP should concentrate on local elections – but still remind voters through its leaflets/literature: “UKIP - the party that REALLY WILL stop the EU running our country” (or some other suitable slogan).

Kennedy’s Laboural ‘Democrats’ are getting away with deceiving the voters in local, EU, Scottish Parliament, Assembly and UK national elections. The more ‘floating’ voters are reminded of what they (LD) are really all about – the more they will turn to UKIP as a ‘third party’ choice and not LD in local and other elections.

UKIP should be reminding voters in local elections: “By the way – did you know your local LD councillor/candidate backs getting rid of the Pound. It’s his/her party’s official policy.UKIP will fight for your interests locally as well as on national issues. LD will not.”

eublues · 29-07-2005, 04:13 PM

Yes - you can't keep the EU out of sight when discussing local issues - what can and can't be done locally is substantially, but covertly, controlled by the EU one way or another.

Tom Wilde · 29-07-2005, 08:39 PM

42 votes isn't disasterous. In a borough council by-election in my area two or three years ago, the UKIP candidate got, I think, 9 votes. Now, THAT was disasterous!

ops:

However, we need to keep things in perspective. The bloke who got nine votes (a) was up against a particularly unpromising set of local circumstances and (b) made an appalling blunder at the hustings. I don't want to criticise as I gave him no help at all and didn't even know he was standing until he turned up at the hustings. He did his best. He wasn't a bad candidate and in another place and another time he might even have won.

The point I'm trying to make is that with local elections so much is down to local circumstances that you can't draw any conclusion about how well a party is doing nationally. We could be doing quite well nationally and fall flat on our faces in particular local polls. We could be doing badly nationally and still win local council by-elections on the basis of good tactics and strong local campaigns. So we should buckle down, listen to Basildon Boy and UKIP Man, who seem to know what they are talking about, and see if we can start winning some local elections.

nyorks-patriot · 01-08-2005, 03:36 PM

42 is a disaster.
I could get 4 times that amount standing as an independent just with the popularity of my own name.

mkpdavies · 01-08-2005, 04:53 PM

27-07-2005, 11:23 AM	#3 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	UKIP has low - but firm - base of support to build on I’ve looked at the result from the local council by-election in Cambridge (as provided by MKP earlier today - above). The percentage share of the vote secured by UKIP was 2.3%. The full percentage shares of the vote that each of the participating political parties secured was: Labour 46.78%, Liberal ‘Democrat’ 36.00%, Conservatives 14.8% and UKIP 2.3%. The UKIP vote share of 2.3% is exactly in line with the share it received across the UK at the May 2005 General Election (a calculation based on inclusion of the seats UKIP did not contest as well as those that it did). It appears that whatever the character of the main battle of each local council or parliamentary by-election (whether it’s a Conservative – Labour, Conservative – LD or Labour – LD fight) UKIP’s minimum vote (‘core’ vote) is presently about 2% - 2.8%. Just under 3% of the vote is a base to build on. The old Liberal Party won 6 seats in the House of Commons on a national vote share of 2.3% (in the 1955 General Election). UKIP obviously got squeezed at Cambridge (as did the Conservatives) by the two ‘main contenders’. I doubt if UKIP really ran a campaign ‘to win’ in the ward. I wonder if any serious canvassing was done at all. Despite the ‘squeeze’ affect and despite the fact that UKIP is presently orientated around one main policy (EU) – it (UKIP) seems to now have the guaranteed support of at least 2 in every 100 voters across the country. The minimum number of Liberal ‘Democrat’ voters that Kennedy could rely on in a very bad election for his party is thought to be 4 in every 100 voters. I believe 2 voters in a 100 for a party (UKIP) which has only one well-known policy (quitting the EU) is a good starting point to start start expanding INTO phpbb_other policy areas (and to set up UKIP campaigning units for local government elections). Development of an interesting range of domestic policies is important (for UKIP) because this Lie-bour government will probably hold the next General Election on the same day as the 2009 EU Elections – in order to deliberately push the ‘europe’ issue in the background (thus starving UKIP and other anti-EU candidates of publicity). To keep under the spotlight, UKIP must now concentrate on local and national issues – as well as on the EU.

27-07-2005, 11:29 AM	#4 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	2.3% is actually significantly below our average in local elections. If it was just this one result, I would ignore it. However in most local elections since the GE, we have done very poorly. The party needs a revamp. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

27-07-2005, 03:18 PM	#6 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	UKIP's main fight must be against Kennedy's party I don’t know if I can fully agree with you on this one, Basildon Boy (posting above). I hope that you might allow me to give a slightly different opinion. Leaving the europe issue on the shelf in local elections is exactly what most of the other political parties do. Kennedy’s Laboural ‘Democrats’ (LD) particularly benefit from this – they are seen as ‘third party independents’ – when, in fact, all they are is a front organisation for the european movement in this country. The rest of their policies are just ‘window dressing’. That’s why so many people who voted UKIP in the West Country in June 2004 (EU election) then went on to elect fanatically pro-euro LD MP’s at the General Elections 11 months later. Many of them thought that they were voting for the same sort of people as UKIP. UKIP should concentrate on local elections – but still remind voters through its leaflets/literature: “UKIP - the party that REALLY WILL stop the EU running our country” (or some other suitable slogan). Kennedy’s Laboural ‘Democrats’ are getting away with deceiving the voters in local, EU, Scottish Parliament, Assembly and UK national elections. The more ‘floating’ voters are reminded of what they (LD) are really all about – the more they will turn to UKIP as a ‘third party’ choice and not LD in local and other elections. UKIP should be reminding voters in local elections: “By the way – did you know your local LD councillor/candidate backs getting rid of the Pound. It’s his/her party’s official policy.UKIP will fight for your interests locally as well as on national issues. LD will not.”

01-08-2005, 04:53 PM	#10 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	__________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

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

27-07-2005, 11:20 AM	#2 (permalink)
Bellatrix Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 623	42! ****......

27-07-2005, 11:29 AM	#5 (permalink)
BASILDON BOY Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: N'Djamena, Chad Posts: 1,728	This is what I have been saying in many of my previous posts - UKIP should not enter local Government council elections as an anti-EU pressure group. It should keep European issues on the shelf for use during European/General elections and fight hard on local issues! Take a look at my previous posts on the issues of local council elections. I am compiling a list of potetial publicity oppurtunities for local council candidates - just leave a message - will be ready in a week or two!l

29-07-2005, 04:13 PM	#7 (permalink)
eublues Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,970	Yes - you can't keep the EU out of sight when discussing local issues - what can and can't be done locally is substantially, but covertly, controlled by the EU one way or another.

29-07-2005, 08:39 PM	#8 (permalink)
Tom Wilde Moderator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: London. Posts: 2,757	42 votes isn't disasterous. In a borough council by-election in my area two or three years ago, the UKIP candidate got, I think, 9 votes. Now, THAT was disasterous! ops: However, we need to keep things in perspective. The bloke who got nine votes (a) was up against a particularly unpromising set of local circumstances and (b) made an appalling blunder at the hustings. I don't want to criticise as I gave him no help at all and didn't even know he was standing until he turned up at the hustings. He did his best. He wasn't a bad candidate and in another place and another time he might even have won. The point I'm trying to make is that with local elections so much is down to local circumstances that you can't draw any conclusion about how well a party is doing nationally. We could be doing quite well nationally and fall flat on our faces in particular local polls. We could be doing badly nationally and still win local council by-elections on the basis of good tactics and strong local campaigns. So we should buckle down, listen to Basildon Boy and UKIP Man, who seem to know what they are talking about, and see if we can start winning some local elections.

01-08-2005, 03:36 PM	#9 (permalink)
nyorks-patriot Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 653	42 is a disaster. I could get 4 times that amount standing as an independent just with the popularity of my own name.