PS Switzerland, Norway and Turkey are all European Nations and are not members of the EU.

erictheviking

I'm the person who coined the slogan "Europeans against the EU" for exactly that reason, and it certainly annoyed Keith Vaz when we turned up to picket one of his bunfights with it on stickers.

I ought to be mean and say "Bzzzt. Repetition!"

You're not wrong, it just doesn't light the voters' fires. That's the problem.

I've got my own thoughts though. I'll see about 100 words...

Percy the Poodle

I've found a typo C-steam

FuroraCeltica

was it just me who found that test kinda funny?

__________________
Every great movement must experience three stages: ridicule, discussion, adoption. John Stuart Mill

One person with a belief is equal to ninety-nine who have only interests. Stuart Mill

SGK

There's so much wrong with the party at the moment that I don't want to join it. But, as a non-member, I appreciate its existence if it does absolutely nothing else. It is the only officially non-racist, anti-EU party. No matter how anti-EU some Conservative members may be, the party isn't. Fact. Full stop.

Percentage

Are you trying to play some kind of hidden message word game?

If so your not fooling me!

erictheviking

Well, you either laugh or cry... or both

Another go

Because it is right.

The public are fed up with parties pandering to public opinion too. They want principled politicians for the 21st century.

The arguments against the EU haven't been enough to convince enough yet. More work has to be done.

When the EU funds projects which require EU propaganda saying 'partly funded by the EU' or 'Thank EU' people are being deceived. The public are not aware it is their money being spent but promoted as if it is someone else's.

It is right to unmask the deceptions.

It is right for the British people to elect politicians who will make 100% of their laws.

It is right to plug on in exposing the pro-EU propaganda.

It is right to hammer on an important subject when people don't realise the extent of what is happening. It is the only way they will wake up.

As Roger Knapman stated in his speech, the time will come.

If the EU is not important to people, how come the BBC had a programme called 'How Euro are you?' last week?

I believe UKIP have to develop so they convince the people they could run the country if elected, as well as get out of the EU.

Christina

erictheviking

It's certainly not wrong, just irrelevant to most people. That's the problem in a nutshell with the political aspects of the party.

Basic sociology (Maslow) shows that there are certain things that will always rank higher on people's list than others. The anti-EU issue is a too-difficult sell on its own (as I and others have repeatedly tried to get those at the top of the party to see). We ain't gonna change that, no matter how much we want it to be changed.

My problem with UKIP (and I seem to be the only one marching in step at the moment 8) ) is that I'm no longer going to go on flogging the 'cheval mort' of trying to recruit in an area that isn't interested in a blend of quasi-BNP, thinly-disguised xenophobia and fascism.

UKIP has a natural constituency in the shires which is largely absent from the urban environment. Issues like foxhunting ought to have given us a BIG CLUE that something's amiss and sharply polarized between the two.

But it's the cities where the votes are, and it's the urban voters we have to engage successfully with if we are to succeed in getting the EU out of the UK. I've tried time and again to make the point that we could campaign successfully, if we had a vision, promoted by the leadership, to give cohesiveness, direction and context to our anti-EU stance.

Right now, not only do we look a million miles from government, we look like our clothes have Velcro instead of buttons and we are forbidden sharp instruments (just in case, you understand). That last bit is sensible, as we don't have a wonderful track record. Nattrass is the latest in a long line of UKIP political suicides.

I don't mind being laughed at. What I detest is being laughed at for good reasons.

Now there I agree with you. So who are we attracting INTO phpbb_the party, and who's making key decisions at the top? What message does it send? Is UKIP setting a stellar example of what reformed politics might be like, or is it becoming a safe house for people other parties (sensibly) rejected?

Sorry, but that is a non sequitur. Of course UKIP should be loud, clear and consistent on the matter of the EU, but it won't wake people up per se. The purpose of taking such a line now is so that we are not compromised when the matter can finally be laid to rest by an honest British parliament acting in the national interest, not politicians' self-interest. Firing anti-EU darts, with no other shots in our locker, is beyond risky, it's suicidal. the only reason we're still here is that the bigger parties have had other targets to train their guns on (each other). Heaven forfend they notice UKIP in the next few months!

Roger is being 'economical with the actualité'. Any fule can stand up, tell people what they want to hear, reassure them that what they believe is right and be cheered for it. Outside that hall and beyond that moment he convinced nobody at all. Roger's whistling while Rome burns. Unless UKIP reforms itself, the end will come, and soon.

I'm now in two minds about that. If UKIP is wasted effort, as it certainly appears to be after the weekend's ego-fest, then either it's redeemable or it isn't. If it isn't, the quicker we stop unproductive activity and put finite resources INTO phpbb_something that will work, the better.

So do I, fervently. But that is another non sequitur to your previous arguments. You said that we had to keep banging on about the EU, as that would work. It won't, and one doesn't need to be a sociologist to see it.

I'm a newbie to UKIP. The UKIP Broadcast woke me up to the issue of the EU.

Why did I vote Conservative instead of UKIP then?

I considered my responsibility to vote for a Party that would make Britain a better place.

When I thought of UKIP, I realised that although getting out of the EU is important to me, so is the manner in which it is done.

A vote for UKIP was clearly a protest vote. If everyone made that protest vote, where would the Country be with a UKIP Government unprepared to govern? What if they got out of the EU but made a mess of things?

I voted Conservative because they were the better option overall. I'm in Michael Meacher's constituency and he got almost a 10, 000 majority, with the Lib Dems second, Conservatives thord with 7000+ , BNP 2000+ and UKIP got 200+.

Suppose it had been an EU election for MEPs. I would have voted UKIP then because it makes perfect sense. If MEPs can't actually do very much anyway, then a protest vote may do some good. It won't do any harm.

I think the Lechlade Group idea is needed, but the debate needs to be done in such a way that it does not evoke emotional reactions because it is reminding people of Kilroy. I think the same language is being used as him, and I think that is part of the problem.

I agree with you about the importance of other issues, my example of terrorists is relevent now because Clarke has had to drop his plans to deport them because of the Human Rights laws, and this is of concern today.

Other issues which people are concerned with, and are on the public's mind right now, which are unsolvable because of the EU, can be a case of killing 2 birds with one stone, for UKIP. Other issues too though. FYI, I'm 41 and live in an urban area, Oldham.

Christina