For_England

Is the high result Bromley by any chance? Do you know how many UKIP have stood for, and how badly their support has collapsed? I have nothing to do with the EDs, never will. I'm not trying to fight any issue here, just stating the plain facts. Here are a few examples I could find: feel free to give a full account if you want. Also, could you please give me the 19 in which they got the result you stated - I would bet that the BNP were not standing at the same time.


Forest Heath
Lib-Dem 281
Con 211
UKIP 32
6.1 pc

rural Norfolk (don't know where)
Lib-Dems 1,696
Con 854
Lab 177
UKIP 71
- 2.5 pc

let me start a new post so this doesn't time out.

For_England

Now then, it seems to me that the mistake you are making is that you haven't given consideration to the fact I said the support has collapsed. So giving good results for 2007 is only valid if the vote is greater or the same as 05, which you didn't compare with. But some of those good votes have even collapsed since May. For example, North Kesteven. In May 07 UKIP got 20 pc. HOwever, in Nov, when the BNP stood, they got 9 pc, UKIP got 4 pc, and no doubt the rest of that original vote went to the Tories.

Look again at this result:

Lincolnshire County Council
Heighington & Washingborough Ward
Thursday 15th November 2007.
Clive Oxby (Con) 788
Darren Hopewell (Lab) 206
Roy Harris (Lib-Dem) 137
Michael Clayton (BNP) 126
Stephen Pearson (UKIP) 52
Victor Sahunta (Ind) 21
3.6 pc. But last time UKIP stood, they got 11.3 pc.

What about another example? Babergh Council: Hadleigh North ward.
8th November 2007.

Lib-Dems - 446
Cons – 261
Ind – 138
UKIP - 66

Yet in May UKIP got over ten percent - and that was a drop despite no presence from the EDs or BNP.

Anyway, it's not even worth discussing. I see it as a foregone conclusion that UKIP is breathing its last. You can have hopes to the contrary, but if I were a UKIP supporter, I would be pretty depressed. Like it or not people are concerned about immigration and the cost of living, and UKIP is seen as out of touch to alot of people on those issues (though the tougher stance on immigration might give them some extra support, though there doesn't seem much evidence yet).
However, I do concede that you have had some good results, and I would appreciate a list of those good results, if you have them.

B.A.Ware

On Holiday in Cornwall this year i meet a couple from Manchester that voted BNP i asked them why; they said that although they were not racists there was no other party they could vote for i asked them if Ukip were standing in their area they said who are Ukip i explained and they were very impressed and said they would definitely vote for them next time.
Oddly enough my local landlady's parents come from Manchester so i asked them if they have heard of Ukip they hadn't so i gave them some info and they too were very impressed.

I mention the above because it never ceases to amaze many people have never even heard of Ukip but they all know about the BNP.

__________________
We’re not just about Europe.

Britannist

The court case in which the BNP Chairman was involved (and found not guilty along with one other) was widely reported in the UK national media, giving the BNP a huge publicity boost.

The BNP is making more of an effort than UKIP is in local goverment/local campaigning so it may appear that more people have heard of the BNP than UKIP at this particular time.

However, the electoral system now used for choosing UK members of the EU 'Parliament' presently works better for UKIP than it does for the BNP. This is because the UKIP vote is spread out more evenly across the UK than the BNP vote currently is. The BNP are stacking up votes in certain localities where they then win a seat (or seats) on a local authority. But the UKIP vote in the UK spreads out more in a way which made it possible for UKIP to win/hold 12 seats in the last EU Election (something which would not have been possible had UKIP been confined to relying on 'pockets of support' in certain parts of some EU election constituencies).

Britannist

Not much of a mention for UKIP in most mass-circulation newspapers for a long time, I have to say. The 'papers read by millions of voters in marginal constituencies.

I can only repeat what I wrote earlier - UKIP has not been mentioned much in national television and radio news bulletins over the last year and many voters in the UK have not had a single leaflet from UKIP since the last General Election - and some voters (millions of people) in the constituencies UKIP did not contest at the May 2005 General Election) have not actually had a leaflet from UKIP since the May 2004 campaign for the June 2004 EU Election.

In view of this, the fact that UKIP has secured a 2% rating in the latest opinion poll is, in fact, not at all a bad result for the party. 2% is just a fraction less than the actual vote share UKIP got at the last General Election.

UKIP has the potential to get a much higher share of the vote (as it proved at the last EU Election) if/when it is able to build up an organisation and structure capable of leafleting more voters and more regularly.

A66

Ukip 2% + BNP 3% = 5% = real threat to the establishment! Together Unionists could change things, split, then the EU/Lib,Lab,Con win !.

kernow

Don't bloody tempt them!

Britannist

I think differently on this, For England.

My view is that poor results for UKIP in local government elections/By-Elections are evidence that UKIP is not active enough in local election campaigning (and not that a party of over 16, 000 members - far more than any other party in the UK apart from Labour/Conservatives/Liberal Dims - is about to collapse).

The party (UKIP) does not have very much money and it may be saving som of its resources for what is known in UKIP circles as "the big one" - the next EU Election (an election fought using an electoral system which works in a way very advantageous to UKIP because of the way the party's vote is spread out and distributed around the country).

I would also add that the Liberals (now the Liberal 'Democrats') nearly went into 'meltdown' at the 1989 EU Election, getting under 10% of the vote - but they came back and (as we know) got a 23% share of the national vote at the last General Election (something I hope that that obviously unpleasant europhile party never achieves again). The Liberal Dims have also (unfortunately) come back (i.e. recovered) from very poor results in local government. If the amateur Liberal Dims can build up their support from big defeats - I see no reason why UKIP cannot do so either.

As for your comment, For England, about UKIP "breathing its last" - you know, I heard people say that about Labour after the 1983, 1987 and 1992 General Election defeats for that party. I thought at the time it was wrong dismiss Labour as 'finished' and I think it foolish to 'write off' UKIP now.

Britannist

The depressed are Labour and the europhile Liberal Dims. Both of those parties are doing badly in the opinion polls now because of their revolting policies and their performance.

UKIP is not currently riding high (as it was at the last EU Election) because of a lack of money for campaigning - not because of its policies (which are supported by millions of people).

For_England

The results seem to me to be alot worse, even at a local level, then a few years ago, and I do think people are increasingly concerned with the problems of mass immigration, militant Islam, and the high cost of living.


Politics can definately change very quickly, and we must be careful making predictions. UKIP could always make a comeback at the Euro elections, but if, as seems very possible to me, the BNP make the gains in these elections instead, and the UKIP vote actually diminishes from last time, I can't see how UKIP could continue. It seems to me that UKIP needs a breakthrough somewhere, and soon, because I don't think it can go on indefinately the way it is now. I really don't expect it to make any kind of breakthrough, but things can change quickly, and I might be forced to eat my words!!!