What can UKIP realistically achieve?

steve fowler · 25-05-2008, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

The problem with your analysis Anthony is that you are assuming that UKIP has appeal for traditional Tory voters. I disagree. First of all, with the Tories high in the polls a lot of their supporters and voters will be less likely to support us simply because they can sense victory, and success will allow them to forgive many of the things they dislike about David Blair... I mean Cameron.

In any event, with the Tories polling well, they are less likely to see us as a threat and therefore we have little leverage to force them to adopt an anti-EU position.

And having spent the past two days manning a booth at the Laughton Show in East Sussex I think it is fair to say that we probably have more appeal to Labour voters or non-aligned voters than Tory voters.

Labour appears to be mortally wounded. Therefore UKIP's strategy should be to try and hoover up as many Labour votes as possible in next year's European elections and the next parliamentary election. In the latter case it will probably result in more Tories elected to Westminster, but if we can persuade a lot of traditional Labour voters to vote for us,

We have plenty of policies, particularly on crime, immigration, and tax that should appeal to traditional working-class, Labour voters.

I would think that in next years Euro Elections we can hold the seats we have if we run an effective campaign. At this time I don't think we could win any seats in the next general elections if but if the euros go well, and we go after Labour (and to a lesser extent, Lib Dem) voters we could perhaps pick up a seat or two in the next parliamentary elections.

I agree, i think going after the labour and lib dem voters would serve us better as they are looking for a party that has some of the ideas and value's that these votes want.

The Tories are on the rise again and i think the public will just fall for the same con trick they did when new labour came to life back in 97.

So i think its time to go for the two weaker parties voters now.

Anthony Butcher · 25-05-2008, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

The problem with your analysis Anthony is that you are assuming that UKIP has appeal for traditional Tory voters.

I think that you have missed my point slightly. I am not saying that UKIP only appeals to Tories, because I know that isn't the case. What I am saying is that in terms of what it can achieve, the Tory voters are all that matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

In any event, with the Tories polling well, they are less likely to see us as a threat and therefore we have little leverage to force them to adopt an anti-EU position.

Well that is the crux of it. UKIP is about forcing other parties to adopt an anti-EU position. The only party that can be realistically targetted in this way (and the only one that matters if it is to be the next government) is the Tories.

Farage has always been about pressuring the Tories, and of course you have highlighted a major weakness of that plan. This is why so many of us campaigned for UKIP to become a properly independent party, rather than 'parking its tanks on the Conservative lawn'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

And having spent the past two days manning a booth at the Laughton Show in East Sussex I think it is fair to say that we probably have more appeal to Labour voters or non-aligned voters than Tory voters.

Absolutely true. But what use are those people in terms of applying pressure if they were never going to vote Tory?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

Labour appears to be mortally wounded. Therefore UKIP's strategy should be to try and hoover up as many Labour votes as possible in next year's European elections and the next parliamentary election. In the latter case it will probably result in more Tories elected to Westminster, but if we can persuade a lot of traditional Labour voters to vote for us,

That works if your plan is to strengthen the pro-EU element of the Tory party, rather than pressure it into becoming more anti-EU. I am not sure what it achieves in terms of leaving the EU.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

We have plenty of policies, particularly on crime, immigration, and tax that should appeal to traditional working-class, Labour voters.

We will have to agree to disagree on whether policies make the slightest bit of difference to how people vote

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

I would think that in next years Euro Elections we can hold the seats we have if we run an effective campaign. At this time I don't think we could win any seats in the next general elections if but if the euros go well, and we go after Labour (and to a lesser extent, Lib Dem) voters we could perhaps pick up a seat or two in the next parliamentary elections.

Again, I ask - to what purpose? If the next Tory Government remains pro-EU for the next ten years, what is the point of UKIP having a couple of MPs?

What we are really discussing is whether growing UKIP to have 12 MEPs and a couple of MPs is a more desirable achievement than converting the Tory government into an anti-EE party, or even just forcing it into giving a referendum on EU membership.

mkpdavies · 25-05-2008, 09:09 PM

Wha is to stop UKIP going after whoever is weakest at the time.

Going after the Labour core could be the best idea now.

Richard Allen · 25-05-2008, 09:22 PM

The idea that we have to choose which parties support to target is false and a limiting idea. We have to go for the disaffected voters of all three big parties. Traditional Tories, Old Labour and people who vote Lib Dem as a protest should all be targeted. We have something to offer all of those groups and it gives us the chance to build a broad based party.

mkpdavies · 25-05-2008, 09:30 PM

That's a given.

Doesn't mean a well placed kick to the plums of a establishment party already on the deck couldn't be worth it.

Anthony Butcher · 25-05-2008, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Allen

The idea that we have to choose which parties support to target is false and a limiting idea. We have to go for the disaffected voters of all three big parties. Traditional Tories, Old Labour and people who vote Lib Dem as a protest should all be targeted. We have something to offer all of those groups and it gives us the chance to build a broad based party.

That of course is something I would wholeheartedly agree with if the aim is to build UKIP into a competitive national party over the next 20-30 years to replace one of the current big three.

Is it realistically achievable (the title of this thread)? I am not sure. I suspect that many UKIP members would also argue that this is not the purpose of UKIP at all anyway.

I am only following the current line of argument because pressuring the Tories is the most realistically achievable aim that I can see for the party at the moment. Threatening to prevent them getting a majority in the HoC seems far more realistic than getting a couple of MPs next time around to me.

Niall Warry · 26-05-2008, 11:35 AM

I agree in the main we want to hurt the Tories - that is where our limited forces and resources can be most effective.

mrabody · 26-05-2008, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony Butcher

I think that you have missed my point slightly. I am not saying that UKIP only appeals to Tories, because I know that isn't the case. What I am saying is that in terms of what it can achieve, the Tory voters are all that matter.

Quote:

Well that is the crux of it. UKIP is about forcing other parties to adopt an anti-EU position. The only party that can be realistically targetted in this way (and the only one that matters if it is to be the next government) is the Tories.

And precisely because they are doing so well right now they will feel they don't need to deal with us and therefore our leverage with respect to influencing Tory policy is nil.

Quote:

Farage has always been about pressuring the Tories, and of course you have highlighted a major weakness of that plan. This is why so many of us campaigned for UKIP to become a properly independent party, rather than 'parking its tanks on the Conservative lawn'.

And that is what I am suggesting - that we become a properly independent party.

Quote:

Absolutely true. But what use are those people in terms of applying pressure if they were never going to vote Tory?

The message would be clear - if UKIP can capture significant numbers of Labour and Lib Dem voters, wouldn't that send a very clear message to Cameron that we have broad appeal and that Tory voters are also at risk?

Quote:

That works if your plan is to strengthen the pro-EU element of the Tory party, rather than pressure it into becoming more anti-EU. I am not sure what it achieves in terms of leaving the EU.

I'm suggesting we play the long game here. We have no ability to influence the Tories at the moment barring a Labour revival. They don't need our votes to get elected. What we do have is an opportunity to do severe damage to the Labour Party. UKIP might not win a lot of seats by going after Labour voters, but we will have a noticeable effect on the outcome of the election and we can hopefully increase our share of the vote. Putting Labour in a four way vice between the Tories, the Lib Dems, UKIP and the SNP could produce a devastating result for them. They are already broke and unable to repay their various debts. They are already demoralized. After a disasterous election they would be even worse off than now, and it would allow us to build on our results through a cycle of local elections during the following parliament and establish UKIP as a serious contender in parts of the country.

Quote:

We will have to agree to disagree on whether policies make the slightest bit of difference to how people vote

Quote:

Again, I ask - to what purpose? If the next Tory Government remains pro-EU for the next ten years, what is the point of UKIP having a couple of MPs?

I would hope that midway through the 10 year period the couple of MPs would increase in number. Do you think that a Europhile-led Tory government would somehow be able to wiggle out of unpopular EU polices? They can't get rid of HIPs despite promising to. They can't get rid of EU mandated incinerators or bring back weekly bin collections - in fact Tory-run local and county councils are already implementing these EU-inspired policies. Are a pro-EU Tory government going to bring back post-offices? Or even slow the rate of closure? Right now the Tories are able to blame Labour for unpopular policies forced upon us by the EU. Once they are in power they will have to continue to support the same unpopular policies. I would argue that it's better to let the Europhile Tories suffer the consequences of their support for the EU.

Quote:

What we are really discussing is whether growing UKIP to have 12 MEPs and a couple of MPs is a more desirable achievement than converting the Tory government into an anti-EE party, or even just forcing it into giving a referendum on EU membership.

Unless we start costing the tories local council, county council, euro parliament, and westminster seats they will pay no attention to us. We can't pose a credible threat to them until we can actually hurt them where it counts - at the ballot box.

Anthony Butcher · 26-05-2008, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrabody

Unless we start costing the tories local council, county council, euro parliament, and westminster seats they will pay no attention to us. We can't pose a credible threat to them until we can actually hurt them where it counts - at the ballot box.

I think that we are largely saying the same thing. However, in the context of this discussion, I think that UKIP would be better off with a clearly stated and well formed plan. Is the aim to force the Tories to agree to a referendum asap? Or is it to try to become a significant force in Parliament in 20-30 years? While not mutually exclusive, these two would require very different tactics. At the moment, I sense that UKIP is still drifting around somewhere in the middle, unsure of its direction. Until Farage starts to lead, instead of just reacting, I can't really see this changing though.

Millennium3 · 26-05-2008, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony Butcher

I think that we are largely saying the same thing. However, in the context of this discussion, I think that UKIP would be better off with a clearly stated and well formed plan. Is the aim to force the Tories to agree to a referendum asap? Or is it to try to become a significant force in Parliament in 20-30 years? While not mutually exclusive, these two would require very different tactics. At the moment, I sense that UKIP is still drifting around somewhere in the middle, unsure of its direction. Until Farage starts to lead, instead of just reacting, I can't really see this changing though.

UKIP would probably do best with a single lead policy of trying to push the Tories into a LT post ratification referendum and targeting marginals from now until the GE. There is no point in fighting Tory seats where they have a large majority - this includes bye elections. The same lead policy can also be used at the Euro elections, but in all constituencies.

In both cases such a policy would be effective given the political capital the Tories have gained in condemning Labour and the Lib/Dems for not honouring their manifesto pledges to hold a referendum.

The party's simple message could then be:

If the Tories believed it was right to hold a referendum on the LT before it was ratified - why not afterwards, when they are in position to hold one?

This would be a difficult question to answer.

25-05-2008, 09:09 PM	#43 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 32,059 Party: Libertarian Party	Wha is to stop UKIP going after whoever is weakest at the time. Going after the Labour core could be the best idea now. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Lib Dems

25-05-2008, 09:30 PM	#45 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 32,059 Party: Libertarian Party	That's a given. Doesn't mean a well placed kick to the plums of a establishment party already on the deck couldn't be worth it. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Lib Dems

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

25-05-2008, 09:22 PM	#44 (permalink)
Richard Allen Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 575	The idea that we have to choose which parties support to target is false and a limiting idea. We have to go for the disaffected voters of all three big parties. Traditional Tories, Old Labour and people who vote Lib Dem as a protest should all be targeted. We have something to offer all of those groups and it gives us the chance to build a broad based party.

26-05-2008, 11:35 AM	#47 (permalink)
Niall Warry Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Somerset Posts: 1,674	I agree in the main we want to hurt the Tories - that is where our limited forces and resources can be most effective.