I notice that Jackart is wondering why people vote UKIP
I am bored of commentators and bloggers lazily trotting out the line that "the boy Dave is just another Tony Blair and we might as well go and vote UKIP", just because he refuses to promise Tax-cuts, and has worked out that making people like you makes them more likely to vote for you. The Line that "Europe makes most of our laws ERGO Westminster is irrelevant therefore we must vote UKIP" is just as dull. This is just as silly as "It's all about oil". Any comment using the phrase "Blu Labour" will be deleted - it's pathetic.
I don't think that many commentators do. I for one like to scatter facts throughout my arguments of why I will not be voting for David Cameron and instead will be giving my support to UKIP.
I also question if it is indeed the work of 'Dave' which has put the Tories up in the polls, or the complete failure of our Labour government. The Tories aren't in the magic 40% target in the polls, despite many efforts by Cameron to use 'Words that Work'. Like 'Blue Labour'.
There is more to policy than tax-cuts and Europe, and no-one can get everything they want out of a Party, if they're prepared make the compromises necessary to be part of a Governing movement.
Yes, to a point. But bearing in mind that the EU make 75% of our laws, including our international trade policy, transport policy, are interfering in health and education, control immigration, whether or not we can deport foreign criminals, are trying to bankrupt the City of London, employment legislation including how many hours a week someone can work, and are even having an effect on how often rubbish is collected, then I suspect that some people would class it as a 'big' issue. And tax is also another vital issue, because fiscal policy is effective, especially on a microeconomic level. And Government doesn't work unless people pay tax into the coffers for their public services.
If you're prepared to look like ridiculous lefties (revolutionary Trotskyite alliance, Socialist Peoples' party, Communist Party of Great Britain, Socialist Workers party etc... ad infinitum) each with their own religious belief in their solution to societies ills, then go ahead. Stick to your principles to the letter. Or you can grow up.
Yes, this comment did rather confuse me. Why on earth would I not want to vote for a party which represented my views? How does wanting the people who make the decisions governing the way that I and my friends and family live be accountable to the very same in any way extreme? And more to the point, how is that 'leftie'? Whilst I understand the author is of the political right, surely hurling around insults should be a little more accurate?
Dave is not the same as Tony.Although I notice that you are calling them both 'Dave' and 'Tony' as they both decided to alter what they were known as to appeal more broadly to the masses. Anyway, I'll just pop this amusing little link in to this section
Yes he's a moderate - radical reformers do not do well when everyone's doing basically OK (by basically OK, I mean "Has a job"), but his instincts are against state intervention, and pro individual responsibility.
But people aren't doing well. People are monumentally pissed off, which is why voter turnout is down, minority parties are getting more votes and, importantly, huge numbers of British people are leaving because they are sick of the way the country is being run, and the direction is being taken in. Cameron has not reached the magic 40% in the polls, which, with this government, he really should be doing.
He will cut taxes, eventually (Thatcher took her time too).
How do you know that? The Shadow Chancellor has made it perfectly evident that he doesn't get the link between expansionary fiscal policy and economic growth. They think that the state can spend money better than the people who earn it, and they don't want to cut funding on public services, despite it being perfectly evident that chucking money at the problem really doesn't work. Also, Cameron has broken the only policy he ever made when he was running to be leader; namely to withdraw his MEPs from the federalist EPP group in the European Parliament.
He will reduce regulation, a bit. He will be better at standing up to Brussels than Tony. Individual policies may not be much cop, but add them up and there's a world of difference between Cameron and his party and the largely unreconstructed Dave and Dierdrie Sparts led by a power-grubbing one-eyed thief and a spivvy ambulance-chasing lawyer who currently "govern" us.
He will find it very difficult, given that at least 70% of Britain's regulatory burden comes shrink wrapped from Brussels, where we only have a 1 in 27 vote at the Council of Ministers, 78 MEPs out of 785 and in an organisation where the European Commission propose the laws. Given the last attempt to deregulate by the European Union, I suspect this is just another red herring. There was an immense amount of publicity surrounding the claims by Siim Kallas that the Commission were going to scrap 56 regulations and directives. In actual fact, about half were defunct, because they referred to enlargement countries that were now part of the EU. At least 10 have been challenged in the court by the relevant head of the DGs, leaving a few small directives that, rather than being abolished, have been amended to existing regulations. And then you have the Sir Humphrey's of this world.
We've had one day shy of 10 years of this nonsense and it's time for it to end. The local government elections are an opportunity to thrust a knife into Blair, Brown and all the other bastards who have comprehensively ruined this country's once elegant constitution and once powerful economy.We;ve had 1 day shy of ten years of a Labour government, and this Thursday is the local elections and the Welsh and Scottish Elections. Of the latter two, isn't it interesting that the Conservative Party have decided that the extra layer of bureaucracy in these Euro-Regions is now rather a good thing, now that they can get more money from it, even though it's a blatant example of regionalisation, which the Tories say they oppose.
If you're right of centre, and you want a new government, vote Conservative on Thursday.Well, not really. Because this Thursday is the voting on local elections, and you decide a government in a General Election.
If you're a swivel-eyed monomaniac with adolescent fantasies of self-importance, vote UKIP especially if you want 5 years of Gordon Brown (hey, at least he's Eurosceptic). If there's no UKIP standing, you can always vote BNP.I am sure that Timothy Congdon, former 'Wise Man' in the Treasury in the 1980s would be delighted at you calling him such names. As would Lord Pearson of Rannoch, who was given a life peerage by the Conservatives, and is chairman of the Pearson Webb Springbett (PWS) Group of reinsurance brokers, which he founded in 1964. Or, indeed, Lord Willoughby de Broke. Since 1992, Lord Willoughby de Broke has been governor of the Royal Shakespeare Theatre and since 2002 president of the Warwickshire branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE). He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts (FRSA) and of the Royal Geographical Society (FRGS).
And here is a small list of why I will always be voting UKIP, which was a reply to a post similar to Mr J's by Caroline Hunt, once again wondering why people voted UKIP:
I don't want another Labour government. I want a UKIP government. And if I can't have that, I at least want UKIP MPs. I'm not going to get that by not voting for them, am I?
If you can't understand why people would vote UKIP then it may be time to compare their manifesto with that of the Tory party.
I, for example, vote UKIP because firstly I want the UK to withdraw from the EU and replace membership with a free trade agreement. Once we have control of our own trade policy we can, either multilaterally, bilaterally or unilaterally embrace free trade. This has the benefits of increasing global parity.
I also understand that the way to stimulate economic growth is to cut taxes, as an increased marginal propensity to consume and invest increases the money multiplier. This is NOT the policy of the Conservatives, who seem to have abandoned any logical economic policy, and who also want to keep state spending at this unsustainable and damaging level.
I also believe in selection for schools and think that the reintroduction of grammar schools and support for existing grammar schools is vital for improving education in this country. I think that Head teachers should be freed up from being controlled by the government and should have control of their own school. This is not the policy of the Conservatives.
I don't think that environmental taxes are necessary. Indeed, I think they are a convenient way for our Westminster politicians to raise taxes without any political opposition from within Parliament. I certainly don't think that we should be so preoccupied with an unproven theory, which this fandango with climate change is.
I think we should have nuclear power. I think we should build more prisons.
As for Helmer and Hannan. Well, the fact that Helmer was thrown out of the EPP for doing what he was elected to do is illustrative of the true feelings in the Tory party towards anyone with EUsceptic leanings.
Helmer was given the whip back after he wrote a letter to Cameron saying he would join UKIP unless the whip was restored, so clearly he thinks that there is a reason to vote UKIP.
People vote UKIP because they represent the views of many, many people. And as it is their democratic right to vote for who they wish to, why should they not vote for a party which represents their views? It's not a case of only being able to vote for Tories or Labour. I actually think that Gordon Brown is more EUsceptic than David Cameron, and having heard him address the European Parliament Economic and Monetary Affairs committee, I certainly heard more statements from him to convince me of that than I ever heard or saw in 2 years of following that committee and seeing the true beliefs of the Tory MEPs on that committee.
As a last point Caroline, what do you think about the Tory MEPs helping to fund the 'yes' propaganda for the EU Constitution? Because they did....
Your comment that UKIP cannot and will not win seats in Westminster is rather confusing. Do you know something you're not letting on? Are all UKIP votes going to be destroyed? Is there a ban on UKIP entering Parliament? Or are you just copying rhetoric from your leadership who don't exactly have a perfect record when it comes to speaking honestly about any matters linked with the EU.
Withdrawing from the CFP and Social Chapter, anyone?