Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
UKIP win a seat
Comments
-
A stepping-stone too far I would suggest.Chizz said:
Even more than that, actually.Valiantphil said:
A nasty party built to serve a small number of nasty people.Chizz said:
But of course they won't, will they? Not while there are greedy, selfish, self-serving, greasy-pole climbers that believe they can continue to con their way into positions of influence.blackpool72 said:UKIP only existed in order to get a referendum on the EU.
Now that we have had the referendum and article 50 is being implemented on Wednesday they have achieved their goal.
As they have no other major political aims they might as well disband.
Ukip's latest defection merely puts them back to where they were before Carswell was elected. A nasty party built to serve a small number of nasty people. And, as Carswell was far from being one of the nastiest, it leaves a vacuum into which Nuttall, Banks, Farage and a few others will try to pour themselves.
They'll be around for some time yet. Because some of their "leading" figures still have battles they wish to fight. And, frankly, no other party will have them.
Ukip are starting their slow, public, painful and terminal decline. And few outside their small and dwindling membership will much mind.
Didn't they get a couple of million votes at the last general election ?
Hardly a small number.
At the height of their popularity, in 2015, they polled nearly 3.9m.
But the "small number" of people to whom I was referring is nothing to do with voters. I was referring to the people Ukip serves: its leaders.
It's a vanity project for Banks, a cash cow for Farage and a stepping-stone to respectability for Nuttall. And, until yesterday, a flag of convenience for Carswell.
They have no MPs, yet they'll keep going as long as Nuttall and/or Farage can keep persuading Banks to throw his money at their project. Whatever that might be.2 -
I think I agree with you on this, but with one reservation. What if the views of the party and the MP diverge so much that the MP can't vote for them in any debate. If we had a law that said you had to resign your seat if you leave your party, then the MP would just stay with the party, but vote against them as often as he/she liked. That wouldn't serve anyone well.Lincsaddick said:
in any case there should be a rerun.. if any MP/local councillor swaps party's this should always be the norm .. we always hear 'people vote for the party not for the individual' .. Goldsmith (e.g.) was kicked out from his constituency, this shows that however 'popular' a representative might be, he/she still needs to prove his/her mandate to those who elected him/herkentaddick said:
Carswell is incredibly popular with his constituence. Even if a by election was required, he'd win it easilyLincsaddick said:there should be a bi-election, otherwise old slit mouth will hold the Clacton seat under false pretences
(Of course, there's the other anomaly that no MP is actually allowed simply to resign their seat of their own volition. They have to make a request to the Chancellor, who decides whether to allow it. And if the Govt doesn't want that MP to resign, they can prevent it).
(We've got some strange laws in the UK!)2 -
In general, I think in these circumstances an MP should resign his/her seat and seek re-election, regardless of whether or not it is a foregone conclusion that he/she would be re-elected.Chizz said:
I think I agree with you on this, but with one reservation. What if the views of the party and the MP diverge so much that the MP can't vote for them in any debate. If we had a law that said you had to resign your seat if you leave your party, then the MP would just stay with the party, but vote against them as often as he/she liked. That wouldn't serve anyone well.Lincsaddick said:
in any case there should be a rerun.. if any MP/local councillor swaps party's this should always be the norm .. we always hear 'people vote for the party not for the individual' .. Goldsmith (e.g.) was kicked out from his constituency, this shows that however 'popular' a representative might be, he/she still needs to prove his/her mandate to those who elected him/herkentaddick said:
Carswell is incredibly popular with his constituence. Even if a by election was required, he'd win it easilyLincsaddick said:there should be a bi-election, otherwise old slit mouth will hold the Clacton seat under false pretences
(Of course, there's the other anomaly that no MP is actually allowed simply to resign their seat of their own volition. They have to make a request to the Chancellor, who decides whether to allow it. And if the Govt doesn't want that MP to resign, they can prevent it).
(We've got some strange laws in the UK!)0 -
It's an important convention and practicality that you vote for the person, not the party. Otherwise we might as well just a President and party lists.1
-
In general, I would agree. Except that you could have dissafected MPs being forced to hold on to party membership that they don't actually want, in order to avoid going to the electorate again.Saga Lout said:
In general, I think in these circumstances an MP should resign his/her seat and seek re-election, regardless of whether or not it is a foregone conclusion that he/she would be re-elected.Chizz said:
I think I agree with you on this, but with one reservation. What if the views of the party and the MP diverge so much that the MP can't vote for them in any debate. If we had a law that said you had to resign your seat if you leave your party, then the MP would just stay with the party, but vote against them as often as he/she liked. That wouldn't serve anyone well.Lincsaddick said:
in any case there should be a rerun.. if any MP/local councillor swaps party's this should always be the norm .. we always hear 'people vote for the party not for the individual' .. Goldsmith (e.g.) was kicked out from his constituency, this shows that however 'popular' a representative might be, he/she still needs to prove his/her mandate to those who elected him/herkentaddick said:
Carswell is incredibly popular with his constituence. Even if a by election was required, he'd win it easilyLincsaddick said:there should be a bi-election, otherwise old slit mouth will hold the Clacton seat under false pretences
(Of course, there's the other anomaly that no MP is actually allowed simply to resign their seat of their own volition. They have to make a request to the Chancellor, who decides whether to allow it. And if the Govt doesn't want that MP to resign, they can prevent it).
(We've got some strange laws in the UK!)1 -
But you may like the person, but know that voting that person in will lead to Jeremy Corbyn being your Prime Minister.Fiiish said:It's an important convention and practicality that you vote for the person, not the party. Otherwise we might as well just a President and party lists.
1 -
You've got that the wrong way round, we vote for the person, not the party.Lincsaddick said:
in any case there should be a rerun.. if any MP/local councillor swaps party's this should always be the norm .. we always hear 'people vote for the party not for the individual' .. Goldsmith (e.g.) was kicked out from his constituency, this shows that however 'popular' a representative might be, he/she still needs to prove his/her mandate to those who elected him/herkentaddick said:
Carswell is incredibly popular with his constituence. Even if a by election was required, he'd win it easilyLincsaddick said:there should be a bi-election, otherwise old slit mouth will hold the Clacton seat under false pretences
0 -
And he hasn't swapped parties eitherStu_of_Kunming said:
You've got that the wrong way round, we vote for the person, not the party.Lincsaddick said:
in any case there should be a rerun.. if any MP/local councillor swaps party's this should always be the norm .. we always hear 'people vote for the party not for the individual' .. Goldsmith (e.g.) was kicked out from his constituency, this shows that however 'popular' a representative might be, he/she still needs to prove his/her mandate to those who elected him/herkentaddick said:
Carswell is incredibly popular with his constituence. Even if a by election was required, he'd win it easilyLincsaddick said:there should be a bi-election, otherwise old slit mouth will hold the Clacton seat under false pretences
0 -
People clearly don't vote for the person. Look at Michael Gove, he couldn't find three people in his own family who like him, but 32'000 voted for him in 2015...MrOneLung said:
But you may like the person, but know that voting that person in will lead to Jeremy Corbyn being your Prime Minister.Fiiish said:It's an important convention and practicality that you vote for the person, not the party. Otherwise we might as well just a President and party lists.
5 -
Some people vote for the person, some people vote for the party they represent. Personally, I vote for the party.0
- Sponsored links:
-
As a Clacton resident I can assure you that Douglas Carswell has a very strong local following and I am positive that he will hold this seat as an independent. He may not have a large party behind him but he was wise enough to retain all the details of his constituency voters etc. Also his profile in the area is very beneficial.0
-
Do you mean he rang the local council and asked for the electoral register? Or that he stole data from Ukip?diamondaddick said:As a Clacton resident I can assure you that Douglas Carswell has a very strong local following and I am positive that he will hold this seat as an independent. He may not have a large party behind him but he was wise enough to retain all the details of his constituency voters etc. Also his profile in the area is very beneficial.
0 -
UKIP have just elected a new party leader...
Henry Bolton.0 -
-
Have none of them seen Game of Thrones?
His brother Ramsey was a right bastard.
0 -
Saw Farage in Biggin Hill last week. Right little slug.0
