The Guardian starts to get UKIP

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/05/left-behind-voters-only-ukip-understands

I wonder whether the Labour party rulers will pay attention - because this is one of the most accurate examinations of the UKIP core I have seen.  Ignoring the bits about "far right" that left wing bastion that is the Guardian is almost insulting the old core of hard working labourers it refers to as "left behind voters" almost as if it is their own fault they have not gone to university and become "middle class".

I would recommend supporters of all three traditional parties read this and try and understand it - because UKIP is not going away and is giving a vital voice to those the other parties would rather not hear.

Thanks Sphynx

Fascinating article even more so as it has appeared in the Guardian.

Well I do keep telling people UKIP is not ex Tories.

[quote="sphinx"]Well I do keep telling people UKIP is not ex Tories.[/quote


because it suits the establishment and the media to categorize UKIP as such. Everyone has to be boxed to make targeting the correct audience or so we are told by the nanny state

Well there is one party breaking out - and its gaining popularity.

So do none of our left leaning posters have an opinion on what the Guardian has written?

sphinx wrote:Well there is one party breaking out - and its gaining popularity.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

Really?

And the first past the post electoral system that we have, will always dictate that fringe parties, have to get a lot more votes to get a candidate elected to parliament.

You might want to look at membership figures.

Even better read the guardian article - because it is one of the most accurate reports I have seen from the media.

sphinx wrote:You might want to look at membership figures.

Even better read the guardian article - because it is one of the most accurate reports I have seen from the media.

Membership figures mean nothing, most people that vote for Labour or the Tories aren't party members!

One of the comments below was absolutely accurate:




This (patent rubbish full of dubious 'facts' and questionable assertions: academia at its worst, right down to the overblown introduction) is remarkably similar to what these self-same authors used to write about the BNP.


Matthew Goodwin is a lecturer at the University of Nottingham whose book The New British Fascism: Rise of the BNP is published by Routledge. He is the co-author, with Robert Ford, of Revolt on the Right: Explaining Public Support for the Radical Right in Britain. He is also an associate fellow at Chatham House, and tweets here

The two authors of the article.   Remarkably enough, if any actually read it, the Guardian has writers from many spectrums.


Oh, and if they were right, then the majority of UKIP supporters wouldn't come from the South East, the most prosperous area would they.

Keep reassuring yourself guys. We all know that if we pretend it isnt happening it will all go away.

sphinx wrote:Keep reassuring yourself guys.  We all know that if we pretend it isnt happening it will all go away.

Oh you wish Sphinx. I remember the articles they used to right about the BNP, virtually word for word as that one. So tell me, where are all the poor labour voters they are talking about in the SE? Because that is where UKIP have it's highest numbers, the little englanders.

Typical leftie white wash waffle and bias from the typically leftie white wash waffle and biased Guardian.
From the article...
"These voters are on the wrong side of social change, are struggling on stagnant incomes, feel threatened by the way their communities and country are changing, and are furious at an established politics that appears not to understand or even care about their concerns. And it is these left-behind voters who have finally found a voice in Farage's revolt."
I have so many issues with this ridiculous article, but in particular this bit stood out as a blatant heavily loaded and biased description of UKIP voters, passed off as established fact, while in reality it is nothing of the sort and no more than a prime example of the pro leftie agenda and the propaganda machine working against anything that challenges this.
Bit by bit:
"These voters are on the wrong side of social change" - Automatically enforcing the idea that this "social change" is right and wanted my a majority and anyone who may be against it is wrong. Although what they describe as "social change", is actually defined as mass immigration, others ways/culture/religion/demands being established, enforced and prioritised over the wants/beliefs/will of the British people at large, and something that nobody wants!
"are struggling on stagnant incomes" - Is this trying to suggest that UKIP voters are all just low wage low skilled workers, in dead end jobs, and really just a bit thick, unable to formulate comprehensive thought or informed opinion on matters political or EU? Or is this a back handed admission that mass immigration has had a detrimental effect on wages while also increasing the costs of living? But let's not forget that there are huge numbers of UKIP voters from all age groups and earning brackets, and many who don't need to work at all as they are retired and financially secure.
"and are furious at an established politics that appears not to understand or even care about their concerns" - It is true that our democratically elected politicians have completely ignored the views and wishes of the British people who they pretend to represent, regardless of being either labour/tory/lib dems, they pursue the same 'established' agenda. And people are quite right to be furious about this!!!
"And it is these left-behind voters who have finally found a voice in Farage's revolt" - It is these labour/tory/lib dem politicians who have all collectively run off in the same mutually agreed direction together, heading in a completely different direction to the way the electorate told them to go. Then they expect everyone to just follow them along their way obediently. "Do as you're told!" they say to those who questioned the direction (cos they know best of course, just like every leftie does), "If you don't like to follow, then we will call you a 'follow-a-phobe' until you do!".
Most people followed for a while, some followed because of labour, some because tory, some lib dems. Some because everyone else was following, some because they didn't want to be called a 'phobe'. Some refused to follow and stayed behind.
After a while the followers realised that they were all heading in the same direction as each other, although their leaders had been telling them they were going in different directions, and one by one, they agreed that this direction was wrong and turned back to join the ones who stayed behind.
The labour/tory/lib dem leaders carried on together, proclaiming to know what's best and that their direction was right, although completely different to the way the people wanted to go.
Then after a while they stopped, and looked back, and what they found was that nobody was following them any more at all, the only people walking with them in their self proclaimed 'right direction', was each other. They were on their own, and were walking further and further away.
And then while everyone else started going in the direction they had previously democratically agreed on, before being so disastrously hi-jacked and led astray by the anti-democratic lab/tory/libdems, it is in fact the lab/tory/libdems who end up being left behind!

Sassy wrote:

sphinx wrote:Keep reassuring yourself guys.  We all know that if w

e pretend it isnt happening it will all go away.

Oh you wish Sphinx.   I remember the articles they used to right about the BNP,  virtually word for word as that one.   So tell me, where are all the poor labour voters they are talking about in the SE?   Because that is where UKIP have it's highest numbers, the little englanders.

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

You obviously know nothing about the authors Tommy boy.  I doubt most would describe them as left wing.

Blase attitudes lead to apathy which is where we are now as a democratic country................. 30% turn out to vote on a good day...... Why 'cause most think it is a complete waste of time.

In Kenya and other countries they walk for miles queue for hours just to get to vote in an election that may or may not be rigged, but still they take the time............... hours and hours under the baking sun.


Our ancestors have died for us here in England to have the vote and most go what the Timothy.......

The forgotten voter might just have found a voice.......

Beware all mockers and can't be bothereds......

Sassy wrote:You obviously know nothing about the authors Tommy boy.  I doubt most would describe them as left wing.

This is not about the authors, but what is written.


Care to comment on article content and posts instead of the authors and posters?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Sassy wrote:You obviously know nothing about the authors Tommy boy.  I doubt most would describe them as left wing.

This is not about the authors, but what is written.


Care to comment on article content and posts instead of the authors and posters?

Not really, as I said they wrote practically the same thing about the BNP and they were wrong then.

Tommy Monk wrote:Typical leftie white wash waffle and bias from the typically leftie white wash waffle and biased Guardian.
From the article...
"These voters are on the wrong side of social change, are struggling on stagnant incomes, feel threatened by the way their communities and country are changing, and are furious at an established politics that appears not to understand or even care about their concerns. And it is these left-behind voters who have finally found a voice in Farage's revolt."
I have so many issues with this ridiculous article, but in particular this bit stood out as a blatant heavily loaded and biased description of UKIP voters, passed off as established fact, while in reality it is nothing of the sort and no more than a prime example of the pro leftie agenda and the propaganda machine working against anything that challenges this.
Bit by bit:
"These voters are on the wrong side of social change" - Automatically enforcing the idea that this "social change" is right and wanted my a majority and anyone who may be against it is wrong. Although what they describe as "social change", is actually defined as mass immigration, others ways/culture/religion/demands being established, enforced and prioritised over the wants/beliefs/will of the British people at large, and something that nobody wants!
"are struggling on stagnant incomes" - Is this trying to suggest that UKIP voters are all just low wage low skilled workers, in dead end jobs, and really just a bit thick, unable to formulate comprehensive thought or informed opinion on matters political or EU? Or is this a back handed admission that mass immigration has had a detrimental effect on wages while also increasing the costs of living? But let's not forget that there are huge numbers of UKIP voters from all age groups and earning brackets, and many who don't need to work at all as they are retired and financially secure.
"and are furious at an established politics that appears not to understand or even care about their concerns" - It is true that our democratically elected politicians have completely ignored the views and wishes of the British people who they pretend to represent, regardless of being either labour/tory/lib dems, they pursue the same 'established' agenda. And people are quite right to be furious about this!!!
"And it is these left-behind voters who have finally found a voice in Farage's revolt" - It is these labour/tory/lib dem politicians who have all collectively run off in the same mutually agreed direction together, heading in a completely different direction to the way the electorate told them to go. Then they expect everyone to just follow them along their way obediently. "Do as you're told!" they say to those who questioned the direction (cos they know best of course, just like every leftie does), "If you don't like to follow, then we will call you a 'follow-a-phobe' until you do!".
Most people followed for a while, some followed because of labour, some because tory, some lib dems. Some because everyone else was following, some because they didn't want to be called a 'phobe'. Some refused to follow and stayed behind.
After a while the followers realised that they were all heading in the same direction as each other, although their leaders had been telling them they were going in different directions, and one by one, they agreed that this direction was wrong and turned back to join the ones who stayed behind.
The labour/tory/lib dem leaders carried on together, proclaiming to know what's best and that their direction was right, although completely different to the way the people wanted to go.
Then after a while they stopped, and looked back, and what they found was that nobody was following them any more at all, the only people walking with them in their self proclaimed 'right direction', was each other. They were on their own, and were walking further and further away.
And then while everyone else started going in the direction they had previously democratically agreed on, before being so disastrously hi-jacked and led astray by the anti-democratic lab/tory/libdems, it is in fact the lab/tory/libdems who end up being left behind!

That is what I meant with the almost insulting of Labours core targets.

Well it would be, because that is how they see them. Which is why they are wrong and why they were wrong about the BNP.

Sassy wrote:Well it would be, because that is how they see them.  Which is why they are wrong and why they were wrong about the BNP.

Yet Labour are happy to take ex BNP members and put them up for election paying vast sums and the labour supporters vote them in?

Sassy, are you saying you are in disagreement with their synopsis on UKIP membership?
Or what exactly are you saying?

And? Provided they have given up being racist, the BNP were always very left wing in a lot of ways, apart from their racism. Very badly thought out left wing of course.

Even Winston Churchill crossed the House a few times.

Tommy Monk wrote:So are you saying you are in disagreement with their synopsis on UKIP membership?
Or what exactly are you saying?

They are saying that a large number of UKIP supporters are ex Labour.   The majority of Labour support is in the North.   UKIP have very little support in the North.   The least amount of Labour support is in the SE.   UKIP have a vast amount of their support there.   Ergo, they are talking out of their backsides.   They're known for it.   Its not just LW writers in the Guardian you know.   Chris Huhne (as an example) writes for them quite a lot.

Sassy wrote:And? Provided they have given up being racist, the BNP were always very left wing in a lot of ways, apart from their racism. Very badly thought out left wing of course.
Even Winston Churchill crossed the House a few times.

BNP left wing!!!


CORRECT.


And their 'racism' as you call it, is actually their extreme 'NATIONALISM', which is also a common far left wing ideal.

Nationalist state socialists.


Examples of nationalism/racism widely in Communism, and of course Nazism.

Sassy wrote:And?   Provided they have given up being racist, the BNP were always very left wing in a lot of ways, apart from their racism.  Very badly thought out left wing of course.

Even Winston Churchill crossed the House a few times.

Only because his cigar smoke was annoying his nose on the side he was sitting on...... Crossed over fresh air..... Oh and the ash trays were full.......

Tommy Monk wrote:

Sassy wrote:And? Provided they have given up being racist, the BNP were always very left wing in a lot of ways, apart from their racism. Very badly thought out left wing of course.
Even Winston Churchill crossed the House a few times.

BNP left wing!!!


CORRECT.


And their 'racism' as you call it, is actually their extreme 'NATIONALISM', which is also a common far left wing ideal.

Nationalist state socialists.


Examples of nationalism/racism widely in Communism, and of course Nazism.

Same old crap from you then. That argument has been shown for the rubbish it is so many times I've lost count.

Sassy wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:So are you saying you are in disagreement with their synopsis on UKIP membership?
Or what exactly are you saying?

They are saying that a large number of UKIP supporters are ex Labour.   The majority of Labour support is in the North.   UKIP have very little support in the North.   The least amount of Labour support is in the SE.   UKIP have a vast amount of their support there.   Ergo, they are talking out of their backsides.   They're known for it.   Its not just LW writers in the Guardian you know.   Chris Huhne (as an example) writes for them quite a lot.

Do you know the biggest reason UKIP will not ever do a deal with the Tories to no field candidates in areas they need to win but are vulnerable?

The biggest reason is any such deal would immediately result in between half and 2/3rds or their membership walking out (I would be one of them) - every former labour voter would leave as would between half and all of ex Tories, plus a portion of previously non voters.

UKIP are big in the South East because that is where the party was born - results in the North are showing UKIP coming second and closing. The Guardian has actually had the strength to go out and look at reality (for once) - it seems there are lots not ready to join them.

No the Guardian didn't, the writers did, the Guardian hosts many articles it's readers don't agree with. Sorry Sphinx, you are so kidding yourself.

Sassy wrote:No the Guardian didn't, the writers did, the Guardian hosts many articles it's readers don't agree with.   Sorry Sphinx, you are so kidding yourself.

One of us is kidding ourselves - I am pretty sure, having met Paul Nuttall, that it is not me.

You admit the BNP are left wing, then try to claim they aren't as they are racist and that is only a RW trait.
Plenty of racist/nationalist examples of LW in history.
But this thread is about UKIP and the Guardian article.
UKIP are right wing in definition, and nothing to do with BNP who are LW and as you just admitted.

Tommy Monk wrote:You admit the BNP are left wing, then try to claim they aren't as they are racist and that is only a RW trait.
Plenty of racist/nationalist examples of LW in history.
But this thread is about UKIP and the Guardian article.
UKIP are right wing in definition, and nothing to do with BNP who are LW and as you just admitted.

Dear oh dear! Haven't you got fed up with people showing what a wally you are? The writers who wrote that piece also wrote the same thing about the BNP. That was a load of rubbish too.

Tommy Monk wrote:You admit the BNP are left wing, then try to claim they aren't as they are racist and that is only a RW trait.
Plenty of racist/nationalist examples of LW in history.
But this thread is about UKIP and the Guardian article.
UKIP are right wing in definition, and nothing to do with BNP who are LW and as you just admitted.

Simply and politely put......

Goodnight.

UKIP are not RW...... BNP are more RW than anything we have seen in this country for decades......

Reality check me thinks...

Sassy wrote:And? Provided they have given up being racist, the BNP were always very left wing in a lot of ways, apart from their racism. Very badly thought out left wing of course.
Even Winston Churchill crossed the House a few times.

Being nationalist or racist doesn't change this, it just makes them nationalist state socialists.


Again nothing to do with UKIP or OP.