Tories Hope To Decapitate Ukip Snake As Nigel Farage's Battle For South Thanet Hots Up

The Conservatives believe they can decapitate the Ukip "snake" by stopping Nigel Farage in his bid for Parliament next May as prospective MP for South Thanet.
Ukip is hoping to secure a flock of MPs at the next general election, but doubts have been raised about the strength of Farage's electoral support in the seat after recent polling by Tory peer Lord Ashcroft found that he was five points behind the Conservative candidate.
"Wouldn't it be great if we won?" a Tory MP pondered excitedly to HuffPost UK, "It'd cut the head right off the snake!"
Farage's team bristle in response to such venomous talk, with a Ukip source remarking that it "sounds like the negative sort of campaign they want to run, while we are campaigning on positive issues".

However, Lord Ashcroft's polling, carried out last November, suggests the Tories are gaining momentum after a survey by Survation a year earlier found that Ukip was in second place (30%) to Labour (34%), with the Tories trailing two points behind (28%).

Questions have also been raised about how much time Farage, 50, has spent out in South Thanet, since been selected as Ukip's parliamentary candidate in August.
Conservative sources tell HuffPost UK that since being selected as Ukip's candidate for the Kent seat in August, Farage has only turned up in the constituency, which includes the towns of Ramsgate, Margate and Broadstairs, three times to campaign.
Tory candidate Craig Mackinlay, a local Medway councillor, quipped: "I'm on the streets of Thanet in a week more than Nigel has been since August."


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/01/16/south-thanet-nigel-farage-tories_n_6476994.html?utm_hp_ref=uk









As much as people keep believing immigration will be a key debating point which no doubt it will, but when it comes to who people vote for. It will be in the main based on money in their pockets and who can provide that. Hence why the Tories are starting to gain momentum and UKIP is losing ground as seen from the massive swing about in the seat Farage is trying to win. People just do not grasp, that as much as immigration is a concern to people. The economy will end up being the key reason again for this election. The debates may not be, but the votes by far will be made on that. Notice how the EU did not even make the top 5 issues?

I'll say this for the Tories, at least they openly oppose UKIP instead of acting like they support them, the way U.S. Republicans do with the Tea Party.

Also, it seems to me that immigration is the one issue that UKIP stays consistent on. I'm sure everyone remembers that they used to want to dismantle the NHS, before they tried to be the party that was going to "save" it ...

Ben_Reilly wrote:I'll say this for the Tories, at least they openly oppose UKIP instead of acting like they support them, the way U.S. Republicans do with the Tea Party.

Also, it seems to me that immigration is the one issue that UKIP stays consistent on. I'm sure everyone remembers that they used to want to dismantle the NHS, before they tried to be the party that was going to "save" it ...

 

Which is weird when you think about it Ben, even if the Tories are more center right than right wing, as many Tory MP's share views with UKIP, just that between the two parties the priorities are different as to what matters most.

The point on immigration, which at no point has UKIP stated how achievable this will be. They seem to think it is straight forward hen it is far from it. Net migration to the country to 50,000? I mean less British people will now find it far more difficult to get work in the EU or even settled there, meaning less would be leaving. Of which I ill be very interested how they would achieve this? Or is it going to be UKIP instigating a mass deportation of immigrants that have been here for years by any chance? Whilst also providing any contingency plans they have for job vacancies not being filled?

Just goes to show my U.S. bias -- here, the right wing positively cannot be conservative enough. They have made out-conservatisming one another into the hallmark of their electoral process, to the point that far-right conservatism has little to do with the actual beliefs and more how crazy and hateful a candidate seems.

Luckily, it doesn't work about as often as it works.

I think the most legit radical right-wingers tend to be the ones who disregard the value of government completely -- they're basically right-wing anarchists who see businesses as superior. At least on the economic spectrum, they're as far-right as it gets.

But that, of course, calls into question the entire issue of immigration. I.E., if government is totally inept and cannot do anything as well as capitalists can, then why should anybody pay one iota of attention to what land a government says people should be allowed to live and conduct business upon?

I happen to basically agree with this. There is no logical reason a law-abiding, non-violent person should not have the inalienable right to go anywhere and do anything that isn't harmful to others, at least not in idealistic terms.