Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
fru-gal

Why Losing Rochester To Ukip Is A Total Catastrophe For The Tories

Recommended Posts

For all those TL:DR the article basically says that the Tories know that if they lose Rochester to UKIP it means that UKIP can win anywhere because Rochester is very different from Clacton, basically full of younger voters who work in London and are more liberal and in theory should not be voting UKIP.

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Results like losing Rochester and Strood (the telegraph forgot Strood) to UKIP wouldn't really be doing Labour or the LibDems much good either as UKIP's momentum is taking votes from those branches as well.


http://

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strood

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quelle surprise! Another 'UKIP' thread

It is about a byelection tomorrow which UKIP might win, it is news - and of course baring in mind the latest threat is that UKIP will make houses cheaper - very relevant (I am not sure why cheaper houses is a bad thing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice how some posters will rush to any thread to do with UKIP and start denigrating them.

They appear more worried by UKIP than the thought of five more years of the liblabcon muppets wrecking the the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice how some posters will rush to any thread to do with UKIP and start denigrating them.

They appear more worried by UKIP than the thought of five more years of the liblabcon muppets wrecking the the economy.

The more they denigrate UKIP, the more I want UKIP to win and I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also... this 'UKIP are not making inroads into London'

In the EU elections, UKIP got 44% of white British votes in London.

83% of the UK is white british...about 86% of the electorate that is eligible and bothers to vote is 'white british' compared to about 50% in London.

If they got 44% of that 86% nationwide, they'd be on 38%...higher than any of the parties in the 2010 election.

London is a rare exception as people are generally either not white, or not british, or both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
83% of the UK is white british...about 86% of the electorate that is eligible and bothers to vote is 'white british' compared to about 50% in London.

Would be interesting to see how that % has changed over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be interesting to see how that % has changed over time.

83% in 2011

89% in 2001

92% in 1991.

Officially. 1991 is based on country of birth, but correlates fairly well with self identification of 'white,other' ethnicity reporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

83% in 2011

89% in 2001

92% in 1991.

Officially. 1991 is based on country of birth, but correlates fairly well with self identification of 'white,other' ethnicity reporting.

Interesting... thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also... this 'UKIP are not making inroads into London'

In the EU elections, UKIP got 44% of white British votes in London.

83% of the UK is white british...about 86% of the electorate that is eligible and bothers to vote is 'white british' compared to about 50% in London.

If they got 44% of that 86% nationwide, they'd be on 38%...higher than any of the parties in the 2010 election.

London is a rare exception as people are generally either not white, or not british, or both.

The figures would seem to show that people are starting to vote along ethnic rather than ideological lines.

.

In my view this is a strong sign that the multi-cultural experiment is beginning to fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just another by-election and we all know that voters have a bit of a laugh when they're the most important thing on the news for a day.

The real disaster for Cameron will be if after the result a bus load of his back benchers wet their pants and give Farage a ring. They can't afford to wait until May to jump ship, they'd have to act quickly.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine how uttley FLICKING dull todays politics would be without them.

The problem with UKIP is that its giving some people HOPE

The problem is that just kicking the other parties out is not enough, you also need some kind of a plan and they don't seem to have one yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more UKIP win the better. In fact, the more different parties and representation we get to annoy the established order the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.