Bolitics The New Condem Government

[Risso]

 

How many Polish-born people have settled in the UK in the last 10 years, half a million or so?  Has that had an effect on the country in terms of unemployment, wages and public services etc?  Makeminvilla makes some good points.  Because people are afraid to discuss those sorts of questions, UKIP are filling the information void, very successfully.  And whether that migration has had a positive effect, or a negative effect, it happened without the people of the UK having much of a say in it.  That's also where they're making capital.

UKIP aren't filling any 'information void' very successfully, they are doing it in a pretty popular (or populist) way. They aren't filling any void with information but with opinion.

 

 

 

 

That's exactly what I meant, apologies if it wasn't clear.  It's why I asked the genuine questions that I did in my first couple of sentences.  I don't know, and suspect that most people don't either.  As you point out, and as I was trying to say, UKIP fill that information void with their own propaganda, very successfully.

[snowychap]

That's exactly what I meant, apologies if it wasn't clear.  It's why I asked the genuine questions that I did in my first couple of sentences.  I don't know, and suspect that most people don't either.  As you point out, and as I was trying to say, UKIP fill that information void with their own propaganda, very successfully.

Ah, fair enough.

[bickster]

I actually think the media reaction to the latest council elect results is the most biased reporting of an election I've ever seen in a UK election. Lets examine some facts as portrayed in the media

Labour did badly. Did they? Overall gains of some 330 seats. They now have 5 more councils than previously and took some previously Tory councils to no overall control.

UKIP did well. Did they? They won less seats than even the Lib Dems managed and the Lib Dems might as well be lead by Fred West right now, he'd be no less popular than Clegg. Their share of the vote decreased from 22% last time to 17% this time at an election that was at the same time as the Euro elections so you'd think they'd be in a fine position to take advantage of this but no, their % percentage of the vote went down by 5% of the overall vote, they control zero councils and any chance of power they have will be as minor coalition partners in Tory dominated No Overall control councils

Only London rejected UKIP. Really? Won Zero seats in Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and plenty of other places, I think they won one seat in the West Midlands. I think London elected more kippers than those places

UKIP are as much of as threat to Labour as the Tories, where on earth does the basis of that insidious load of testes come from? It bears no analysis whatsoever

And what about the Greens? They reinforced the council they run in Brighton, won more seats elsewhere and are even the official opposition in Liverpool and a few other places, yet they are totally ignored?

To be honest the media reaction across the board from left to right, from Murdoch and Rothermere to the Guardian, has been the biggest load of crap I've ever read, it has no basis in truth. It doesn't stand up to any analysis

Don't believe a word you read in the papers, when they can spin election results so that people think the opposite happened then you know this country is up the creek without a paddle

[PaulC]

Depends on what spin you put on the results. UKIP gained 128 seats, The Green party gained 15 seats. 

Edited May 27, 2014 by PaulC

[villaajax]

+6 councils for Labour, -11 for the Tories and they claim Labour had a disaster. There is now going to be a probe into the Tower Hamlets debacle as well, that was a potential Labour gain.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Aye, this has been the first time I've seen overt bias in the media in this part of the world, and I must say I don't care for it a bit. Back to the old insidious propaganda please.

[bickster]

Depends on what spin you put on the results. UKIP gained 128 seats, The Green party gained 15 seats.

I didn't compare the two parties.

[PaulC]

No you mentioned the Greens were ignored by the media. Anyway wasn't it Miliband who raised concerns about Labour's results in the local and EU elections and recognsises he has a big fight on his hands if Labour are to win a majority in the next election.... 

[suttonpaul]

I actually think the media reaction to the latest council elect results is the most biased reporting of an election I've ever seen in a UK election. Lets examine some facts as portrayed in the media

Labour did badly. Did they? Overall gains of some 330 seats. They now have 5 more councils than previously and took some previously Tory councils to no overall control.

UKIP did well. Did they? They won less seats than even the Lib Dems managed and the Lib Dems might as well be lead by Fred West right now, he'd be no less popular than Clegg. Their share of the vote decreased from 22% last time to 17% this time at an election that was at the same time as the Euro elections so you'd think they'd be in a fine position to take advantage of this but no, their % percentage of the vote went down by 5% of the overall vote, they control zero councils and any chance of power they have will be as minor coalition partners in Tory dominated No Overall control councils

Only London rejected UKIP. Really? Won Zero seats in Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and plenty of other places, I think they won one seat in the West Midlands. I think London elected more kippers than those places

UKIP are as much of as threat to Labour as the Tories, where on earth does the basis of that insidious load of testes come from? It bears no analysis whatsoever

And what about the Greens? They reinforced the council they run in Brighton, won more seats elsewhere and are even the official opposition in Liverpool and a few other places, yet they are totally ignored?

To be honest the media reaction across the board from left to right, from Murdoch and Rothermere to the Guardian, has been the biggest load of crap I've ever read, it has no basis in truth. It doesn't stand up to any analysis

Don't believe a word you read in the papers, when they can spin election results so that people think the opposite happened then you know this country is up the creek without a paddle

That was the biggest load of crap I've read

[villaajax]

 

I actually think the media reaction to the latest council elect results is the most biased reporting of an election I've ever seen in a UK election. Lets examine some facts as portrayed in the media

Labour did badly. Did they? Overall gains of some 330 seats. They now have 5 more councils than previously and took some previously Tory councils to no overall control.

UKIP did well. Did they? They won less seats than even the Lib Dems managed and the Lib Dems might as well be lead by Fred West right now, he'd be no less popular than Clegg. Their share of the vote decreased from 22% last time to 17% this time at an election that was at the same time as the Euro elections so you'd think they'd be in a fine position to take advantage of this but no, their % percentage of the vote went down by 5% of the overall vote, they control zero councils and any chance of power they have will be as minor coalition partners in Tory dominated No Overall control councils

Only London rejected UKIP. Really? Won Zero seats in Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and plenty of other places, I think they won one seat in the West Midlands. I think London elected more kippers than those places

UKIP are as much of as threat to Labour as the Tories, where on earth does the basis of that insidious load of testes come from? It bears no analysis whatsoever

And what about the Greens? They reinforced the council they run in Brighton, won more seats elsewhere and are even the official opposition in Liverpool and a few other places, yet they are totally ignored?

To be honest the media reaction across the board from left to right, from Murdoch and Rothermere to the Guardian, has been the biggest load of crap I've ever read, it has no basis in truth. It doesn't stand up to any analysis

Don't believe a word you read in the papers, when they can spin election results so that people think the opposite happened then you know this country is up the creek without a paddle

That was the biggest load of crap I've read

 

 

I thought it was spot on.

[Kingfisher]

That's because it is pretty much spot on.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2014

[AVFCforever1991]

 

 

I actually think the media reaction to the latest council elect results is the most biased reporting of an election I've ever seen in a UK election. Lets examine some facts as portrayed in the media

Labour did badly. Did they? Overall gains of some 330 seats. They now have 5 more councils than previously and took some previously Tory councils to no overall control.

UKIP did well. Did they? They won less seats than even the Lib Dems managed and the Lib Dems might as well be lead by Fred West right now, he'd be no less popular than Clegg. Their share of the vote decreased from 22% last time to 17% this time at an election that was at the same time as the Euro elections so you'd think they'd be in a fine position to take advantage of this but no, their % percentage of the vote went down by 5% of the overall vote, they control zero councils and any chance of power they have will be as minor coalition partners in Tory dominated No Overall control councils

Only London rejected UKIP. Really? Won Zero seats in Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and plenty of other places, I think they won one seat in the West Midlands. I think London elected more kippers than those places

UKIP are as much of as threat to Labour as the Tories, where on earth does the basis of that insidious load of testes come from? It bears no analysis whatsoever

And what about the Greens? They reinforced the council they run in Brighton, won more seats elsewhere and are even the official opposition in Liverpool and a few other places, yet they are totally ignored?

To be honest the media reaction across the board from left to right, from Murdoch and Rothermere to the Guardian, has been the biggest load of crap I've ever read, it has no basis in truth. It doesn't stand up to any analysis

Don't believe a word you read in the papers, when they can spin election results so that people think the opposite happened then you know this country is up the creek without a paddle

That was the biggest load of crap I've read

 

 

I thought it was spot on.

 

 

It is. 

[thetrees]

I actually think the media reaction to the latest council elect results is the most biased reporting of an election I've ever seen in a UK election. Lets examine some facts as portrayed in the media

Labour did badly. Did they? Overall gains of some 330 seats. They now have 5 more councils than previously and took some previously Tory councils to no overall control.

UKIP did well. Did they? They won less seats than even the Lib Dems managed and the Lib Dems might as well be lead by Fred West right now, he'd be no less popular than Clegg. Their share of the vote decreased from 22% last time to 17% this time at an election that was at the same time as the Euro elections so you'd think they'd be in a fine position to take advantage of this but no, their % percentage of the vote went down by 5% of the overall vote, they control zero councils and any chance of power they have will be as minor coalition partners in Tory dominated No Overall control councils

Only London rejected UKIP. Really? Won Zero seats in Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and plenty of other places, I think they won one seat in the West Midlands. I think London elected more kippers than those places

UKIP are as much of as threat to Labour as the Tories, where on earth does the basis of that insidious load of testes come from? It bears no analysis whatsoever

And what about the Greens? They reinforced the council they run in Brighton, won more seats elsewhere and are even the official opposition in Liverpool and a few other places, yet they are totally ignored?

To be honest the media reaction across the board from left to right, from Murdoch and Rothermere to the Guardian, has been the biggest load of crap I've ever read, it has no basis in truth. It doesn't stand up to any analysis

Don't believe a word you read in the papers, when they can spin election results so that people think the opposite happened then you know this country is up the creek without a paddle

That was the biggest load of crap I've read

I thought it was spot on.

I thought that it was interesting and well thought out.

I don't know whether it was completely accurate*, because I no longer read any newspapers.

*small edit-not questioning the accuracy. Given the past contributions of the OP I can assume that it is completely accurate, but cannot make that judgement myself.

Edited May 28, 2014 by thetrees

[bickster]

That was the biggest load of crap I've read

Well thanks for the insightful analysis, I particularly admired your use of facts to debunk my thoughts. A succesful career in journalism awaits you

[peterms]

As Patrick Dunleavy at LSE points out, most commentary doesn't discuss Ukip and BNP votes alongside each other.

 

Where has the BNP vote gone?  Nick Griffin unequivocally thinks to Ukip.  I gather Ukip have felt it necessary to discuss whether to ban former BNP members from standing as Ukip candidates, because they are aware of the crossover as well.

 

 

2009 Far right, anti EU vote (UKIP + BNP) = 22.9% in European election. 2014 = 27.7% all but 1% UKIP. So real UKIP growth = 4.7%

 

[NurembergVillan]

I actually think the media reaction to the latest council elect results is the most biased reporting of an election I've ever seen in a UK election. Lets examine some facts as portrayed in the media

Labour did badly. Did they? Overall gains of some 330 seats. They now have 5 more councils than previously and took some previously Tory councils to no overall control.

UKIP did well. Did they? They won less seats than even the Lib Dems managed and the Lib Dems might as well be lead by Fred West right now, he'd be no less popular than Clegg. Their share of the vote decreased from 22% last time to 17% this time at an election that was at the same time as the Euro elections so you'd think they'd be in a fine position to take advantage of this but no, their % percentage of the vote went down by 5% of the overall vote, they control zero councils and any chance of power they have will be as minor coalition partners in Tory dominated No Overall control councils

Only London rejected UKIP. Really? Won Zero seats in Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and plenty of other places, I think they won one seat in the West Midlands. I think London elected more kippers than those places

UKIP are as much of as threat to Labour as the Tories, where on earth does the basis of that insidious load of testes come from? It bears no analysis whatsoever

And what about the Greens? They reinforced the council they run in Brighton, won more seats elsewhere and are even the official opposition in Liverpool and a few other places, yet they are totally ignored?

To be honest the media reaction across the board from left to right, from Murdoch and Rothermere to the Guardian, has been the biggest load of crap I've ever read, it has no basis in truth. It doesn't stand up to any analysis

Don't believe a word you read in the papers, when they can spin election results so that people think the opposite happened then you know this country is up the creek without a paddle

That was the biggest load of crap I've read

Boot on the other foot is it?

[Awol]

 

As Patrick Dunleavy at LSE points out, most commentary doesn't discuss Ukip and BNP votes alongside each other.

 

Where has the BNP vote gone?  Nick Griffin unequivocally thinks to Ukip.  I gather Ukip have felt it necessary to discuss whether to ban former BNP members from standing as Ukip candidates, because they are aware of the crossover as well.

 

 

2009 Far right, anti EU vote (UKIP + BNP) = 22.9% in European election. 2014 = 27.7% all but 1% UKIP. So real UKIP growth = 4.7%

 

Not quite accurate Peter, UKIP is and has for some time been the only party that bans former members of the BNP from even joining them, let alone standing for their party.

 

By contrast Trevor Maxfield, a former member of Combat 18, the NF and also BNP organiser for Blackburn, stood for Labour in the recent local elections - I don't know whether he was elected.  It's not just Labour putting former fascist supporters up for election though, according to Searchlight the Tories appear to be at it too.

 

UKIP ideology is more free market and small government, quite different from the state controlled national socialism of the BNP. It doesn't follow that former BNP votes are being hoovered up by UKIP, particularly when their members and activists are being taken in by the Labour and Tory parties! Results like UKIP taking 10 councillors from Labour in Rotherham are the reason Miliband's people have correctly identified the threat UKIP pose to their core vote.

 

In terms of the total distribution of councillors obviously UKIP are starting from a very low base and in the seats/councils up for contention last time they started from a base of 3 and added over 160 to that. Labour gained 330 and the coalition parties lost 100's. Yes the UKIP share of the vote was down on the local elections last year, but they took place in the Shire areas were UKIP were always likely to do better than the more metropolitan boroughs. I think the only spin is to suggest they haven't done remarkably well, and when added to the fact they are the first party other than Labour and Conservatives to win a national election in over 100 years it becomes obvious why the media have wet their collective undies at the outcome.

[MakemineVanilla]

The Sun seem to think that Cameron needs to move his party to the right if he is going to win the General Election.

 

Presumably they think that disaffected Lib Dem voters will defect to Labour and that Cameron needs to reclaim some of UKIP's ground to bring back the disaffected Tory 'protest' voters.

 

The question for Ed is whether he holds his ground or follow the Tories.

 

I don't think there is a conspiracy in the media to distort the results; they just take for granted that people understand that the significance of the results is mostly to do with what each party needs to do, to either form the next government or be part of another coalition. 

 

 

Thanks to StefanAVFC for the heads-up on Sun pic.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

'It'll be grand, trust me' - Alex Salmond.

[Eames]

I'm keen to see where this goes. If the Tories lose the Murdoch press  because they chuck their lot in with UKIP the General Election could be very interesting indeed. Labour should walk back into office with no hassle whatsoever.

 

Its sad that the problem with this country is not EU immigrants taking British jobs, but barely literate Sun readers believing the shite that rag churns out ona  daily basis.