Election Year or Fear!

[Geoff Parkstone]

"won 26.1% of the vote. That means that 73.9% rejected their stance"

That is a classic non sequitor, Aristotle an logic. 26% of a room hate cats ergo 74% love them. No, the 74% may love them, like them a bit, be be entirely indifferent to them or base their choice on somethingcelse

[Andy_Faber]

P.S. At the most recent by-election in Scotland, Farage’s ReformUK and the ‘sink the boats’ crew won 26.1% of the vote. That means that 73.9% rejected their stance.

That?s either daft or desperate as an attempted put down, Labour got 5 years in office with a similar order of magnitude vote (33.7%. Which means 66.3% rejected their stance)

[MadAmster]

So he isn?t really in favour of the ?sink the boats? mentality is he? He?s concerned about the level of illegal immigration as I?d suggest many, including Swale and I are. At no time have I ever suggested that it isn?t a complex and significant problem which needs to be addressed via ?joined up? international thought. We just tend to express ourselves rather more compassionately than you and TTR.

P.S. At the most recent by-election in Scotland, Farage?s ReformUK and the ?sink the boats? crew won 26.1% of the vote. That means that 73.9% rejected their stance.

Prior to Johnson's "oven ready Brexit deal", we had all manner of agreements with the EU that would have allowed us to intercept the boats mid channel and send them back to France. Agreements we could have kept but the eejit decided to throw that particular "baby" out with the bathwater.

[ramAnag]

That?s either daft or desperate as an attempted put down, Labour got 5 years in office with a similar order of magnitude vote (33.7%. Which means 66.3% rejected their stance)

In your haste to portray my post as ‘daft’ you seem to be dealing with the result at a particularly simplistic level.

You’re right to the extent that Labour’s 31.6% earned them disproportionately much more than Reform’s 26.1% but you need to look in more depth.

Who do Reform UK appeal to? I’d suggest disgruntled former Tory voters, one time UKIP voters, and a collection of miscellaneous right wingers who would formerly have found sanctuary amongst the likes of Britain First and the National Front. In short they are the party of the Right and, of those who stood in Hamilton, are only competing for votes with those who stubbornly stick to the traditional Tory vote, all 6% of them.

In comparison Labour was up against the SNP, the Greens and the Lib Dems who all have something in common. Between them Labour, the SNP, Scottish Greens and the Lib Dem won 65.6% of the vote. It was that 65.6% that ‘rejected’ the divisive policies of Farage and, looking at the bigger picture and the possibility of some form of national coalition after the next General Election that, thankfully, is Farage’s problem…he leads a populist party which appeals to in the region of 25-30% of voters, but that still leaves a very significant majority who want nothing to do with him.

[Geoff Parkstone]

It's massively presumptuous of you to see the bye election as a one trick pony. Voters will have had concerns about eg immigration, independence, environmental issues etc. Yet only one vote. So someone who wants Scotch independence but also wants control over immigration can only vote once. That vote may be SNP WC as a priority but that still doesn't mean he opposed key reform policies. Voting is more nuanced and involves compromises.

[ramAnag]

Voting is more nuanced and involves compromises.

Completely agree and there was probably tactical voting in operation in Hamilton too. Doesn’t alter the fact that approximately two thirds of those who voted in Hamilton rejected/didn’t support Farage and that at a time when ReformUK is a novelty and the Labour government is unpopular.

[Andy_Faber]

In your haste to portray my post as ‘daft’ you seem to be dealing with the result at a particularly simplistic level.

You’re right to the extent that Labour’s 31.6% earned them disproportionately much more than Reform’s 26.1% but you need to look in more depth.

Who do Reform UK appeal to? I’d suggest disgruntled former Tory voters, one time UKIP voters, and a collection of miscellaneous right wingers who would formerly have found sanctuary amongst the likes of Britain First and the National Front. In short they are the party of the Right and, of those who stood in Hamilton, are only competing for votes with those who stubbornly stick to the traditional Tory vote, all 6% of them.

In comparison Labour was up against the SNP, the Greens and the Lib Dems who all have something in common. Between them Labour, the SNP, Scottish Greens and the Lib Dem won 65.6% of the vote. It was that 65.6% that ‘rejected’ the divisive policies of Farage and, looking at the bigger picture and the possibility of some form of national coalition after the next General Election that, thankfully, is Farage’s problem…he leads a populist party which appeals to in the region of 25-30% of voters, but that still leaves a very significant majority who want nothing to do with him.

I?m not going to get into another spat but I disagree, and with an observers hat on not an anti-right (your phrase) one.

[MadAmster]

What % of voters are mentally incapable of seeing the full picture or even care about repercussions? Whatever the political leanings they will want some of the following...

Reduce migration, whatever the cost.
Better pay for all, whatever the cost.
Ever increasing profits, whatever the cost.
Ever increasing dividends, whatever the cost.
Ever decreasing choice through takeovers and mergers, whatever the cost.

I'd be struggling to find a UK party to vote for if I intended to do so. There simply isn't one. The Labour party of old was as close as one could get.

Tories are all for themselves and the rich and always have been.
Libs LibDems are Tories in disguise with some saving graces
Today's Labour party are as Tory as the Tories
Reform will prove to be as effective as Meloni in Italy and Wilders in NL
The rest are irrelevant

I'd like to see a party look to have a broad appeal. One that sees reasonable profits as a natural offspin of business and perfectly acceptable. One that supports the passing of some of those profits on to shareholder dividends, however, when a company makes a loss there should be no dividends (eg Thames Water have built up 15Bn GBP in debt while having paid out almost 11Bn in dividends and having around 14Bn backlog in repairs, new infrastructure and maintenance. I find that situation disgusting). Windfall tax on extra profit gained through accident of circumstance. Equalising taxes. Whatever the source of any income, it is income and should be taxed similarly. Close all tax loopholes. Stop tax evasion and avoidance. Encourage firms to pay a proper living wage so that people in full time work (some in multiple jobs) can actually afford to live without getting State handouts. Firms going for government contracts should be warned that if they quote 100M then there may be 10% wiggle room but that what they put in their tender has to be realistic so that we never get a repeat of HS2 and Crossrail etc.

Basically, fairness across the board for everybody from the person unable to work for whatever reason, to the non tax paying expat Billionaires who own all UK media. IMO those billionaires should be paying UK tax on income derived in the UK.

Benefit fraud is said to be around 1.6Bn a year, unclaimed benefits around 10 times that, tax evasion/avoidance is said to be around 120Bn. I'd like to see benefit fraud tackled as seriously as tax avoidance and to get that equality I'd much rather they went after avoidance more rather than easing back on benefit fraud chasing. I'd also like them to chase up those not claiming benefit to which they are entitled and make sure they get it.

It still wouldn't be perfect but would, IMO, be better, fairer and less people would be suffering the mental and physical issues that come with being unable to cope financially.

There has to be a better balance between rich and poor. The ultra rich don't need anything like as much as they have. The poor don't need an awful lot more to get by but should really get it.

Taking the poor out of poverty will decrease pressure on the NHS. A win.

Giving the poor more money will see them spend it thereby creating more demand for goods and services and thus creating jobs. The increased demand will see company profits rise and that would trickle down to shareholder dividends.

I don't think there's a party anywhere in the world that has the policies to achieve what I'd like to see. It's a great pity.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Completely agree and there was probably tactical voting in operation in Hamilton too. Doesn’t alter the fact that approximately two thirds of those who voted in Hamilton rejected/didn’t support Farage and that at a time when ReformUK is a novelty and the Labour government is unpopular.

Not strictly true. About 2/3rds did not vote Reform I agree. But that does not mean to say they reject some or all of Reform policies. The anti immigration, ardent Scottish nationalist is in a quandary, especially in the unlikely event of that they are members of Just Stop Oil and Vegans!!

[MadAmster]

Not strictly true. About 2/3rds did not vote Reform I agree. But that does not mean to say they reject some or all of Reform policies. The anti immigration, ardent Scottish nationalist is in a quandary, especially in the unlikely event of that they are members of Just Stop Oil and Vegans!!

Why would ScotNats want to stop vegans?