tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6247050185364541007.post3410297873191321291..comments2024-03-21T18:02:46.110+00:00Comments on PORTSMOUTH POINT: UKIP? Really?J. Burkinshawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07521961323780567072noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6247050185364541007.post-29654108857631120272014-11-06T23:16:35.993+00:002014-11-06T23:16:35.993+00:00So embarrassed to support the Libdems your not wil...So embarrassed to support the Libdems your not willing to name and shame yourself ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6247050185364541007.post-28841024559437836752014-11-06T19:53:58.528+00:002014-11-06T19:53:58.528+00:00(One would comment on the continued insistence of ...(One would comment on the continued insistence of political articles to be about UKIP despite only holding one seat in the House of Commons, but I suppose that this article seeks to reduce that eventually. I shall wait in vain for articles on Nick Clegg...)<br /><br />Overall, an excellent article that neatly summarises the key flaws with the UKIP model, being more of a convenient protest vote than any other party. An exuberant and (marginally) more relateable leader helps with this. The defections are, in my opinion, the most confusing aspect. Politicians who should be aware of the movements of their own parties defect to a party with no real sense of its policies, and no (contingency/emergency/accidentally voted Farage in as PM) plans for growth apart from being the `people's party`. <br /><br />The UK continues to require a more skilled economy and improved education, a point the party is unlikely to promote in claiming to stop immigration. The point I am trying to make is that everyone; voters and campaigners, right up to civil servants and serving politicians, does not realise the incompetent, amateur attitude taken by this party, instead agreeing with the voice of the (most vehement) people, even when these people do not represent the true values of those who vote, let alone the majority of those eligible to vote who choose not to, as demonstrated in the 2010 election. These people, who choose not to vote, can change the political outlook of the entire country. All that it takes is persuading them to vote, something which the 650 (501 of whom are male) persons in charge (?) of our country seem not to be encouraging; after all, their (well-paid) positions would be put at risk! <br /><br />I feel like I have detracted from the article (never mind- I study relatively unrelated subjects). However, I still wish to make one final comment- do voters, when voting in a general election or otherwise, vote in terms of the leadership of the country, the MP for their area or their own perceptions in terms of the leadership? Does a person voting Conservative in Chichester vote for Cameron, Tyrie, or Conservative policies? The division of leadership from representation in general elections is a flaw that leads to the misrepresentation of a large proportion of citizens (those who voted UKIP in past elections ignored in terms of seats; predicting what will happen in 2015 is a dangerous game!). Or does it? We cannot know, since voters do not give reasons for voting, but in the context of UKIP, how can we be sure of what voters are looking for? That is one of the key aims of those looking to destabilise the so-called `People's Revolution.<br /><br />Yours faithfully, <br /><br />One Person (who may or may not support the Lib Dems)One Personnoreply@blogger.com