Another attempt at misinformation?

I refer to this article on Conservative Home by Tom Mludzinski, who we are informed, is Deputy Head of Politics for Ipsos MORI. This former of public opinion writes:

“Are UKIP a one trick pony? A party set up with the sole aim of, as the name suggests, withdrawing the UK from the European Union, has had to develop beyond that narrow remit with its increased exposure. And indeed the European Union is, in fact, only fifth on the list of UKIP supporters’ concerns; a fifth (18%) saw it as among the most important issues facing Britain in 2012 with the economy, race relations and immigration, unemployment and crime all rated as more important than the EU. However, the one in five UKIP supporters naming the European Union is much higher than the 6% of the general public overall.”

Most definitely are Ukip not a “one-trick pony”, although obviously under-developed they may be – in fact one could say classification as a pony is incorrect as ass may be more pertinent. Remember, who but an ass would look a gift-horse in the mouth – but maybe I digress.

When one considers the matters of the economy, race relations, immigration, unemployment and crime, in which one does the European Union not have a “finger in the pie”? That statement can but say a great deal about the mentality of Ukip supporters and their understanding of the European Union and the matters mentioned. As at the time of writing, there is no rebuttal of this “skewage” (a word just invented – similar to sewage and with the same “root”) on the Ukip website, neither have I seen similar on Twitter.

Leaving the matter that legislation implemented by Brussels has been originated way above them, this failure by Ukip to be “on the ball” can but beggar belief. And this is a party that is asking the electorate to look on them as a government-in-waiting?

Some readers have castigated me in the comments section that I am too “hard” on Ukip and Farage, making the point that Farage is doing the best he can and that Ukip are the only option left if we, as a country, wish to exit the European Union. Where is their “Exit Plan”? Where is their plan after exiting? Why is it taking Richard North and others, to point out subjects that they should be discussing and bringing to the attention of the electorate. Reverting to the link about a “gift-horse”, is it any wonder it takes two members of the QT audience to point out to Ukip a glaring deficit in their “EU Debate”?

When the only choice left are demonstrably not “fit for purpose”, please tell me: what is the point in voting for them?

Afterthought This post may cost me a few readers, but then I don’t write this blog for a few readers – I write attempting to educate……..


Share
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow
twitterrsstwitterrss

15 Responses

  1. Sean O'Hare says:

    I won’t stop reading David because I agree 100% with the content of your non ukip bashing posts, but I still think you should call a halt to hostilities and climb back on board. If you and Richard couldn’t convince the UKIP membership of your case when you were on board, what chance you can convince the not so EU sceptic population at large from your respective websites?

  2. john in cheshire says:

    David, I’d like to give my counter-point to the above comment. I, as a UKIP member, would say that you need to keep on criticising, educating and hopefully influencing. I tend towards your and Richard’s analysis and advice on how to extricate ourselves from the EU monster and unless you, he and others keep up the pressure, then nothing will change. Your observations serve to strengthen UKIP, not weaken it. And hopefully there are some waverers, and members of other parties, who come to your websites, who will be persuaded by your collective efforts.

    • Sean O'Hare says:

      JiC I don’t think you and I are a million miles away on this. I totally agree that David and Richard need to keep up the pressure, including on UKIP. The only point at issue is whether that is best done from outside or inside the tent.

  3. Robert says:

    ‘Some readers have castigated me in the comments section that I am too “hard” on Ukip and Farage, making the point that Farage is doing the best he can ‘

    I won’t. Farage’s best is not good enough and it is he who has taken it upon himself to be the UKIP front man. He doesn’t learn and last Thursday’s Question Time was a perfect example where he again failed to nail the lies of the federasts. He has been doing the job long enough he ought really to have the script in his little grey cells by now. UKIP and the people who vote for them (that includes me) deserve better.

  4. Woodsy42 says:

    I think getting out of the EU will take the combined efforts of everyone who wants out. The vested interests are huge.
    In the grand scheme of things it matters not a jot whether UKIP are propertly prepared with the fine details. Neither does it matter how other different groups would prefer to go about it. Whether Article 50 is the method or whether we simply break the treaty is trivial, it really doesn’t make any long term difference. These details are just that – details – all completely dwarfed by the desperate need to just get the hell out. Details can be taken care of.
    If we pull together we may eventually get our freedom. If different tribes all squabble between themselves about relative trivia we most definitely will fail.
    Currently UKIP are the best chance we have. It may not be what any of us would have chosen. We might have much preferred something different. But so what? We are where we are, not where we might have wanted to be, and we have to deal with reality.
    Currently UKIP is the best chance of political success. For all our sakes let’s help them not snipe at them.

  5. Robin says:

    UKIP are not an “etablishment” party . So if you want to have the Harrogate agenda , or bring the civil service into line , or counter the Gramscians /Common Purpose / Bilderburgers etc , or get a better democracy you have to vote and support a party like UKIP .

  6. wg says:

    In the past I have given my encouragement to you to carry on David – and I’ll do so again; you and various other bloggers are ploughing a field which will, I believe, reward us all with a better harvest.

    I have nowhere left to go – UKIP are the only answer for me, imperfect as they are.

    With the sudden recognition by UKIP that Article 50 exists, it becomes clear that notice is being taken.

    It is up to the rest of us to take the message on board and get it over to our friends and colleagues.

  7. thespecialone says:

    I am a firm believer that in any part of life you can learn from others even if you are at the top. To do otherwise is very stupid and arrogant. As an ex-RN man, I have known too many officers who failed to take advice thinking they knew it all as they were of senior rank; but then fell flat on their face. It is the same here. You, TBF, Richard, AM and others have a lot of knowledge that if UKIP leadership are intelligent enough will take on board and maybe have some kind of agreement between you all that you really are on the same side and should help each other. It is in everybody’s interest on the “out” side to stick together as we are up against a powerful media and a political class that have lots of money and of course the power. UKIP are the best chance of getting that message out to the wider public so if any of their leadership are reading this, do not sulk, learn from WfW and others investigations and get it out to the wider audience. If you don’t, you will only have yourselves to blame that people will believe in Cameron’s “fax democracy”.

  8. Boudicca says:

    I will still read you WfW, but I find the sniping at UKIP a tad irritating.

    In the long term, something approximating the Harrogate Agenda will serve the people far better than the rigged representative system we currently have. But no-one is listening to theoretical debate about our Parliamentary system or our Constitution, and they’re not going to. As far as the vast majority of people are concerned, there are many more immediate issues which need resolving.

    To get anywhere, we first need to break the cartel currently sharing the governance of the UK. LibLabCON play pass the parcel with our government and until we can break their game, nothing will change.

    The Party isn’t perfect: we need more experienced people and we need to hone and improve our message …. but we’re making headway and we now have the electorate’s attention, if not enough of their votes.

    Stop carping and help!

  9. graham wood says:

    Good posts from all – and I agree 100% with these – and esp. Woodsy42.

    Although still something of a premature debate, the point about the mechanics of getting out is still important to settle between all the eurorealists – but arguably, not now!
    Re the place of invoking Article 50 of the LT, and the comment “With the sudden recognition by UKIP that Article 50 exists, it becomes clear that notice is being taken”

    I say premature re Art. 50, because whether recognised by UKIP or by the Tory “sceptics”, invoking Article 50 is simply not an option whilst Cameron is PM – for the simple reason that he has repeatedly affirmed that he wishes Britain to stay IN the EU. Does not that settle the discussion on Art 50 as closed – or at least postponed for the immediate future? I think so, and there is little point in this “detail” being discussed if there is no prospect of it being a reality.
    We wait and see therefore what the Great Speech will bring – but of necessity just because he has boxed himself in almost completely, then DC cannot offer anything realistic about our exiting the EU.

    My own view is that UKIP should concentrate on hammering away at the sheer economic costs of EU membership, the waste of public money, and related simple facts for the ordinary man in the street, as to just how it impoverishes him personally, his family and the nation.
    To some degree Farage is suceeding in this – but there is still a long way to go in educating the public about the real issues – as opposed to theories about our exit

  10. Peter Whale says:

    Whom are you trying to educate? If its yourself all well and good. UKIP and Farage are not perfect, but without the likes of Farage, Hannan, Carswell, Guido, Dellingpole and others the EU question would be so low profile you would be considered an odd faction like ansrchists. Nothing is perfect, argue with them and send them your points to consider. Why do you try to denigrate everyone who does not have your purest view on the EU?

  11. kenomeat says:

    UKIP and Farage must not be above criticism just because they are our only hope of eventual freedom, but it’s the tone of the criticism that many of us find unhelpful. Yes Farage missed an open goal on QT but pointing it out is sufficient rather than ridiculing him. He remains our best hope.

  12. Geoff Cavender says:

    I have been in favour of the UK leaving the EU and have read various books on the subject (The Castle of Lies, The Great Deception) but never knew how much I didn’t know until starting to read Richard North’s blog, WFW, the Boiling Frog, Autonomous Mind amongst others. The detail does matter and article 50/EFTA/EEA/Bi-Partisan agreements seem the best strategic argument. My issue is how on earth we can make it happen against a political system and bureaucracy that is absolutely dedicated to staying in the EU

  13. Flyinthesky says:

    “When the only choice left are demonstrably not “fit for purpose”, please tell me: what is the point in voting for them?”

    Who then?
    The only thing that’s flying the kite is the perceived threat from UKIP. Any reduction of support will lead to a corresponding reduction in effort to address the eu issue.

    You/we have chance to influence UKIP on method and direction, you don’t have that opportunity with any other party, they’re all on minimums for placation not to be guided by you/me or anyone else.

    In order to have a chance of becomming Great Britain again the focus has got to be on the destination not obsessing on the route.
    If the impetus of UKIP is lost the whole process goes back by a decade or more by which time there will be no discernible Britain to defend.

    • kenomeat says:

      “If the impetus of UKIP is lost the whole process goes back by a decade or more by which time there will be no discernible Britain to defend.”
      Very well said Fly. That statement should be etched in stone.

Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012