I don't support any party at the moment, although I would vote to stay in the EU. I find it deeply ironic that the hugely increased prospective vote for UKIP provides the best possible chance of the UK staying in the EU by giving Labour a chance of winning which they otherwise would not have and therefore avoiding an in/out referendum.
And that is really the crux of the matter.
Farage has now re-positioned UKIP away from being a one issue party (exiting the EU) to being an alternative party of government. Not everyone in UKIP is happy about that but many newer members are.
A Tory election win damages that aim as Cameron will hold the in/out referendum and either result shoots the old UKIP fox. Either the UK leaves in which case UKIP battle is won or we stay in and the public have spoken.
But New UKIP are no longer a one issue party in the eyes of Farage. It is a real shot for power. A tory win in '15 stops that so the most desirable result for Farage is a Labour win whether with a majority or in a coalition with the Lib Dems or the nationalists.
If and when that happens the Tory party will tear itself apart over Europe and UKIP, and Farage, can become a real force on the right.
What happens on the left is yet to be seen. The Lib Dems seem very damaged and the Greens (who have already won a Westminster seat remember) don't have a high profile despite having more Euro MPs than the Lib Dems. They have the problem of being seen as just an Environmental party but their leader also wants to reposition them as a social democratic party similar to the other Green parties in continental Europe.
Labour are in one of their regular messes and have an uninspiring leader. How they must wish for a Blair or Smith or even David Miliband. If they can hold their 35% (which seems to be their strategy) then they can be part of the next government.
I don't think anyone was bullying anyone, grandpa is intelligent enough to answer questions on his beliefs and opinions and was just asked by another poster to elaborate on what he has said as it was a little unclear. I'm not sure why anyone would see that as bullying, but by accusing people of bullying they will come back on the offensive and is likely to cause arguements rather than friendly debate and get a what was an interesting and amicable thread closed down. So my suggestion is that this is just dropped now before it gets personal and if any poster feels like they are being singled out or bullied they can take it up themselves with the person or an admin, let us get back to the discussion at hand and I mean no disrespect to anyone.
You think "Cast Iron Dave" is actually going to honour his" repeated promise"of an in-out referendum on EU membership? Dream on! There will never be an in-out referendum from Con/Lib/Lab! There will always be another excuse not to hold one! As it stands now it`s 3 years away!
Under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty another 43 sovereign powers are passed to the EU on November 1st this year which makes a referendum practically impossible. The EU will simply not allow the British people a say on this. Look at their track record with referenda and total contempt and disregard with which they treated the people of Denmark, France, Ireland and Holland!
i'll probably get ticked off again by Addickted, but this is a genuine question: Which one of these "43 sovereign powers" are you most concerned about losing, and how will it affect your daily life?
i'm not saying that everything about the EU is wonderful (nor do most Germans I know) but every time I come home and listen to people moaning, they are moaning about the same things they were when I moved away 20 years ago. The NHS. The overcrowded London transport. The price of a pint. The price of everything else (often compared with "Europe" as they find out when they travel).
So I'm genuinely curious. Maybe I will learn something to push me towards Cameron's camp.
Fear not Sadie - I don't think what's been posted so far would cause the thread to be closed. We're just having a 'robust debate', which is healthy.
There's been no threats, no hissy fits and probably no one has changed their opinion on Mr Reckless.
I'm sure Chizz and Prague have been accused of worst things than 'bullying' on a thread about a defecting politician - though I felt the John Redman remark was near the mark (though the wanky retort was probably fair comment).
I think your analysis is pretty much spot on Henry.
There are two real difficulties for Farage. (1) He didn't have any MPs, until now and even on optimistic forecasts, won't get more than 8 or 9 at the election; (2) UKIP are a one man band. Carswell mitigates this a bit but his views are very different to Farage and they may clash.
So Farage's best outcome is a split within the Tory party, with the right-wing section merging with UKIP. There are a couple of problems with this, though. The Tories aren't very prone to splitting - they've not done so since the Corn Laws 170 years ago. The other big problem is Boris, who is Farage's biggest threat on the populist right. Finally, to sketch out an alternative government, you have to have policies. UKIP is united around the EU and immigration. But can they be united on other issues including taxation and spending? Can they continue to assert that party indiscipline is a virtue corresponding to freedom of expression in the face of what will be a relentless media onlsaught?
So far Farage has played a blinder and he's been lucky. The capture of Carswell and Reckless is hugely significant. UKIP are now definatevely established as a major player in British politics. But it gets a lot tougher from now on in.
It's going to be hugely interesting to see how it all develops.
They were both bullying him with rhetorical questions because they don't agree with his opinion
And there's no such word as 'wanky'.
You actually seem to have fallen into a John Redwood mindset.
Happy to argue and disagree with you Prague, but that's below the belt.
Well I should have inserted a smiley. So apologies that I did not do so. Nevertheless I understood you to mean that anyone who posts Eurosceptic opinions on here should be allowed to do so unchallenged. That's what Redwood said to the business community. Admittedly you didn't threaten to send a gang of thugs round to beat me up, as Redwood appeared to do.
You think "Cast Iron Dave" is actually going to honour his" repeated promise"of an in-out referendum on EU membership? Dream on! There will never be an in-out referendum from Con/Lib/Lab! There will always be another excuse not to hold one! As it stands now it`s 3 years away!
Under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty another 43 sovereign powers are passed to the EU on November 1st this year which makes a referendum practically impossible. The EU will simply not allow the British people a say on this. Look at their track record with referenda and total contempt and disregard with which they treated the people of Denmark, France, Ireland and Holland!
i'll probably get ticked off again by Addickted, but this is a genuine question: Which one of these "43 sovereign powers" are you most concerned about losing, and how will it affect your daily life?
You most certainly won't. I was unaware of this and am keen to know what they are.
I suppose driving on the right hand side of the road will be hidden in at number 36 - bloody foreigners.
Under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty another 43 sovereign powers are passed to the EU on November 1st this year which makes a referendum practically impossible. The EU will simply not allow the British people a say on this. Look at their track record with referenda and total contempt and disregard with which they treated the people of Denmark, France, Ireland and Holland!
Not a dig at you at all I'd genuinely like to know about this. I've seen people posting links to obscure blogs and memes on facebook which mention the new powers making a referendum impossible. Yet from any searching I've done I can't find anything official that mentions this. All I've found is that the Lisbon Treaty actually created the powers for member nations to have the right to withdraw from the union.
You think "Cast Iron Dave" is actually going to honour his" repeated promise"of an in-out referendum on EU membership? Dream on! There will never be an in-out referendum from Con/Lib/Lab! There will always be another excuse not to hold one! As it stands now it`s 3 years away!
Under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty another 43 sovereign powers are passed to the EU on November 1st this year which makes a referendum practically impossible. The EU will simply not allow the British people a say on this. Look at their track record with referenda and total contempt and disregard with which they treated the people of Denmark, France, Ireland and Holland!
i'll probably get ticked off again by Addickted, but this is a genuine question: Which one of these "43 sovereign powers" are you most concerned about losing, and how will it affect your daily life?
I know this isn't addressed to me but I'm bored at work so I'll butt in anyway.
We don't cede any powers but UK (and everyone else) does lose the right to veto policies in a number of areas which will now be subject to qualified majority voting (QMV) under Lisbon. The "43" figure is banded around a lot in eurosceptic circles, burt it's not correct. There will be QMV instead of unanimity in 43 areas, but many of these were already QMV. The imortant ones where there will be a change are border controld, transport, tourism, culture, energy and the EU budget
Whether you consider that to be ceding sovreignty or pooling will depend on your views of the EU of course.
Much in the same way that the "Yes" campaign in Scotland seemed to hold all the aces with the "No" supporters appearing to have no story to tell, it always seems to me that the EU gets a bad press and no one defends it. As Prague says, it's not all good news but it does do some tremendous stuff. I'd appreciate it if someone from the anti-EU camp could have a look at the list of EU directives en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_directives and explain which ones have had a detrimental effect on the UK and why. Many (perhaps all) have been a force for good and often brought about change that might otherwise have been impossible from the battleground of internecine politics that exists in the UK. The EU employs some very impressive people who work hard to bring in legislation for the benefit of all. (It is best to ignore all that "Daily Mail bent banana ban" bollocks. (news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6481969.stm) The BIG problem for most people, or at least the one that gets all the publicity, appears to be immigration. But is it really the free movement of labour within the EU that's the issue or is it immigration from outside the EU?
@ cafcfan Excellent post. Isn't it also true that a directive isn't actually enforceable in law?. Which for example explains why all the gadgets in my house are subject to a mandatory two year guarantee whereas you poor saps only get one year? (or is that no longer true re the UK case?)
No such word as 'wanky'?!? I'm sure it was used in a friendly terrace ditty regarding our Bermondsey brethren. But then, I'm probably wrong, I spent most of the 90s either drunk or under the influence of herbal cigarettes :-(
I don't think anyone was bullying anyone, grandpa is intelligent enough to answer questions on his beliefs and opinions and was just asked by another poster to elaborate on what he has said as it was a little unclear. I'm not sure why anyone would see that as bullying, but by accusing people of bullying they will come back on the offensive and is likely to cause arguements rather than friendly debate and get a what was an interesting and amicable thread closed down. So my suggestion is that this is just dropped now before it gets personal and if any poster feels like they are being singled out or bullied they can take it up themselves with the person or an admin, let us get back to the discussion at hand and I mean no disrespect to anyone.
SJ, I'd like your opinion on what I wrote earlier about Farage actually benefiting from a Labour win. Did you see that post?
It's very difficult to accurately gauge where the UKIP votes are coming from and how it will affect outcomes in individual seats - I imagine the reasons people turn to UKIP will vary greatly across the country.
It's worth noting that when Tories win seats they usually win by comfortable majorities; Labour are, on the other hand, get more seats considered to be marginals. This is where Labour's intrinsic advantage in the current constituency set-up lies - their voter base is more 'efficiently' spread to minimise the number of votes it needs per seat (they have fewer 'wasted votes', as any votes more than one greater the number of votes their closest rival in a seat they get are effectively wasted).
So if Tories are bleeding votes, they suffer less as they usually have more surplus votes. Now in Tory/Labour marginals, Labour rely on convincing people to turn from the Tories to and to vote for them. Except now the UKIP threat means that people don't necessarily need to turn left if they don't want to vote Tories (it is safe to say that most swing voters don't vote on a left/right paradigm, only voters who don't swing between parties tend to affirm themselves to either left or right). Therefore Labour cannot count on the usual voters who would automatically vote for the party 'not in government' as many of those voters will now be voting UKIP, meaning there is a depleted pool of swing voters for them to target.
There has been plenty of evidence and polling that suggests that voters voting UKIP for the first-time are more likely to have previously been Conservative voters, but the same evidence also suggests that many voters who would have voted Labour in the absence of UKIP are going to vote UKIP or have now switched to UKIP. Because a greater proportion of Labour seats are marginal, it only takes a smaller swing from Labour to UKIP to deny Labour the victory than it does from Tory to UKIP.
The UKIP threat is more obvious to the Tories but analysis of voting patterns in Labour seats and Labour targets means Labour cannot be complacent and consider UKIP to be a problem only affecting Tories.
I don't think anyone was bullying anyone, grandpa is intelligent enough to answer questions on his beliefs and opinions and was just asked by another poster to elaborate on what he has said as it was a little unclear. I'm not sure why anyone would see that as bullying, but by accusing people of bullying they will come back on the offensive and is likely to cause arguements rather than friendly debate and get a what was an interesting and amicable thread closed down. So my suggestion is that this is just dropped now before it gets personal and if any poster feels like they are being singled out or bullied they can take it up themselves with the person or an admin, let us get back to the discussion at hand and I mean no disrespect to anyone.
SJ, I'd like your opinion on what I wrote earlier about Farage actually benefiting from a Labour win. Did you see that post?
Yes I did I was actually just discussing it with my other half, are you saying that he is planning on jumping ship in the next five years and becoming a Tory and leading them? It's pretty bad if they really do want labour in government as like I said binary opposite to almost everything they stand for. Also if what you say is true he is either extremely egotistic and delusional or completely insane, but I wouldn't put it past him.
At 1.37 Jints wrote: It takes less Labour votes to elect a Labour MP than the Tory equivalent because (a) turnout is lower in safe Labour seats than safe Tory ones (b) Safe labour seats have smaller populations than safe Tory ones (prosperous areas see population increases). That may well be so BUT for goodness sake let's remember that, first and foremost, Charlton Life is concerned with grammatical accuracy, NOT politics (but sometimes there is a mention of football). It is FEWER votes not LESS votes...
I don't think anyone was bullying anyone, grandpa is intelligent enough to answer questions on his beliefs and opinions and was just asked by another poster to elaborate on what he has said as it was a little unclear. I'm not sure why anyone would see that as bullying, but by accusing people of bullying they will come back on the offensive and is likely to cause arguements rather than friendly debate and get a what was an interesting and amicable thread closed down. So my suggestion is that this is just dropped now before it gets personal and if any poster feels like they are being singled out or bullied they can take it up themselves with the person or an admin, let us get back to the discussion at hand and I mean no disrespect to anyone.
SJ, I'd like your opinion on what I wrote earlier about Farage actually benefiting from a Labour win. Did you see that post?
Yes I did I was actually just discussing it with my other half, are you saying that he is planning on jumping ship in the next five years and becoming a Tory and leading them? It's pretty bad if they really do want labour in government as like I said binary opposite to almost everything they stand for. Also if what you say is true he is either extremely egotistic and delusional or completely insane, but I wouldn't put it past him.
I couldn't disagree with you more. He is not "extremely egotistic and delusional or completely insane", he's extremely egotistic and delusional AND completely insane! ;-)
I just imagine that he's a real Tory at heart. And if the Tories came running to him, having ditched Cameron, he'd grab the opportunity with both hands.
So, while he wants to secure as many seats as possible, I think he'll be crying crocodile tears if - when - Ed Miliband starts arranging the furniture in Downing Street.
At 1.37 Jints wrote: It takes less Labour votes to elect a Labour MP than the Tory equivalent because (a) turnout is lower in safe Labour seats than safe Tory ones (b) Safe labour seats have smaller populations than safe Tory ones (prosperous areas see population increases). That may well be so BUT for goodness sake let's remember that, first and foremost, Charlton Life is concerned with grammatical accuracy, NOT politics (but sometimes there is a mention of football). It is FEWER votes not LESS votes...
I don't think anyone was bullying anyone, grandpa is intelligent enough to answer questions on his beliefs and opinions and was just asked by another poster to elaborate on what he has said as it was a little unclear. I'm not sure why anyone would see that as bullying, but by accusing people of bullying they will come back on the offensive and is likely to cause arguements rather than friendly debate and get a what was an interesting and amicable thread closed down. So my suggestion is that this is just dropped now before it gets personal and if any poster feels like they are being singled out or bullied they can take it up themselves with the person or an admin, let us get back to the discussion at hand and I mean no disrespect to anyone.
SJ, I'd like your opinion on what I wrote earlier about Farage actually benefiting from a Labour win. Did you see that post?
Yes I did I was actually just discussing it with my other half, are you saying that he is planning on jumping ship in the next five years and becoming a Tory and leading them? It's pretty bad if they really do want labour in government as like I said binary opposite to almost everything they stand for. Also if what you say is true he is either extremely egotistic and delusional or completely insane, but I wouldn't put it past him.
I couldn't disagree with you more. He is not "extremely egotistic and delusional or completely insane", he's extremely egotistic and delusional AND completely insane! ;-)
I just imagine that he's a real Tory at heart. And if the Tories came running to him, having ditched Cameron, he'd grab the opportunity with both hands.
So, while he wants to secure as many seats as possible, I think he'll be crying crocodile tears if - when - Ed Miliband starts arranging the furniture in Downing Street.
Like I said I wouldn't put anything past him, but I really don't know what to do, I've never voted labour in my life, I have always been a Tory voter but refuse to vote for a party that cocks up and won't admit it ffs Cameron why is it pride before country for you? I have lost all faith in them but I won't vote UKIP, confused.com
I don't think anyone was bullying anyone, grandpa is intelligent enough to answer questions on his beliefs and opinions and was just asked by another poster to elaborate on what he has said as it was a little unclear. I'm not sure why anyone would see that as bullying, but by accusing people of bullying they will come back on the offensive and is likely to cause arguements rather than friendly debate and get a what was an interesting and amicable thread closed down. So my suggestion is that this is just dropped now before it gets personal and if any poster feels like they are being singled out or bullied they can take it up themselves with the person or an admin, let us get back to the discussion at hand and I mean no disrespect to anyone.
SJ, I'd like your opinion on what I wrote earlier about Farage actually benefiting from a Labour win. Did you see that post?
Yes I did I was actually just discussing it with my other half, are you saying that he is planning on jumping ship in the next five years and becoming a Tory and leading them? It's pretty bad if they really do want labour in government as like I said binary opposite to almost everything they stand for. Also if what you say is true he is either extremely egotistic and delusional or completely insane, but I wouldn't put it past him.
I couldn't disagree with you more. He is not "extremely egotistic and delusional or completely insane", he's extremely egotistic and delusional AND completely insane! ;-)
I just imagine that he's a real Tory at heart. And if the Tories came running to him, having ditched Cameron, he'd grab the opportunity with both hands.
So, while he wants to secure as many seats as possible, I think he'll be crying crocodile tears if - when - Ed Miliband starts arranging the furniture in Downing Street.
Like I said I wouldn't put anything past him, but I really don't know what to do, I've never voted labour in my life, I have always been a Tory voter but refuse to vote for a party that cocks up and won't admit it ffs Cameron why is it pride before country for you? I have lost all faith in them but I won't vote UKIP, confused.com
Reckless will lose this by- election and UKIP will pick up two or three seats next May before they fade into obscurity. As far as I am concerned they are xenophobic and a couple of policy changes short of the BNP.
In the meantime I am delighted that they will split the Tory vote and add to Labours majority.
Nice one Nigel!
I hope you are correct. However the Conservatives / Reckless have a majority of nearly 10,000 votes from Labour. Voters tend to use their votes to protest in by-elections. I can't see Labour winning the seat though. Living in the area and having a vote I am concerned I could be represented by UKIP in a few weeks. Personally for the first time in my life I will be voting Conservative as they have the best chance of stopping UKIP /Reckless.
As interesting as this discussion is, it's all rather redundant. Call me a cynic but no matter which party gains power next year (or coalition if it suits a purpose) the average, tax paying, responsible, decent man in the street will still be left to squabble over the crumbs from the rich man's table whilst the feckless, degenerate, underbelly will still suckle from the teat of the nation because 'it's what I'm entitled to, innit'. Those who genuinely want to work will be stymied because there's only so many cups of coffee that can be served after all. All the while, foreign companies will continue to make huge profits from our nation whilst doing all they can to avoid paying their dues. New arrivals to these shores will continue to bear the brunt of the frustrations of the indigenous whilst the bankers celebrate their obscene profits with thirty grand bar bills.
As interesting as this discussion is, it's all rather redundant. Call me a cynic but no matter which party gains power next year (or coalition if it suits a purpose) the average, tax paying, responsible, decent man in the street will still be left to squabble over the crumbs from the rich man's table whilst the feckless, degenerate, underbelly will still suckle from the teat of the nation because 'it's what I'm entitled to, innit'. Those who genuinely want to work will be stymied because there's only so many cups of coffee that can be served after all. All the while, foreign companies will continue to make huge profits from our nation whilst doing all they can to avoid paying their dues. New arrivals to these shores will continue to bear the brunt of the frustrations of the indigenous whilst the bankers celebrate their obscene profits with thirty grand bar bills.
Comments
Farage has now re-positioned UKIP away from being a one issue party (exiting the EU) to being an alternative party of government. Not everyone in UKIP is happy about that but many newer members are.
A Tory election win damages that aim as Cameron will hold the in/out referendum and either result shoots the old UKIP fox. Either the UK leaves in which case UKIP battle is won or we stay in and the public have spoken.
But New UKIP are no longer a one issue party in the eyes of Farage. It is a real shot for power. A tory win in '15 stops that so the most desirable result for Farage is a Labour win whether with a majority or in a coalition with the Lib Dems or the nationalists.
If and when that happens the Tory party will tear itself apart over Europe and UKIP, and Farage, can become a real force on the right.
What happens on the left is yet to be seen. The Lib Dems seem very damaged and the Greens (who have already won a Westminster seat remember) don't have a high profile despite having more Euro MPs than the Lib Dems. They have the problem of being seen as just an Environmental party but their leader also wants to reposition them as a social democratic party similar to the other Green parties in continental Europe.
Labour are in one of their regular messes and have an uninspiring leader. How they must wish for a Blair or Smith or even David Miliband. If they can hold their 35% (which seems to be their strategy) then they can be part of the next government.
i'm not saying that everything about the EU is wonderful (nor do most Germans I know) but every time I come home and listen to people moaning, they are moaning about the same things they were when I moved away 20 years ago. The NHS. The overcrowded London transport. The price of a pint. The price of everything else (often compared with "Europe" as they find out when they travel).
So I'm genuinely curious. Maybe I will learn something to push me towards Cameron's camp.
There's been no threats, no hissy fits and probably no one has changed their opinion on Mr Reckless.
I'm sure Chizz and Prague have been accused of worst things than 'bullying' on a thread about a defecting politician - though I felt the John Redman remark was near the mark (though the wanky retort was probably fair comment).
There are two real difficulties for Farage. (1) He didn't have any MPs, until now and even on optimistic forecasts, won't get more than 8 or 9 at the election; (2) UKIP are a one man band. Carswell mitigates this a bit but his views are very different to Farage and they may clash.
So Farage's best outcome is a split within the Tory party, with the right-wing section merging with UKIP. There are a couple of problems with this, though. The Tories aren't very prone to splitting - they've not done so since the Corn Laws 170 years ago. The other big problem is Boris, who is Farage's biggest threat on the populist right. Finally, to sketch out an alternative government, you have to have policies. UKIP is united around the EU and immigration. But can they be united on other issues including taxation and spending? Can they continue to assert that party indiscipline is a virtue corresponding to freedom of expression in the face of what will be a relentless media onlsaught?
So far Farage has played a blinder and he's been lucky. The capture of Carswell and Reckless is hugely significant. UKIP are now definatevely established as a major player in British politics. But it gets a lot tougher from now on in.
It's going to be hugely interesting to see how it all develops.
I suppose driving on the right hand side of the road will be hidden in at number 36 - bloody foreigners.
I've seen people posting links to obscure blogs and memes on facebook which mention the new powers making a referendum impossible. Yet from any searching I've done I can't find anything official that mentions this. All I've found is that the Lisbon Treaty actually created the powers for member nations to have the right to withdraw from the union.
We don't cede any powers but UK (and everyone else) does lose the right to veto policies in a number of areas which will now be subject to qualified majority voting (QMV) under Lisbon. The "43" figure is banded around a lot in eurosceptic circles, burt it's not correct. There will be QMV instead of unanimity in 43 areas, but many of these were already QMV. The imortant ones where there will be a change are border controld, transport, tourism, culture, energy and the EU budget
Whether you consider that to be ceding sovreignty or pooling will depend on your views of the EU of course.
I'd appreciate it if someone from the anti-EU camp could have a look at the list of EU directives en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_directives and explain which ones have had a detrimental effect on the UK and why.
Many (perhaps all) have been a force for good and often brought about change that might otherwise have been impossible from the battleground of internecine politics that exists in the UK.
The EU employs some very impressive people who work hard to bring in legislation for the benefit of all. (It is best to ignore all that "Daily Mail bent banana ban" bollocks. (news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6481969.stm)
The BIG problem for most people, or at least the one that gets all the publicity, appears to be immigration. But is it really the free movement of labour within the EU that's the issue or is it immigration from outside the EU?
Or was that Yes, Prime Minister?
Excellent post. Isn't it also true that a directive isn't actually enforceable in law?. Which for example explains why all the gadgets in my house are subject to a mandatory two year guarantee whereas you poor saps only get one year? (or is that no longer true re the UK case?)
It takes less Labour votes to elect a Labour MP than the Tory equivalent because (a) turnout is lower in safe Labour seats than safe Tory ones (b) Safe labour seats have smaller populations than safe Tory ones (prosperous areas see population increases).
That may well be so BUT for goodness sake let's remember that, first and foremost, Charlton Life is concerned with grammatical accuracy, NOT politics (but sometimes there is a mention of football). It is FEWER votes not LESS votes...
I just imagine that he's a real Tory at heart. And if the Tories came running to him, having ditched Cameron, he'd grab the opportunity with both hands.
So, while he wants to secure as many seats as possible, I think he'll be crying crocodile tears if - when - Ed Miliband starts arranging the furniture in Downing Street.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/ukip-party-bigots-lets-look-evidence
We're all fucked.