Will UKIP get more votes than the Lib Dems in 2015?

[doktorb]

In Canada...

This isn't Canada. British people are much more fixed in their political affiliations, at least as far as the big ticket election is concerned.

I just took a look at the UK election of 1983. About 9% of the UK swung from Labour to Lib/SD. UKIP needs a smaller swing than that to equal the Lib Dems at current polling. It's plausible, if not probable.

Exactly. Even in terms of Labour and the Liberals, if there was an election today, we'd see a 13.5% swing from Liberal to Labour and when you consider that the Tories lost in 1997 on a 10% swing... Any such result would be fatal to the LibDems, surely.

The problem when you talk about UKIP's figure in polling is that there's sort've an air of complacency in the media and definitely in both Coalition parties in that nobody quite believes that UKIP are really at 10(ish)%. For them, by-elections are acting like by-elections and polls are acting like polls.

True. Their support will go down under the scrutiny of an election campaign. They got 3% in 2010 and I could see them getting 5-8% next time.

But they would struggle to get a seat.

With the Greens, at least, we could see so much work in Brighton leading to Caroline Lucas' victory.

I can't think of a single constituency where UKIP has put in the work.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yeah are there any relative UKIP strongholds? I was under the impression their support is pretty evenly spread out.

[minionofmidas]

Yeah, I really cannot see UKIP getting into Parliament outside of a by-election in a safe Tory seat where the Tories cock up and where in normal years the LDs would have been there to challenge. Such a gain could I suppose be held in the GE if the MP turns out a competent Independent.

[DC Al Fine]

In Canada...

This isn't Canada. British people are much more fixed in their political affiliations, at least as far as the big ticket election is concerned.

I just took a look at the UK election of 1983. About 9% of the UK swung from Labour to Lib/SD. UKIP needs a smaller swing than that to equal the Lib Dems at current polling. It's plausible, if not probable.

Exactly. Even in terms of Labour and the Liberals, if there was an election today, we'd see a 13.5% swing from Liberal to Labour and when you consider that the Tories lost in 1997 on a 10% swing... Any such result would be fatal to the LibDems, surely.

The problem when you talk about UKIP's figure in polling is that there's sort've an air of complacency in the media and definitely in both Coalition parties in that nobody quite believes that UKIP are really at 10(ish)%. For them, by-elections are acting like by-elections and polls are acting like polls.

True. Their support will go down under the scrutiny of an election campaign. They got 3% in 2010 and I could see them getting 5-8% next time.

But they would struggle to get a seat.

With the Greens, at least, we could see so much work in Brighton leading to Caroline Lucas' victory.

I can't think of a single constituency where UKIP has put in the work.

Why haven't they put in the work? If the Greens can win or at least be competitive, why hasn't UKIP picked a few wealthy Tory seats and started putting the moves on them?

[doktorb]

In Canada...

This isn't Canada. British people are much more fixed in their political affiliations, at least as far as the big ticket election is concerned.

I just took a look at the UK election of 1983. About 9% of the UK swung from Labour to Lib/SD. UKIP needs a smaller swing than that to equal the Lib Dems at current polling. It's plausible, if not probable.

Exactly. Even in terms of Labour and the Liberals, if there was an election today, we'd see a 13.5% swing from Liberal to Labour and when you consider that the Tories lost in 1997 on a 10% swing... Any such result would be fatal to the LibDems, surely.

The problem when you talk about UKIP's figure in polling is that there's sort've an air of complacency in the media and definitely in both Coalition parties in that nobody quite believes that UKIP are really at 10(ish)%. For them, by-elections are acting like by-elections and polls are acting like polls.

True. Their support will go down under the scrutiny of an election campaign. They got 3% in 2010 and I could see them getting 5-8% next time.

But they would struggle to get a seat.

With the Greens, at least, we could see so much work in Brighton leading to Caroline Lucas' victory.

I can't think of a single constituency where UKIP has put in the work.

Why haven't they put in the work? If the Greens can win or at least be competitive, why hasn't UKIP picked a few wealthy Tory seats and started putting the moves on them?

Organisation, or more honestly, a lack of it.

UKIP had a leg-up in the European Parliament elections, with two advantages for them:

1) Nobody votes in those elections, so getting in using the d'Hondt voting system is easy/easier
2) Everybody gets attention when they're Nigel Farage shouting "Brussels is Bad!" over David Cameron trying to balance his arse on two stools.

Unfortunately UKIP gaining seats, money and publicity by winning Euro seats was done at the expense of focusing on FPTP constituencies at Westminster. The result - terrible results spread out too thinly. There's an unholy amount of heat with little light, with Farage the only known name in the party. Whilst most politicos can identify "Brighton" when asked to name the Green Party's place of strength, there's nothing to give as an answer to the same question with UKIP. They've spent years becoming known for doing really well at European Elections, and as a result have no councillors, no MPs, and no target seats.

[minionofmidas]

In theory, their EU Parliamentarians ought to be reasonably known in their respective constituencies.

In theory.

[doktorb]

In theory, their EU Parliamentarians ought to be reasonably known in their respective constituencies.

In theory.

Well yes. But in theory eating nachos with sour cream dip every night is a balanced diet when accompanied by diet Coke.

[countydurhamboy]

Not happening, UKIP are a protest party. I would be surprised if they got half of the Lib Dem's vote.

Unless, however they were able to get a platform in next elections debates. Then maybe they could do it. I think they would probably need their own gang of four as well.

[DC Al Fine]

I can name exactly 3 MEP's

Hannan (Tory)
Farage (UKIP)
Taylor (Green)

[doktorb]

Not happening, UKIP are a protest party. I would be surprised if they got half of the Lib Dem's vote.

Unless, however they were able to get a platform in next elections debates. Then maybe they could do it. I think they would probably need their own gang of four as well.

Remember that Caroline Lucas won Brighton Pavilion, whilst nationwide the LibDems got 25 x more votes than the Greens....Our voting system doesn't take any notice of proportion.

(LibDems - 6.83 million votes, 57 seats,  UKIP 919k votes, 0 seats, Green 265k votes, 1 seat)

[Leftbehind]

285k

And i've got that scouse UKIP bloke who's name escapes me.

He's their only other (relatively) high-profile face. Token Scouser to sell their bourgeois politics.

[doktorb]

I'm working off Wikipedia, admittedly. Greens on 265,243.

[Insula Dei]

I could probably name all my MEP's if I were to try. Does that count?

[Leftbehind]

I'm working off Wikipedia, admittedly. Greens on 265,243.

Yeah that's the E&W Greens. The UK figure, including their Scot & NI counterparts is 285k.

[doktorb]

Aaah, they are a separate party so there is no "UK figure"

[Leftbehind]

I know, but it's a fairer comparison to UKIP's total. Although the BBC did state it as one, which is where the initial confusion lied.

[Goodwin]

UKIP is just a protest party, although I do quite like Nigel Farage. I can see them getting 5% in 2015 but no seats.     

[osideguy92]

Depending on what happens with the Government's same-sex marriage legalization plans, traditional Tory voters may very well be inclined to join the ranks of the rabidly anti-gay UKIP, especially if the bill is approved by the House of Commons, which appears to be a near certainty, despite an internal Tory rebellion on the issue.

This will help Labour and Ed Miliband ride to an easy victory with a comfortable majority in the new House of Commons. UKIP will undoubtedly enter Parliament and will, in all likelihood, either surpass or come very close to surpassing the vote received by the LibDems.

[afleitch]

Depending on what happens with the Government's same-sex marriage legalization plans, traditional Tory voters may very well be inclined to join the ranks of the rabidly anti-gay UKIP, especially if the bill is approved by the House of Commons, which appears to be a near certainty, despite an internal Tory rebellion on the issue.

This will help Labour and Ed Miliband ride to an easy victory with a comfortable majority in the new House of Commons. UKIP will undoubtedly enter Parliament and will, in all likelihood, either surpass or come very close to surpassing the vote received by the LibDems.

No. The same sex marriage legislation is a free vote. The thing is, the same sort of constituent wrote to the same sort of MP who hummed and hawed over the civil partnership legislation in 2005. It's the same argument now re-hashed. Difference was the Tory party was whipped to vote in favour of the legislation by Michael Howard. There was no division then in the party and no impact at the General Election the following year.

As for the Lib Dems, they exist as a collection of MP's rather than as a 'party' at the GE and a significant number of them will hang on in 2015 even if the national result for them is poor.

The vote will pass with a majority of something like 150-200 in the Commons with Tory backbenchers, rural troglodytes and the Gavin Shukers of the Labour Party voting against. And no one will care or remember come the GE.

[osideguy92]

Depending on what happens with the Government's same-sex marriage legalization plans, traditional Tory voters may very well be inclined to join the ranks of the rabidly anti-gay UKIP, especially if the bill is approved by the House of Commons, which appears to be a near certainty, despite an internal Tory rebellion on the issue.

This will help Labour and Ed Miliband ride to an easy victory with a comfortable majority in the new House of Commons. UKIP will undoubtedly enter Parliament and will, in all likelihood, either surpass or come very close to surpassing the vote received by the LibDems.

No. The same sex marriage legislation is a free vote. The thing is, the same sort of constituent wrote to the same sort of MP who hummed and hawed over the civil partnership legislation in 2005. It's the same argument now re-hashed. Difference was the Tory party was whipped to vote in favour of the legislation by Michael Howard. There was no division then in the party and no impact at the General Election the following year.

As for the Lib Dems, they exist as a collection of MP's rather than as a 'party' at the GE and a significant number of them will hang on in 2015 even if the national result for them is poor.

The vote will pass with a majority of something like 150-200 in the Commons with Tory backbenchers, rural troglodytes and the Gavin Shukers of the Labour Party voting against. And no one will care or remember come the GE.

The vote is a free vote ONLY for the Tories. Labour and LibDems are both enforcing party positions in favor of it. You really don't think it will hurt the Tories in local elections this year and in 2014 and that the UKIP won't try to promote its gains based on the notion that the Tory base is upset w/ the approval of SSM?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Last I heard was that it was to be a free vote for Labour, but I've not been following too closely. It's not a big deal anyway.

[afleitch]

Last I heard was that it was to be a free vote for Labour, but I've not been following too closely. It's not a big deal anyway.

Miliband climbed down on that one. There were rumours that Timms and Shuker threatened to resign from the shadow cabinet. IIRC It makes it the first pro-equality legislation that hasn't been whipped since '97. The only announced 'no' names I can find from Labour are Dobbin, Godsiff, Donohue, Pound, Paul Murphy, Benton and Glinton.