letsskiptotheleft wrote:Rather partisan piece from Michael Crick, not many ''impartial'' commentators even pretend these days do they?
http://blogs.channel4.com/michael-crick ... abour/4403" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Like Ernst's and AAW's view on this?
My first impression is that all but one of the posters BTL there is clinically insane. UKIP will benefit the working class? In what way?
H&M is a seat where the cash rich (and let us not pretend that their riches come with strings unattached by philanthropists, as opposed to very rich people with their own agendas) UKIP are hurling in people (and I assume most of their leafleters will be bought) to try to win the seat. They might succeed, and I'll be able to tell you more after this weekend when and a sizeable number of our local party go out there and start telling people what UKIP actually stand for - and it ain't the working man.
You don't have to be a genius to figure out that the meeja will play this one low key in the hope that it will be a shock, horror if Labour, whereas if they win it'll be dismissed as a safe Labour seat and therefore not part of the narrative.
I, and anyone else with half a brain (well, that's me told), can figure this out. UKIP voters invariably won't. I'll be out there on the stump and happy to do so. It's a while since I've had a chance to rip UKIP to tiny pieces on the doorstep, given that the meeja aren't in the least interested in actually seriously questioning what they stand for.