Forum Topic

Farage/UKIP/Reform

UKIP got almost 4 million votes and 13% of the vote share in 2015 (though it only got them one seat then). Nine years later - after the failure of Brexit - Reform take 4 million votes and 14% of the vote share, which gives them 5 seats this time. Reform are UKIP rebranded and they've brought the same voters with them, in the same numbers. Farage hasn't managed to attract any more hearts and minds to his cause than he had in 2015.Farage doesn't offer solutions - he exploits people's frustration and discontent. But he was able to sidestep any responsibility for the crashing and inevitable failure of Brexit. He can blame the Tories for it going wrong. Now he's an MP and party leader - he has to be accountable. And I don't think he is capable of delivering on what he promises. He'll rail against FPTP and the press and whoever else he can try and pin the blame for his own inadequacies and maybe that will work for some people but I think this time in the sunlight will show him for what he is.He exploits people's frustrations in a similar manner to a certain A.Hitler in Germany during the 1920s.

Lucille Grant ● 577d31 Comments

https://www.desmog.com/2024/07/12/heres-what-nigel-farages-reform-party-mps-have-to-say-about-climate-change/

Philippa Bond ● 564d

At a guess it's more to do with where they focused their campaigning efforts. The majority of time/money/effort was focused on seats to overturn at the expense of a proportion of majority in safe seats.Since each constituency is a FPTP vote the size of the majority isn't particularly relevant until the next election.Starmer losing his seat despite a Labour landslide would have been a talking point!

John Kettlekey ● 575d

Difficult to compare Boris as Reform or whatever they were called stood down.And Labour went for an anti referendum ticket which we now know the architect of that policy didn't think they would win. Obviously nothing to do with his policy but he subsequently changed it when he ran.All a bit odd.

Ed Robinson ● 576d

Starmer appears to have lost quite a few thousand votes in his own seat in this election, compared with the 2019 election, to Andrew Feinstein, a leftwinger, and also to a Liberal Democrat.Pretty unusual result for an incoming Prime Minister, I'd guess.

David Ainsworth ● 576d

> I understand that St Jeremy attracted more in the last election ! In absolute numbers terms yes, but as a percentage of the people that voted he (Keir Starmer) got a greater percentage because the turnout was lower in 2024.2019: Corbyn: 10,269,051 (32.1%)2024: Starmer: 9,731,363 (33.8%)Boris got 13,966,454 (43.6%) in 2019, Sunak only 6,827,112 (23.7%).

John Kettlekey ● 576d

I think a multi millionaire will have been motivated by far more than the loss of his EU land subsidies.  He has always been a committed European, like so many others in this country.  Thanks to Brexit having disappointed its own supporters never mind those that voted Remain, I believe the pro-rejoin % is now around 70%.  We won't be rejoining any time soon but I think we will see a step change in our relationships with our neighbours over the coming months and years, if only at the trade and security levels.  We may have to abide by some rules set by others to achieve that, so brace yourself for rightwing frothing at betrayal, loss of sovereignty etc etc.  I hope pragmatism wins out though.

Jonathan Callaway ● 576d

You have to hand it to the LibDems - they played the system perfectly.  A rigid focus on the winnable seats, probably some quiet local deals with other parties etc and this is the result, a seat share that in % terms more or less matches their vote share.  Reform did none of that.

Jonathan Callaway ● 576d

Sue Hammond ● 576d

@NickHeseltine having a dig at Farage. Again. The bitter old multi-millionaire (worth in excess of £200m) who trousered £93,000 every year from EU land subsidies, but lost them when we Brexited, and hasn't stopped bleating ever since.

Sue Hammond ● 576d

Mr RoseWell put.'Unfortunately it is impossible to have a rational conversation about this issue nowadays. People seems more concerned to avoid an accusation of xenophobia or racism than to speak honestly'.This is how the modish 'new left' close down discussion on political issues that they disagree with.I am afraid it does not work against me and I am always pleased to see that is the case with you as well."Stand up for free speech and open, fearless political dialogue".

John Hawkes ● 576d

Ms Grant'He exploits people's frustrations in a similar manner to a certain A.Hitler in Germany during the 1920s'.All politicians focus on (exploit ?) people's frustrations and a good thing too for if politicians do not address them then those less savoury will do so as you point out.Do you believe that there is not a legitimate concern over immigration in this country that is not especially driven by racism but by its consequences; the effect on housing costs for example ?Farage pointing out such an issue does not make him a fascist, a term far too easily thrown about. And as for Farage not attracting any more hearts and minds, is this not also the case for Starmer's Labour ?I understand that St Jeremy attracted more in the last election !

John Hawkes ● 576d

I think Michael Heseltine sums up Reform UK Ltd (owner Nigel Farage) pretty accurately: “Reform has landed us with a Labour government with the use of a handful of phrases which even they admit do not constitute a serious programme, but which are designed to whet the gut instincts of racism, populism and nationalism.” Nick

Nicholas Evans ● 576d

Mr Ixer'I don't think referring to rather dubious relations is necessarily 'slinging mud' it's just pointing out some unsavoury facts about some of the company of his party. In the 1930s would you have considered saying Hitller's antisemitic tendencies were 'slinging' mud'.Today of course it is the Islamists that are anti-semitic.Glad my pointing this out is not considered 'mud slinging' !

John Hawkes ● 576d

Labour 2024 9,704,655 votes  (Starmer)  33.7%  Labour winLabour 2019 10,269,051 votes  (Corbyn)  32.1%  Labour lossLabour 2017 12,877,918 votes  (Corbyn)  40%  Labour loss

David Ainsworth ● 576d

The LibDems have been banging on about PR for decades but have been widely ignored.  For example in 1979 they won only 13 seats on 18.3% of the popular vote (4.3 million votes).  It's not a new problem.The referendum the LibDems were given during the coalition years was poorly explained, poorly constructed and failed badly but no doubt Farage, given the stronger position he now finds himself in, will work with them and the Greens to push through changes to our voting system so we see votes more accurately translated into seats.  Don't expect it to happen very soon though.  And expect voting patterns to change substantially when people no longer need to vote tactically.  This was an anti-Tory election and people chose whatever party was seen most likely to help remove a Tory MP.

Jonathan Callaway ● 576d

Sue Hammond ● 576d

Sue Hammond ● 576d

Hi Lucille. Those statistics just highlight the anomalies created by our archaic and hugely  unfair FPTP voting system and confirm why it must change to PR. Of course Labour and Conservative will always oppose this so the smaller parties must coalesce and put combined pressure on the Government to get it done. This is Farage's pet project and if anyone can effect change, we all know that he can!💪P.S. Your Hitler comment is ridiculous.🙄

Sue Hammond ● 576d

Andy my mother was a young child in Germany at the time. I think she would disagree with you.

Lucille Grant ● 576d

Be it food, goods, investment or even people - the idea that you should import and not use local is very odd.Now if we valued what we were importing that would be different. There just seems to be an endless cycle to get even cheaper and no value attached to even people that have just settled here.The main parties didn't give an (excuse the language) about the EU citizens already settled here. Instead they were more concerned that they may have to queue while entering EU countries.Peoples jobs, mortgages - lives instantly uncertain due to the selfish main party leaders.Now that wasn't Farage but Corbyn & May.Of course there were other actors but these were at the top.When it came to it Party and themselves came before people & country.We could have literally grown our own nurses, doctors etc in the time the Conservatives were in power and it was much the same for Labour.Should we vote for Farage? No!But what do they seriously expect when the main parties are so complacent with ordinary people's lives and crap policies?

Ed Robinson ● 576d

I don't think referring to rather dubious relations is necessarily 'slinging mud' it's just pointing out some unsavoury facts about some of the company of his party. In the 1930s would you have considered saying Hitller's antisemitic tendencies were 'slinging' mud.On the other topic; yes, the Tories two child policy on benefits was a despicable attack on children's wellbeing and im disappointed in Labour not doing that immediately but thry haven't said they won't d it when they've fixed the economy wrecked by the Tories. Starmmer has made a commitment to address child poverty.

Michael Ixer ● 576d

Well said Stephen - unfortunately we are currently stuck with ideological views which refuse to acknowledge reality.

Robert Wheeler ● 576d

The population of the UK has increased by almost 10 million since the start of the millennium, most of which is due to net immigration. An increase in the population inevitably puts pressure on the infrastructure, notably  housing, the NHS and schools. Does pointing this out make Nigel Farage a Nazi? The fact that many immigrants do  important jobs in society does not mean  that it is wrong to limit immigration. Even Nigel Farage concedes that some immigration is necessary, but an economic model of continually importing people from abroad to perform tasks  that British citizens are unwilling or unable to do is simply unsustainable.Unfortunately it is impossible to have a rational conversation about this issue nowadays. People seems more concerned to avoid an accusation of xenophobia or racism than to speak honestly.

Steven Rose ● 576d

The lack of good policies by the main parties has enabled Farage to get where he is today.Slinging mud at him hasn't worked so far - but perhaps does  distract from having such poor policies.

Ed Robinson ● 577d

I know full well what you were referring too but it was a total, unnecessary distraction from the importance of Farage associating himself with a misogynist accused of rape.

Michael Ixer ● 577d

It was a cryptic reference to the Conservative & Labour two child benefit cap  policy. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67999028#:~:text=The%20two%2Dchild%20cap%2C%20which,with%20the%20cost%20of%20living.

Ed Robinson ● 577d

Better ask Mr Farage and Co in this context, I'm not aware he's stated that. Perhaps Sue knows?

Michael Ixer ● 577d

"Do they consider women should be kept in the kitchen, raising children?"By children do you mean one or two but no more??

Ed Robinson ● 577d

I agree, Lucille.The parallels with Germany in the early 1930s are often mentioned and it makes me incredibly uneasy....

Ivonne Holliday ● 577d

A lot of good stuff in there Lucille but the Hitler comparison is a bit ridiculous.

Andy Pike ● 577d

Mr Farage does seem to keep company with some less that desirable people - I'm not sure making comparison with Andrew Tate is a really good idea:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/03/farage-says-he-is-part-of-similar-phenomenon-to-andrew-tate-among-young-menI note in one of Sue's posts one of the Reform contract promises is '* “Frontload” benefits system to allow mothers to stay at home'. In the 21st Century shouldn't this be '* “Frontload” benefits system to allow a parent to stay at home'; perhaps this shows an underlying sexism in the Reform party's culture? Do they consider women should be kept in the kitchen, raising children?

Michael Ixer ● 577d