Carswell and Farage

Bloggers for UKIP write:

Douglas Carswell has told the media to stop “mischief making” about his relationship with Nigel Farage.

Rumours were circulating yesterday (almost certainly from the anti-UKIP “research” team in CCHQ who have been running the dirty campaign against UKIP since 2013) that there is a rift between Douglas Carswell and Nigel Farage.

There’s little doubt that he is being wooed for a switch back to the Tories and I’ve speculated for a long time now that he is the one closest to doing it.  Mischief makers such as Nick Cohen won’t do it as he’s disparaging of Farage with no substance to back up his actionable statements, e.g. in Anorak.

It’s more like at the end of Three Days of the Condor, when the hitman explained how it would be – a car door would open and it would be a friendly, welcoming face, maybe even someone you know.  Carswell has mates in the Tory party, roots and he’s faced with old friends versus principles, i.e. his old party has none.

As for his stance, that immigration has been good for the UK, for the party to be elected, it has to take that stance, plus banning the BNP – safe enough to do as the members have moved into other groups in an unofficial way – and yet Farage has gone there before him.

Across the channel, Marine le Pen has that unfortunate legacy of National Front.  If they changed the name, softened it, it would be even more electable.  Her rhetoric on the Jews has been absent and so, in these dangerous times whipped up by Them [see Ukrainian East for a start], how strange for Jews to turn to Le Pen.

She’s trusted by more and more French not to waver, to put forward a moderate sort of patriotism, not Little France and this has been the issue over here – detractors are desperately trying to pin Little England on Farage but that is not the policy.  The policy is that immigrants are welcome in the way they are in any other country outside the EU – the good ones get in, the bad ones are excluded.  Point system.

What’s wrong with that policy?  Interesting that it’s not even UKIP’s core policy – independence from Brussels and direct democracy are – but supporters within and detractors outside all drag it back to immigration.

The most interesting thing to me is summed up in this comment at the Telegraph, on Ashcroft’s shameful piece, in response to troll commenters now flooding the online media:

UKIP has no intention of governing we just want a referendum, you know, democracy. Something the LibLabCon wouldn’t know if it jumped up and bit them on the nose.

That is … er … ahem … what had been originally intended.  That’s what many were supporting – out of the EU and direct democracy.  All this other guff came later, with the party’s success and it’s the other parties speaking of UKIP governing, not UKIP itself.  Yes, I know it’s in the literature now but I meant in a realistic way.

In other words, the legacy parties know the real polls and there is this fear of UKIP being a close second in many constituencies – it would not take much to see them over the line.

Conceivably, UKIP might have 4 MPs or 18, it seems that up in the air.  As for Carswell, who knows?  He’d stay if UKIP were doing all right, he’d go back IMHO if Dave genuinely promised the referendum, internally to members, in early to mid 2016.

As the latest poll had 51% saying Out, that’s probably not going to happen.  Ashcroft’s poll had UKIP dropping 5 points after the C4 programme, coupled with that councillor’s comments about blacks.  How do they dig these people out, the detractors?  Why would a councillor come out and say such a thing at this sensitive time?

Answer is that these are not smooth pollies, they’re people unhappy with what they see.

Finally, a comment emailed seconds ago, on the topic of R. North’s latest:

For my part, I’ll (probably) vote UKIP even though it’s (probably) quite hopeless, simply because not to protest is to consent.

Amen to that and I suspect many are thinking along the same lines. Seems to me many will go into that booth, see the names on that bit of paper, think: “To hell with it, let’s shake it up a bit.”

8 comments for “Carswell and Farage

  1. February 25, 2015 at 8:53 am

    I really hope to goodness your closing statement is correct, because if you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always have what you’ve always had.
    A wise man once told me that and it is so true.
    If you want something to change you have to have the courage to change it. There are ample people who are fed up, angry and annoyed at what is going on in the country, but they all need to back their words with actions at the election, and not have their nerve fail at the last hurdle, and not be swayed by biased MSM perversions of truth.

    • February 25, 2015 at 11:37 am

      Seems to me it’s going to come down to a majority for either Con or Lab of no more than about 20 seats. That then brings the minor parties back into it.

      • February 25, 2015 at 12:39 pm

        And that in it’s self brings further problems particularity in relation to the SNP influence which could be very key and if combined with Labour that is a union made in hell as far as I am concerned.

  2. The Jannie
    February 25, 2015 at 5:25 pm

    Kath wrote: “SNP influence which could be very key and if combined with Labour that is a union made in hell ” Indeed. I despair of our country if that horror happens. The SNP is a two trick pony; one is the paranoid Braveheart parochialism they espouse, the other is being a Labour clone. Labour is a no-trick pony and, I trust, heading for the knackers’yard.

  3. Brightside Bob
    February 25, 2015 at 8:37 pm

    Whichever party you vote for, the civil service always gets in…

    • Flyinthesky
      February 27, 2015 at 6:32 pm

      AKA, the actual government. We only change the front signage not the ruling entities.
      A party gets elected to govern, even if it had the best intentions once incumbent it is confronted by the brick wall of establishment, empires have been built, palms have been greased, all this has to be protected.
      Yes we hear what you say as the governing party but you can’t do that as it would in direct conflict of rule four, paragraph three, subsection B, clause twelve.
      The ongoing constraints are to work within the rules, what we need is statesmen or women to call out the rules and say this is how it’s going to be.
      In order to resume any form democratic state we would need to shave off the top layers of bureaucracy on every change of government, not going to happen, we have a system, I don’t know what you would call it but anyone who thinks it’s democracy is seriously delusional.

      Further, let’s actually recognise what democracy is: It’s a position held by the majority.
      Democracy to governments is a majority position held by the populace that the government agree with is democracy in action. A majority position they don’t agree with is dismissed as mob rule.
      Just think, if we had actual democracy there would be no unlimited immigration, we wouldn’t have invaded Iraq or Afghanistan, we wouldn’t have relinquished our governance to the eu, the list is near endless.
      I don’t know if UKIP are the answer but what I am sure of is if we don’t have the courage to change something nothing is going to change. The established parties are working to an agenda………..and it isn’t ours.

  4. Junican
    February 26, 2015 at 12:03 am

    I see voting for UKIP as disruptive of the cosy hegemony of the ‘big two’. My constituency is solid Labour,so my voting UKIP will make little or no difference. But it is a way to protest without wasting my vote on either Tory or Libdem. I think that I am right to think that way. I have no desire to give Tory or Libdem comfort.
    There is also a chance that, in more marginal constituencies, a combination of Green votes and UKIP votes could upset the apple-cart in chaotic ways. The beauty of chaos is its unpredictability. ‘Focus groups’ are not much use when they are not characteristic of the general population.
    What happens if neither UKIP nor the Greens gain seats? But wait ….. Libdem seems to have collapsed. What party might invade Libdem space?

    If there is one thing that I would focus on, if I was Farage, it would be the idea of ‘Regimentation’. The whole EU is based upon regimentation, from top (banking) to bottom (smoking bans), and so has become our own system of government. When national government tries to micro-manage, there can be no alternative but regimentation. There is no doubt in my mind that such regimentation is fascist. All must march in step.

  5. Viscount Rectum
    February 26, 2015 at 12:29 pm

    Cameron offering a referendum on Europe is a poisoned chalice, as George Carlin said “the Game is rigged” people you are owned, the media is owned, subversion is the order of the day,not Rotherham or Saville but grandma Maddonna arse upwards alongside a satanic model thats more interesting than Saville thats the real news. two million well educated Brits emigrate since Cameron, the same number of immigrants come in, many with the sole intention of retiring. Mind numbness? there is definately something in the water.

Comments are closed.