**** I'm so scared Tories will win now.

what about their intrinsic racism/sexism/total disreguard for the benefits of immigration/colonial arcaic attitude

All polls put Labour on winning a near majority so what are you crying about?

then vote greens or even just spoil your ballet- voting ukip bc you dont like the others is like ****ting in your own bed

Well I read their manifesto multiple times and did not see it personally.

They want controlled immigration based on a point system that accepts people for their credentials and not race. This means if we need doctors we will accept more doctors, if we need lawyers we will accept more lawyers.

There was no policy I saw about deporting migrants back to their host countries so yeh I do not see that one.

The NHS will apparently be free to the point of access

They want English votes for English laws, seems fair to me if the Scots and Welsh have such rights

They want to abolish the bedroom tax, I like that

They want to abolish inheritance tax, even better

They want to introduce grammar schools, yup I would of loved the chance to go to one of these but Labour abolished them leaving me with a school in the bottom 30%

They want safeguard our military budget, yup I like that

They want to increase the tax threshold, even better

They want UK nationals to get first come first serve on the housing list, as a UK national I want that

They want to abolish HS2, I support that

They want to re-calculate the Barnett formula, seems fair

They want permits on foreign fisherman using our fisheries, seems fair

They want new migrants to know and speak English, seems fair and boosts integration

They want set up a british bill of human rights, sounds good

I could go on all day

What polls are you referring to here? The one's I've read are saying that they're tied.

I vote UKIP because after reading their policies I like what I see.

Plus I must add.

My friends who are all migrant born know I will support UKIP and they think of me no differently and most agree with me. I have members of all communities either support UKIP too or support my reasons.

But when I meet privileged white English people, well now they have an argument with me. God I do hate you people, because you have never lived in an area like mine and then judge UKIP voters like me yet I have immigrants who do not bat an eyelid about me voting UKIP, it really is a joke. I feel safer declaring my support for UKIP in an all immigrant neighbourhood, than white English privileged neighbourhood either made up of Champagne Labour socialists or Tory elitist politicians

1. Nigel Farage on women: “Godfrey’s [Bloom, former UKIP MEP] comment that ‘no employer with a brain in the right place would employ a young, single, free woman‘ has been proved so right. With this lunacy, that if you have children you get three months paid leave off work, or six months paid leave off work – he absolutely got it spot on.”

2. UKIP want to scrap paid maternity leave (in line with Lesotho, Swaziland, the US and Papua New Guinea).

3. UKIP want to make it legal for employers to discriminate on the basis of gender (as well as race).

4. This would also entail the scrapping of employment regulations against sexual harassment and safeguards for part time and irregular workers, the majority of which are women.

5. Nigel Farage informed City high flyers that they are “worth less” to employers if they become mothers or that motherhood is a lifestyle choice.

6. Patrick O’Flynn, MEP Candidate, also say that pregnant women in the workplace are a “disaster”.

7. UKIP’s MEPs have consistently failed to represent the interests of women. They have voted against or simply not turned up to key votes in the European Parliament on ensuring equal pay, combating violence against women and ruling out FGM, to name but a few.

8. Since the 2009 European Election UKIP’s only two female MEPs, Nikki Sinclaire and Marta Andreasen, have both left the party. Andreason said Farage “doesn’t try to involve intelligent professional women in positions of responsibility in the party. He thinks women should be in the kitchen or in the bedroom”. Nikki Sinclaire won an Employment Tribunal claim for sex discrimination against the party.

9. Roger Helmer, UKIP MEP and candidate in the Newark by-election, said, “Rape is always wrong, but not always equally culpable.”

10. Godfrey Bloom, a former UKIP MEP, was not reprimanded for hugely sexist statements such as, “[feminists are] shrill, bored, middle-class women of a certain physical genre” and, “Women, in spite of years of training in art and music – and significant leisure time in the 18th and 19th Centuries – have produced few great works”

11. Stuart Wheeler, the party’s treasurer, said that women were “absolutely nowhere” when they compete with men in sports where they are not physically disadvantaged. He said, “I would just like to challenge the idea that it is necessary to have a lot of women or a particular number on a board… Business is very, very competitive and you should take the performance of women in another competitive area, which is sport where [men] have no strength advantage.”

12. In November 2013, UKIP MEP, Stuart Agnew said (in a debate on women in the boardroom) that “Women don’t have the ambition to get to the top, something gets in the way. It’s called a baby… Those females who really want to get to the top do so”.

13. David Chalice , a senior party official in Exeter, has voiced his belief that women should stay at home and that “cash-strapped Moslems” should have multiple wives.

14. Demetri Marchessini, the party’s sixth-largest individual donor in 2013, said there was no such thing as marital rape, arguing: “If you make love on Friday and make love Sunday, you can’t say Saturday is rape.” He also claimed women should be banned from wearing trousers because they “discourage love-making”.

thats just women alone- obviously i dont need to even go into all the racist blunders and policies they've let slip..

the only thing that makes our country is diversity

So you give me a list of people, of who most have been suspended and expect me to judge a party of almost 50,000 members?

Less than 30 of the 50,000 have been found guilty of such claims and the necessary action has been taken. I rely on policies tbh.

Plus what about Labour, Tories and Lib dems. Each of these parties alone have had more members go to prison than UKIP. Lib/Lab/Con composes of pedophiles, racists, sexists, rapists, fraudsters, abusers and so on over their years. Why should I vote for them with their past records?

im from peckham so hardly a super privileged neighbourhood

Lies or not, I know one thing:

1. Labour/Tories/Lib dems have all lied so much in the last 40 years that it is hard to believe a word that comes out of their mouths
2. The candidates from these 3 have never lived in my area, we are too poor and working class for them
3. They have never come out to meet us
4. Labour left a disastrous mess after their term and the Tories have changed absolutely nothing
5. Labour have held this seat for 19 years and every year the area has got worse and worse in terms of crime, education, health, housing, environment, jobs, hygiene, integration and so on. Give me one reason why I should vote them?

Luckily people round here have had enough of Labour because you continue to prop them up but why has people in my area all through Labour never seen the area get better, please answer this.

ukips much smaller - its on a smaller scale yet the amount of racist/sexist/backward attitutes from its members is far more condensed

1. So has UKIP. They've backpedalled and contradicted themselves so many times that I've lost count.
2. And how is UKIP the party of the working class? Farage is as privileged as they come.
3. How does that matter? Most of time it's just for publicity anyway.
4. The global recession, which wasn't solely caused by one political party in Britain, was the primary reason for the problems faced after Labour's last stint in government. As a matter of fact that Conservatives don't have a leg to stand on in this argument; they were advocating less regulation.
5. I don't know your area, but why would UKIP do any better? I can definitely see health, the environment, jobs, and integration getting much worse under UKIP.

The 'case' I was arguing was simple - that you were at fault to assume that the previous poster's remark about Labour's economic 'recklessness' was made with reference to the budget deficit. Your quoting the ONS's deficit-to-GDP figures shows this one-track attitude and a complete ignorance of the possibility that the recklessness to which the commenter referred was regulatory in nature.

Put simply, at no point was I trying to argue a counter-factual, nor did I mention the Tories' standpoint on regulation. Your assumption that I was arguing pro-Tory by arguing anti-Labour showed a very binary attitude to the debate.

In response to your final comment, the onus really is not on me to inform the casual observer as to how this recession was caused.

Wow you clearly no nothing of life. How many papers oppose UKIP- EVERY SINGLE ONE (except the express).

1. Guardian hates UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Labour
2. Mirror hates UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Labour
3.Daily Mail hates UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Tories
4. The sun hates UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Tories
5. The telegraph hates UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Tories
6. The independent hates UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Labour or Tories
7. Metro hates UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Labour
8. BBC, Channel 4, Sky news, ITV hate UKIP, always condemn the party, never see negatives on Labour



WHAT DO YOU EXPECT. YOU SURE HAVE MORE INTELLIGENCE AND CAN NOT BE THAT STUPID SURELY?

THEY SPEND EVERY WORKING HOUR OF THEIR LIVES BEATING DOWN UKIP

IF THEY SPENT THE SAME TIME BEATING YOUR BELOVED LABOUR AND TORIES THEN WATCH THE STORIES UNFOLD.

Just stop to think a minute about what austerity actually is and why it's needed - Labour ran up a huge bill and kept borrowing to fund spending. After they got kicked out someone needed to get things under control and try and get the country back on track for the longer term. Do you actually think Tory politicians (or any politician, for that matter) like to be in this position? Don't you think that everyone would rather have a healthy bank balance to be able to afford to spend on the things which are beneficial to society? I'm not saying the Conservatives are fantastic, but they at least understand the situation and are taking steps to tackle the problem. Labour would keep on spending and let someone else pick up the tab. "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money".

"Ed Miliband is not as bad as he may seem" is hardly a ringing endorsement from a Labour supporter.

1. So has UKIP. They've backpedalled and contradicted themselves so many times that I've lost count.
2. And how is UKIP the party of the working class? Farage is as privileged as they come.
3. How does that matter? Most of time it's just for publicity anyway.
4. The global recession, which wasn't solely caused by one political party in Britain, was the primary reason for the problems faced after Labour's last stint in government. As a matter of fact that Conservatives don't have a leg to stand on in this argument; they were advocating less regulation.
5. I don't know your area, but why would UKIP do any better? I can definitely see health, the environment, jobs, and integration getting much worse under UKIP.

This is precisely the thing with UKIP supporters. They see UKIP as the fearless fighter for the common man who's been viciously down-trodden by the 'establishment'. You perhaps ignore the possibility that these papers are against UKIP for a reason of substance rather than some Kafkaesque conspiracy to keep the 'lower orders' in check. UKIP's unpopularity with the press is no reason to vote for them.

Considering the poster was extremely vague in what they defined as Labour's economic recklessness, your assertion that I was completely ignorant to the possibility that it could be down to their lack of regulation of the financial sector isn't a valid standpoint. Their attempts to make claims without any substance to back it up left them open to critique for any potential issue their viewpoint might have referred to.

In actual fact, looking back at their comment, it was you who first made any reference to the possibility that a lack of regulation by Labour was a possible line of thought. If anything it seems like this is a case of you suggesting another point to try and give credence to their criticism of Labour's governance - a point which was promptly shot down. As a result, you've now taken to writing comments in which you try and detach yourself from any participation in the debate in order to distance yourself from your incorrect assertion.

And considering this is a thread in which people are arguing for or against Labour/Tory governance, I think a binary attitude is more deserving of a place than your whataboutery. If this were a thread discussing a lack of regulation in the financial sector in general then a non-binary attitude would of course be preferable. However, this is a thread discussing the possibility of a particular party entering into government. A "binary" debate of the two most likely parties is pretty much expected.

Or because they have political bias rooted in them over decades? You should see some of the trapp I read from the Guardian and Daily mail especially. They are really scraping the bottom of the barrel.