Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Farage Stays as UKIP Leader Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ibzombie96)
    How the hell is it not an achievement for a party, in five years, to rise from almost complete obscurity to gaining second place in 120 seats?
    In FPTP it's 1st place or nothing. What don't you understand about that?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by balanced)
    It's obviously quite apparent you don't read their manifesto do you? what is it with people and shouting down ukip for no reason. Firstly, I am in favour of tuition fees, they are there for a reason. Secondly ukip would make it so tht there are no tuition fees for stem subjects (science technology economics and medicine) (I think!). This is done to encourage more british nationals becoming doctors, as a country we are not good at producing doctors, one reason being affording such a long course is a tough ask.
    The E stands for engineering and the M stands for mathematics. Not sure if economics falls under any of those, but medicine would fall under science.

    (Original post by leahnesbit)
    I have read the manifesto and I actually know my stuff - not 'think' it. Also, did you know the person they get the third highest economic support from is a man who says 'women shouldn't wear trousers as they aren't sexually appealing.' Really puts UKIP in a good light there. Furthermore, UKIP want to get rid of paid maternity leave and along with a member of the party (although they're dwindling in numbers now!) said 'no one in their right mind would employ a young, single, white female shows how much UKIP members value women's rights. UKIP are scum for more than just their education policies. Do your research before you start putting the UKIP sign as your profile picture.
    Sorry sweetie, but "research" does not consist of whatever meagre hearsay you've picked up on via uncredible sources. I've never heard the first statement you claim he's made; can you find a (reliable) source?

    I am a female so before you draw the misogynistic card, consider this: why should employers pay for an employee who has chosen to take an extensive period of time off work? They become a liability to the business, since they aren't providing the labour but are still being paid their wages, just because they have a supposed entitlement to have a kid whenever it pleases them—without consideration of the financial repercussions upon the firm they're employed by?

    Perhaps employees of a larger corporative firm are less of a hindrance, but especially for smaller firms, it can be damaging to the growth of the business. Why do you think 1 in 7 women are made redundant whilst on maternity leave? It's not because they've chosen to have a child, it's because they're not bloody in work. THAT'S why someone said no-one in their right mind would employ a young, able female (I'm not sure where you got "white" or "single" from, and I really don't see how either are relevant; source again is needed for that). He didn't say it to disrespect "women's values"—he said it because it's common sense. In the case of paternity leave being made equal to that of maternity leave, would it be wise for a firm to employ a young, able male who has not yet had kids but has a female partner, over say, a man in his 40s who already has? Of course not. It's tough, but so is competition in the labour market today. Employers have to take on workers who will benefit their business most in the long run.

    And OBVIOUSLY the statement is made in general terms, and one could infer that he is insinuating that firms should be prejudiced against young females; obviously not all young females are prospective mothers, and any sane employer would take that into account. Stop jumping to conclusions about what someone has said from one, unclarified statement. You won't get very far with that—unless of course, you decide to become a journalist for the Sun.

    The movement towards scrapping maternity leave is clever. It will discourage couples from having as many children (which we need to happen, in the midst of overpopulation), make the grounds more equal between both genders and also benefit the growth of businesses.

    Instead, women should quit their job and re-apply once they are ready to return to work. It is unfair that they are to be paid for labour which they are not providing. The process of having to re-apply for work and not being paid for the time off work can be viewed as unfair, but there is an opportunity cost to everything, and trade-offs have to be made. Deciding to have a child should not be exempt from this.

    (Original post by KevK92)
    Correct, maybe. To champion that as some kind of achievement is delusional.
    Oh, you certainly are wrong.

    As Farage stated before the GE, not only the seats they obtain matter, but the seats they come 2nd in. They are both an indicator of areas that UKIP should target in 2020, and where their popularity has risen most substantially. If our electoral system was a form of PR as opposed to FPTP, the achievement of seconds would actually have more show, but sadly, it isn't.

    (Original post by origen5)
    This comes as a shock...to absolutely no one. What a joke - the man couldn't even win his own seat!
    It was never "his". South Thanet is a Conservative stronghold.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KevK92)
    In FPTP it's 1st place or nothing. What don't you understand about that?
    I understand that - that's pretty obvious. Irrespective of the voting system, however, gaining millions more votes between one election and the next is a considerable achievement. I genuinely don't understand how you can deny that. You seem to have the idea that if you don't win, your position within the losers is irrelevant - going from fifth place to second place tells a significant story, and to ignore anyone that didn't come first place shows a complete unwillingness to look at the elections in a nuanced way.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Farage=Failure
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farah_786)
    Farage=Failure
    Valuable contribution to the discussion.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ibzombie96)
    No, he/she's entirely correct.
    Re checked, 120 second places.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiytt)
    The E stands for engineering and the M stands for mathematics. Not sure if economics falls under any of those, but medicine would fall under science.



    Sorry sweetie, but "research" does not consist of whatever meagre hearsay you've picked up on via uncredible sources. I've never heard the first statement you claim he's made; can you find a (reliable) source?

    I am a female so before you draw the misogynistic card, consider this: why should employers pay for an employee who has chosen to take an extensive period of time off work? They become a liability to the business, since they aren't providing the labour but are still being paid their wages, just because they have a supposed entitlement to have a kid whenever it pleases them—without consideration of the financial repercussions upon the firm they're employed by?

    Perhaps employees of a larger corporative firm are less of a hindrance, but especially for smaller firms, it can be damaging to the growth of the business. Why do you think 1 in 7 women are made redundant whilst on maternity leave? It's not because they've chosen to have a child, it's because they're not bloody in work. THAT'S why someone said no-one in their right mind would employ a young, able female (I'm not sure where you got "white" or "single" from, and I really don't see how either are relevant; source again is needed for that). He didn't say it to disrespect "women's values"—he said it because it's common sense. In the case of paternity leave being made equal to that of maternity leave, would it be wise for a firm to employ a young, able male who has not yet had kids but has a female partner, over say, a man in his 40s who already has? Of course not. It's tough, but so is competition in the labour market today. Employers have to take on workers who will benefit their business most in the long run.

    And OBVIOUSLY the statement is made in general terms, and one could infer that he is insinuating that firms should be prejudiced against young females; obviously not all young females are prospective mothers, and any sane employer would take that into account. Stop jumping to conclusions about what someone has said from one, unclarified statement. You won't get very far with that—unless of course, you decide to become a journalist for the Sun.

    The movement towards scrapping maternity leave is clever. It will discourage couples from having as many children (which we need to happen, in the midst of overpopulation), make the grounds more equal between both genders and also benefit the growth of businesses.

    Instead, women should quit their job and re-apply once they are ready to return to work. It is unfair that they are to be paid for labour which they are not providing. The process of having to re-apply for work and not being paid for the time off work can be viewed as unfair, but there is an opportunity cost to everything, and trade-offs have to be made. Deciding to have a child should not be exempt from this.



    Oh, you certainly are wrong.

    As Farage stated before the GE, not only the seats they obtain matter, but the seats they come 2nd in. They are both an indicator of areas that UKIP should target in 2020, and where their popularity has risen most substantially. If our electoral system was a form of PR as opposed to FPTP, the achievement of seconds would actually have more show, but sadly, it isn't.



    It was never "his". South Thanet is a Conservative stronghold.
    OH yeah e is for engineering and my god finally someone who speaks sense! A breath of fresh air
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    All praise to farage
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by balanced)
    Re checked, 120 second places.
    Yeah, that's right
    • Reporter Team
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It was less of a resignation Thanet seemed.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    He seemed to be "persuaded" to remain on the basis that the NEC said there was overwhelming evidence to suggest many supporters of the party wanted him to remain as leader. I believe he didn't want to see as being like a politician of the "establishment" as he phrases it in breaking promises all the time so handed in his resignation, but also engineered a way out of it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiytt)
    It was never "his". South Thanet is a Conservative stronghold.
    You're pulling at semantics there. Though the seat was never "his", surely the fact I was referring to South Thanet was inferred?

    I'll rephrase: the fact he couldn't win the seat he was standing for, even with all of the effort he clearly put into it, loses him all of the little credibility he ever had?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by origen5)
    You're pulling at semantics there. Though the seat was never "his", surely the fact I was referring to South Thanet was inferred?

    I'll rephrase: the fact he couldn't win the seat he was standing for, even with all of the effort he clearly put into it, loses him all of the little credibility he ever had?
    Credibility is determined through value judgements. Just because you may think that does not mean it is necessarily true. Personally, I believe credit is due for his contributions to the rise in UKIP's popularity. If you believe otherwise, go ahead.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.