In May this year, when UKIP had its ‘big’ electoral ‘breakthrough’ opinion polls asking people their views on the UK’s membership of the EU had 47% in favour of leaving, and 30% in favour of staying.
Despite Eurosceptic UKIP’s ‘surge’ the signs have been clear that the number in favour of staying in the EU would rise. This is because of the concerted campaign that has been conducted by the Europhiles and their corporate sponsors to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about the impact on the UK of leaving the union.
This blog has not held back in accusing UKIP of failing the Eurosceptic side because it has utterly failed to use its prominent platform to even attempt to counter the flood of misinformation, lies, manipulated statistics being pumped out. This isn’t a case of UKIP struggling to get attention for its rebuttals of the Europhile FUD, it has simply not devoted a single moment to rebutting the Europhile nonsense. In return this blogger has been attacked by some UKIP supporters who refuse to accept any criticism of their party. Time and again this blog has said that if there is no rebuttal by the prominent Eurosceptics to counter the lies, using evidence and facts, voters will start to believe the Europhile claims are true and increasingly – however reluctantly – opt to stick with the status quo.
This blog’s UKIP detractors and naysayers have rubbished this argument. Voters, they claim, do not want lots of detail in rebuttal of the Europhile lies. UKIP’s simple ‘we want out’ message, they assert, is far more effective than explaining the truth. No one is that interested, they say, in an argument that extolls the opportunities and benefits of the UK freeing itself of EU control. This blog explained why these arguments are wrong, but to no avail.
So it is that a YouGov poll question, ‘If there was a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union, how would you vote?’ returned the following results:
Taken from PoliticalBetting.com
Richard has his own analysis of the findings over at EU Referendum. He points out the trend that is emerging, this being the lowest margin of the year so far, dropping 17 points from the peak in 9-10 May when the “outers” stood at 47 percent and the “inners” took 30 percents. By August, the margin had dropped to 12 points and last month it stood at a mere five points. While Richard points out the linkage between anti-EU sentiment and UKIP support is no longer clear-cut, for me the linkage between this decline in support for the ‘out’ campaign and UKIP’s silence in the face of Europhile FUD is clear.
It does not give me any pleasure. There is no smug self satisfaction about this. But it was so bloody obvious. What it does is make me want to scream in frustration at those cult-like morons who blindly follow Farage regardless of any evident failings, both political and strategic, and adopt a tribal defence of UKIP even though it is clearly letting down the Eurosceptic side – even reducing the argument to things such as misdirections where they demand I compare how many Google returns there are for UKIP as opposed to The Harrogate Agenda, as if that refutes UKIP’s failure.
With only a small handful of blogs reaching out to their audience of readers in low five figures, getting the message across to voters is an almost impossible ask. With UKIP having run away from the fight, because Nigel Farage is frightened of the debate that needs to be had and won, it is clear that no political party is going to devote the kind of focus to this issue that a campaign requires. A non-party political campaign is not now preferable, it has become essential.
For all its talk of a ‘surge’ in support, its boasts of thousands of new members added to its roll, and its predictions of a big result in the European elections in 2014, UKIP has done the sum total of nothing to push the positive reasons for leaving the EU and nothing to counter the flood of spin and deception that characterises the Europhile media blitz. The Europhiles are in the ring throwing punches while UKIP is searching for the fastest car away from the venue.
My message tonight to Nigel Farage and his Praetorian Guard in UKIP, is short and sweet. Thanks for nothing.
Autonomous Mind 
No doubt that UKIP or more specifically Nigel has not countered the lies and spin of the out camp and the FUD are winning . Maybe it is time to stop calling for a referendum (which the IN side look certain to win ) . However as Mary E Synon informed us recently, which ever way the vote went we would not be leaving the EU Empire .. The whip hand belongs to Brussels and the fellow travellers . Still a mountain to climb .
Usual brilliance, AM.
Thanks for nothing, indeed. The boast of “highest ever membership” so touted here and elsewhere by Faragista muppets, now looks lamentable, given the number of people leaving within their first year.
Only one question for the entire UKIP membership:The Lisbon Treaty was – inarguably – the most impacting and affecting treaty since the treaty of Rome.
Where was UKIP opposition to it?
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/top-judge-surprised-that-controversial-eu-laws-that-we-blocked-are-now-legally-binding-8934773.html?origin=internalSearch
Whilst I love your normal blogs, I get sad at your constant griping at UKIP. Is UKIP peerfect? NO! If Nigel Farage perfect? NO! What it is doing is it’s best. Does it and it’s members get everything right every time? NO! Constantly attacking it for not doing what YOU think it should do, is not helping the cause. Maybe some attacks on the party YOU love, the ‘In EUrope not ruled by EUrope’ traitors would help the cause? I am a long term member of UKIP and I wish I was in a position to do more for the cause.
Don’t be an idiot.
If by doing nothing UKIP is doing its best, then God help us. Presumably you are quite happy with UKIP’s refusal to get into the debate on the very topic it was set up for. What cause exactly am I not helping by railing against UKIP’s lamentable, pathetic excuse for Euroscepticism? Where are UKIP on the ’cause’?
They are happy to talk about HS2 and immigration. What about an exit plan and hammering home the benefits to Britain of getting out of the EU, instead of acting like a purple and yellow imitation of the BNP? Perhaps that’s another reason people are turning away from Euroscepticism, Farage’s apeing of Nick Griffin probably doesn’t sit comfortably with potential voters who in addition to rejecting UKIP now reject the whole need to get out of the EU. A lot of the support UKIP is gaining correlates with the fall in support of the BNP. Go figure.
Your suggestion that because I am angry at Farage and UKIP’s stupidity I must be a Tory is utterly ridiculous. All you’ve done is reinforce the tribal defence of the indefensible that too many UKIPpers exhibit rather than apply pressure to the party to get in the bloody fight.
If UKIP don’t counter the drip, drip, drip they they are doomed.
As somebody still retaining a vestigial affection for the underdog I am gobsmacked that they have no central research and rebuttal unit apart from the well known shoot from the hip crew.
It’s not good enough UKIP guys n gals – there’s a massive constituency out there of truly, deeply pissed off voters and *non voters* waiting for some proper, evidenced reasoned confrontation with the dissembling trash that spews daily from the meejah People are getting frustrated and angry.- they want change – and I don’t mean a different coloured rosette.backed up by a few YouTubes and and personal appearances – people want substantial change.
You need to get on the attack and rebuttals are part of the game – wise up and pull your fingers out – otherwise you’re toast.
With the greatest respect AM (and at the risk of being insulted) I would like to make the following points to counter some of your arguments:
1. Without Farage I doubt if UKIP would be much above the 3.2% they scored at the 2010 GE with Malcolm Pearson as leader.
2. The media clearly like Farage and he gets far more air time than Pearson got during his (brief) time as leader.
3. I can see nothing wrong in banging on about immigration. It is clearly a vote winner but accusing Farage of apeing Griffin is disappointing. Surely you don’t think the subject should once more be taboo.
As for the lack of exit strategy and failure to counter the FUD I concede you have a point. However UKIP can only broadcast an opinion on national television when invited to do so. When Farage does appear before the cameras he generally does very well. Yes he has missed the occasional target but who could do better?
Kenomeat, your points take me back to responses I have given to others on here who have made similar.
1. You could be right about Farage. But then again, against a backdrop of increasing disgust at mainstream parties, with a leader who hones in on the points that need making and makes them in a positive and constructive way – rather than jumps to whatever bandwagon he thinks will help him electorally – UKIP could be scoring significantly higher than it is today.
2. I don’t think the media ‘like’ Farage. I think they see him as something of an oddity. Hence almost every photo of him has him in some ridiculous pose that simply does not become of a serious aspiring leader and every profile he submits to be interviewed for talks about ‘cheeky chappie’, smoking, drinking, near death experiences, city career (with very few details), etc. He loves the attention he courts, but uses it appallingly.
3. There are serious and valid points that should be made about immigration. But look at UKIP’s current leaflet campaign and its talk of 29m Bulgarians and Romanians as if they are just poised to burst forth and all set up here, and its BNP tactics to a tee. Why not a ‘Best for Britain’ immigration campaign, that puts at the forefront inviting people with the skills we need here to the forefront, while taking control of our borders enables us to decline speculative migrants or control the numbers admitted to meet demand for lower skills?
The major issues with UKIP concern the lack of exit strategy and silence about the FUD. Thanks for recognising my point is valid. What Farage is doing is self publicising in front of the cameras. This is not about him missing the occasional target, rather anger that comes from him refusing to even take aim at it and looking in another direction.
People in the room have let slip Farage is frightened to get into the fight. No word of a lie, it is because he is scared of being ganged up on in concerted fashion by the Europhiles. Instead of seeing the obvious benefits of being set apart from the mainstream while presenting a positive vision of a future for the UK that can be realised outside the EU, he chooses to join the mainstream failures in talking to their diversionary issues such as HS2.
Plenty of people could do better. They will struggle though because anyone who shows sense and ability is marked out as a threat to Farage and quickly crushed in UKIP. There is a long line of people who have been done over by Farage who could do better, but are no longer in the party. Farage has destroyed any likely successor, which is why the likes of Pearson were the only alternative to Farage – and he didn’t even know the platform he was fighting on.
I’m confused AM. I don’t know what I need to do. I want the UK to leave EU. Until that is done, this country has no chance of sorting itself out (and even if we were to leave tomorrow, it would take decades to reverse the damage).
I know that your “solution” is to just not vote for anyone in the next GE but I also know that millions of people will not heed your advice – they will vote for someone.
This means that we can look forward to another Labour or Tory government. If Labour get in, the chances of us leaving the EU would seem to be nil. If Tories get in, the chances appear to increase to next to nothing.
UKIP won’t win the election, we all know this but surely, surely a few UKIPpers in positions of influence cannot make the situation any worse?
I know you’ve been pushing Richard North and his Harrogate Agenda but it is always at the expense of UKIP, not at the expense of those parties who really are to blame for our current predicament. Reading your stuff of late, you’d think that Farage himself signed all the treaties and led us into the EU single-handedly.
I can’t speak for anyone else but my support of UKIP and Farage is not because “I can’t see the facts” or because I worship him blindly as some kind of idol. As far as I’m aware, I do not belong to some kind of cult, either.
I just don’t see how abstaining from voting for UKIP come the next GE can be anything less than a strengthening for the status quo which we all hate (I say “we” because I suspect that the bulk of your readership are anti-EU).
I cannot see why people cannot vote for UKIP AND get behind the Harrogate Agenda (if indeed that is something worth doing).
What I do know is that sitting at home come the next general election is not going to get us any closer to leaving the EU. If everyone tired of the LibLabCon stitch-up voted for UKIP and if everyone who has stopped voting because they’re disenfranchised and disillusioned voted for UKIP then we could see a few UKIP MPs and I cannot see how that can be a bad thing.
If we all vote for nothing then we can hardly complain post-2015 that nothing seems to be happening to further our aims of leaving the EU. Although you will probably blame Farage for that, too.
I largely agree with Anthems sentiments on this.
Let’s get this is perspective too, it’s one survey and the fall in the “out” is no doubt partly due to FUD and lack of opposition to it but probably also due to the lull in the Euro crisis which isn’t going to last. I’m not sure how much trust we can put in these polls either.
Farage is certainly not perfect and maybe his strategy (my interpretation of it) of wider appeal in order to try and win some Westminster seats is misguided. However, it is certainly true that rise in UKIP earlier this year has forced both major parties to move ground and Cameron to offer his conditional referendum (for what it’s worth), so it’s not all been for nothing. For this latter reason alone I’ll vote UKIP as a protest against the pro EU major parties. It will be interesting to see what happens in the Euro elections in May which could be a game changer.
So let’s not get to disheartened. I think the idea of a non political “no” campaign with a positive message of an independent Britain can work. Let’s not forget that when the time comes we’ll get equal air time so the biased media will be less of an issue. There’s also the issue of keeping your powder dry. The CBI and their like can spout their half truths and lies all they like when there’s no imminent referendum. If we get our arguments and facts straight in the background then maybe we can blow them away in the debates and they’ll be unprepared and complacent. The truth is powerful and the out campaign aren’t telling it much.
On immigration, it’s clearly a vote winner and Farage is often misquoted as he said 29m have the right to come here but he does need to be very careful with the populist stuff lest he frighten away the very voters he needs to win. However on QT, he said exactly what AM is suggesting.
I think to highlight the sovereignty issue is also key. The British are still by and large very patriotic as can be seen the rise in support for the armed forces, the Olympics etc….. Many do not realise what is at stake here and its vital that any out campaign strongly make this point.
btw…………
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10446890/Immigration-Britains-doors-are-wide-open-and-we-cant-even-talk-about-it.html
that should have read “in” campaign of course…ooops!
Some time ago, as a long time conservative voter, I voted for UKIP a protest, all to no avail. They had their chance but now they have blown it. The FUD has to be counted now, far too many people are being taken in by it. Few look for the alternatives, it is not easy, so I agree with AM we need to get the correct information out, tomorrow will be too late, it must start now!
AM I want to thank you for your detailed and considered reply. I really don’t think there is much disagreement between us. You think UKIP should be doing a lot more and I think they are trying their best. You consider Farage a self-publicist whilst I can see no real alternative as the main anti-EU spokesman. Remember he willingly resigned the leadership to fight the last GE and only resumed it (after a leadership contest) when Pearson realised he was out of his depth. (If there was more to it than that I would be intrigued).
I largely agree with the comments of Anthem and TT, except I think Anthem is wrong in suggesting that you wouldn’t vote for UKIP. I think, when the time comes, you will hold your nose and vote for them. I also think TT is wrong to be optimistic about the referendum result.
Anyway, let’s wait and see just how many Romanians and Bulgarians come here next year. That could be a real game changer.
@kenomeat “Remember he willingly resigned the leadership to fight the last GE and only resumed it (after a leadership contest) when Pearson realised he was out of his depth. (If there was more to it than that I would be intrigued).”
Another way of looking at it is the situation of Putin and Medvedev. Putin under the Russian constitution couldn’t continue as President after two terms and so installed Medvedev as a puppet for him to be President until circumstances allowed for Putin to take the reins again
Thanks, Anthem, TT and Kenomeat for your comments. I’ll try to take each in turn but some points will overlap.
Anthem, what you see as my ‘solution’ is incorrect. I do not advocate voting and will not vote, because I don’t want to give legitimacy to the parties. To vote or not vote is a personal choice and many (as I mentioned on the Russell Brand posts) will vote out of a sense of ‘duty’ because people have fought and died for us to have that ‘right’. Actually they fought and died to allow us the freedom to vote or not as we see fit, but I digress.
My solution is to have a non-party political campaign that focuses exclusively on leaving the EU. An entity with supporters and donors, but not members. A special purpose vehicle in effect that does not get sidetracked into other issues in the way UKIP inevitably has, and does not have to service and manage all the issues that come with members and power struggles and side agendas. It needs to be better organised and more inclusive than the existing membership groups that exist.
I just wonder what influence you think a few UKIPpers could have? If the Tory backbench rebels can’t change anything, what will a few UKIP MPs achieve? Sure, it won’t make the situation worse, it won’t make any difference at all.
What I really want to make clear is another misunderstanding you have, regarding Harrogate. I do not push it at the expense of UKIP. It is not a competitor of UKIP. It is an entirely different animal and has an entirely different purpose to UKIP or any political party for that matter. Harrogate is about changing the system. UKIP is about trying to win ‘power’ within the system. Very different things.
Vote for UKIP or any other party, or don’t vote for them. Nothing will change. This is the fundamental point. Nothing will change because the control and the power to change things is now in Brussels. Voting in the UK – unless in a binding referendum – is a complete waste of time. We will not strengthen the status quo, but by denying political parties the validation and legitimacy they need, we can weaken them.
Of course, people can vote for UKIP AND get behind the Harrogate Agenda. But given one constitutes engaging in the system and the other seeks to replace it, that would be contradictory.
Sitting at home come the next general election is not going to get us any closer to leaving the EU. It will not make any difference at all. So why bother voting?
TT, your comments largely echo Anthem’s, as you say. So much of what I said above relates to you too. But let’s address this YouGov survey.
It is not just one poll. It is the latest in a line of polls that have seen the ‘out’ sentiment falling and ‘in’ sentiment rising by several percentage points each month. If you don’t trust the polls, fine. But polls before recent elections have just about got voter intentions correct and on issues such as the referendum, a ‘status quo’ effect needs to be added where most ‘don’t knows’ stick with the current situation.
You say the rise in UKIP earlier this year has forced both major parties to move ground and Cameron to offer his conditional referendum (for what it’s worth). But what has Cameron offered? IF the Tories win the election, a faux renegotiation, after which he will declare victory and say ‘vote to stay in this reformed EU’.
Just to ensure he has maximum advantage, see Richard’s blog for Mary-Ellen’s explanation of the timings and the methods the ‘in’ campaign will use. To be honest, UKIP has not achieved anything apart from uniting the Tories around the blue flag to fight off UKIP so they can hold on to their seats in Parliament – see Afriyie for confirmation.
When the time comes we’ll get equal air time, but the guests that will be chosen and questions that will be asked, the subtle and not so subtle bias, the naked ‘in’ campaign by the papers, the flood of ‘in’ campaign donations from big business so the biased media will be a huge issue.
I utterly disagree with your assessment that keeping your powder dry works. The CBI and their like are establishing in people’s minds certain ‘facts’. It’s like brainwashing. Trying to get people to break with what they then hold as their ‘knowledge’ is bloody difficult, because you are having to tell them what they’ve believed for years is wrong. People don’t like being told they are wrong and they dig in. They need to see where this information in wrong BEFORE they accept it as truth and fact.
On immigration, you can’t misquote a leaflet. There is no solution from UKIP, just their own kind of fear to get people to act in response to a negative. There are many more UKIP leaflets than viewers of Question Time. People will judge what they see and the UKIP leaflets are BNP-lite.
I’m glad you think highlighting the sovereignty issue is key. It has to be more than key, it has to be the only argument. Who should run Britain? That is the issue, nothing else. Why do you think the Europhiles focus on economic issues exclusively?
Kenomeat, there’s plenty of meat above for you. But I want to address one thing. You think Anthem is wrong in suggesting that I wouldn’t vote for UKIP. You think, when the time comes, I will hold my nose and vote for them. You obviously don’t know me, we’ve never met.
But to use an expression, you clearly don’t know me if you think I say this lightly and will support any party, let alone the one that is so badly failing the cause.
As for the ‘wait and see just how many Romanians and Bulgarians come here next year’ being a possible game changer, it shouldn’t have to be and I don’t want it to be. We will not win the argument from a negative position. We can win from a positive. Hence, the argument being solely about ‘Who should run Britain?’
If UKIP fatally split the Tories and let Labour in, we owe them a great debt of thanks for a major public service!
AM – Thanks for your lengthy and detailed reply to my comment.
I’d just like to repeat something I said recently. Perhaps you could give some consideration to telling us how THA can make a difference? I don’t mean when it is implemented, I mean how they intend to get it implemented in the first place.
Coca Cola doesn’t sell so many cans by telling everyone how shit Pepsi is.
In the meantime, I’ll be voting for UKIP when the time comes. You might be right; it might make no difference whatsoever but I’d consider it very bad form to spend another four or five years slagging off a Labour or Conservative government as they pass on the bad news from their master in Brussels knowing that I did absolutely nothing to prevent it.
I firmly believe that, for all the doubts about the UKIP leadership, everyone who wants Britain to be free should vote UKIP at every opportunity. I understand all the criticisms and am sure that they are largely valid, but I still urge everyone to vote for them. At this moment in time there is no other way, and not voting will do the cause no good at all. By all means criticise, even attack them, but with the understanding that they will have your vote when it matters. I really can’t see any other way of gaining our freedom than through the ballot box and there is only one choice.
Anthem, THA is building a movement that educates people about the reality of the system we are in, and shows them what a democracy – people power – really looks like. So you can see, this is not a rival to UKIP.
As people learn and understand how the system works – including how consent works, is relied upon and how it can be withdrawn peacefully to real effect – and pass this knowledge on to others, the movement will continue to encourage new supporters to join in and thus THA will increase in size. This is key as numbers become important later on.
When the movement has a substantial number of supporters who are committed to it, knowledgable and ready to apply pressure on the system, it will be possible for a substantial body of people to peacefully withdraw consent from the establishment and undertake actions that, joined by other people, can make the system unworkable. It would appear something like a ‘flash mob’, and it would seem to be spontaneous as we know the media and the political parties will have ignored the quiet and steady growth of the movement.
Instead of going the same way as most other movements – getting bogged down as they desperately to maintain their protest and build a following at the same time, splitting resources and focus and giving government the time and space to wear them down – having a large and knowledgable movement already built and in place enables a withdrawal of consent to have an immediate, significant and high profile impact that can’t be ignored or worn down by the establishment.
This methodology would wrong foots the establishment which would have no option but to listen and accept people taking back power. Reaching that point will be the enabler for the 6 Demands to be heard and the process of having them implemented (which could take years) to commence. The tried and tested approaches espoused by Gene Sharp, which have been used to good effect in various situations in other countries including those shaking off dictatorships, inform this thinking and strategy.
I would very much endorse the above. There is a fundamental difference between a movement and a political party. The latter aims to gain power within the system – by getting its supporters elected – and thence to effect change. A movement acts from the outside, seeking to change the system and, by that means, then effecting change.
TFA, as a movement, has no interest in getting its supporters elected, and has no ambitions to take power within the system. As a temporary expedient, TFA could even support UKIP, if it saw in the party a means of achieving its own objectives.
That’s THA (The Harrogate Agenda) not TFA … too much on my mind. The point stands, though, that as a movement, we are not in competition with UKIP (or any other political party). Longer term, we would like to see party politics diminished, especially at local level, with many more independent (i.e., non-party) politicians.