Tallbloke’s Reflections on the Elections

Posted: May 9, 2015 by tallbloke in government, greenblob, Politics
Tags: ,

roosevelt-quote It’s hard to be objective about the outcome of the elections, having been in the thick of the battle. This post is more about my personal experiences of the campaign and reflections on the aftermath. I joined UKIP because it is the only party with a sane energy policy, and as an engineer with a degree in the history and philosophy of science, I’m only too aware of the danger to our country’s economic and social well being of the insane energy policy pursued by successive Labour and Conservative governments. Although the main parties avoided the energy question during the election campaign, I believe it to be the most important issue underlying UK politics.

Which brings me face to face with the green influence which has captured the ear of the progressive wings of both main parties which have held sway over the last two decades of global warming fevered politics. The civil service is strongly infected with the bug, as is academia, the media, and the arts. As Nigel Farage pointed out recently, all these areas of public life are dominated by people who attended the fee paying schools and did PPE degrees at the top universities. Commonsense and the injection of climate realism is sorely needed, and this is why I entered the political fray. I got attacked with a tirade of abuse for my views on the economic upside of fracking and non-dramatic climate change at a hustings in Leeds a couple of weeks ago by the Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition candidate (and Bunny la Roche impersonator) Liz Kitching. In the event she polled 323 votes to my 4687.

pudsey-result

Click for Youtube video of the Pudsey result.

But despite beating Liz by an order of magnitude, I only got 9.2% of the vote in my constituency of Pudsey. The positive spin on this figure, is that it’s a fourfold improvement on the result achieved by the previous UKIP candidate in Pudsey. Not that this is any reflection on our relative abilities, since that fourfold improvement is the same as that seen countrywide, enabling UKIP to achieve over 100 second places, firmly establishing us as the real opposition to the pro-EU/green progressive establishment. I did marginally better in the local election, where I gained 13.5% of the vote as the council candidate for Pudsey town itself. pudsey-ward-result

Clearly, this election was dominated by the same old main parties, and the reasons for that are largely speaking; fear, ignorance, apathy and loyalty. Fear of change and of the nationalist insurgence in Scotland. Ignorance of what UKIP really stands for. Apathy about politics in general. Loyalty to the party your parents voted for. These are the factors we must overcome if we are to effect the change we sorely need.

Comments
  1. A good start to build on Roger, hope you gain confidence from this experience ready for next time.
    Pointman has an excellent piece…
    https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2015/05/08/uk-election-2015-the-car-crash-of-the-chatterati-against-reality/

  2. J Martin says:

    We need a sensible form of PR. In New Zealand a few years back they introduced a form of PR with an option to remove it if the people felt it wasn’t working, but when the time came the people voted to retain their new electoral system. In the UK when we had a referendum on the subject the existing corrupt beneficiaries of the existing corrupt system designed an abomination of PR in order to ensure that the status quo would not change. Not surprisingly the people rejected it.

    UKIP should examine the system used in NZ and work on bringing it into the minds of the population of this country. We need to get PR in the UK. Our current system is little better than an elected dictatorship. In what is today a far more complicated country and world the electoral system used by the mother of parliaments leaves significant portions of the electorate unrepresented.

    New Zealand PR would be a good start.

  3. Stephen Richards says:

    Elections are both bruising and exhilarating but taking part is what sets you apart from the whinging do nothings around you. Pick yourself up, spend time in with your public by attending local event and introducing yourself. Next time you will win.
    .
    My first election was in a village where I had lived only 5yrs and I was the foreigner. I came 5th of 22 candidates. Once your are in, though, it’s tough Roger. So girdle your loins and up and at ’em.

    WELL DONE YOU AND UKIP

  4. tallbloke says:

    Lord B: Thanks. At least I kept the £500 deposit. Losing that is enough to put many off a second attempt. As vice chair of my local UKIP branch, I’m now thinking about how we can reboot, rejuvenate, and keep the momentum going. Next Tuesday’s monthly branch meeting will be interesting.

    Stephen: Dead right. Pudsey carnival is next saturday. We’ll be there with a stand, and talking to the locals.

  5. tallbloke says:

    Cameron will deliver the EU referendum, because it’s political suicide not to. Not only would the electorate not forgive the Tory party, but there would surely be many defections of Tory Eurosceptics to UKIP, undermining the slim majority Cam now has to nurture.

    In fact, the true test of Tory Eurosceptics is now here:
    If a dozen of them defected now, then Cam would have to negotiate the terms of the referendum with UKIP. That’s the only way we’ll get a fair deal on the question, the coverage, the financing and the eligibility. However, Mark Reckless’ defeat this time will act as a deterrent to would be defectors for now.

  6. J Martin says:

    I think that the conservatives owe their victory to the very clearly televised prospect of Ed Miliband looking like a spitting image puppet on strings being pulled by the leader of the Scottish party, the SNP. I think this also led to a 30% reduction in the vote for UKIP.

    Boris Johnson is right to push for a federalist solution for Scotland, that will reduce the tactical voting from fear that we have seen in this election and then we can look forward to more representative elections in England.

    UKIP fielded 6% non white candidates. They must work to increase that as the non white population grows towards a majority in the UK as it is in many electoral zones in London already. More lgbt candidates, also in winnable seats will help reduce the biased reporting in the press which has led many to think that UKIP is racist and homophobic, thus unduly influencing the young vote in particular.

  7. Stephen Richards says:

    cam will hold the referendum but he will bias it any way he can toward a yes. He’ll grant immigrants a vote all 4.000.000 of them for a start and this will be ruled legal by the European court.

    He is a liar and a cheat and they don’t change their spots.

  8. “Cameron will deliver the EU referendum, because it’s political suicide not to. Not only would the electorate not forgive the Tory party, but there would surely be many defections of Tory Eurosceptics to UKIP, undermining the slim majority Cam now has to nurture.”

    Roger, you did well.
    Again, in some sort of public election, can anyone chance to represent my values rather than that of the stupid majority? A Monarchy, perhaps beneficial, limited, or constitutional is best. Some ONE that can and must declare “alles ist kaputt”, and all serfs and slaves agree! -will-

  9. Well done. Braver than me. I have emigrated to Malaysia where there is more interest in jobs and security in old age than in the ravings of well-fed Greens who have or believe they have the moral high ground and that trumps the age-old need merely to achieve health and welfare.

  10. tallbloke says:

    Will: In elections, the only way to get someone who’ll properly represent your own values is to stand for office yourself.😉

    Stephen; If Cam can prohibit Scottish-born residents of Newcastle from voting in the Scottish Independence Referendum, he can stop EU-born immigrants of less than 5 yrs residence voting in the British EU referendum too.

  11. colliemum says:

    Thanks, Rog, and congrats – it ‘s indeed the going into the arena and do battle which counts, and you did very well indeed. That experience will be hugely useful in coming elections, and I hope all candidates’ experiences can be shared across the membership so that everybody can learn.
    While we all need to sort through the fall-out, and need to take a short breather, the encouraging thing is that there are so many young people starting to join, who are keen to bring their skills to the table.
    It’s still onwards and upwards!

  12. sidefxny says:

    I commend you for having the courage of your convictions such that you would enter the race to begin with. I wish that we had some people like yourself, Nigel and the UKIP folk here in the USA. Please don’t ever give up and I won’t either. All the best!

  13. xplod says:

    Well done, Rog. Locally, we had similar results – my UKIP candidate came 3rd, as did the UKIP lady facing a certain Keith Vaz, in a neighbouring constituency. A platform for all UKIP supporters. There’ll be plenty of opportunity in local elections, and the occasional by-election, between now and the next GE. I said locally that maybe the country isn’t quite ready for a wholesale shift toward UKIP, perhaps because of (political) inexperience, and fear of the potential SNP/Labour alliance. But, over the next parliament, maybe higher profile, and fairer, coverage in the MSM will help.

    Best wishes for future campaigns – keep us informed!

  14. pyromancer76 says:

    Congratulations to you for your efforts and growing percentage of the vote. Please have the courage and stamina to keep it up, as well as to think of all the ways to appeal to those voters who are ready for a change, but afraid. Everyone can be grateful that you went into the rough-and-tumble (TR an apt example), with your intelligence and integrity and willingness to explain the scientific details to others in “everyday” language.

    Would “four-fold” of 9.2% make a difference? Or does it have to be “six-fold” next time?

    Thanks also for the blog which I read everyday. Wow! Run for election and have the energy for blogging and for the truth (truths). A hero.

  15. graphicconception says:

    The results are interesting. If I lump together the SNP and the LibDems I get:

    3,870,324 votes and 64 seats.

    UKIP received 3,881,129 votes but only 1 seat.

    I don’t think you did badly at all. You were just snookered by our electoral system.

    Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results

  16. Anoneumouse says:

    I hope you have better luck next time.

    Rememebr: ‘Progressive’ is an adjective, ‘Progress’ is a noun.

    ‘Word play’, one of the great joys in the subtleties of life.

  17. mike fowle says:

    Sincere congratulations. Please don’t be downhearted. Your efforts and the results all count. It may be a long haul but we will win in the end.

  18. Well done!

    A very credible vote for a first time candidate and a party which has never got MPs elected.

  19. Our local anti-renewable energy campaign group had three members who stood as UKIP parliamentary candidates.

    I’m told that one came second with18.3% of the vote (+12.9%), one came third with 21.5% of the vote (+13.8%) and one came third with 15.8% of the vote (+7.5%).

  20. Alan Poirier says:

    Sorry you weren’t able to secure a seat. I think you would have made a good representative. I do hope you can take some solace in the fact that Labour had its nose rubbed in its filth. Perhaps now Cameron, freed from his coalition partners, can defang the greenies and Europhiles and return a measure of sanity to the UK.

  21. tallbloke says:

    Thanks Alan. As it happens, the Tories seem to have got the UKIP energy policy message to some degree. This from the Independent:

  22. Graeme No.3 says:

    The combined vote for the Tories and UKIP was 49.5% of those voting (around 66%).

    OK, UKIP isn’t the far right party as portrayed but as a combination it would very likely be a winner. And where would disillusioned Tories go? Mind how you go, Dave.

    P.S. am I the only one who thinks that a party led by a Sturgeon and a Salmond is a little fishy?

  23. Paul Vaughan says:

    TB: As in sun-climate discussions, you & your UKIP political allies appear to be masters of efficiently strategic provocation. I wish you refreshing walks in the hills that are sure to naturally inspire your next strategic move. When the time’s right, I have JEV stuff in the pipeline. I think you’ll like it…

  24. Kevin Hearle says:

    Hi Roger, If you had the NZ political system (not perfect but better than first past the post) UKIP would now have 82 members of parliament and be third behind cons and labs. Our system seems to work in a Westminster style democracy but some tweeks are needed.

  25. Graeme No.3 says:

    Richard111
    that leaves me with nothing to say. Give her my regards.

  26. tallbloke says:

    Paul V: Thanks for the props. I can’t wait to get back to the science for a while. Looking forward to your next JEV revelations with interest.

  27. Richard111 says:

    The BBC website tells us we have an Electorate of 46,425,386 persons of whom 66.1% turned out to vote. Therefore we should have had a total of 30,687,180 votes cast during the election. With a Parliament of 650 seats this gives us a ‘seat value’ of 47,211 votes per seat.

    By this reasoning UKIP, who received a total of 3,881,129 votes, should have walked into 82 seats, NOT JUST ONE!

    Likewise the SNP received a grand total of 1,454,436 votes and should only have got 31 seats, are actually awarded 56 seats. Labour gets 34 EXTRA seats and the Conservatives were lucky to get 331 seats, as by this argument, they should only have got 240 seats.

    And the Green party should have walked into 24 seats at least.

    When all is said and done, this government does not reflect the peoples aspirations.

  28. thejollygreenman says:

    Rodger,

    You lost because of the real and present danger of the SNP being the puppet master of Labour.

    That image was used with great effect by the Tories.

    Until we have the boundary changes enacted, be careful with you cash.

  29. steverichards1984 says:

    Well done Roger, you got twice the percentage that I got when I ran in 2010. At least you kept your deposit.

    Most people are amazed that candidates from small parties have to pay their own deposit!

  30. hunter says:

    Congrats on a hard fought race. The real reform and progress UKIP offers will take years of work to realize. Hang in there.

  31. P.A.Semi says:

    This is one example, that voting system in UK (majority vote) is utterly bad and injust…
    In the just system, if the party has 13% votes, it gets somewhere arround 13% of deputies, +- rounding error. The majority system is designed to ban and prevent fair minority representation.

    About energy – this civilisation always used renewable energies – mainly the wood, which is a conserved solar energy, and only in the last few centuries it started to prey coal, a long-term reserve of conserved solar energy, which was here laid out as an egg-white for civilisation startup. You cannot fairly cry for living eternally on the finite limited reserve, as the chicken cannot hope to grow on egg-white until its death. Some generation will need to invest to switch back into using renewable solar energy, either in form of fotovoltaic, or in the form of wind (which is also a solar energy, transfered through atmospheric dynamics), unless we can start our own Sun by hydrogen termonuclear fusion, which does not seem near yet… All other forms of energy, beside they being dirty, are just a time-bomb left to our grandchildren to move back into dark and cold caves… (the candles are also mostly made from parafine from oil…)

    So if our generation will not invest in the energy-mode recovery, the children or grand-children will be forced to do it, and will despise their fathers, that they did not start it sooner (also because the coal and oil are precious source of carbon for chemical synthetics…).

    This also and mainly pertains to cars – the petroleum industry buyed all patents to block evolution of electric cars, just for the unjust profit of few looter families… Also the cars must very soon (even sooner than coal-electric) switch to the electric propulsion…

    About nuclear power, it is a pitty, that every 30 years or so there is a major catastrophe, and so the total of this industry is rather too much dirty…?

    The stony age did not end by exhausting stones, and also the oil-age should not end by exhausting oil !

    Also consider, that we have not inherited the planet of our fathers into possession. Instead we have got it borrowed from our children and from God (if you believe – but anyway you cannot distrust the children will come), we are not here as owners, not even as free hotel guests, we are here as responsible custodians and gardeners… (and what pertains democracy, we are here as representatives of future hundreds of billions, who in present time vote our few representatives into parliament. The hundreds of future billions do not have the voting right yet, but they are silently waiting your decissions, because they will bear the responsibility and consequences…)

    (And some ones believe, that when they made a fence near the end of middle ages arround some area, everything they dig from beneath it is their property, but instead they are all robbers and looters of future generations, if they take more, than what is actually needed… Robbery there is, because they sell the coal for price of mining costs, and all rest is their profit, which instead they must invest into renewable energy evolution, and if they do not and take their profit, it is a robbery…)

    So despite the government CO2 talk is not true, it is necessary to push lazy folks to invest into switching to a just and fair energy consumption, regardless of contemporary price, because the civilisation-age-scaled price of energy is higher than what you used to pay for cheap coal reserves… In this technological time, using coal and oil for energy is not just and fair, it is a robbery.

  32. Paul Vaughan says:

    P.A.Semi says (May 10, 2015 at 3:51 pm ) wrote:
    “This is one example, that voting system in UK (majority vote) is utterly bad and injust…
    In the just system, if the party has 13% votes, it gets somewhere arround 13% of deputies, +- rounding error. The majority system is designed to ban and prevent fair minority representation.”

    We have the exact same problem in the Canadian system. It’s easy to understand what’s going on in the UK because it looks so familiar.

  33. tempestnut says:

    There is much wrong with politics but just changing the voting system is not going to lead to any change. I’m a New Zealander by birth way back when but have lived and worked all over the world but mostly in the UK. Anyone suggesting New Zealand is now better off and their Politian’s more responsive because of their voting system is living in dream world. In fact many people I speak to back home hate it. They have the problem that minorities call the tune rather than the majority.

    Everyone agrees first past the post can be unfair, but sometimes it works in your favour. Because UKIP got a numerically large popular vote it shows up the absurdity to the English of all the Scottish seats. That will be changed at the next election automatically now in 2018.

    The silver lining is we get an in-out referendum on the EU. The in and the out side will NOT be run by the political parties so those wanting out will come from all corners of the political divide. The ins will confine their argument to economics in order to scare people. The out side have to concentrate on the political dimension, because the EU is politics not economics.

    Leaving the EU is the first prerequisite step in regaining control of our Politian’s. Without that step we can’t start. And the key to controlling Politian’s is not allowing them to spend money on anything we don’t agree with. That control comes with fundamental political change, not with a change to the voting system.

  34. tgmccoy says:

    thank you for the TR quote. had that on my desk for years. Don’t have a desk now. when i do again it will go back up.
    Been involved with local politics when able. but it can be a nasty business. My worst experience
    was a local school council/board never again….

  35. suricat says:

    Glad you got your deposit back TB. However, a successful entry needs careful deliberation to match the right candidate with the right constituency in a first past the post election. Well done.

    Best regards, Ray.

  36. Thanks for making the effort and be assured that you will do better next time. Remember that Abraham Lincoln failed several times before he was elected:
    http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/education/failures.htm

    When I ran for office in 2002 my opponent got three times as many votes. Unfortunately circumstances prevented a rematch so my opponent won five more elections (every two years):
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_Kinnaird#Elections

  37. dscott says:

    Leaving the EU is the first prerequisite step in regaining control of our Politian’s. Without that step we can’t start. And the key to controlling Politian’s is not allowing them to spend money on anything we don’t agree with. That control comes with fundamental political change, not with a change to the voting system. tempestnut

    Sounding very American

    Take a page from the Tea Party in America, rub the misspending of tax revenue in the politician’s faces each and every time they propose a tax increase, congestion fee and then a new program that consumes additional funds. Get the blood to boil over the decision maker’s inability to prioritize limited resources. In fact, force the confrontation the over fairy tale belief that revenue is unlimited from the pockets of the tax payer versus the declining net take home pay of the individual from whom this money is taken. Do that for a couple of years and the electorate will be so sullen that most politicians and bureaucrats will be in fear for their jobs.

    I don’t pretend to understand your electoral system given the 3 million plus votes UKIP received with only one representative being the result. But is it possible UKIP doesn’t either? What is UKIP NOT doing that the say the Green Party is to get representation in Parliament? IF you have the votes and not the representation, then someone is doing something wrong?

  38. dscott says:

    Interesting article you might consider using for strategy purposes.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-trust-those-polls/2015/05/08/b9f2d678-f59b-11e4-bcc4-e8141e5eb0c9_story.html

    Lesson three, and this part I did get right, is the absolute necessity of “trust” in voter intentions. In just about every pre-election poll, Conservatives and Labor were locked in a dead heat, yet voters gave Conservative leader David Cameron a large advantage over Ed Miliband, his Labor challenger, on the question of whom they would trust more to run the country. In the end, trust is a far more accurate predictor of the election outcome than any other metric. Even though Britain votes for local members of Parliament rather than prime minister, a lack of faith and trust in Miliband’s leadership capabilities sunk his party in the end.

    IF you intend to beat the Green Party and their allies, you need to destroy the “trust” they enjoy from the public’s ignorance of their activities. Tie each of their candidates directly to the negative impacts of their stated policies. Make it personal to the voter, what did they lose as a result of trust they placed in Green or Liberal they elected. Take away the good feeling of virtue signaling in voting for the positive emotion.

    Conversely, you now see why UKIP is being misrepresented by your opponents, they set out to destroy the reason to “trust” your party. You can counter that misrepresentation by exposing your opponents to the exact same strategy because in reality they are even more vulnerable to it than you are. It’s called “Projection” when someone falsely accuses you it is because they themselves are guilty of the very practice.

  39. suricat says:

    dscott says: May 11, 2015 at 5:17 pm

    I disagree. Vilification of a political party’s intent can only show an impact if the ‘party’ holds it’s members to ‘the party line’ on ‘policies’.

    UKIP ‘doesn’t’ use/employ a ‘party whip’, thus, members are open to ‘speak/vote’ with conscience on the issues that their electorate voted ‘them’ (the candidate) to represent ‘them’ (the electorate) upon. The UKIP ‘party members’ are more likened to ‘independent representatives’ than ‘party members’.

    Perhaps the electorate haven’t been made fully aware of this yet!

    Best regards, Ray.

  40. Jack Savage says:

    Well done and thanks for all your efforts. It ALL helps.