UK General Election 2015

[MintTrav]

Just because someone votes UKIP does not make them a racist.

That said, if you are a racist, you probably voted for UKIP.

This.

I would guess there would be at least 250k people who voted labour and tory who people on here would consider racist.  To say racist people only vote UKIP is crazy.

What proportion of the UK do you think is racist?

Depends on your definition of racist.  If you include the millions of people like Ryan describes who say uncomfortable things because they don't get out often/Dave Whelan old types who grew up in a totally different era then literally millions imo.

And people were surprised when I said I'm not proud to be British/English?

LOL

I think its one of the things to be most proud of being British.

We are incredibly accepting compared to the rest of the world.  I can't think of any other nation that comes close.

I'm glad we're not racist like those flippin foreigners. They have no right to be racist when they're already foreign themselves.

[The Camel]

BNP got nearly 1 million votes in consecutive euro elections in the 2000s!

[Woodsey]

Migration Watch are a right-wing, anti-immigration pressure group who pretend (not very effectively) to be a respected, independent think tank.

Ok, I don't necessarily accept that, but same question I asked above to you then, show me some 'reputable' figures then.

[arbboy]

The demise of the BNP is quite stunning.

They got over 500,000 votes in 2010 but less than 2000 split between between 8 candidates this week.

Losing Griffin mattered that much?

racists found ukip and didn't appear to be as racist to society (nap)

[mulhuzz]

Migration Watch are a right-wing, anti-immigration pressure group who pretend (not very effectively) to be a respected, independent think tank.

Ok, I don't necessarily accept that, but same question I asked above to you then, show me some 'reputable' figures then.

what is the question you're asking again?

and if you don't accept Migration Watch can't be trusted as a source of actual data then it's just pointless. Look here man.

Click to see full-size image.

whether you agree or not with their commentary on migration (and something tells me you do), you can't possibly regard them as a serious first source for actual data

[Woodsey]

Migration Watch are a right-wing, anti-immigration pressure group who pretend (not very effectively) to be a respected, independent think tank.

Ok, I don't necessarily accept that, but same question I asked above to you then, show me some 'reputable' figures then.

what is the question you're asking again?

and if you don't accept Migration Watch can't be trusted as a source of actual data then it's just pointless. Look here man.

Click to see full-size image.

whether you agree or not with their commentary on migration (and something tells me you do), you can't possibly regard them as a serious first source for actual data

I haven't found a better source yet so show me a better source for polls/stats etc on immigration opinion.

The question is what % of people in the UK think immigration is too high, or along those lines.

[mulhuzz]

you have to accept that Migration Watch are a thoroughly terrible primary source of data first though, because otherwise anything I show you will just be 'ah, fucking leftie bollocks, MigrationWatch is better' or whatever.

if you can't accept on its own merit that MW is a terrible source then it's absolutely pointless, might as well just continue believing they are the bestest.

[Woodsey]

you have to accept that Migration Watch are a thoroughly terrible primary source of data first though, because otherwise anything I show you will just be 'ah, fucking leftie bollocks, MigrationWatch is better' or whatever.

if you can't accept on its own merit that MW is a terrible source then it's absolutely pointless, might as well just continue believing they are the bestest.

Ok fine, show me a source you accept.

[mulhuzz]

you have to accept that Migration Watch are a thoroughly terrible primary source of data first though, because otherwise anything I show you will just be 'ah, fucking leftie bollocks, MigrationWatch is better' or whatever.

if you can't accept on its own merit that MW is a terrible source then it's absolutely pointless, might as well just continue believing they are the bestest.

Ok fine, show me a source you accept.

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings

http://www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/

[George2Loose]

Lol at migration watch. Might set up my own website with Bs info

[Doobs]

The demise of the BNP is quite stunning.

They got over 500,000 votes in 2010 but less than 2000 split between between 8 candidates this week.

Losing Griffin mattered that much?

racists found ukip and didn't appear to be as racist to society (nap)

1.01 gubbed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_League

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-party-become-frankensteins-monster

[Woodsey]

you have to accept that Migration Watch are a thoroughly terrible primary source of data first though, because otherwise anything I show you will just be 'ah, fucking leftie bollocks, MigrationWatch is better' or whatever.

if you can't accept on its own merit that MW is a terrible source then it's absolutely pointless, might as well just continue believing they are the bestest.

Ok fine, show me a source you accept.

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings

http://www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/

Ok hands up, I made a mistake it was migration observatory I meant to link before, that was the site I was thinking of.

They come up with about the same figures though, about 55% want immigration reduced a lot, 20% a little.

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/migobs/Public%20Opinion-Overall%20Attitudes%20and%20Level%20of%20Concern.pdf

[The Camel]

The demise of the BNP is quite stunning.

They got over 500,000 votes in 2010 but less than 2000 split between between 8 candidates this week.

Losing Griffin mattered that much?

racists found ukip and didn't appear to be as racist to society (nap)

1.01 gubbed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_League

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-party-become-frankensteins-monster

I was reading earlier that the roots of the NF came from the Liberal Party.

[DungBeetle]

snp, nationalist party campaining for democratic independce.

Ukip, nationalist party campaining for democratic independence

Snp, progressive party looking to build good public services

Ukip, right of thatcher economic policy strong distain for public services not being run for private profit

Snp, postive campaign focusing on the the strengths of their country and collective strengths

Ukip, negative campaign focusing on immigration, immigrants and foriegn erosion of county

Snp, negative press, leader attacked on front pages and painted as a great threat

Ukip, positive press, leader promoted on front pages as saviour of politics / country

Snp swept aside old guard,, huge influence in pariliment

Ukip, swept aside and rejected

---------

Scotland are bad-ass radicals.

Ukip should have focused on democratic independence. Instead they tried to insist immigrants where an overwhelming threat to the nation. Not only did voters not agree, it attracted people who felt comfortable saying they would shoot an asian prime minisister.

Lets say everyone agreed immigration was a huge problem. It would still be a mere symptom of our lack of democratic indepdendence. We have peolel holding power over us in the european commission that we cannot remove via the ballot box. Instead of focusing on this they prattle against foriegners. My guess is they knew that xenophobia speaks to a core fan base, and that by speaking that plummy, bloke/cad ,middle-brow tone they could make ukip the acceptable face of anti-foriegn sentiment.

Farage ran in an affluent 99% white constitioncy whilst trying to tell well-off people who only ever see a nonwhite face when they are seeing their muslim doctor or indian nurse that immigration is a ruinous threat to their way of life. They didnt buy it.

Meanwhile north of the border a progressive, left of centre party-probably pro immigration too -  crushed their opposition by selling a postitive message: telling their people that their country was too resourceful to hand over democratic power to their bigger neighbours.

Ho hum.

Get back under your rock farage

I don't agree with UKIP but saying a party getting 12 percent of the vote is rejected and swept aside is ludicrous  If we had PR they would have 80 MPs.  Let's be realistic.

[Woodsey]

you have to accept that Migration Watch are a thoroughly terrible primary source of data first though, because otherwise anything I show you will just be 'ah, fucking leftie bollocks, MigrationWatch is better' or whatever.

if you can't accept on its own merit that MW is a terrible source then it's absolutely pointless, might as well just continue believing they are the bestest.

Ok fine, show me a source you accept.

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings

http://www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/

Ok hands up, I made a mistake it was migration observatory I meant to link before, that was the site I was thinking of.

They come up with about the same figures though, about 55% want immigration reduced a lot, 20% a little.

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/migobs/Public%20Opinion-Overall%20Attitudes%20and%20Level%20of%20Concern.pdf

Similar figures from your second link.

http://www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/latest-report/british-social-attitudes-29/immigration/views-of-immigration.aspx