VISIT WEBSITE >>>>> http://gg.gg/y83ws?283054 <<<<<<
It is absolutely true that, regardless of how distant their runners-up were, progress from 0 second places to in the space of a single Parliament represents a significant step for UKIP. But these sizeable majorities warrant a closer look at these seats and raise the question of whether expectations of similar levels of progress by are realistic. The maps below reveal something interesting about UKIP progress in one particular region.
While the winners map for the South East may not have changed drastically relative to 72 of the 83 seats were held by the Conservatives the same is not true of the second place map. UKIP finished second in a high proportion of seats around 40 per cent compared with 18 per cent nationally in , yet perhaps even more interestingly, in 28 of these 33 seats it was the Liberal Democrat candidate that came second in Of those voters who claimed to have voted Lib Dem in but would not be voting for the party again in , only 11 per cent said that they would be switching their vote to UKIP compared with around 20 per cent to the Conservatives and 37 per cent to Labour.
How might this explain what was observed in the South East? The chart below shows an apparent association between the degree of the Liberal Democrat loss of vote share in constituencies in the South East and the Conservative majority.
Each dot represents one of the 72 constituencies where the Conservatives held the seat, and shows a clear negative relationship between the Liberal Democrat loss of votes and the increase in the Conservative majority.
This suggests that not only were the Lib Dems second in many seats in the South East in , but also that they were a much closer second. How exactly does this relate to UKIP? The government is becoming increasingly authoritarian and our media is run by a handful of billionaires, most of whom reside overseas and all of them have strong political allegiances and financial motivations.
Our mission is to hold the powerful to account. It is vital that free media is allowed to exist to expose hypocrisy, corruption, wrongdoing and abuse of power. But we can't do it without you. If you can afford to contribute a small donation to the site it will help us to continue our work in the best interests of the public. We only ask you to donate what you can afford, with an option to cancel your subscription at any point.
To donate or subscribe to The London Economic , click here. The shop can be found here. Email address:. Read more. Editorial enquiries, please contact: jack thelondoneconomic. The Yes campaign wants devolution, that is the problem. Do you want Sovereignty? Well, we want currency union- Do you want Sovereignty? Er, er, we want control over the NHS…. As they say, a little love goes a long, long way.
Oh, and the money. Politics is cheaper over here, and money is going to the far right. That carries weight. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Share this: Twitter Facebook Email Pinterest.
He is an avowed defender of civil liberties, which hurtles him towards confrontation with Evans. Opinion UK Independence party Ukip. This article is more than 6 years old. Zoe Williams.
Comments