BNP - votes dropped from 943,598 to 1,667

MakeEmLaugh

In 2009, the BNP (British National Party - a white supremacist party) received 943,598 votes in the European election, and elected two MEPs.

In 2015, they lost 941,931 of those votes. They received only 1,667.

Quite a staggering loss.

Good for people of colour in Great Britain, though.

Slydice

They might have gone to another party which those voters think has similar ... political... views.

Seth Brundle

Slydice wrote: »

They might have gone to another party which those voters think has similar ... political... views.

They took our jobs votes

Berserker

Slydice wrote: »

They might have gone to another party which those voters think has similar ... political... views.

Like who?

Lemming

Berserker wrote: »

Like who?

It's not like the area in which I currently live - once commented upon by TV pundits as being "one of the last strongholds of the BNP" - has seen the BNP vote drop whilst .... *ahem* ... another party with similiar views has risen.

Hmmmmmm.

/sarcasm
I need to ponder on this; can't quite put my finger on it.

C14N

Berserker wrote: »

Like who?

Let's just say the party name rhymes with "Blue Chip".

SeanW

Slydice wrote: »

They might have gone to another party which those voters think has similar ... political... views.

Lemming wrote: »

It's not like the area in which I currently live - once commented upon by TV pundits as being "one of the last strongholds of the BNP" - has seen the BNP vote drop whilst .... *ahem* ... another party with similiar views has risen.

Hmmmmmm.

/sarcasm
I need to ponder on this; can't quite put my finger on it.

C14N wrote: »

Let's just say the party name rhymes with "Blue Chip".

Could you be more specific? :rolleyes:

Nodin

C14N wrote: »

Let's just say the party name rhymes with "Blue Chip".

....still can't think of it, just a man in a pub comes to mind for some reason.

SeanW

C14N wrote: »

Let's just say the party name rhymes with "Blue Chip".

Lemming wrote: »

It's not like the area in which I currently live - once commented upon by TV pundits as being "one of the last strongholds of the BNP" - has seen the BNP vote drop whilst .... *ahem* ... another party with similiar views has risen.

Hmmmmmm.

/sarcasm
I need to ponder on this; can't quite put my finger on it.

Slydice wrote: »

They might have gone to another party which those voters think has similar ... political... views.

Nodin wrote: »

....still can't think of it, just a man in a pub comes to mind for some reason.

All this amnesia wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the left got trounced in the election :cool:

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

All this amnesia wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the left got trounced in the election :cool:

Fairly sure that other party aren't left wing....whoever they might be. Or have been.

MightyMandarin

It's simple really, the BNP was a toxic brand with a toxic leader (Nick Griffin), while UKIP, while not having a great reputation, has a more toned-down right wing message with a charismatic leader.

MakeEmLaugh

MightyMandarin wrote: »

It's simple really, the BNP was a toxic brand with a toxic leader (Nick Griffin), while UKIP, while not having a great reputation, has a more toned-down right wing message with a charismatic leader.

Nick Griffin hasn't been their leader since 2014, though. If anything, I think losing him as the acceptable face of white supremacy in Britain did even more damage to the party.

MightyMandarin

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

Nick Griffin hasn't been their leader since 2014, though. If anything, I think losing him as the acceptable face of white supremacy in Britain did even more damage to the party.

Well he was the face of the party, and despite bringing them to the heights they reached, was still unable to appeal to the ordinary voter in any way that Farage can.

Losing him didn't really damage the party; the rise of UKIP as the more acceptable right wing party was the primary cause of their fall.

SeanW

Nodin wrote: »

Fairly sure that other party aren't left wing....whoever they might be. Or have been.

No, but the Tories obliterated both the Lib Dems and Labour. The left got pwned in the election. I'm just wondering if that has anything to do with the lefts sudden amnesia about ... that other party ... who one so does like to post crap about while being strangely unable to name

I'm going to offer another theory. Assuming for the sake of argument that the BNP lost most of its votes to "rhymes with blue chip." This means that of the 943,598 votes they got in the 2009, 1,667 were from actual racists, while the other 941,931 were from people who turned to them out of extreme desperation with not being represented by mainstream parties that were all rabidly pro-European Union, in favour of loose immigration, committed multiculturalists and all the rest. When a sane, non-racist alternative appeared, those 941,931 voters jumped ship because they weren't really BNP material to begin with.

Along with a large number of defectors from other parties, and many more who had not voted in any election for the previous 20 years.

A Dub in Glasgo

SeanW wrote: »

No, but the Tories obliterated both the Lib Dems and Labour. The left got pwned in the election..

Really? 36.9% obliterates 38.3% in your world?

oscarBravo

SeanW wrote: »

...mainstream parties that were all rabidly pro-European Union... When a sane, non-racist alternative appeared...

So, let's see: pro-EU equals rabid; anti-EU equals sane.

Fair enough.

Lemming

SeanW wrote: »

No, but the Tories obliterated both the Lib Dems and Labour. The left got pwned in the election. I'm just wondering if that has anything to do with the lefts sudden amnesia about ... that other party ... who one so does like to post crap about while being strangely unable to name

You DO realise that everyone before you posted initially was taking the p1ss right and mocking the BNP & UKIP? It's nothing to do with some sort of imagined Amnesia conspiracy.

On top of that; your "theory" is largely pants. Whislt there is some merit regards your raising the prospect of protest votes (there's always a well-meaning fool somewhere), UKIP have done an incredible job of lying and playing innuendo and fear on the electorate, whipping up phobia of Johnny Foreigner. I've had more than a few friends trot out the "immigrants" line to much dismay, and it all comes back to an easy play on people's economic fears. In a downturn, it's far easier to stoke that particular fire which is exactly what Farage has done.

SeanW

oscarBravo wrote: »

So, let's see: pro-EU equals rabid; anti-EU equals sane.

Fair enough.

The BNP are not sane. They're racist scum. That's why their vote has collapsed.

Lemming wrote: »

You DO realise that everyone before you posted initially was taking the p1ss right and mocking the BNP & UKIP? It's nothing to do with some sort of imagined Amnesia conspiracy.

Yes, and I was taking the piss back. The idea that a racist party (the BNP) and a non-racist party (UKIP) are similar deserves to have the piss taken out of it. At minimum.

BoJack Horseman

SeanW wrote: »

The idea that a racist party (the BNP) and a non-racist party (UKIP) are similar deserves to have the piss taken out of it. At minimum.

Ukip aren't racist.

They just (somehow) keep attracting racist members.

A party bedevilled by remarkable coincidence.

Lemming

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Ukip aren't racist.

They just (somehow) keep attracting racist members.

A party bedevilled by remarkable coincidence.

Remarkably remarkable to be sure. Just like Sean's apparent claims of humour. :pac:

SeanW

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Ukip aren't racist.

They just (somehow) keep attracting racist members.

A party bedevilled by remarkable coincidence.

Leftists aren't murderers.

They just (somehow) keep attracting genocidal maniacs. (Mao Tse Tung, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot) etc.

An ideology bedevilled by remarkable coincidence ... I am sure you will agree.

MightyMandarin

SeanW wrote: »

Leftists aren't murderers.

They just (somehow) keep attracting genocidal maniacs. (Mao Tse Tung, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot) etc.

An ideology bedevilled by remarkable coincidence ... I am sure you will agree.

It's a good thing fascists never had that problem though.

*cough* Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, Tojo *cough*

BoJack Horseman

SeanW wrote: »

Leftists aren't murderers.

Good to know.

Thanks for the update!

C14N

Lemming wrote: »

You DO realise that everyone before you posted initially was taking the p1ss right and mocking the BNP & UKIP? It's nothing to do with some sort of imagined Amnesia conspiracy.

On top of that; your "theory" is largely pants. Whislt there is some merit regards your raising the prospect of protest votes (there's always a well-meaning fool somewhere), UKIP have done an incredible job of lying and playing innuendo and fear on the electorate, whipping up phobia of Johnny Foreigner. I've had more than a few friends trot out the "immigrants" line to much dismay, and it all comes back to an easy play on people's economic fears. In a downturn, it's far easier to stoke that particular fire which is exactly what Farage has done.

Immigrants, I knew it was them! Even when it was the bears, I knew it was them!

Fratton Fred

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Ukip aren't racist.

They just (somehow) keep attracting racist members.

A party bedevilled by remarkable coincidence.

I don't disagree, but I doubt all four million people who voted for them are racists.

there has been a constant movement of supporters between English Democrats, BNP and UKIP. to me, it suggests there is a gap in the market for a moderate English Nationalist party, along the lines of the SNP.

Iwasfrozen

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I don't disagree, but I doubt all four million people who voted for them are racists.

there has been a constant movement of supporters between English Democrats, BNP and UKIP. to me, it suggests there is a gap in the market for a moderate English Nationalist party, along the lines of the SNP.

I don't think so. Out of those three groups two are pro union.

Nationalism has never been a major aspect of English social conscious and I don't see that changing soon.

PopePalpatine

If only I was halfway decent at using video editors, I would have made a "Hitler Reacts" video about this. :pac:

ancapailldorcha

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Nationalism has never been a major aspect of English social conscious and I don't see that changing soon.

I would disagree. Most of the people I work with are Tory voters. They expressed a lot of concern at the prospect of "the Scottish tail wagging the English dog". This was something they felt very strongly about and I don't think this is an isolated phenomenon at all, judging by newspaper covers at least. Alex Salmond certainly didn't help matters.

L1011

BNP had their thunder stolen by UKIP, along with quite a few of their candidates/figures; and lost Griffin as their figurehead.

The latter alone will have had a major impact which is pretty much why UKIP refused to let Farage go. BNP without Griffin is a tiny marginal party and the same would almost inevitably be the same for UKIP.

porsche959

Lemming wrote: »

You DO realise that everyone before you posted initially was taking the p1ss right and mocking the BNP & UKIP? It's nothing to do with some sort of imagined Amnesia conspiracy.

On top of that; your "theory" is largely pants. Whislt there is some merit regards your raising the prospect of protest votes (there's always a well-meaning fool somewhere), UKIP have done an incredible job of lying and playing innuendo and fear on the electorate, whipping up phobia of Johnny Foreigner. I've had more than a few friends trot out the "immigrants" line to much dismay, and it all comes back to an easy play on people's economic fears. In a downturn, it's far easier to stoke that particular fire which is exactly what Farage has done.

That may or may not be the case, but suggesting that 3.7m voters are at best deluded or at worst racists isn't going to win their votes away from UKIP.

I think one of lessons from this election is that UKIP proved to be more of a threat to Labour than to the Conservatives.

wats the craic

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

In 2009, the BNP (British National Party - a white supremacist party) received 943,598 votes in the European election, and elected two MEPs.

In 2015, they lost 941,931 of those votes. They received only 1,667.

Quite a staggering loss.

Good for people of colour in Great Britain, though.

they just vote ukip now they got over4 million vote s

silverfeather

Slydice wrote: »

They might have gone to another party which those voters think has similar ... political... views.

Similar but whitewashed. A quite appropriate use of the term I think. Quite revealing about who really votes for UKIP despite their pr campaign it's racists.

FTA69

silverfeather wrote: »

Similar but whitewashed. A quite appropriate use of the term I think. Quite revealing about who really votes for UKIP despite their pr campaign it's racists.

You can't just write off millions of people as racists because they have concerns about immigration etc. The real reason behind the growth of UKIP as an electoral force is because Labour abandoned millions of working class people in the UK or else took them for granted. They failed to paint any sort of vision or alternative for people and instead have become simply part of the establishment in many people's eyes.

They need to instil some hope, they need to have a message of homes and jobs. If they provide that alternative then they'll win people back from UKIP. Without that they'll continue to lose working class support.

You'd be better off going out to places where people are contemplating voting for UKIP rather than writing off millions of often decent people as raving bigots.

Eugene Norman

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Ukip aren't racist.

They just (somehow) keep attracting racist members.

A party bedevilled by remarkable coincidence.

Well assuming some of the BNP vote was racist, yes they do. However they also attract normal people who are hurt by immigration.

ancapailldorcha

Normal people aren't being hurt by immigration, they're being hurt by austerity. I think FTA69 is right in that working class voters have flocked to UKIP as they feel Farage better represents their interests. If Labour are to be a serious force in 2020 then they need to address this and hopefully without reverting to the New Labour philosophy.

A Dub in Glasgo

It does not look like they will go back to their roots. It very much sounds like they will go New Labour

What needs to change though is the voting system so that people are not disenfranchised

ancapailldorcha

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

It does not look like they will go back to their roots. It very much sounds like they will go New Labour

What needs to change though is the voting system so that people are not disenfranchised

AFAIK, FPTP works with a 2 party system in mind. We don't really have that anymore. It's a shame that Labour didn't see fit to push for it at the time nor over half the electorate to bother to vote at all in the referendum in 2011.

gallag

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Normal people aren't being hurt by immigration.

How? Competition for unskilled jobs and wage deflation are not real things? Companies that used to offer better wages and contracts if they had trouble filling positions can now bypass the host workforce and advertise directly in Bulgaria etc where average wage and conditions are much worse, and you think taking the only bargaining chip the working class has away won't hurt them?

ancapailldorcha

Do you have any proof of this?

gallag

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Do you have any proof of this?

Proof of what?

ancapailldorcha

Your post.

Eugene Norman

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Do you have any proof of this?

That increased supply of labour reduced prices? It's basic economics 101. There are claims that increases in aggregate demand can compensate but I'm pretty sceptical. Then of course people don't spend their gross salary, disposable income after rent is what matters. That can't but decline for the rental classes.

gallag

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Your post.

What part are you having trouble with?

ancapailldorcha

Eugene Norman wrote: »

That increased supply of labour reduced prices? It's basic economics 101. There are claims that increases in aggregate demand can compensate but I'm pretty sceptical. Then of course people don't spend their gross salary, disposable income after rent is what matters. That can't but decline for the rental classes.

If there was a shred of evidence for this, Nigel Farage would be touting it ceaselessly.

SeanW

That would be like touting that the sky is blue - it's obvious to anyone who has a basic understanding of "supply and demand". The main beneficiaries of immigration are the ruling and political classes. That's why it's happening on such a large scale.

ancapailldorcha

SeanW wrote: »

That would be like touting that the sky is blue - it's obvious to anyone who has a basic understanding of "supply and demand". The main beneficiaries of immigration are the ruling and political classes. That's why it's happening on such a large scale.

No, it isn't. Have you not noticed that the most economically developed countries in the world benefit hugely from immigration?

FTA69

If you have a problem with high rents and low wages then take that up with the bosses and landlords, not the Polish factory worker or some lad driving a taxi.

C14N

Eugene Norman wrote: »

That increased supply of labour reduced prices? It's basic economics 101. There are claims that increases in aggregate demand can compensate but I'm pretty sceptical. Then of course people don't spend their gross salary, disposable income after rent is what matters. That can't but decline for the rental classes.

That seems like an overly simplistic view of the situation. Labour isn't a commodity and employment isn't a zero sum game. It's not like in Ireland there are exactly X many jobs and there will be unemployment if the number of people looking for work exceeds X. The USA had less than a third its current population 100 years ago. The absolutely gigantic increase in population (a huge part of which is from immigration) didn't result in there being 200+ million people twiddling their thumbs because the early immigrants took all the jobs that were going at the time and it didn't make labour cheap either, if it did manufacturing wouldn't all be moving to China and Mexico.

jackofalltrades

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Normal people aren't being hurt by immigration, they're being hurt by austerity.

If immigration is such a benign force why is it importance with the electorate increasing?

oscarBravo

jackofalltrades wrote: »

If immigration is such a benign force why is it importance with the electorate increasing?

Is this the "if enough people believe something, it magically becomes true" school of thought?

C14N

jackofalltrades wrote: »

If immigration is such a benign force why is it importance with the electorate increasing?

Look to American politics and you could say the same thing about the gays or creationism. Mass hysteria about a thing is no evidence that it's a real issue at all.