OVLOV JAY:
Carryfast:
OVLOV JAY:
The problem with voting ukip is they are pulling themselves apart. They had a joint cause of leaving the eu. This was cementing a party with views from far left to far right. Now Brexit is in process, the party can’t decide which way to turn. Every vote for ukip is one more vote towards a hung parliament and all the fears of 2015 being realised, albeit with a much more dangerous man at the helmHow is Brexit ‘in process’ when all we’ve got is article 50 having been delivered and no other progress to show for a year since the referendum.All conveniently left open for U turning or at best turning the hard Brexit manifesto promise into soft Brexit.In addition to the question why did May call a needless election instead of implementing and delivering Brexit well within the life of the majority administration she had.
Which leaves the question what’s wrong with a Con minority government with UKIP holding the balance in co alition similar to the previous Con/LibDem coalition.On that note why have the Cons refused to withdraw their candidates in the strongest Brexit constituencies in East Anglia for example.
The truth is May can’t be trusted and the ideologically remain Cons have more in common with their remain LibDem/SNP/Lab ‘opposition’ who they’d rather see holding the balance than UKIP.
Let alone the other issues like immigration policy,border protection,concreting over the South East,and the theft of people’s private property to pay for care costs.In view of which how can a Con majority possibly be a better option for the country than a Con minority and UKIP coalition.Bearing in mind that even on its worse day UKIP beats the Cons easily on all those issues in addition to a better chance of making sure that May delivers on Brexit.
Firstly, what would you like to see as a mark of progress then? As I see it, the process of leaving the eu is started by triggering article 50, followed by a two year notice period. In that definition, it’s in process. The funny thing is they decided to delay negotiations by 3 months to allow for the general election, which makes a hypocritical mockery of all the reasons given for not triggering article 50 the day after the referendum last year.
As for a con/ukip coalition, it’ll never happen as they’re both targeting the same voters. Ukip just won’t pull any votes from Labour or the lib dems. I hate to say it, but I think Labour are going to win on Thursday, as there’s nothing more pig headed than a blinkered Labour voter, and I can see the liberals nicking enough Tory remainers to weaken their position. That’s why, I feel using my head and not my heart, a vote for ukip on Thursday is a backhanded vote for Labour. And this country is in real trouble if Corbyn gets into number 10
I think you’ve actually agreed yourself that ‘progress’ on Brexit would have been May at least triggering article 50 when she took over from Cameron with the letter clearly ruling out soft Brexit.With that process now well under way by now.In which case shes deliberately stalled Brexit by at least a year not just a few months.
As for the supposed risk of undermining a Con majority,in favour of Labour,in an attempt to get UKIP into a position of power like the LibDems held over the Cons previously,that’s a risk we have to take for the sake of the country.With,as Terryt rightly says,there being nothing to lose in the case of trusting May to deliver on anything other than her own immigration appeasement and remain Con agenda.While ironically if only Labour changed its stance to one of hard Brexit not soft Brexit and got a grip on the immigration issue I actually think that Labour might even then be the lesser of two evils v May’s Cons. 
Having said that how does replacing Con MP’s with UKIP ones supposedly help Labour as opposed to what’s needed in keeping May honest and putting a block on the Cons worst self destructive tendencies ?.While bearing in mind your obvious probably well founded fears why would May have chosen to put her administration in this predictable situation.Rather than stay where she was and get on with delivering the referendum vote mandate that she’d been given ■■.No prizes for guessing the only possible logical answer to that bearing in mind the impossibility of a committed remainer supposedly turning leaver.