Article: Meet the new face of UKIP!

[J.L.W]

From the Mirror:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/meet-new-face-ukip-free-12819236?!111

Quote

 

There followed "a spike" in membership - anywhere from 500 to a thousand in a few days, depending on who you ask.

While not Momentum numbers, it amounts to around a 5% bump in membership in a very short space of time.

Ukip sources say the new members are younger, angrier and more extreme in their defence of ‘free speech’ and libertarianism than the party has ever seen.

It’s unclear how seriously the new faces of Ukip are taking the move, which Watson joked was a ‘soft coup’, and Benjamin described as “both important and hilarious.”

But Ukip are taking it seriously, and can see the huge potential of the party’s average age reducing and a boost to party coffers from membership fees - not to mention a direct line to around 2 million social media followers.

 

It is inevitable in my view I suppose that people who work in this area will eventually move forward to attempt to influence politics more directly than simply bringing these things up in a social media capacity.

Could this be a big change or will it not make that much of an impact? What do we think?

[andrewclunn]

ukip was a single issue party based on leaving the EU.  If they now become a single issue party based around establishing a legal equivalent to the US' first amendment, then I dare say they'll have a resurgence.

[barn]

I was wondering if joining a party was really necessary, had you supported their specific goals with producing content endorsing, explaining the benefits.

I would also argue, the membership meant, those joining will/are having less 'wiggle room', therefore staying an unofficial supporter of specific goals of a party was overall more benefit for the celebrity AND the party as well.

(creative people tend to be more creative with less restrictions but with adequate guidance on the concept their productivity is aimed at)

ps. - Sure, good to see a boost to a movement that's been much needed lately. (ie. - active participation in the very thing what one's trying to break free from... I... I'm not so sure about that.)

[J.L.W]

15 minutes ago, barn said:

I was wondering if joining a party was really necessary, had you supported their specific goals with producing content endorsing, explaining the benefits.

I would also argue, the membership meant, those joining will/are having less 'wiggle room', therefore staying an unofficial supporter of specific goals of a party was overall more benefit for the celebrity AND the party as well.

(creative people tend to be more creative with less restrictions but with adequate guidance on the concept their productivity is aimed at)

ps. - Sure, good to see a boost to a movement that's been much needed lately.

That is a good point. There is another party that has splintered off from UKIP that seems quite a bit better, it doesn't have such a love/ hate relationship with the more extremist elements and the woman at the top is just talented as a political figure imo... Her name is Anne Marie Waters. She's one of those, a bit like Trump, where when you hear her speaking you feel it. I know not many believe such things in this forum but I saw a woman who stood up in Nazi Germany who this woman reminds me of as though she was back here from a past life.

UKIP risks becoming a flashy party with no real substance and I suppose if PJW and others stuck moreso to their message they might have more connection with their followers than if they are carefuil not to diverge from a certain tract, for instance, on fox hunting. Which UKIP and Nigel Farage supported, and is incidentally, sick. To be precise UKIP supported referendums on the practice. This is one area I agree moreso on what might be considered the left, having seen foxhunting first hand and those ridiculous toffs on horses with their guns, I believe there is no precedent for it, even if it is voted by the folks in Surbiton.

Anne Marie Waters party is called 'For Britain'.

[barn]

2 hours ago, J.L.W said:

(1) That is a good point.

[...]

(2) UKIP risks becoming [...]

1. Your generosity is much appreciated, one tries, when can speak unfiltered ... (there are exceptions, although generally they solidify the trend ultimately, as a whole. Oh, and not in science-science.)

2. It's started (any addition changes the characteristics of the whole... not just mathematically). The questions are multiple, for some, from this point on... sorry, I'm not here for those (ie. - how/when/what degree deviation... Easy to win over people are easy to lose... etc.)

All in all, it's a noteworthy 'blip' on the radar...