Lord Pearson the leader of UKIP has stood down because he is "not much good" at party politics and UKIP "deserved a better politician... to lead it". Well he can't have been too bad within his own party as I presume they are a democratic party and he was elected leader. The trouble is Lord Pearson is right. He isn't good at party politics and I don't think it is unfair to describe his leadership as shambolic.
So how did UKIP manage to increase their vote locally and nationally as the local campaign was shambolic too? I can only presume that people vote on image rather than content because whenever I have looked at the latter there is no substance and no answer to any serious questions.
Maybe the next leader will at least know what is in their manifesto and then a debate may take place. Radio and television interviews at the last election did not manage to engage in UKIP policy because Lord Pearson was so inept.
Change the world
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Maybe the number of voters for UKIP increased because they appear to respect democracy - like having a referendum on whether or not Britain should be in or out of the EU for instance Michael!
ReplyDeleteCON/DEM - vote for change. LOL!!!!
Having an in/out referendum was a popular Lib Dem proposal. I have written to the Visitor again this week about in reply to David Whitaker's reply. You may like to read it.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous has replied. If you wish to reply without obscenity then I'll publish it. Could I also ask why you are anonymous?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous replied again. He or she doesn't understand obscenity which makes it really difficult to relate to this person, but I have written a blog about their comments and you can find it on the 27th August. At least they will learn something about the Liberal Democrats' call for a referendum on whether we should be in or out of Europe.
ReplyDelete