And now for something completely different (British Politics)

[Jerichi]

So from my 10 second Wikipedia glancing, I'm guessing the UKIP is the British version of the Tea Party, with a little anti-EU flavor thrown in?

[Concept]

Not exactly. We don't have anything as far right as the Tea Party, really, and also that would imply that UKIP are in any way coherent. They're strongly anti-EU and anti-immigration, and that's about all they can agree on - on any other issue you get wildly differing views between senior party members. If you look at their voting figures in the most recent European elections the sizeable elements of their voter base (15-30% each) previously voted for the Conservatives, Labour, UKIP or the BNP (British National Party, our thankfully now defunct super racist party that enjoyed some success in European elections until UKIP put a more acceptable face on anti-EU politics) - these different groups agree on little to nothing else.

They're a single issue party who've drawn members and voters who agree on nothing else except immigration. If you only have one policy then you'll have fewer potential sticking points with voters. It's a combination of people who a) wish the UK was still the world power it once was, b) are annoyed that the population density of England is like cramming the entire US population into Texas and/or c) are just very racist. If we had a referendum on EU membership tomorrow and voted to leave UKIP would collapse overnight.

[DaveTheFishGuy]

UKIP basically exist to get the old white guy vote by telling them that the state of the country isn't their fault at all, no sir-ee.

[Concept]

It's mostly racists or people looking for anyone to blame in an effort to avoid any kind of responsibility (akin to the SNP in the latter case, just with a different target to shift blame onto). But there are presumably some people who'll vote that way out of a legitimate belief the EU has failed. I'm in favour of the EU because I support the ideas behind it and think that if it fails we won't try again, but it's been done absolutely terribly and is a complete mess. A good half of the countries in it should not have been let in. Look at the mess with Greece - the EU let them join despite their finances coming nowhere near to meeting the standards they say they require for membership, and now they're even more in the shitter than when they joined. A number of eastern European countries are being completely shafted after having their membership rushed through - freedom of movement means skilled workers are leaving those countries en masse and suddenly they suffer a shortage of doctors etc. Higher standards for entry and patiently helping applicants reach those standards before letting them in would've worked out much better for everyone involved. It's pretty much a joke at this point, about as successful as the League of Nations was.

Whilst most of UKIPs support is just racism or blame-dodging, it's not hard to see legitimate anti-EU arguments even if I think they're ultimately less compelling than the pro-EU ones.

[Stealthy]

So let's see if I've got this right:

Conservative- Also known as the Tories, are the UK equivalent of the Republicans. One of the two main parties, has been in power this past term and generally people aren't super happy with them so they're expected to lose a bunch of seats. David Cameron is one of them. Also gave us Margaret Thatcher and Winston Churchill.

Labour- UK equivalent of the Democrats. One of the two main parties, has been leading the Opposition this past term and because people aren't liking the current regime they are expected to gain a bunch of seats. Tony Blair was one of them. Also brought us that pink barbie bus to appeal to women. I learned that one from John Oliver.

LibDem- Obligatory third party. I would've thought leftward idealists but apparently they're centrists/slightly left centrists. Though that's convenient for a third party. They get their votes via two ways: the people who just like their policies as a base, and the protest votes from people who go "I hate everybody equally so I'm going to vote for LibDem to spite them all". The latter explains quite well why Kush is one of them. Expected to lose a bunch of seats because their partnering with Conservative pissed off their base while it's really hard to gain the protest vote when you're part of the regime.

UKIP- Kinda rightward party that's just super anti-EU. Expected to rip a bunch of seats in a few places but because of districting will not grab as much as expected. Has had a resurgence in past few years and is expected to pick up a bunch of seats because nobody likes the EU mainly because overcrowding or something? Man, you'd think the easy solution here would just to throw all the non-UKers moving in from the EU up into Scotland. Speaking of Scotland...

SNP- Another one-issue ish party that's basically just wanting Scotland to be independent because nationalism rawr. Also Scotland is super liberal and the Tories are in charge and even though independence just got voted down they're gonna push for a revote like every six months. And they'll keep doing so until it happens or Scotland just tells them to shut up because they finally realize that apparently independence does nothing helpful for anyone, as I again learned from John Oliver. Thanks John. Will rip a bunch of seats from Labour in Scotland but that's okay for Labour because they're going to rip even more seats from LibDem and Conservative.

Green Party- Basically the US Green Party except marginally more successful. May take a seat or two as the only acceptable protest vote despite not being a great one.

Monster Raving Loony Party- Vermin Supreme.

The expected end seat count will be Labour having the most but not enough for a majority, followed by Conservative. Scotland, Lib Dem, and UKIP will have some decent amount of seats but it'll probably all add up to only slightly more than what the lot of them have now I guess (but LibDem will have considerably less while SNP will have considerably more), and somebody will have to form a coalition. I think somebody said the rule is that Conservative, as the current power, gets to try first. Lib Dem may not have enough to give them majority and Lib Dem may not want to try again because they got bloodied for it, so they turn to most likely UKIP because SNP would lose support faster than you can say Nick Clegg if they coalitioned with Tory (even though it's in the best interest of them to get the Tories in charge). UKIP may or may not have enough to support a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition. Lib Dems may or may not be willing to go along with UKIP help. If Conservative fails, it falls to Labour, who may be able to get Lib Dem help and can have enough ideological similarity with SNP to get their help, so Labour's got a good shot at taking over. SNP and UKIP will most certainly demand their specific referendums to be held in order to earn their support, and like nobody wants to give them what they want.

So all in all, things are going to get a bit frantic.

[Concept]

Also Plaid Cymru (Welsh equivalent of SNP, much less successful because the Welsh care much less). Plus Northern Ireland returns something like 20 MPs (out of 650 UK-wide) and not one of them will be from any of the aforementioned parties - they have four parties of their own (DUP, SDLP, Sinn Fein, Alliance). Unlikely to ally with anyone.

[SoS]

It's five Concept, you forgot the UUP. Though they're fundamentally the same as the DUP anyway.

[Stealthy]

Oh yeah. Don't the Irish elect people but none of them ever actually show up to Parliament because fuck you Britain and all the Northern Ireland bullshit.

[Concept]

That's Sinn Fein.

[Talon87]

Sooooo ...

Ex-cop claims a royal was in paedophile ring but inquiry was closed to shield Buckingham Palace from scandal (mirror.co.uk)

U.K. Government rejects immunity for public officials who blow whistle on child sex abuse (exaronews.com)

Scotland Yard Investigated for ‘Protecting Pedophiles’ in U.K. (thedailybeast.com)

Conspiracy theory or conspiracy fact? Seems like Reddit's front pages, which I turned to this morning for some quick amusement, are covered with stories about this topic.

[deh74]

I'd say it looks to be a conspiracy theory/ratings grabber given that the only news organizations reporting on it aren't exactly the most reliable of sources.

[Talon87]

Originally Posted by deh74

I'd say it looks to be a conspiracy theory/ratings grabber given that the only news organizations reporting on it aren't exactly the most reliable of sources.

I'd be inclined to agree with this line of reasoning but for this. Obviously a smoking gun renders UK libel laws incapable of shielding those who are accused of doing heinous acts, but if the smoking gun is inadmissible in court due to how it was obtained, if it's been destroyed, etc etc, it makes it that much harder to win the libel suit. Which means that the British press may be less inclined to defame members of the royal family as paedophlles in the absence of smoking guns.

I agree it still sounds like a conspiracy theory, but I wondered aloud if it were one commonly given credence by British nationals.

[Concept]

You're misunderstanding how UK libel laws (and indeed libel laws in general, including in the US) work. There's a difference between reporting "these former ministers and this royal are child molesters" and "these former ministers and this royal have been accused of being child molesters by x source". In one you're saying they are and that's the claim you're defending, in the other you're saying someone someone has made accusations that they are and all you have to defend is that you have a source that said it. Even in the cases of people like Dominique Strauss-Khan (against whom all charges were eventually dropped due to there being no evidence they were true) libel cases were not made because they would not be won - all the papers reported was "he's accused of this" or "alleged to have done that".

As for this particular case, maybe? We have had several large child abuse scandals emerge in the past few years from twenty or thirty years ago involving tv/radio presenters and the Rotherham abuse case etc. But those were all reported on from very early on (before legal action was taken) by major news sources which this is not.

[Concept]

Nigel Farage and family run out of pub.

Short version; anti-UKIP protesters found Nigel Farage, his wife and 15 and 10 year old sons having lunch in a pub and chase them out whilst shouting abuse, and then jumping on his bonnet has he tried to drive away. I think labelling these people scum is the first thing I've ever agreed with Farage on. His views have absolutely nothing to do with whether this kind of thing is acceptable or not (hint; it's not). They acted like the EDL.

[deh74]

Really? I mean really? The guy was with his family! You don't just attack someone like that, even if they are politically your worst enemy. I could maybe, just barely, see yelling disapproving things at him from across the street, but nothing like this is anything even resembling acceptable.

[Raves]

I mean, I see him as a cunt but even I agree that's going too far. No wonder this country's going to the shits if that's the sort of behaviour our indigenous animals behave like. Wacky political cultists.

[Princess Ana]

Protest organiser Dan Glass said the group was in fancy dress to stage "a cabaret of diversity" and included migrants, HIV activists, gay people, disabled people and breastfeeding mothers.

and instead of that you've likely managed to piss off all the well-meaning people in these groups. This kind of thing infuriates me.

[SoS]

... Not going to lie, I find the Farage thing quite funny, but I'm a git.

[Concept]

To clarify, you find abuse hurled at a family out for a quiet lunch that results in a ten year old child going missing for hours because he ran and hid out of fear funny in general or only when it's aimed at people whose politics you disagree with?

[SoS]

Yes.

[Concept]

>Looks at the options to vote for in my constituency

Temptation to stand as an independent rising.

[SoS]

Concept 4 PM, he can't possibly be worse then Farage.

... Dare we ask who they are?

[Concept]

No-one important is running in either of the constituencies I could vote in, it's just my only alternative to the main five is a guy whose position is essentially "make the government as shitty as possible so it'll be overthrown".

If I didn't have finals in June I'd stand just to give myself someone worth my vote. Half seriously considering it anyway (although there is the downside of the £500 deposit I'd almost certainly never get back).

[Concept]

Anyone other than me bother to watch the leaders debate? Nicola Sturgeon played that very well and no-one seemed to want to challenge her.

[Handymankg2]

Yeah it was pretty clear that she won. The women definitely came off better after that debate. I can't imagine Nigel will be very pleased tonight.