Astonishing? I’d say they were quite predictable results really.

objet, I think that was sarcasm we heard there.

Now let the toss-arguing begin.

Not entirely sarcastic – the positive feeling towards Greens, much higher than for UKIP, is astonishing to me given how much people talk up UKIP.

The supposed ‘surge’ of BNP support talked up by right-wing media is of course meant to be sarcastic.

Its only ‘astonishing’ if you’d convinced yourself beforehand that the BBC were the font of all evil, and that the British people are a bunch of ignorant racist fuckwits who would take to the streets with burning crucifixes upon hearding the words of a quivering blancmange in a suit.

“An astonishing result too: more people in the country have positive feelings towards the Green Party than UKIP, despite the latter’s claims of representing the “silent majority” on the subject of immigration.”

I doubt many people know what the Greens’ immigration policy is. Or most of their policies for that matter. I suspect the general perception is that they’re well-meaning lefties who want to cut pollution and improve public transport.

As someone who is sad enough to have read their entire long-term manifesto I’m probably in a minority of people who realise just how left-wing they are.

if you’d convinced yourself beforehand that the BBC were the font of all evil, and that the British people are a bunch of ignorant racist fuckwits

Way to go with illiteracy and stupidity. Perhaps you should hang out with the likes of PragueTory more, who has similar problems understanding basic points.

The point is ‘astonishing’ to the extent how much right-wingers claim there is overwhelming support for UKIP / BNP etc on immigration policy and whatever else. I’m actually pointing out that Britons are not as reactionary as many right-wingers claim they are. I see such subtleties are beyond your grasp.

.I doubt many people know what the Greens’ immigration policy is. Or most of their policies for that matter.
Because most papers keep banging on about the usual crap all the bloody time:
lesbian dogs mauling kids, EU-funded single mothers assassinating white British OAPs, immigrants shagging your house; social workers infiltrating facebook and gay asylum seekers taking all jobs.

I said it before and I’ll repeat it again. If the Green Party managed to total over a million votes in the midst of an almost total press blackout, god knows what they’d get with proper press coverage and tabloids echoing their policies the same way they do with UKIP and BNP.

‘Way to go with illiteracy and stupidity. Perhaps you should hang out with the likes of PragueTory more, who has similar problems understanding basic points.’

Yeah, everyone who thinks you’re inconsistant hangs out together. Me and PT, we’re like this (crosses fingers).

Keep up the smears, I’m sure you are convincing everyone. Now go through my posts and find one where I agree with PragueTory, let alone where we gang up on you.

The fact that I made precisely the predictions the evidence now points to and now you’ve come round to my point of view should not trouble you.

“If the Green Party managed to total over a million votes in the midst of an almost total press blackout, god knows what they’d get with proper press coverage”

Probably about a quarter as many votes.

‘I said it before and I’ll repeat it again. If the Green Party managed to total over a million votes in the midst of an almost total press blackout, god knows what they’d get with proper press coverage and tabloids echoing their policies the same way they do with UKIP and BNP.’

Actually, their vote would fall. They’re popular because of their well known opposition to climate change but if people took a closer look at their preference for crank medicine over stem-cell research they wouldn’t get close to Parliament.

They get a soft ride because they are associated with one major issue and so to criticise them is to be accused of climate change denial.

Oh, and I’m as confident of that as I was Griffin would make a twat of himself.

The fact that I made precisely the predictions the evidence now points to and now you’ve come round to my point of view should not trouble you.

Err no. You first twisted what I meant, and when I pointed that out, you’re now claiming I’ve come around to your point of view. As if there are only two points of view in this debate. My article this morning in fact says that right-wingers are exaggerating the influence of the BNP for political reasons. Any sane person could read what I meant from that.

‘My article this morning in fact says that right-wingers are exaggerating the influence of the BNP for political reasons.’

The right have been exaggerating SUPPORT for the BNP, not their influence: they claim the BNP are addressing widely held concerns other parties are afraid to. It’s the Left which has exaggerated their INFLUENCE, hence their fear of granting them a ‘platform’.

Both sides are wrong. People are better than they think.

‘Any sane person could read what I meant from that.’

And I’ll let that slide, even though I have referred to my mental health on more than one occasion, because I have a thicker skin than most people here.

(I am also, as you’ll notice, an insomniac.)

Can Shatterface be banned please? He only ever repeats right-wing talking points, and his only line of argument is that the left have sold out to Islamo-fascists etc etc

‘Can Shatterface be banned please? He only ever repeats right-wing talking points, and his only line of argument is that the left have sold out to Islamo-fascists etc etc’

What the fuck?

Can you justify either accusation or explain why I am such a threat to this site that I need to be banned?

Seriously?

“No Platform for Shatterface” !

“No Platform for Shatterface” !

Exactly – ‘no platform’ has given us a generation unable to counter their opponents with evidence and logic, and unwilling to look too closely at their own arguments.

I’ve seen the future and it looks like Sally.

I’m not sure about banning him, I found his first comment quite funny and I’d rather Shatterface’s bollocks than what I thought would occur here is the usual raft of BBC haters.

Denim Justice @17:

Er, please no?

Shatterface disagrees with me about most things, but can hold up a civilised debate, frequently knows his stuff, and is a fair commentator in that he’s prepared to accept a viable argument even if it doesn’t convince him. There’s others around who’re much less reasonable. Let’s keep the ones we can have a good argument with, yes?

Grow up children forfucksake

I think it was Robespierre who believed that all good reasonable men would after consideration arrive at the same conclusion and therefore anyone who disagreed with his project was guillotined. This I think would be the preference of towering intellect mr justice.

Shatterface @ 13,

I agree that the Green Party seems able to hide some ‘New Age’ ideas in it’s manifesto. This seems to me to be of interest to anyone that hasn’t given up on the idea of evidence based medicine:

http://tinyurl.com/nmclo6

I agree with John Q. Publican @ 23, by the way.

Sunny who?
Then he would say that wouldn’t he.