It isn't a strawman and even if it was, that kind of accusation needs some serious backing considering precisely what UKIP have been criticised for in the past year in particular.
Hardly. I think only Emily Thornberry has had anything like approaching the same level of media coverage as UKIP.
The poll also stated that people thought UKIP attracted people with racist views, are you willing to admit that as a concrete truth because it was in that poll?
Considering the BNP told it's voters to switch to UKIP I don't think that this is in dispute. However, the reality is that UKIP want closer ties with the Commonwealth and English speaking world which would result in the opposite of what racists actually want for Britain.
The News of the World debacle was more damaging to Murdoch's empire than any bullshit even remotely related to Blair
Not in terms of Murdoch being kingmaker it wasn't.
Other parties attack immigration levels, perhaps, but none attack the actual people like UKIP does. Stop arguing semantics.
Not all immigrants are equal. Speaking honestly about that fact is what gets people labelled racist. That isn't semantics it is fact.
Thirty years isn't recent history.
The Thatcherite Tory party isn't the same thing as the Tory Party under Thatcher's leadership. I would really expect you to know that if you consider yourself to have an "informed" opinion on this debate.
Can you give me some examples?
Trevor Maxfield was the first. Margaret Burke, Maureen Stowe and Peter Moseley are the other well known ones.
Not really since that's precisely what the term means.
You do realise that by making the above comment you are outing yourself as "absolute moron"? Being unable to prevent entry to 29m people is NOT the same as saying that all 29m will come. You not seeming to understand this was almost enough for me not to bother responding to you.
I love how you continually ignore the point that the fact that these people got into these positions in the first place is an absolute travesty and that the media that you (and UKIP) hates so much is the one always exposing these views.
We've already been over vetting. You simply don't understand how it works. I don't hate the media either. You do seem to believe a lot of nonsense and are barely a bushel short of a full blown conspiracy theorist.
If you hire someone who is racist, and are totally unable to detect any racism, to a party that is being particularly criticised for racism, and then you have a year where Councillor after Councillor after MEP after MEP openly starts talking racist shit then firing them isn't going to appease anybody because the more people you have in your organisation that say these things, the harder it is for you to say "we're not racist."
Yet they are fired for making racist comments. What kind of person would judge a party that expels it's racist members as a racist party for doing the one thing that demonstrates that they are not a racist party? Have you ever stopped to consider the logic (or rather the lack thereof) of your position?
And you think Godfrey Bloom makes your case? A 'character' politician objectively less bigoted, racist, sexist, etc. than at least a couple of members of the previous government's Cabinet? Not only do you not understand the topic you are pontificating upon but your argument doesn't have a leg to stand on.