Local Elections - 3rd of May 2012

[beanzontoast]

Hi N.S.H., thank you for pointing it out B.O.T. i mean i didnt see it but you are right and i didnt`even before it was pointed out thing it was derogatory.

you are also right with national party`s, local party`s and manifesto`s however to take immigration it was introduced as an open door policy by the last labour government, that has put a great strain on local councils and services, ie schools, hospitals, and social housing, as an example in london the cost for interpreters per year runs into the millions of pounds, which you the taxper will have to pay for ( London of course ) but because this open door policy was allowed by Labour the national government at the time, the local councils if they are Labour controlled must agree with it, and in effect put up your taxes to pay for it all. My piece on George Galloway on this forum will complete the picture.

[beanzontoast]

Wow another one who is seeing it well done M.K.1.

just to throw something else into your comment have you noticed why everyone callls the arms trade the defence industry, or why the local council call speed and tax cameras Safety camera`s, Follow the money, also when the poll tax was brought in it dosent matter by who whoever was in opposition and said it was nasty, again it dosent matter who. They didn`t get rid of it they just changed it`s name and carried on.

[notinshadow]

Ryhill, Firstly let me say that what happens nationally doesn't bother me to much at all, as for the rumours, there are better people to talk about them than me.

Now lets look at what I think is the facts.

I was in two minds who to vote for, I wanted to vote Tory but Ray Wells turned us over in my area last time round, so that made me look elsewhere at who to vote for.

I put a shirt and tie on, turned up to the UKIP meeting at the pub (The Woodcutter)..
Dave Pascoe was in good humour along with a couple of other guys that were there.

Eric and Dave clearly don't get on as well as you think..they spent the whole 90 minutes I was there digging at each other.

I walked away thinking "what a tool Eric was" to think that his constant digs went unnoticed to me and others there. Erics conduct in my view was simply shocking.

Dave Pascoe has a clever mind for politics and his not childish as Eric was and is a natual born leader..but has image issues ..so sort the image issues, build a team for next time round and I would be delighted to vote for a UKIP party with Dave Pascoe at the helm.   

That's my view, I hold it dear and if you don't like that's very sad.     

[notinshadow]

P.S.

Come May 3rd UKIP will come bottom of the pile sadly..that is my honest opinion.
If only 6 people tuned up to the meeting, when 8 are standing, that speaks volumes to me also.
If UKIP couldn't get all the 8 there, what chance will they have at the polling station.

The guy standing in Hart ward has a sporting chance, the rest havn't got a hope in hell and a blind Stevie Wonder, blind folded with a sack over his head and locked in a basement could see that, so why you can't is a shock to me.

You clearly must be in the circle, so you need to take one step back and then look!!

UKIP might get one seat but if you expect more of the 8 to gets seats, forget it, Going back to Stevie Wonder, you have more chance of him driving down York Road than UKIP have of getting more than two seats come May 3rd, so yes, I think UKIP have major issues locally in this town.

Dave Pascoe made a major screw/f*c* up by standing where his standing, against guys that will clearly get more votes. If it had been me, I would have pushed my luck elsewhere and given myself a sporting chance followed up with plenty of door knocking to drag votes out.

It makes me sad to think that come May 3rd the poxy BNP will do better than UKIP in this town.

[The Shadow]

            There is a lot of  speculation going on at the moment and U.K.I.P. seem to be the target for much of it. First of all we were told ,from a good source, that U.K.I.P. weren't going to contest this years local elections. Wrong. Then there was much speculation that Hartlepool First was really U.K.I.P. in disguise ,again wrong. Now we are told that Dave and Eric, of U.K.I.P, are at loggerheads and their dispute is damaging U.K.I.P. locally.  The first two rumours were proved to be incorrect so maybe Notintheshadow can provide some solid proof to justify his comments. If not retract them.

The evidence that is there for everybody to see clearly shows that UKIP did indeed have something to do with Hartlepool First. An objection from Eric Wilson does not constitute proof that there is any link.
Perhaps you will now retract your statement as it is incorrect.

[notenoughsaid]

In support of the post by"Testicles" he is dead right. I am sure most people on this forum remember the famous words of the then Minister of Health,under the Blair(wash my mouth out!)Gov.Dr.John Read ..."As long as I am Minister of Health Hartlepool will not loose its Hospital."   Any guesses as to what his qualification to use the initials DR.  come from?     He wrote a paper "On the history of the Palm Oil industry of West Africa" I leave the rest to your imagination, but I feel it was another Whitehall deception at our expense.

I accept this post is slightly "off topic"  but suggest he may be able to land a job at the One Life Centre.!!!!

[beanzontoast]

I will reply to The Shadow post 109 and the quote from Ryehill on the same ticket, interesting, I will find out the truth of the matter and post it here. I will not ever reveal my sources. I will remain totally objective, game on

[mk1]

The evidence that is there for everybody to see clearly shows that UKIP did indeed have something.......................

Do I detect the sound of slapping on the flanks of a long deceased Equus caballus?

[Ryehill]

          So  on the basis of one meeting Notheshadow condemns U.K.I.P. to oblivion. Can I ask him how did he get in to the meeting. Was he invited? If he was invited then it is a pretty low blow to criticise people who I assume made him welcome at the meeting. I don't think you will be invited again.

[Inspector Knacker]

            There is a lot of  speculation going on at the moment and U.K.I.P. seem to be the target for much of it. First of all we were told ,from a good source, that U.K.I.P. weren't going to contest this years local elections. Wrong. Then there was much speculation that Hartlepool First was really U.K.I.P. in disguise ,again wrong. Now we are told that Dave and Eric, of U.K.I.P, are at loggerheads and their dispute is damaging U.K.I.P. locally.  The first two rumours were proved to be incorrect so maybe Notintheshadow can provide some solid proof to justify his comments. If not retract them.

The evidence that is there for everybody to see clearly shows that UKIP did indeed have something to do with Hartlepool First.

Does anyone of any consequence really care ......?

[notinshadow]

          So  on the basis of one meeting Notheshadow condemns U.K.I.P. to oblivion. Can I ask him how did he get in to the meeting. Was he invited? If he was invited then it is a pretty low blow to criticise people who I assume made him welcome at the meeting. I don't think you will be invited again.

This time round not oblivion, I think you are over egging it somewhat.
I had rang up as I had a question or two and was invited along by Dave and then Eric when he rang ten minutes, after I had put the phone down to Dave.

They were looking for councillors, I was looking for a couple of answers to a couple of questions I had.
That I guess is why they put a phone number on the leaflet, so people can call them with questions they have.

I did not expect Eric to continuely dig out Dave Pascoe at the meeting, had I known that I would have stayed at home.
If they don't want to invite me back that's fine, I will lose no sleep over it either.

[beanzontoast]

Hi All There are some who have made predictions, for the local elections, and those that have had a moan and groan about Hartlepool councillors in particular the length of time it has been Labour controlled. A newspaper article today has confirmed UKIP has overtaken the Lib Dems to be the third most popular national party in the country. I wonder if those with predictions, and those who want a change within the council will vote for change, or will it stay as it always has. Predictions please. 

[The Shadow]

Good luck to UKIP. However I think they are ejaculating far too prematurely if they believe these polls will represent results at the ballot box in May. My two pence worth.

[notinshadow]

Beanz how do you think UKIP will do locally in Hartlepool on May 3rd??

[beanzontoast]

Hi Notinshadow, It`s not easy to predict, considering the unique circumstances to this election, it`s unique in that the whole council is up for election, the reason for this as you know is the boundry changes, these changes have reduced the amount of wards, but made them twice the size to do this they have not only changed the the natural voting patern of the old wards eg you would expect manor would go to labour as would the brus, but the brus ward now includes King Oswy drive all the way up to hart station, because of the boundry changes i would not think labour would not be happy with any of the changes, but they as well as the tories, and lib dems are national party`s and have a brand, ( people know who they are )  so they by tradition have less work to do to get a vote. There is a lot more to put in the mix UKIP have the hardest work to do as they should have worked harder to get themselves known, The turnout i think will be higher than usual but not fantastic, the postal voters are the key they are more likely to vote. So i think UKIP will get 3, tories 1, Independants 4, HPF, 5 Labour to get the rest overall though labour will not dominate the council, even if labour have more councillors as there will be much tactical voting.