State of the parties as 2015 General Election looms.

[jean]

Why do you keep calling them the UKIP? No-one who is anyone uses the definite article any more! (cf. Wigmore, Tate etc.)

[Beef Oven!]

Why do you keep calling them the UKIP? No-one who is anyone uses the definite article any more! (cf. Wigmore, Tate etc.)

The United Kingdom Independence Party, shortened to, the UKIP. Like the RAC, the AA, L'arc De triomphe, La Bora, La Bamba, the UK, etc. I still call it the Tate!

I'm not just anyone, btw.

Is this one of ahinton's legitimate by-ways?

[jean]

It is if I say so.

[amateur51]

It is if I say so.

if you're going to be a pedant, be a confident one, eh jean?

[Beef Oven!]

Party membership numbers are deemed low in this country, e.g. compared with Germany.

The SNP numbers seem enormous, something to do with the referendum? Anyway, why don't they field some candidates in England and Wales? If they want to hold the balance of power, they're probably going to need more than just Scottish seats.

[jean]

Once again, the Green Party are omitted (though they're there in the German example!)

I can tell you that membership of the Green Party in Liverpool at some time yesterday topped 300 for the first time ever, but I have no idea how this compares with membership of other parties.

[Beef Oven!]

I can tell you that membership of the Green Party in Liverpool at some time yesterday topped 300 for the first time ever.....

There are more Man United fans in Liverpool!

[ahinton]

The SNP numbers seem enormous, something to do with the referendum? Anyway, why don't they field some candidates in England and Wales? If they want to hold the balance of power, they're probably going to need more than just Scottish seats.

Well, of course that last bit's true (in theory, anyway), but I do not know if it would be constitutionally possible even if it would strike the majority of SNP supporters as being desirable! Perhaps if there's no other obvious obstruction to their doing so, their reason for not having already sought to do so might be that they quite understandably want to minimise the risk that the English Defence League might mount demonstrations or otherwise seek to make their unwelcome presnece felt in Scotland.

[Beef Oven!]

Well, of course that last bit's true (in theory, anyway), but I do not know if it would be constitutionally possible even if it would strike the majority of SNP supporters as being desirable! Perhaps if there's no other obvious obstruction to their doing so, their reason for not having already sought to do so might be that they quite understandably want to minimise the risk that the English Defence League might mount demonstrations or otherwise seek to make their unwelcome presnece felt in Scotland.

I don't think there is a constitutional issue.

[Serial_Apologist]

if you're going to be a pedant, be a confident one, eh jean?

Once again, the Green Party are omitted

"IS omitted"

{winkydinkyplonky}

[visualnickmos]

I don't think there is a constitutional issue.

Quite right. The SNP is a legal political party operating within the UNITED Kingdom, and can, therefore field candidates in any constituency, therein.
It would be quite a thing if they did, although I can't quite imagine, what would be the line fed to potential voters in not-Scotland to garner support! "Better off without us" perhaps!

[ahinton]

I don't think there is a constitutional issue.

Well, if there isn't, it could be very interesting indeed should SNP decide to major in on its electoral support and success by muscling in on Westmonster politics by deciding to field candidates other than in Scotland itself; if it did, however, the result might even muddy the wters even more in terms of the possibility of creating a coalition following that election...

[ahinton]

Quite right. The SNP is a legal political party operating within the UNITED Kingdom, and can, therefore field candidates in any constituency, therein.
It would be quite a thing if they did, although I can't quite imagine, what would be the line fed to potential voters in not-Scotland to garner support! "Better off without us" perhaps!

Or may be even "better together", provided that the recycling of that one could be guaranteed not to expose SNP to the risk of intellectual property law infringement...

[french frank]

Party membership numbers are deemed low in this country, e.g. compared with Germany.

The SNP numbers seem enormous, something to do with the referendum?

In the case of party membership surges due to special topical circumstances which cause a sudden burst of enthusiasm, the crunch comes when the renewal date comes round. As with the Phrenological Society of Cincinnati.

[Beef Oven!]

In the case of party membership surges due to special topical circumstances which cause a sudden burst of enthusiasm, the crunch comes when the renewal date comes round. As with the Phrenological Society of Cincinnati.

If the SNP's increase in membership isn't a special interest spike, then it's impressive and so long as they get their renewal notices and folllow-ups out in time, the membership level and increase may well be sustainable.

On the other hand, the UKIP have moved from circa 16,000 members at the beginning of 2011 to 40,000 today. Although I am unaware of the drill-down information, Ockham's razor tells us that the increase must be a non-spiked, even increase, and UKIP must have taken care of renewals, because to get to 40,000 otherwise, would require an inordinate number of new members to off-set the churn.