Protest votes dwindle as the platform diasppears. But that was before 24 hour media and twitter

Politicians and parties who have been given a bit of a kicking by a 'protest vote' in the past, would have to 'front up' the next morning, suggest that 'lessons will be learnt', be a bit humble and then move on confident that the whole furore would soon die down and they could then get back on with treating the electorate with smug, arrogant disdain as usual.

The comments coming out of the political parties this morning following the local election results, suggest that some - most even - think that this is still the case.

However, I have news for them: The landscape has changed. This so-called 'protest vote' or perhaps 'protest movement' as it should probably be called, is likely to be sustained by our modern 24-hour media, weekly if not daily rolling polls and. above all, by social media and twitter in particular.

Whereas most past protest votes have dwindled as the platform to be heard was effectively removed until the next election opportunity, that is simply not the case today and this 're-allignment' in terms of two-way communications, the formation of informal but like-minded groups on twitter and the ability for comments and promises to be re-broadcast and remembered, is actually likely to increase momentum rather than dwindle away into nothingness. Particularly so since the initial local election results out this morning show that that it is working - nothing breeds success like success.

By definition 'protest votes' tend to be single issue votes that subsequently disappear. But our membership of the EU is not going away as an issue. And nor are the growing numbers of people who recognise the dangers that the EU poses to our very existence as a nation state. I think, therefore that the term 'protest vote' is inaccurate in the current context. It has certainly been a protest against our corrupt, disconnected establishment, but it is not something about which people just want to 'register' their displeasure and then move on. It is something about which they believe passionately and about which they want to campaign for the longer term.

So I think this 'backlash' will be sustained - partly because of the nature of the communications platform that so many 'ordinary' voters now have but also, in my opinion, because the 'battle' that has been joined by so many people is not just against three political parties who are out of touch with what voters care about: It is also a back-lash against the biased main stream media (MSM) and in particular the BBC.

The media thought it could use its power and influence to kill off UKIP's popularity. It threw down the challenge, flexed its muscles, called UKIP 'racist' called those who support it 'loons' and guess what? They were ignored.

Actually more than just ignored; they were called out about it. Hauled over the coals as all of our suspicions about media bias that have been bubbling under the surface for years, were actually brought out into the open and exposed for the reality that they are.

The mask has slipped and we have all seen what lies beneath. The battle between the people and the establishment has effectively just begun and the provision of a major additional target (a largely biased media) that many people feel (quite rightly in my opinion) must also be addressed, will prove to be an additional and important element of the whole argument and ongoing campaign.

By trying to kill-off the UKIP stance on the taking back of popular control over those who supposedly work for us, the media has (largely) shown itself to be firmly in the enemy camp. Far from holding our establishment to account, it has shown itself to be a cheer-leader for the smug oppression that we have been subjected to for decades.

I think we've had enough and that we now have a rare opportunity to build momentum.

I hope UKIP will be rational and relatively humble when the results come in on Sunday; the party's next step is to ditch the highly effective but close-to-the-wind campaigning stuff (which made me wince but I fully understand why that approach was used), and start to prove to people that it has sensible, proper policies to promote: It also needs to start bringing the many issues surrounding the EU to the fore now that it has a platform of credibility and support upon which to do so.

In short, UKIP needs to take some high moral ground, show itself to be a serious, intelligent party (without discarding its 'man in the street' connection with real people) and it needs to get to the point where far from being embarrassed to say 'I voted UKIP', more people can say 'Yes I voted UKIP because it is right for the future of our country, you should too.'

If it can achieve this, it can not only become the third party in the UK ahead of the woeful Lib Dems, but it can have real influence over both of the other parties as it takes votes from both. Ultimately this could lead to our campaigning for an 'out' vote at a future referendum - which is my overriding concern. But along the way, it could also mean that we have a new, dynamic, well-connected third party which changes both the political landscape and the connectivity between voter and representative and which means that the media has to raise its game and re-read its charter on impartiality.

Thanks for reading.