THE United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) has come far, chortles Nigel Farage, its leader. Not so long ago, he admits, UKIP was a "hardline protest party" dogged by scandal and monomaniacally focused on ending Britain's European Union membership. Now, he says, it is a force to be reckoned with and a grown-up party of government. He is half right. At a time of public hostility to politicians and Eurocrats, UKIP is doing a roaring trade in populist outrage. In the Corby by-election on November 15th, it won 14% of the vote, splitting the political right and allowing Labour to capture the seat easily. Awe-struck Conservatives fear being caught in the same pincer at the 2015 general election. Daniel Hannan, a Eurosceptic journalist and Tory MEP, calls for a Conservative-UKIP electoral pact. Under this agreement, the two parties would avoid standing against each other in marginal seats. Mr Hannan and others have talked of them governing in coalition afterwards. There is every chance that UKIP will cause further upset in by-elections in Croydon North, Middlesbrough and Rotherham on November 29th. Next year's local elections, mostly in the prosperous southern English counties in which UKIP is strongest, could provide further momentum. Peter Kellner, head of YouGov, a polling firm, says it is quite possible that the party will then come first in the 2014 European elections. This may oblige broadcasters, bound by strict impartiality rules, to give it a larger share of coverage in the general-election campaign. Despite growing Euroscepticism in the country as a whole, Mr Farage intends to use every electoral opportunity to show that UKIP is not a single-issue party. It already champions lower immigration, selective grammar schools and lower taxes, he stresses. Working groups are busy developing detailed policies for scrutiny by the national executive committee. The party even claims to be the "third force in British politics," supplanting the Lib Dems. Some polling supports that assertion (see chart). Mr Farage is inspired by the Lib Dems" emergence as a well-oiled electoral machine in the 1990s, and calls the party "the model for everything we do apart from our policies." The comparison is inaccurate. UKIP's growing media profile obscures the complex psychodramas and organisational chaos below the surface. A former adviser describes a hollowed-out structure with few engaged members, opaque finances and little internal democracy, ascribing the party's successes to "force of charisma, standing out from the dullards and being in the right place at the right time." Nikki Sinclaire, an MEP who resigned the party whip, describes it simply as "Stalinist and unprofessional." The party lacks a coherent identity: Mr Farage at once lays claim to Gladstonian liberalism, declares himself a convinced Thatcherite and speaks of reaching out to Old Labour supporters. The "detailed policies" he promises are a distant prospect. Nor does UKIP possess a network of activists sufficient to wage a national campaign. So far its successes at easier-to-fight European and by-elections have not been matched at general elections. In 2010 it won just 3.1% of the vote; even with an electoral pact, the party would probably secure few - if any - seats in 2015. It has many fewer local councillors even than the Green Party, which, unlike UKIP, is already represented in the Commons. It is, then, too large and popular to be a mere protest party, but too chaotic and ill-defined to be a viable party of government. For the Tories, this is the worst of both worlds. It is hard to imagine David Cameron going anywhere near an electoral alliance with UKIP, whatever Eurosceptics and fearful activists may want. The jaws of the pincer await.