Politics 2024/25 General Election Voting Intention (2022)

[Scouse]

Not to be outdone:

Reform receives second £36m donation in two days as crypto investor matches record

Cryptocurrency investor Christopher Harborne says he has equalled a donation from Ben Delo announced late on Friday.

www.bbc.co.uk

They're getting it in before Labour changes the law - and they're announcing it to avoid accusations of secrecy.

 

[Raven]

Fairness isn't quite the same thing as 2 foreign based Crypto millionaires chugging money into Reform Ltd, for the obvious return of "do what you like to make money"

 

[Gwadien]

Fairness isn't quite the same thing as 2 foreign based Crypto millionaires chugging money into Reform Ltd, for the obvious return of "do what you like to make money"

Billionaires.

All because they're in a higher tier Discord server of the ponzi scheme.

 

[Embattle]

I think it'll do as much harm as benefit in this country.

 

[Scouse]

So. Anyone want a crack at the question?

 

[Raven]

So. Anyone want a crack at the question?

What question? I mean, there are paragraphs and paragraphs of spiel.

But if you can't see the issue with a few individuals, pumping 10s of millions into one party, and not understanding that they require a return (much bigger than 35m) then that's on you.

 

[Gray]

If this was FFP Everton would have had a 10 point deduction

 

[Raven]

If this was FFP Everton would have had a 10 point deduction

And rightfully! I hope you're ready for City's punishment, I see you getting at least a 15 points deduction.

 

[Scouse]

What question?

"One of the reasons why the old parties have lasted so long is that they have made it very expensive to challenge them

Both of them have annual budgets that run into the tens of millions. Last year, when there was no general election, Labour spent some £3.9m per month and the Tories about £2.3m per month. Reform only managed around £1.8m per month"

This. Want to address that? That sounds not very good in a democracy at all, does it. A stitch up by encumbants that prevents alternative voices breaking through?

...?

But in answer to your question (because I actually answer questions around here):

But if you can't see the issue with a few individuals, pumping 10s of millions into one party, and not understanding that they require a return (much bigger than 35m) then that's on you.

I can see that issue very clearly. Motivation was the question - and Reform is full-throatedly crypto positive (and I agree with that position). But given both of the articles they've posted - there could well be more to it than that.

If it was just crypto, then they could easily have spoken to Badenoch and said "support crypto and I'll give you £35m". Because the Tories are well up for being bought off. As are Labour. Both of them are quite happily to take cash for questions, or donations for seats in the lords or peerages and the like. And that's aside from the low-level shit - like getting tens of thousands of pounds of clothes bought for them, holidays etc. Or maybe the billions that got funnelled into Tory donors during covid? And, of course, Labour's the party of Mandelson.

So if corruption is your only objection, then meh is all I've got to say. You have to do better than that.

Have a crack at the above. It's more interesting than basic corruption in a system where all parties are plainly corrupt.

 

[Gwadien]

...?

But in answer to your question (because I actually answer questions around here):

I can see that issue very clearly. Motivation was the question - and Reform is full-throatedly crypto positive (and I agree with that position). But given both of the articles they've posted - there could well be more to it than that.

If it was just crypto, then they could easily have spoken to Badenoch and said "support crypto and I'll give you £35m". Because the Tories are well up for being bought off. As are Labour. Both of them are quite happily to take cash for questions, or donations for seats in the lords or peerages and the like. And that's aside from the low-level shit - like getting tens of thousands of pounds of clothes bought for them, holidays etc. Or maybe the billions that got funnelled into Tory donors during covid? And, of course, Labour's the party of Mandelson.

So if corruption is your only objection, then meh is all I've got to say. You have to do better than that.

Have a crack at the above. It's more interesting than basic corruption in a system where all parties are plainly corrupt.

Why do you support billionaires taking full advantage of poor people, getting them into crypto and then dumping them and people lose all their money?

 

[Scouse]

Why do you support billionaires

Why can't you read?

 

[Raven]

- and Reform is full-throatedly crypto positive (and I agree with that position).

Ah, understood.

Side note, sell it now because with AI it's worthless, without AI, it’s worthless.

 

[Scouse]

So nobody wants to address the issue. That's fine.

My position on crypto has been the same for well over a decade. I think it's got really usable potential. Can't help it if you guys don't.

 

[Raven]

So nobody wants to address the issue.

What is your actual issue? You could argue in a lift up or down, when you're the only occupant.

Nobody can keep up.

As for Crypto, it’s just an idiot tax, and will be done and dusted within 2 years, It has no use vs what AI can do. "Oh but you can see the ledger" nobody cares, it will be beyond that.

 

[Scouse]

What is your actual issue? You could argue in a lift up or down, when you're the only occupant.

I literally linked the question above for you. I went back in the thread and quoted it for you.

 

[Raven]

I literally linked the question above for you. I went back in the thread and quoted it for you.

Pretend I don't have a mouse wheel, and I am not watching a YouTube video on how they make sex robots in China, on my second screen. Summerise, please.

It's both alarming and informative, btw.

 

[Gwadien]

So nobody wants to address the issue. That's fine.

My position on crypto has been the same for well over a decade. I think it's got really usable potential. Can't help it if you guys don't.

It's a completely irrelevant point, billionaire crypto man said 'this is the reason why' and rather that being like 'hmm what's the actual reason why' you're buying his BitPie and eating it. It's straight out of the MAGA handbook - go on the offensive.

But to humour you, I think it's an inherent failure of democracy, you're always going to have interests interfering, obviously it'd be wonderful if it wasn't the case, but how else do you want to do it? Tax payer funded parties? How would you decide which parties get funding and which don't? Sounds like a very expensive case of fraud to me.

 

[Embattle]

So nobody wants to address the issue. That's fine.

My position on crypto has been the same for well over a decade. I think it's got really usable potential. Can't help it if you guys don't.

My position hasn't changed on crypto either; it is crap and still hasn't done much more than it did when it first appeared, other than being used more and more to hide illegal activities.

 

[Scouse]

But to humour you

Why thankyou

I think it's an inherent failure of democracy, you're always going to have interests interfering, obviously it'd be wonderful if it wasn't the case, but how else do you want to do it? Tax payer funded parties? How would you decide which parties get funding and which don't? Sounds like a very expensive case of fraud to me.

You're missing the seriousness of the problems in the existing system.

If it requires multiple millions to spin up opposition in a democracy then your system is holed below the waterline in some very serious ways.

Effectively "they" have ended people's ability to organise structured opposition - and limited it to only the very rich. (That's why we've got what is happening - nouveaux rich guys funding new parties - as the system is rigged to exclude challengers this is the only way it can happen).

That's not a democracy.

Sure, you have a vote - but it's meaningless as there's nobody to vote for, and start-up parties are blocked.

And now some super rich have busted that system, Labour are searching for ways to fix it to halt this entryism without cutting off their own funding.

So what we have now is a bunfight between rich political backers - but all of them want the plebs cut out of a real say.

If you're poor, or even very well off, and an amazing political thinker and have come up with a system of changes to our politics that would be win-win-win for everyone, and echo down the aeons in human prosperity, then tough shit - you're shut out. You need 100m minimum to have a chance to break through.

I don't really give that much of a monkeys about the Reform question, or the crypto panic, or any of that crap. However, the original post, which demonstrated the multi-millions that the Tories and Labour spend monthly during non-election years show up our system for what it is.

But nobody blinked. They're looking at today's problems rather than the big problem.

And that's: it's not a real democracy. It's a fake. Voters are worker-playthings - tools who's lives bought and sold at the whims and passing ideologies of the super rich.

 

[Scouse]

To illustrate the fix: one of these big crypto donors moved back to the UK in April.

The law Labour is passing just so happens to apply retrospectively to anyone who lived abroad on 25th March.

Funny that eh?