Buying votes – Tories in the lead

The Conservative Party accepted £4.7 million of donations in the first three months of 2018, new data shows.

Theresa May’s party received more than three times as much as Labour between January 1 and March 31.

Labour accepted £1.49 million in donations.

The Liberal Democrats received £564,135 and the Green Party just £1,800.

This is £2.4 million less than what was accepted during the same period last year (£9.3 million). …”

One thought on “Buying votes – Tories in the lead

  1. There is no longer any doubt that the Conservative bankroll by rich donors (or as I call them sponsors or even investors) is a major bias to the election process, for two reasons:

    1. No other party (who don’t have a long list of ultra-rich donors) – and especially no Independent candidate – can hope to match their spending on advertising; and

    2. Big spending allows parties to use social media advertising targeted at individuals based on big-data profiling of the topics likely to influence their voting – again a level of influence on voters that other parties – and especially Independent candidates – cannot possibly match; and

    3. Social media advertising to individuals allows the party to pretty much say whatever they feel will influence that individual to vote for them regardless of its truthfulness and without any real transparency or accountability over what is said.

    If democracy is about all candidates having an equal chance to persuade the voters of their policies, and if democracy is about open debate and truthfulness and transparency and accountability, then this level of election spending is incredibly damaging to democracy.

    Democracy is not just about the vote itself – it is at least as much about what is said before the vote, and about what happ

    Indeed, based on the scandalous breaking of election spending rules in the 2015 general election and the Brexit referendum, and on how Cambridge Analytica created detailed political profiles on millions of individuals in order to provide targeted advertising, and on how Facebook has admitted allowing both parties and foreign countries to post fake-news posts designed to bias the election, and on how debate is stifled by insults and “a decision is a decision however bad”, and on hijacking decisions getting a decision on false promises and then switching direction, and on the lack of transparency of real agendas in both general elections and referendum, and on how policies not declared before a vote have then tried to be bulldozed through Parliament after the vote without debate … I would say that democracy is pretty much dead in the UK at the moment.

    It is time that people stopped believing the propaganda published by biased media and aimed specifically at them on social media, and instead researched topics for themselves to have genuine facts to base their decisions on.

    BUT, if people want to make life easier for themselves by trusting someone else to know what is best for them, then surely it is better to trust someone who does not have the vested interests of a few ultra-rich donors at heart or someone who stands to make huge financial gains themselves from a particular result, and instead trust someone that has shown by several years hard effort fighting for local issues that will impact you that they are independent of vested interests and will genuinely represent you in parliament.

    In other words, decide whether who you can trust more:

    1. the media, or
    2. your local Conservative MP who has done little or nothing for their constituencies (and in Hugo Swire’s case has done more for himself and his friends in the Middle East than for East Devon); or
    3. your local Independent Candidate whose track record fighting for local residents speaks for itself.


Comments are closed.