Aaron Banks-more scary than any politician?

Very dangerous trisher

He gave me the creeps.

I think he financed the voteleave pamphlet that I'm so angry about. We think we've taken back control and have some sort of democracy and someone like this is pulling the strings. I despair.

He is the money behind many things 2014 1mill to Ukip. Said to have given 6mill to leave campaigns. Says if Leadsom doesn't win he may start a new right wing party.

Banks credits the success of Leave.EU to their hiring of Goddard Gunster and their subsequent adoption of "an American-style media approach". Banks said, "What [Goddard Gunster] said early on was 'facts don’t work' and that's it. The remain campaign featured fact, fact, fact, fact, fact. It just doesn’t work. You have got to connect with people emotionally. It’s the Trump success."

I copied the above from Wiki, but it also appeared i a number of papers.

Facts versus connecting with people emotionally...hmmm. They certainly managed that. Banks knew what he was doing.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arron_Banks

He doesnt appeal to me either at the moment.

For somebody who isn't a politician and Leadsom claims never to have met, Banks has a very loud voice...

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/687978/theresa-may-brexit-arron-banks-marr

It's people like him who make a mockery of democracy, because his money buys votes.

It makes me angry that people like him ( very creepy) and bloody Murdoch can have such a huge influence on the outcome of elections/referenda in the UK. He has stated his intent of creating what will be a 'red UKIP' as he plans on targetting about 30 seats in the NE, areas where Labour is seen to have let people down. He was creepily calm and controlled on Andrew Maar show, rather chilling. While the two big parties bicker on and on, people like him will slip into the vacuum.

He has said before that he sees the disaffected of the North East as a 'market opportunity'. They're vote fodder - nothing else.

I thought he was a deeply unpleasant and dangerous person. I wonder what else is likely to come crawling out of the woodwork.

I think there should be a rigid limit on how much money any one person can donate to political purposes in any one year.

A sum limited to, say, £10,000 a year so that no wealthy person can effectively 'own' a political party and dictate its policy.

I thought there was a limit on how much they could spend on the referendum but Banks spent £11 million?

@Monica

Wasn't something like this tried (or at least attempted)?

Unfortunately, some donations are made through companies, so it's difficult to know who's making the actual donation.

Ssecondly, it counted unions as a single donor, so disrciminated against them, because in reality donations come from many members' subs.

I agree something must be done, because it undermines democracy. when donors are invited to black tie events, etc.

I read that too, Tegan. He was boasting about it, but said it was all legal (no idea how). He sounds like a deeply unpleasant man with something to 'prove'.

I do not think corporate bodies should be allowed to make political donations. All donations should be personal, and the limit should be personal so that it is not possible for one donor to give £10,000 to lots of different organisations with shared aims.

Unions should be limited to a certain amount per member who has opted in to the political levy. Perhaps to the total value of the political levy and no more. In the past, and I think still, members have had to opt out of the political levy, which I certainly did when I was a union member.

I think (but could be wrong) you have to opt in these days.

I agree with what you're writing, but who's going to enforce it?

We've noticed for a long time how organised UKIP are when it comes to billboards, posters etc. They obviously have people travelling around putting them up in prominent positions.

Banks is a successful businessman and has admitted that he has given Ukip marketing advice. I suspect Banks is prone to boasting, but it wouldn't surprise me if he has given them advice, as he claims.

But it is the money he gives that enables the party to function and gives him the personal clout he seeks.

Banks millions apparently enabled the Brexiters to pay an army of internet trolls to post lies and propaganda day and night in the run up to the referendum, so that comments on social media were more than 95% pro-leave.

This seriously damages democracy and should not be possible in a civilised democracy.

I agree, Monica. I was commenting on the 'advice' he has also given Ukip about marketing, selling and organisation, etc. I read an article somewhere that he found Ukip's structures and strategies very disorganised, so he changed them. I agree it was the money which paid for the trolls and posters, etc.

I suspect the trolls are still operating to support Leadsom, because I keep coming across sites where a handful of posters use exactly the same terminology to support her.

So with Leadsom gone will he now start a new right wing party? Blackshirts anyone?