Aaron Banks-more scary than any politician?

@Monica

I find that terrifying. In other words, he needs foot soldiers to do his dirty work.

I sincerely hope the 'black ops' are on top of this, because there are times people need saving from themselves.

@trisher

We'll see! My hunch is she was the patsy. The more I listened to her, the more it became obvious that she was completely out of her depth and unsuitable to be PM. She would have to have had teams of people to tell her what to do, because she didn't have a clue.

In the papers today he is quoted as saying that ordinary people should be allowed to speak and have some say in government - then it is suggested that he is prepared to spend £10 million to set up a party that reflects his views and presumably with him as leader.

I cannot help but see a conflict between those two aims!!

I do wonder if Leadsom actually expects to be included in this party??

Banks is boasting on Twitter that he has 40,000 names and details from people who signed up to Leave.EU and is intending to spam them. Britain First managed to get over a million 'likes' on Facebook by getting people to like/share posts about seemingly unrelated topics such as disabled servicemen and animal cruelty.

He pays trolls to post on social media.

He's also boasting that he's about to launch a new campaign/party since Leadsom didn't become party leader.

There's something very frightening about him. Not only does he have money, but he is more organised and ruthless than Ukip, Britain First or any of the right-wing, racist groups.

Don't forget that the Tory party is divided and it will very much depend on the way May handles this division over the next weeks and months.

It could well be that we see a new social, economic and political settlement emerging over the next few years.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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 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'.

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

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

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

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.

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.

He doesnt appeal to me either at the moment.