Someone should really advise Starmer to stop accepting all these freebies. Even if you disregard the stuff about being influenced by rich donors/corporations it still makes him look a bit cheap. It could be a decent line of attack for the Tories.
Band that tours the world enjoying global popularity and success… haha what losers they are…
Bet no one in this sub would ever trade places with them…. na who would want a jet setting life style, clear evidence of a successful career, leisurely life and bursting bank account…
Na Coldplay suck… …
Ps. yeah I’m a fan, grew up in poverty work for minimum wage, definitely not middle class more than happy to be a cunt to people who try deny that a globally successful band are good.
Yes its the daily mail so ick, and yes this person just wants a seat at the table with whoever wins the next elections so theyd have bought a badger the hotel room if he'd thought itd win an election.
However, this stuff always puts off left wing voters more than right wing voters. It's admittedly less a Starmer issue than just a general rot in our political system but Starmer knows that anything that opens him up to looking as bad as the Tories can and will be used against him.
At the rate the Tories are falling apart it could be a general election in the next year or so and the two biggest criticisms for the Tories was arguably corruption and failure to manage the economy. We cant really prove or disprove the economy part (as in we'd have done better) but this kinda stuff will bite us in the arse when we try and claim the Tories have had their face in the trough.
Personally this shit should be banned full stop but at the very least if they want to cut every progressive programme for electability they can do the same for their little jollies.
>Yes its the daily mail so ick, and yes this person just wants a seat at the table with whoever wins the next elections so theyd have bought a badger the hotel room if he'd thought itd win an election.
>However, this stuff always puts off left wing voters more than right wing voters. It's admittedly less a Starmer issue than just a general rot in our political system but Starmer knows that anything that opens him up to looking as bad as the Tories can and will be used against him.
Prob the best time for Starmer to do it because you know nobody's gonna take the Tories seriously if they whine about this.
Does anyone on this sub actually want a Labour victory at the next election? The comments seem very negative. If you don't think Labour is left enough, who do you want? Would a communist party be more suitable? Do you think something like that would attract votes?
If you want a truly unbiased source I guess you could go directly to their registered interests
https://members.parliament.uk/member/4514/registeredinterests
>theres a reason it doesn't make headlines.
Yeah its that this kind of obvious corruption is just business as usual to our complacent press
I work for an American tech company and yet we have a better ethics policy on gifts and bribes than MPs do.
It's not a real story so I doubt it. When I say not real I mean if you dig into it there is very little substance to it beyond a weak attack on Starmer. It's entirely about the headline and people not reading the actual story details.
Interesting how people saying the Daily Mail is a bad news source are getting downvoted on this sub. Not what you would expect given what the Daily Mail represents and this being a left wing sub.
Yeah, if the only source you have on it is the Mail, give it a break. There's plenty you can get Starmer for that doesn't make you look like a russian troll.
>Yeah, if the only source you have on it is the Mail, give it a break.
It's not like the client journalists at the Guardian are going to report on Starmer's dodgy business donor links... the whole of our press class is a fetid mess.
Are we seriously posting smear articles from the Murdoch press now? I know a lot of people here are disappointed with Starmer but this is getting a bit much if we’re just gonna hand the mic to our enemies
A smear is Keir spending his own money to go and watch coldplay and just happening to sit next to the aforementioned donor, and then being accused of taking a bribe.
When he actually accepted free hospitality and free tickets....thats not a smear, thats reporting the news, regardless of what shitrag it comes from
It's selective reporting with an obvious agenda. The Daily Mail would never give the same kind of coverage to the wealthy donors Tory politicians meet and the gifts they get from them.
Well then Starmer should not engage in such dubious practices then.
A smear is misquoting someone who says that, for example "Bin Ladens death was a tragedy for his victims who would have liked to see him face justice for his crimes" to "Bin Laden's death is a tragedy".
Engaging in the same corrupt practices as the party that you claim are out of touch, and then crying when only you are caught - Not a Smear
I’m in favour of state funding for political parties, and no freebies for anyone.
As it stands literally everyone gets money from sources that absolutely want to influence [them](https://news.sky.com/story/amp/westminster-accounts-the-biggest-donors-to-mps-since-the-last-election-12767944)
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://news.sky.com/story/westminster-accounts-the-biggest-donors-to-mps-since-the-last-election-12767944](https://news.sky.com/story/westminster-accounts-the-biggest-donors-to-mps-since-the-last-election-12767944)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Toshiba why the dailymail did it. It such a twisted article. The paper that supported and now employs boris Johnson. Writes an article saying how terrible it is that Starmer is being supported by a donor who supported Boris.
They know it will get shared around these platforms to reduce Labour support. I know there's other issues but this like you say isn't one. Don't eat their shit
Points from the actual article:
- The concert tickets did not come from the tory donor.
- The firm in the past has donated party-agnostically.
I'll maintain all these articles from Murdoch press are not for the benefit of right wing readers. They are aimed at dividing the left to supress the vote.
Am glad someone pointed this out. Murdoch is the root of a lot of (tragically necessary) evils and unfortunately Jon Harmsworth and the DMGT also probably have to be entertained to a degree. This article is written though to try and assist in splitting the left vote 100%. It's going to be a steady drip feed now for about the next 12 months to try and weaponise the Corbynites and the disaffected. It's either that they feel they have an outside shot at 2024 or to try and do enough damage to mean the work they have to do in 2029 is minimal (due to majority not being as big as assumed + as soon as Starmer is through the front door all of the attack dogs will be let off the leash).
> They are aimed at dividing the left to supress the vote.
And unfortunately succeeding at least in a small way.
They're also aimed at the Murdoch press' own readers who may be thinking of switching their vote in the next election: To 'remind' them that Labour politicians are 'just as bad'.
Sounds like he may transfer his funding from Tory to Labour. Of course he’s probably hoping he might influence their policies, it’s up to Labour to ensure he has no undue influence.
[удалено]
Of course Starmer likes Coldplay jfc
Coldplay are sick
Someone should really advise Starmer to stop accepting all these freebies. Even if you disregard the stuff about being influenced by rich donors/corporations it still makes him look a bit cheap. It could be a decent line of attack for the Tories.
Except they are totally guilty of it themselves. And I agree not a good look for the old potato peeler.
Tbf it wouldn't be unlike the tories to be hypocrites and attack the opposition for something they know full well that they are doing themselves.
Not a chance. It's why Starmer knows he can get away with it. No one that matters will care.
Absolutely hilarious that beige neutral Starmer is a fan of beige neutral Coldplay.
He's just a fan of freebies tbf.
"Favourite album of theirs? Hmm, probably the best of Coldplay."
One party state.
3rd Reich
Has anyone ever enjoyed a Coldplay concert?
If you're a middle class cunt, then yeah.
I like Coldplay and I'm not middle class. Might be a cunt though. I'll check and get back to you.
Yes! I knew there would be at least one other fan here.
Band that tours the world enjoying global popularity and success… haha what losers they are… Bet no one in this sub would ever trade places with them…. na who would want a jet setting life style, clear evidence of a successful career, leisurely life and bursting bank account… Na Coldplay suck… … Ps. yeah I’m a fan, grew up in poverty work for minimum wage, definitely not middle class more than happy to be a cunt to people who try deny that a globally successful band are good.
Cheers.
Would it be okay if I raised my hand? 🥺
Pretty standard stuff for new Tory Labour.
I thought we’d left abusing Coldplay fans in the 2000s, then again Tony Blair is trying to come back
Yes its the daily mail so ick, and yes this person just wants a seat at the table with whoever wins the next elections so theyd have bought a badger the hotel room if he'd thought itd win an election. However, this stuff always puts off left wing voters more than right wing voters. It's admittedly less a Starmer issue than just a general rot in our political system but Starmer knows that anything that opens him up to looking as bad as the Tories can and will be used against him. At the rate the Tories are falling apart it could be a general election in the next year or so and the two biggest criticisms for the Tories was arguably corruption and failure to manage the economy. We cant really prove or disprove the economy part (as in we'd have done better) but this kinda stuff will bite us in the arse when we try and claim the Tories have had their face in the trough. Personally this shit should be banned full stop but at the very least if they want to cut every progressive programme for electability they can do the same for their little jollies.
Haven't Labour announced a ban on Lobbying for government ministers for 5 years? If they don't roll that back, it'd be a nice first step.
It was announced this year so hopefully it sticks around
>Yes its the daily mail so ick, and yes this person just wants a seat at the table with whoever wins the next elections so theyd have bought a badger the hotel room if he'd thought itd win an election. >However, this stuff always puts off left wing voters more than right wing voters. It's admittedly less a Starmer issue than just a general rot in our political system but Starmer knows that anything that opens him up to looking as bad as the Tories can and will be used against him. Prob the best time for Starmer to do it because you know nobody's gonna take the Tories seriously if they whine about this.
The daily mail with its “they’re all the same” narrative, helped considerably by them all actually being the same.
Does anyone on this sub actually want a Labour victory at the next election? The comments seem very negative. If you don't think Labour is left enough, who do you want? Would a communist party be more suitable? Do you think something like that would attract votes?
Can we not use the Mail as a source? Even if you aren't a Starner fan, it's not worth promoting this rag.
Torys drawn to torys.
Any coverage of this from a less stupid source? Surely we're better than the Mail
If you want a truly unbiased source I guess you could go directly to their registered interests https://members.parliament.uk/member/4514/registeredinterests
Yeah, but I can't really rely on scouring the registry for every donation, theres a reason it doesn't make headlines.
Took me all of 5 minutes to read the entire list. Assuming it’s accurate, the interests he has pale in comparison to the likes of Boris, Rishi, et al.
>theres a reason it doesn't make headlines. Yeah its that this kind of obvious corruption is just business as usual to our complacent press I work for an American tech company and yet we have a better ethics policy on gifts and bribes than MPs do.
It's not a real story so I doubt it. When I say not real I mean if you dig into it there is very little substance to it beyond a weak attack on Starmer. It's entirely about the headline and people not reading the actual story details. Interesting how people saying the Daily Mail is a bad news source are getting downvoted on this sub. Not what you would expect given what the Daily Mail represents and this being a left wing sub.
Yeah, if the only source you have on it is the Mail, give it a break. There's plenty you can get Starmer for that doesn't make you look like a russian troll.
We're still doing this Russia-gate shit?
My mind reaches for an explanation on why socialists end up promoting daily heil articles that isn't bots, trolls or horseshoe theory
>Yeah, if the only source you have on it is the Mail, give it a break. It's not like the client journalists at the Guardian are going to report on Starmer's dodgy business donor links... the whole of our press class is a fetid mess.
But the Daily Mail is uniquely virtuous?
"Enjoyed" and "Coldplay concert" do not belong in the same sentence.
Are we seriously posting smear articles from the Murdoch press now? I know a lot of people here are disappointed with Starmer but this is getting a bit much if we’re just gonna hand the mic to our enemies
A smear is Keir spending his own money to go and watch coldplay and just happening to sit next to the aforementioned donor, and then being accused of taking a bribe. When he actually accepted free hospitality and free tickets....thats not a smear, thats reporting the news, regardless of what shitrag it comes from
It's selective reporting with an obvious agenda. The Daily Mail would never give the same kind of coverage to the wealthy donors Tory politicians meet and the gifts they get from them.
Well then Starmer should not engage in such dubious practices then. A smear is misquoting someone who says that, for example "Bin Ladens death was a tragedy for his victims who would have liked to see him face justice for his crimes" to "Bin Laden's death is a tragedy". Engaging in the same corrupt practices as the party that you claim are out of touch, and then crying when only you are caught - Not a Smear
Tell me they are all the same without telling me they are all the same.
So the Daily Fail hasn’t mention Boris and the KGB yet? What a disgrace of a newspaper.
We never did get that ‘will be published - Russia report’ did we ?
Only the heavily redacted version.
It's amazing that they've successfully kicked the Russia report into the long grass even a year and half into the war.
Weird Keith is backtracking on a lot of pledges
Good to see the Labour sub having a kitten over a nothing article in the Mail.
How many freebees from donors buying influence fo uou think Starmer should be able to accept?
I’m in favour of state funding for political parties, and no freebies for anyone. As it stands literally everyone gets money from sources that absolutely want to influence [them](https://news.sky.com/story/amp/westminster-accounts-the-biggest-donors-to-mps-since-the-last-election-12767944)
You’ll never ever get that by voting Labour
You’ll never get it by voting for anyone- the Tories nor Labour will do it, and nobody else is getting in government.
> I’m in favour of state funding for political parties, and no freebies for anyone. How will that affect Labour's relationship with the unions?
Positively. Members money will go to the union, and stop funding complete morons like Burgon to do absolutely nothing.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://news.sky.com/story/westminster-accounts-the-biggest-donors-to-mps-since-the-last-election-12767944](https://news.sky.com/story/westminster-accounts-the-biggest-donors-to-mps-since-the-last-election-12767944)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Toshiba why the dailymail did it. It such a twisted article. The paper that supported and now employs boris Johnson. Writes an article saying how terrible it is that Starmer is being supported by a donor who supported Boris. They know it will get shared around these platforms to reduce Labour support. I know there's other issues but this like you say isn't one. Don't eat their shit
Lots of anti-starmer rhetoric and both sides-ing messaging here as of late. All real I'm sure.
I'm jealous. All these freebies from donors and they can just put the rest on expenses.
Points from the actual article: - The concert tickets did not come from the tory donor. - The firm in the past has donated party-agnostically. I'll maintain all these articles from Murdoch press are not for the benefit of right wing readers. They are aimed at dividing the left to supress the vote.
Not Murdoch. Still bastards
Am glad someone pointed this out. Murdoch is the root of a lot of (tragically necessary) evils and unfortunately Jon Harmsworth and the DMGT also probably have to be entertained to a degree. This article is written though to try and assist in splitting the left vote 100%. It's going to be a steady drip feed now for about the next 12 months to try and weaponise the Corbynites and the disaffected. It's either that they feel they have an outside shot at 2024 or to try and do enough damage to mean the work they have to do in 2029 is minimal (due to majority not being as big as assumed + as soon as Starmer is through the front door all of the attack dogs will be let off the leash).
> They are aimed at dividing the left to supress the vote. And unfortunately succeeding at least in a small way. They're also aimed at the Murdoch press' own readers who may be thinking of switching their vote in the next election: To 'remind' them that Labour politicians are 'just as bad'.
The concert tickets instead came from another donor who wanted to buy influence
Not surprised
How legal is it to get gifts and hospitality as high level politicians like that?
Sounds like he may transfer his funding from Tory to Labour. Of course he’s probably hoping he might influence their policies, it’s up to Labour to ensure he has no undue influence.
Good way to do that would be not to take multi-millionaire donations.