De-banked for expressing alternative social views

the top 0.01% in the USA votes democratic HEAVILY


so if you are saying that all bankers are right wing then why would they shut down farage if not for the fact that they fear reprucutions for allowing him to have an account


because reputation is paramount

who cares most about reputation of everything including there bank and how the media portrays them?

Where did you get that percentage from?

NY times article in 2015 on the subject, I would imagine the trend has only continued as the republicans are increasingly less accepted in the main stream and seen as something that you should not support and those who care most about reputation would actively avoid supporting

Unless you can actually link the article, you may as well have made that up.

The reality is that a lot of the extremely wealthy in the US donate heavily to both the DNC and RNC - specifically those politicians in districts they want to have them win because they will put in place or support policies which protect their own interests.

It's also important to understand that the US has no effective left wing political movement. In any other country the DNC would be considered a centre-right party - similar to a lot of conservative party policies in the UK. In general US politics is completely governed by the ratchet effect - the RNC will put in place increasingly right wing policies while in power, and then when the DNC gets power they will not revoke any of those but will simply not put in place any further right wing policies, in an attempt at "bipartisanship". Then the RNC will get power again and move things further to the right.

Also your assertion about it not being mainstream is completely inaccurate - maybe for LA and NYC and similar areas. If you go to the panhandle of Florida, Orange County California, anywhere in South Carolina, etc, etc, you will find the RNC is very much the mainstream.

If you aren't familiar with US politics I'm not sure why you're using it as an example at all.

NY times article in 2015 on the subject, I would imagine the trend has only continued as the republicans are increasingly less accepted in the main stream and seen as something that you should not support and those who care most about reputation would actively avoid supporting

Would you be kind enough to share said link?
suffice it to say, i imagine a bit has changed since then. not least the sanity of the respective parties.

posted it in the post right above

I imagine it has, likely shifted more democratic as Trump appeals to the working class (particularly men and particularly white) like no other candidate but also as he isn't as polished as more establishment guys like Biden, Clinton or a Jeb Bush which turns off some of the more "higher class, elite" people as he is more of a radical candidate whether you like him or not

Obviously it could change but I can only see it changing back to republicans in 2024 is if the democrats nominate Kennedy and the republicans nominate a candidate which isn't Trump or Desantis

(For the record my preferred guy is Kennedy)

Ta

Id be interested to see a new poll done as i cant really see it. By and large the democrats give off the impression about being incredibly anti-business/law and order etc (look at the mess theyve created in the big cities these days). Conversely, thats not to say republicans are 'better' as opposed to fialing in other ways.

Apropos Biden, the most disliked president in history, the recent polling on him (and comments from his own party) do not paint a good picture. Who knows, maybe if they pull their fingers out of their arses and ditch the geriatric and sideline the revolutionary "progressives" (god thats an ironic term) they might actually get somewhere and beat Trump.

He's an interesting one, pulling in a record amount of red funding.. albeit just to screw with the democrats writ large i imagine but still. Personally i prefer De Santis, despite some of his dubious policies a remarkably able politician.

Having worked for a big bank, we 100% dropped customers who weren't doing something illegal but were sketchy or not something we wanted to be associated with.

We didn't wait 8 years to do it though

Which bank was that?

The information on which we based our reporting on Nigel Farage and his bank accounts came from a trusted and senior source. However the information turned out to be incomplete and inaccurate. Therefore I would like to apologise to Mr Farage.

Well, well, well. The BBC’s Business Editor Simon Jack has fully apologised to me publicly and I thank him for that. It’s not often that the BBC apologise. I’ve also got a letter I’ve just received from Deborah Turness at the BBC and I’m going to absorb it and talk more about that at 7 o’clock tonight on GB News. But for the BBC to apologise, I’m very, very pleased. Jack says in the tweet that his information came from a trusted and senior source. I would suggest it may well have been a very senior source.