When Tommy Robinson did not gain enough votes to become an MEP for the North West of England, mainstream media ridiculed a valid point that Tommy made, that his lack of social-media presence restricted his reach, cost him votes, and potentially a place in the European parliament. Nigel makes the case that the success of his Brexit party was because of his reach to the electrorate through social media. THANK YOU NIGEL!
Do you remember the headlines of mainstream media after the European election?
Tommy spoke of government interference that cost him votes on the campaign trail; he was mocked and ridiculed by the press and all those well-financed, union-backed far-left groups.
Well in comes Nigel Farage, a man not known for his support of Tommy, however, he did mention something that validates Tommy’s point.
Nigel, a veteran politician of 20 years with massive financial backing, said his Brexit party’s social media presence played a pivotal part in his success during the European elections. Without it, his reach would not have been so great, no doubt without it the Brexit party would have taken many fewer votes and seats in the European parliament.
Let’s just dive into that point for a moment.
According to data produced by 89up and published in wired, Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party’s official Facebook pages had a combined following of “almost” a million people. Let that sink in for a moment, that is far less of a social media presence than what Tommy had before he was de-platformed and un-personed. Tommy had many, many more followers online; he had a far greater presence online than Nigel Farage and his Brexit party combined!
The data gathered by 89up said that “the Brexit Party website generated more shares than every other party combined.” They also managed to calculate the Brexit party’s total number of online shares. After sifting through a database of 1.5 million public Facebook profiles, they found that “the Brexit Party generated 125,035 shares; the next closest were the Conservatives on 26,400. UKIP, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party all had less than 6,000 shares, while Change UK had just 56.” You can find that information HERE.
You can also find a Biased Broadcasting Corporation programme about Nigels online social media campaign HERE.
Just imagine, if Tommy still had his dominating presence online, how would the election have panned out for him?
Of course, we will never know, what we do know, and what Nigel Farage has confirmed, is that a large social media following can be the difference in winning an election campaign or not. Let us not forget that political parties could pay obscene amounts of money to promote themselves, Nigel did precisely that, his Brexit party, to give you just one example had spent £26,776 on 35 social media advertisements IN JUST ONE WEEK!
How did Nigel put it exactly?
“It took the Labour party 45 years from their birth to becoming a majority government. It took the Brexit party 45 days from its launch to become the biggest party in a national election. How come? Social media – social media, the use of video imaging has changed absolutely everything.”
Was Nigel talking about the very same social media companies that were pushed to ban Tommy from their platforms out of political expediency?
We believe so.
Of course, Nigel wasn’t out to validate Tommy’s point, that his lack of social media presence hindered his chances of being elected, but he just did. So thank you, Nigel, all of us here at TR News give you our full endorsement from here on in!
Of course, we are only joking.
Nigel was also questioned about Tommy by a caller who recognised that the name Tommy Robinson “should not be mentioned”, this is, of course, true, because a mention of Tommy Robinson can and does get you banned off social media.
It’s not just about hindering, de-platforming, un-personing and defaming Tommy, its also about prosecuting the same strategy against those who follow and support him.
Oh, how the powers that be play their political games.
Anyway, our final examination of the Nigel Farage show ends with Nigel (referring to Tommy) saying that “somebody who has been to prison four times, for four separate offences was never going to work in the field of politics.”
Oh, this is where the privately educated Dulwich College boarding school snobbery kicks in, no different to the Etonian “higher than thou” mentality Nigel, we thought you were sticking up for the common man, not stamping on him for a past mistake and political persecution?
What Nigel has failed to mention in the same breath, is that ministers of parliament fill the House of Commons with criminality.
You can find a recent list of MP’s who have served jail time, probably only because they were stupid enough to get caught, right HERE.
Nigel also forgot to mention that ministers of parliament are not required to disclose details of criminal convictions to the House of Commons. Great, when Tommy gets in there, he will have a clean bill of health then!
Let’s have a look at a freedom of information request that was sent to the House of Commons Administration Committee asking the following questions –
Can you please let me know if any current Members of Parliament have a
criminal conviction. If so, how many MPs have a criminal conviction and
what crimes are the convictions for and if any have served time in jail?
What do you think the outcome was?
Well, the IRIS (Information Rights and Information Security) at the House of Commons said they would refuse to answer, of course!
In refusing your request the House is applying the exemption set
out in section 21 (1) and (2) (a) of the FOIA. This is an absolute
exemption and the public interest test does not apply.
You can find that freedom of information request HERE.
We do wonder if Nigel knows of any MP’s or MEP’s with a criminal record?
Want to spill any beans Nigel?
What say you?
CAN YOU HELP US REPORT MORE INDEPENDENT NEWS?