UK Politics

3100 readers

114 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

-10

Starmer unveils ‘GB energy’ logo – a stock graphic for 57p that ‘looks like it’s farting’ (skwawkbox.org)

submitted 5 months ago by RobotToaster@mander.xyz to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] manualoverride@lemmy.world 39 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I very rarely downvote people but @RobotToaster you are just posting the most gutterish drivel. We get you don’t like Labour but if you insist on posting here please try to elevate the quality of your sources and commentary. 57p for the graphic sounds like the sort of bargain we need after 14 years of corrupt Tory contracts.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Thank you for the feedback.

[–] manualoverride@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

I figured it’s better to know the reason than not.

[–] Vexing@lemm.ee 23 points 5 months ago

So he paid, 57p rather than paying his mates tens or hundreds of thousands for it. This is a good step in the right direction.

Imagine being annoying they didn't waste money.

[–] baggins@beehaw.org 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

People would soon complain if they'd used a poncey design studio and coughed up half a million.

[–] frog@beehaw.org 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Even if they'd found the correct middle-ground - paying, say, £10k for a design studio to make something that's new but not over-priced - people would still find some way to complain.

[–] david@feddit.uk 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't see anything correct in spending £20k of their election budget on a logo. No one likes new logos and everyone thinks they're not worth the money. Well thank goodness this one is!

[–] frog@beehaw.org 3 points 5 months ago

Exactly. No matter what they spent on the logo, someone would be unhappy about it.

[–] julietOscarEcho@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago

I don't see it. And who gives a shit what the logo is? Is this all journalism has to offer?Bacon sandwich-gate tier piss taking...