Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hopefully she will be forced into a coalition with the right who will stop her insane immigration policies, although I doubt she would ever repeat her immigration mistake that has ruined Germany and invited terrorism." She is already partially right wing I believe. Just her policies are more liberal. Which is neither left or right. In Europe left does not equal liberal. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"She needs to be shifted further to the right. The right will make gains, because her brand of right has wrecked Germany, because it is so left." What about Rutte the liberal? He steals pensions so I guess that is right wing enough. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"She needs to be shifted further to the right. The right will make gains, because her brand of right has wrecked Germany, because it is so left." More business? More authoritarian? More nationalist? There are many factors. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"German business is good. Right does not mean more authoritative. She just needs to sort out her disastrous immigration policies " Generally it is how they distribute the wealth. Left distribute equally. Right distribute to the powerful. The other factors authority, liberalism, nationalist or globalist are not considered left or right. It's a different spectrum. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Left take from the hard working risk taking wealthy and give it to the feckless poor." Far left yes. Do you know there are various forms of capitalism? We follow the hard right one and the US too. There is a more fairer version. But corporations don't want us to follow it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Generally it is how they distribute the wealth. Left distribute equally. Right distribute to the powerful. " The left distribute it equally? Really? It seems to me that socialists and the left are all for the redistribution of wealth.... just as long as it's not their money that is being redistributed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Generally it is how they distribute the wealth. Left distribute equally. Right distribute to the powerful. The left distribute it equally? Really? It seems to me that socialists and the left are all for the redistribution of wealth.... just as long as it's not their money that is being redistributed. " It's a mirage. It's just an idealism not the reality. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And what is a fairer system and which country follows it?" No country I know of now. Reagen changed it with the Chicago boys theory in Chile. They created a dictatorship, oppressed the poor and created a capitalist economy from it. It's successful for the rich. But there is huge differences between rich and poor. Before they were progressive socialists. Labelled them Marxist or communist and killed that ideology with media and dictatorships. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Left take from the hard working risk taking wealthy and give it to the feckless poor." OK some people have taken risks to make their wealth but a lot haven't - they inherited it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel and a left party from the exit polls. I guess they're shifting the wrong way." Although reading into the results it is shifting to the right. My bad. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"She needs to be shifted further to the right. The right will make gains, because her brand of right has wrecked Germany, because it is so left." Would that be to be more like the UK? Maybe you would like to explain how that will help Germany? Maybe you will explain how good being so far to the right has benefited the UK (bottom of the G8 economic growth table with a failing economy) and how Germany being a more centrist economy has hurt Germany (they being the strongest economy with the highest growth rate in Europe). I'll be interested to read your answer, but before you post it may I advise you to take a walk round your local town centre and look at the homeless beggars sheltering in the doorway corners of the empty and boarded up shops before you tell me we are doing great! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"She needs to be shifted further to the right. The right will make gains, because her brand of right has wrecked Germany, because it is so left. Would that be to be more like the UK? Maybe you would like to explain how that will help Germany? Maybe you will explain how good being so far to the right has benefited the UK (bottom of the G8 economic growth table with a failing economy) and how Germany being a more centrist economy has hurt Germany (they being the strongest economy with the highest growth rate in Europe). I'll be interested to read your answer, but before you post it may I advise you to take a walk round your local town centre and look at the homeless beggars sheltering in the doorway corners of the empty and boarded up shops before you tell me we are doing great!" I tell you one thing. I left the UK 5 years ago. There were homeless people in Sheffield. I went back last month for the first time in a year. There are gangs of them. 6 to 10 homeless on a corner at 10am. All white British. It's shocking how it changed. I have the luxury of not being there so I see the change. In Amsterdam I see less. But I hear the salvation army gives them places to sleep and keeps them off the streets. What is the British salvation army doing? Or our government? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hopefully she will be forced into a coalition with the right who will stop her insane immigration policies, although I doubt she would ever repeat her immigration mistake that has ruined Germany and invited terrorism." Ruined? Oh my. Someone should really tell the Germans that their entire country has been ruined. I'm certain they'd want to know. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like the anti EU AFD have got around 13% of the overall vote and will get around 95 seats in the German Parliament. Great gains for the AFD and bad news for Merkel "With your logic, bad news for May, great gains for JC. Awesome. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like the anti EU AFD have got around 13% of the overall vote and will get around 95 seats in the German Parliament. Great gains for the AFD and bad news for Merkel
With your logic, bad news for May, great gains for JC. Awesome. "Not really and your logic is flawed. Corbyn only had moderate gains because he already had a steady base to work from in our general election and was already the 2nd largest party behind the tories so no change really. The AFD have come from nowhere to gain around 95 seats, 13% of the overall vote and will finish as the 3rd largest party in Germany. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like the anti EU AFD have got around 13% of the overall vote and will get around 95 seats in the German Parliament. Great gains for the AFD and bad news for Merkel "So Centaur is back goosestepping his way round his computer with outstretched arm raised above his shoulder chanting "SIEG HEIL"! You have been missed, many have commented on your absence. 
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like the anti EU AFD have got around 13% of the overall vote and will get around 95 seats in the German Parliament. Great gains for the AFD and bad news for Merkel
So Centaur is back goosestepping his way round his computer with outstretched arm raised above his shoulder chanting "SIEG HEIL"!
You have been missed, many have commented on your absence.
"I've been out in the real world enjoying my weekend, you should try it sometime Merkel getting a bloody nose in Germany is just the perfect end to my weekend.
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"But at the end of it all, she's still in charge. Rubbing one out to such a minor loss is probably about as much as you're going to get out of it. " Four terms too. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"But at the end of it all, she's still in charge. Rubbing one out to such a minor loss is probably about as much as you're going to get out of it. Four terms too." I think your brier score would be very low now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like the anti EU AFD have got around 13% of the overall vote and will get around 95 seats in the German Parliament. Great gains for the AFD and bad news for Merkel
So Centaur is back goosestepping his way round his computer with outstretched arm raised above his shoulder chanting "SIEG HEIL"!
You have been missed, many have commented on your absence.
I've been out in the real world enjoying my weekend, you should try it sometime Merkel getting a bloody nose in Germany is just the perfect end to my weekend.
"yeah... the fact that you are basically cheering on the far right (and please don't even try to deny this, because even they describe themselves as far right!) says so much about your character that we didn't already know.... 
but then you did cheer on le pen and the far right in france... so i am not surprised..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Come on OP, we were told last year what the result would be. Italy would be destroyed by their referendum, and sink into the Mediterranean. France fell to the far right and is now governed by the French Nazis, and Germany will rip Merkel to shreds like a pack of hungry wolves because everyone in the country hates her so much due to her being humane to refugees. Now these once great powers have destroyed the old order of the EU elite. The rest of the crippled EU will come begging to the bargaining table with the UK. Next week they will be offering to repay every penny the UK has sent to the EU, in one lump sum, as well as agreeing to give the UK £20bn a year indefinitely if we will only sign a free trade agreement. I presume that's what has happened, right? " I was saving that for later haha. I remember the conversations last year. It was disgraceful. Shows how out of touch with reality they are. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like the anti EU AFD have got around 13% of the overall vote and will get around 95 seats in the German Parliament. Great gains for the AFD and bad news for Merkel
So Centaur is back goosestepping his way round his computer with outstretched arm raised above his shoulder chanting "SIEG HEIL"!
You have been missed, many have commented on your absence.
"....your getting more childish by the day Rambo. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"But it's true no one can deny that the AfD party in Germany has made significant gains. Mrs Merkel will surely have to look at the mistakes that have driven voters to vote in such a way or not at all. An uncomfortable coalition Government then for Germany which will give AfD the honour of being the biggest opposition party in German parliament, depending of course who Mrs Merkel forms a coalition with. Interesting times ahead one thinks " They won't be the biggest. SPD wants to be the opposition. Clever move. They want to regain their losses. Looks like Greens will get in. But even the Dutch government hasn't formed a coalition yet. Can take time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May?" 4 back to back wins  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins "So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? Did she increase her votes from the last election? Has she got more seats than the last election? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May?" Coalitions aren't strange outside of countries that are lumbered with the shitty FPTP system. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
"It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections? "Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration. "Tony Blair was and has been the best PM this country has every had....i cant wait to see JC in power the clocks ticking on this tory motley crew | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit. "Funny that as the news just broke and basically the 27 other countries have toMay and Davis plus there other cronies to fuck off and come back with a proper plan | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration. "He did, it goes to show how popular their immigration policies and other policies are as people kept on electing them both again and again | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit. "The ADF can push all they like, will they be able to achieve anything? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration. "Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections. But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones! But to answer the questions for them.... So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO Has she got more seats than the last election? NO Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
".. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
.. "So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
..
So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening?"...I can see why it is happening. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If she wins, it will be the end of germany with her policies, it will end up like sweden." On the plus side, a lot of those really dumb articles about how Sweden is some kind of Muslim hellhole can be regurgitated with a quick find and replace. And their intended audience will lap it up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
..
So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening?"No, they are cheering it on! Like I said, she is incredibly popular to win 4 back to back elections. Can you name a British PM who has done the same recently? Or in your life time? Or since WWII? Or in the last 100 years? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
..
So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening?
No, they are cheering it on!
Like I said, she is incredibly popular to win 4 back to back elections. Can you name a British PM who has done the same recently? Or in your life time? Or since WWII? Or in the last 100 years? "Has she ever won an outright majority? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
..
So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening?
No, they are cheering it on!
Like I said, she is incredibly popular to win 4 back to back elections. Can you name a British PM who has done the same recently? Or in your life time? Or since WWII? Or in the last 100 years?
Has she ever won an outright majority?
"Ah, avoiding the questions again. That's a surprise.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
..
So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening?
No, they are cheering it on!
Like I said, she is incredibly popular to win 4 back to back elections. Can you name a British PM who has done the same recently? Or in your life time? Or since WWII? Or in the last 100 years? "We're not cheering the fact that the far right movement is happening.... but like previously said, can see why it's happening. And Merkel should accept her part of the blame. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
..
So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening?
No, they are cheering it on!
Like I said, she is incredibly popular to win 4 back to back elections. Can you name a British PM who has done the same recently? Or in your life time? Or since WWII? Or in the last 100 years?
We're not cheering the fact that the far right movement is happening.... but like previously said, can see why it's happening. And Merkel should accept her part of the blame."Well I'm glad you have changed your mind, last year you were denying that the afd were the far-right. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
..
So you're unhappy a far right movement is happening?
No, they are cheering it on!
Like I said, she is incredibly popular to win 4 back to back elections. Can you name a British PM who has done the same recently? Or in your life time? Or since WWII? Or in the last 100 years?
Has she ever won an outright majority?
Ah, avoiding the questions again. That's a surprise. "Answered it earlier. But just for you, no. There have been two PMs who have won 3 elections...Blair and Thatcher. By your measure they should be the most popular PMs ever to grace the political stage in the UK...yet they're far from it. However, they did win their elections with majorities. Has Merkel? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The CDU CSU party have got the lowest vote share since the second world war.... Now there's popularity for ya!" 2nd place Shultz was born a loser. Lowest ever vote share for his party too. He jumped ship from the EU as soon as the UK voted to leave (at least he now knows the EU is a sinking ship) to try his hand at domestic German politics and has had his ass handed to him in this election. Anything he gets involved with then you know it's the kiss of death. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The CDU CSU party have got the lowest vote share since the second world war.... Now there's popularity for ya!" Please elaborate? You mean the biggest swing? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The CDU CSU party have got the lowest vote share since the second world war.... Now there's popularity for ya! Please elaborate? You mean the biggest swing? " "The German polls have officially closed, and the first exit polls numbers come in, confirming the expected fourth victory for Angela Merkel's CDU/CSU, however getting a unexpectedly low 32.5% of the vote, which according to Europe Elects was the worst result for Merkel's CDU/CSU (EPP) since 1949. Merkel's main challenger, the SPD, got 20%, also its worst result since Nazi era 1945" From Europe elects website. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just been watching channel 4 news.... Quote: 33% of the vote is "its worst showing since 1945"." For a leading party? For Merkel? For her party? :p. Context matters. Since if 33% is the worst showing. Then AFD's 13% is horrendous. Again context matters. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The CDU CSU party have got the lowest vote share since the second world war.... Now there's popularity for ya! Please elaborate? You mean the biggest swing? "The German polls have officially closed, and the first exit polls numbers come in, confirming the expected fourth victory for Angela Merkel's CDU/CSU, however getting a unexpectedly low 32.5% of the vote, which according to Europe Elects was the worst result for Merkel's CDU/CSU (EPP) since 1949. Merkel's main challenger, the SPD, got 20%, also its worst result since Nazi era 1945" From Europe elects website." Thanks. Makes sense. Now she has a new term to turn it around. Look at other politics and the vote can swing either way. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The CDU CSU party have got the lowest vote share since the second world war.... Now there's popularity for ya! Please elaborate? You mean the biggest swing? "The German polls have officially closed, and the first exit polls numbers come in, confirming the expected fourth victory for Angela Merkel's CDU/CSU, however getting a unexpectedly low 32.5% of the vote, which according to Europe Elects was the worst result for Merkel's CDU/CSU (EPP) since 1949. Merkel's main challenger, the SPD, got 20%, also its worst result since Nazi era 1945" From Europe elects website. Thanks. Makes sense. Now she has a new term to turn it around. Look at other politics and the vote can swing either way. " Or maybe look at the vote in Eastern Germany as the far right got most of the vote there....old politics die hard....just a thought  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The CDU CSU party have got the lowest vote share since the second world war.... Now there's popularity for ya! 2nd place Shultz was born a loser. Lowest ever vote share for his party too. He jumped ship from the EU as soon as the UK voted to leave (at least he now knows the EU is a sinking ship) to try his hand at domestic German politics and has had his ass handed to him in this election. Anything he gets involved with then you know it's the kiss of death. "Thats a bit rich coming from the biggest Farage Fanboi on the site! How many times has Farage tried his hand at domestic politics. Talk about a natural born loser! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just been watching channel 4 news.... Quote: 33% of the vote is "its worst showing since 1945". For a leading party? For Merkel? For her party? :p. Context matters. Since if 33% is the worst showing. Then AFD's 13% is horrendous. Again context matters." Of course, the only differences being that CSU lost a fifth of their vote share, while AFD's vote share tripled. CSU lost a fifth of their seats, while AFD, who had zero seats last time, now have 94. And there hasn't been a far right party in the German parliament since the end of WW2. Like you said....context matters. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just been watching channel 4 news.... Quote: 33% of the vote is "its worst showing since 1945". For a leading party? For Merkel? For her party? :p. Context matters. Since if 33% is the worst showing. Then AFD's 13% is horrendous. Again context matters. Of course, the only differences being that CSU lost a fifth of their vote share, while AFD's vote share tripled. CSU lost a fifth of their seats, while AFD, who had zero seats last time, now have 94. And there hasn't been a far right party in the German parliament since the end of WW2. Like you said....context matters. " Would you have voted for the afd or Merkel? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If she wins, it will be the end of germany with her policies, it will end up like sweden. On the plus side, a lot of those really dumb articles about how Sweden is some kind of Muslim hellhole can be regurgitated with a quick find and replace. And their intended audience will lap it up. " It depends what you want to beleive. I take it you get it is all ok from the propaganda newspapers? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If she wins, it will be the end of germany with her policies, it will end up like sweden. On the plus side, a lot of those really dumb articles about how Sweden is some kind of Muslim hellhole can be regurgitated with a quick find and replace. And their intended audience will lap it up. It depends what you want to beleive. I take it you get it is all ok from the propaganda newspapers?" Well, of course things that don't fit into the "fear the Muslims" hysteria mist be propaganda. It makes perfect sense if you don't think about it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Looks like Merkel's not even as strong and stable as May. First she's got to try to form a coalition, probably with two parties that have opposing views to each other. And that could take weeks or even months. More of a lame duck than May? 4 back to back wins
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election?
Did she increase her votes from the last election?
Has she got more seats than the last election?
It shows how incredibly popular she is. How many British PMs have won 4 back to back elections?
Tony Blair won a few back to back elections and it's fair to say now most of the British public utterly despise Blair. It's going the same way for Merkel in Germany as it went for Blair here now and silly frau Merkel is making many of the exact same mistakes Blair made on immigration.
Thatcher too..... One of the least popular PMs ever, yet won 3 elections.
But, once again CLCC avoids answering questions....even the simple ones!
But to answer the questions for them....
So is she in a stronger position now than when she won the last election? NO
Did she increase her votes from the last election? NO
Has she got more seats than the last election? NO
Yep, just goes to show how incredibly popular she is, having lost a fifth of her voter share, and so popular that the far right have risen for the first time since the second world war.
"You failed to ask the most important question: is she still Chancellor? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just been watching channel 4 news.... Quote: 33% of the vote is "its worst showing since 1945". For a leading party? For Merkel? For her party? :p. Context matters. Since if 33% is the worst showing. Then AFD's 13% is horrendous. Again context matters. Of course, the only differences being that CSU lost a fifth of their vote share, while AFD's vote share tripled. CSU lost a fifth of their seats, while AFD, who had zero seats last time, now have 94. And there hasn't been a far right party in the German parliament since the end of WW2. Like you said....context matters. Would you have voted for the afd or Merkel?" Neither. And before you ask, I don't know who I would have voted for, but I know I wouldn't have voted for either of the AFD or Merkel. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit. "...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If she wins, it will be the end of germany with her policies, it will end up like sweden. On the plus side, a lot of those really dumb articles about how Sweden is some kind of Muslim hellhole can be regurgitated with a quick find and replace. And their intended audience will lap it up. It depends what you want to beleive. I take it you get it is all ok from the propaganda newspapers? Well, of course things that don't fit into the "fear the Muslims" hysteria mist be propaganda. It makes perfect sense if you don't think about it " Look at the news today what happened in örebro in sweden, it is the 4th mosque now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If she wins, it will be the end of germany with her policies, it will end up like sweden. On the plus side, a lot of those really dumb articles about how Sweden is some kind of Muslim hellhole can be regurgitated with a quick find and replace. And their intended audience will lap it up. It depends what you want to beleive. I take it you get it is all ok from the propaganda newspapers? Well, of course things that don't fit into the "fear the Muslims" hysteria mist be propaganda. It makes perfect sense if you don't think about it Look at the news today what happened in örebro in sweden, it is the 4th mosque now." I'm unsure of what it is you're getting at here. Someone has, for reasons that are currently unknown, burnt a Mosque to the ground. We don't know who they are, or why they did it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If she wins, it will be the end of germany with her policies, it will end up like sweden. On the plus side, a lot of those really dumb articles about how Sweden is some kind of Muslim hellhole can be regurgitated with a quick find and replace. And their intended audience will lap it up. It depends what you want to beleive. I take it you get it is all ok from the propaganda newspapers? Well, of course things that don't fit into the "fear the Muslims" hysteria mist be propaganda. It makes perfect sense if you don't think about it Look at the news today what happened in örebro in sweden, it is the 4th mosque now. I'm unsure of what it is you're getting at here. Someone has, for reasons that are currently unknown, burnt a Mosque to the ground. We don't know who they are, or why they did it. " Nothing, just thought the news was interesting as it happens more there. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner "Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone. "Doh | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone. "There's nothing to suggest that in order to reclaim the people that have voted for AFD, Merkel and her party needs to become more like the AFD. It's not as if these people were always abstaining from voting until AFD showed up, in previous elections they voted for parties like the CDU and the SPD so there's no reason to assume they're unwilling to do so again. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone.
There's nothing to suggest that in order to reclaim the people that have voted for AFD, Merkel and her party needs to become more like the AFD.
It's not as if these people were always abstaining from voting until AFD showed up, in previous elections they voted for parties like the CDU and the SPD so there's no reason to assume they're unwilling to do so again."True UKIP were split between Conservatives and Labour in the last election. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone.
There's nothing to suggest that in order to reclaim the people that have voted for AFD, Merkel and her party needs to become more like the AFD.
It's not as if these people were always abstaining from voting until AFD showed up, in previous elections they voted for parties like the CDU and the SPD so there's no reason to assume they're unwilling to do so again."By saying she wants to reclaim the AFD supporters back is already a statement of intent for her future policies - It's hard to imagine she will win AFD supporters over without leaning more to the right | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Interesting that a lot think that Merkel is home and dry. She is far from it. If (and it still is IF) she manages to cobble together the "Jamaica" coalition it still only gives her 52.6%. A working majority a lot may think but in German politics it isn't quite that simple. Put simply Merkels CDU didn't get 33%. It was the CDU/CSU alliance that did. CSU are the CDU's sister party in Bavaria and the two have an electoral pact. However they are still two distinct party's and don't always see eye to eye. CSU tend to be slightly further to the right and the noises coming from Germany at the moment is that they are far from happy about jumping into bed with the Greens. As always with minority governments propped up by smaller party's, the small party likes to get as many concessions as possible (a bit like DUP at the moment) and the German greens will be no exception. While Merkel may like to give them what they want I fully expect Seehofer to be at best awkward or at worst block the whole thing. This result could really go anywhere in the next few months. " Did you voted afd? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Interesting that a lot think that Merkel is home and dry. She is far from it. If (and it still is IF) she manages to cobble together the "Jamaica" coalition it still only gives her 52.6%. A working majority a lot may think but in German politics it isn't quite that simple. Put simply Merkels CDU didn't get 33%. It was the CDU/CSU alliance that did. CSU are the CDU's sister party in Bavaria and the two have an electoral pact. However they are still two distinct party's and don't always see eye to eye. CSU tend to be slightly further to the right and the noises coming from Germany at the moment is that they are far from happy about jumping into bed with the Greens. As always with minority governments propped up by smaller party's, the small party likes to get as many concessions as possible (a bit like DUP at the moment) and the German greens will be no exception. While Merkel may like to give them what they want I fully expect Seehofer to be at best awkward or at worst block the whole thing. This result could really go anywhere in the next few months. Did you voted afd? " I am only allowed to vote in local and (for now) European elections. Nice try.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone.
There's nothing to suggest that in order to reclaim the people that have voted for AFD, Merkel and her party needs to become more like the AFD.
It's not as if these people were always abstaining from voting until AFD showed up, in previous elections they voted for parties like the CDU and the SPD so there's no reason to assume they're unwilling to do so again.
By saying she wants to reclaim the AFD supporters back is already a statement of intent for her future policies - It's hard to imagine she will win AFD supporters over without leaning more to the right "Not really. There's two options here - a whole load of normally centre/centre right people have lurched hard to the right in their personal politics in a very short time Or A whole load of normally centre/centre right people have voted for a far right party out of protest. If it's the latter, you can win them back if you address their concerns, and there's nothing about that that would necessitate adopting far right polices. They probably don't actually hate foreigners. If it's the former, then catering to them would come at the cost of alienating people that, rightfully, find AFD to be repulsive. Better to consider them a lost cause and work on getting people who would vote CDU, but stayed home due to apathy, out to vote next time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone. "...they will undoubtedly influence policies of many parties in one way or another ...but pushing a government to a good Brexit deal with 12.6% is complete non-sense ...unless they suddenly find someone who would support their motion from any other party (not exactly likely) ...since they do have a somewhat 'Germany First' attitude and are incredibly divided amongst themselves, we can't see any pushing happening at all ... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone.
...they will undoubtedly influence policies of many parties in one way or another ...but pushing a government to a good Brexit deal with 12.6% is complete non-sense ...unless they suddenly find someone who would support their motion from any other party (not exactly likely) ...since they do have a somewhat 'Germany First' attitude and are incredibly divided amongst themselves, we can't see any pushing happening at all ..."Homer is talking about his ideas on brexit not theres | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone.
There's nothing to suggest that in order to reclaim the people that have voted for AFD, Merkel and her party needs to become more like the AFD.
It's not as if these people were always abstaining from voting until AFD showed up, in previous elections they voted for parties like the CDU and the SPD so there's no reason to assume they're unwilling to do so again.
By saying she wants to reclaim the AFD supporters back is already a statement of intent for her future policies - It's hard to imagine she will win AFD supporters over without leaning more to the right
Not really.
There's two options here - a whole load of normally centre/centre right people have lurched hard to the right in their personal politics in a very short time
Or
A whole load of normally centre/centre right people have voted for a far right party out of protest.
If it's the latter, you can win them back if you address their concerns, and there's nothing about that that would necessitate adopting far right polices. They probably don't actually hate foreigners.
If it's the former, then catering to them would come at the cost of alienating people that, rightfully, find AFD to be repulsive.
Better to consider them a lost cause and work on getting people who would vote CDU, but stayed home due to apathy, out to vote next time."Perhaps referring to people with a different opinion to you (either left or right) "as a lost cause" isn't the best way to finding a solution or to win them over? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Was interesting to hear an AFD MEP speaking on the Jeremy Vine BBC radio 2 show today. She said that the AFD will push Merkel for a good Brexit deal with the UK in the German Parliament because it's essential for German business that the UK gets a good Brexit deal. So looks like the AFD doing as well as they have done is positive news for Brexit.
...that's an interesting promise with a massive 12.6% share of the seats ...and the absence of any coalition partner
Doesn't sound much when you say 12.6% share of seats but the 2nd place party only got 20% share of the seats and first place got less than 35% share of the seats. Just a couple of days after the election results and the AFD have already influenced Merkel, when she now says she wants to win those AFD votes back. The only way Merkel will be able to do that is to shift her party more to the right, so the AFD are already having influence over Merkel from the election result alone.
There's nothing to suggest that in order to reclaim the people that have voted for AFD, Merkel and her party needs to become more like the AFD.
It's not as if these people were always abstaining from voting until AFD showed up, in previous elections they voted for parties like the CDU and the SPD so there's no reason to assume they're unwilling to do so again.
By saying she wants to reclaim the AFD supporters back is already a statement of intent for her future policies - It's hard to imagine she will win AFD supporters over without leaning more to the right
Not really.
There's two options here - a whole load of normally centre/centre right people have lurched hard to the right in their personal politics in a very short time
Or
A whole load of normally centre/centre right people have voted for a far right party out of protest.
If it's the latter, you can win them back if you address their concerns, and there's nothing about that that would necessitate adopting far right polices. They probably don't actually hate foreigners.
If it's the former, then catering to them would come at the cost of alienating people that, rightfully, find AFD to be repulsive.
Better to consider them a lost cause and work on getting people who would vote CDU, but stayed home due to apathy, out to vote next time.
Perhaps referring to people with a different opinion to you (either left or right) "as a lost cause" isn't the best way to finding a solution or to win them over? "Good thing that's not what I said, isn't it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Interesting that a lot think that Merkel is home and dry. She is far from it. If (and it still is IF) she manages to cobble together the "Jamaica" coalition it still only gives her 52.6%. A working majority a lot may think but in German politics it isn't quite that simple. Put simply Merkels CDU didn't get 33%. It was the CDU/CSU alliance that did. CSU are the CDU's sister party in Bavaria and the two have an electoral pact. However they are still two distinct party's and don't always see eye to eye. CSU tend to be slightly further to the right and the noises coming from Germany at the moment is that they are far from happy about jumping into bed with the Greens. As always with minority governments propped up by smaller party's, the small party likes to get as many concessions as possible (a bit like DUP at the moment) and the German greens will be no exception. While Merkel may like to give them what they want I fully expect Seehofer to be at best awkward or at worst block the whole thing. This result could really go anywhere in the next few months. " Hotlovefun, just saw on BBC Newsnight that Angela Merkel's coalition government is on the brink of collapse. The report said part of the coalition now wants to stop more migrants coming into Germany and Merkel has refused to agree, saying migrants should still be welcomed? The BBC Newsnight report gave a statistic that 2/3rds of the German population now want migrant numbers coming into Germany stopped or reduced. What is the situation on the ground there and is there any real possibility that the coalition will fall and Germany could be looking at new elections soon? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Interesting that a lot think that Merkel is home and dry. She is far from it. If (and it still is IF) she manages to cobble together the "Jamaica" coalition it still only gives her 52.6%. A working majority a lot may think but in German politics it isn't quite that simple. Put simply Merkels CDU didn't get 33%. It was the CDU/CSU alliance that did. CSU are the CDU's sister party in Bavaria and the two have an electoral pact. However they are still two distinct party's and don't always see eye to eye. CSU tend to be slightly further to the right and the noises coming from Germany at the moment is that they are far from happy about jumping into bed with the Greens. As always with minority governments propped up by smaller party's, the small party likes to get as many concessions as possible (a bit like DUP at the moment) and the German greens will be no exception. While Merkel may like to give them what they want I fully expect Seehofer to be at best awkward or at worst block the whole thing. This result could really go anywhere in the next few months. Hotlovefun, just saw on BBC Newsnight that Angela Merkel's coalition government is on the brink of collapse. The report said part of the coalition now wants to stop more migrants coming into Germany and Merkel has refused to agree, saying migrants should still be welcomed? The BBC Newsnight report gave a statistic that 2/3rds of the German population now want migrant numbers coming into Germany stopped or reduced. What is the situation on the ground there and is there any real possibility that the coalition will fall and Germany could be looking at new elections soon? " We are in Spain at the moment so I've only got half of the story. However from what I have seen it seems that Seehoffer the Leader of CSU (CDU's Bavarian sister party) is the one who has turned on Merkel. He is also the current interior minister (Home secretary) Bavaria bore the brunt of the 2015 migrant influx and his party have been haemorrhaging votes to AFD. She still seems to have SPD onside but how long that will last is very much open to debate. Also while I don't have the actual numbers to hand I'm pretty sure that without CSU she will be in a minority. The last thing that Merkel wants is another election as in the polls AFD are a good way in front of where they were last time. Could be a very interesting summer. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Interesting that a lot think that Merkel is home and dry. She is far from it. If (and it still is IF) she manages to cobble together the "Jamaica" coalition it still only gives her 52.6%. A working majority a lot may think but in German politics it isn't quite that simple. Put simply Merkels CDU didn't get 33%. It was the CDU/CSU alliance that did. CSU are the CDU's sister party in Bavaria and the two have an electoral pact. However they are still two distinct party's and don't always see eye to eye. CSU tend to be slightly further to the right and the noises coming from Germany at the moment is that they are far from happy about jumping into bed with the Greens. As always with minority governments propped up by smaller party's, the small party likes to get as many concessions as possible (a bit like DUP at the moment) and the German greens will be no exception. While Merkel may like to give them what they want I fully expect Seehofer to be at best awkward or at worst block the whole thing. This result could really go anywhere in the next few months. Hotlovefun, just saw on BBC Newsnight that Angela Merkel's coalition government is on the brink of collapse. The report said part of the coalition now wants to stop more migrants coming into Germany and Merkel has refused to agree, saying migrants should still be welcomed? The BBC Newsnight report gave a statistic that 2/3rds of the German population now want migrant numbers coming into Germany stopped or reduced. What is the situation on the ground there and is there any real possibility that the coalition will fall and Germany could be looking at new elections soon? We are in Spain at the moment so I've only got half of the story. However from what I have seen it seems that Seehoffer the Leader of CSU (CDU's Bavarian sister party) is the one who has turned on Merkel. He is also the current interior minister (Home secretary) Bavaria bore the brunt of the 2015 migrant influx and his party have been haemorrhaging votes to AFD. She still seems to have SPD onside but how long that will last is very much open to debate. Also while I don't have the actual numbers to hand I'm pretty sure that without CSU she will be in a minority. The last thing that Merkel wants is another election as in the polls AFD are a good way in front of where they were last time. Could be a very interesting summer. " Thanks for the update. Not looking good for Merkel then, lol. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month " How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. " That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. " What a stupid question. In any organisation an individual member (or group of members) can always cause problems for the whole. You are right about one thing though. Without the members there is no EU. Think about that statement for a moment. As it is one member is leaving and the "awkward squad" are getting bigger by the day. Maybe one day there really will be no members. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels. "You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month " If Merkel actually makes it to the summit. Kai Whittaker an MP from her own party has said in a radio 3 interview that she could be gone by next week. BTW. I checked the numbers and without CSU she would be just short of a majority. There is also talk of a complete split of CDU/CSU. That would end a 70 year relationship between the two parties. Seehofer's problem is that he is facing state elections in October and the polls are suggesting that CSU could lose control of the state parliament. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month If Merkel actually makes it to the summit. Kai Whittaker an MP from her own party has said in a radio 3 interview that she could be gone by next week. BTW. I checked the numbers and without CSU she would be just short of a majority. There is also talk of a complete split of CDU/CSU. That would end a 70 year relationship between the two parties. Seehofer's problem is that he is facing state elections in October and the polls are suggesting that CSU could lose control of the state parliament." I think it was reported on Newsnight the other night it was AFD who would be making big gains on CSU in October, so that's why CSU can't carry on doing Merkel's bidding. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month If Merkel actually makes it to the summit. Kai Whittaker an MP from her own party has said in a radio 3 interview that she could be gone by next week. BTW. I checked the numbers and without CSU she would be just short of a majority. There is also talk of a complete split of CDU/CSU. That would end a 70 year relationship between the two parties. Seehofer's problem is that he is facing state elections in October and the polls are suggesting that CSU could lose control of the state parliament. I think it was reported on Newsnight the other night it was AFD who would be making big gains on CSU in October, so that's why CSU can't carry on doing Merkel's bidding. " That's about right. CSU still have a big lead but not enough for an overall majority. AFD are running neck and neck with SPD as the second party. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
"Impressive comeback | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
"It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels. "Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?"The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk. "So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament? 
At the moment the commission is made up by people nominated by the leaders of the member states, exactly how our cabinet is made up. So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
"You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP. "Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM! So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either. By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response: "So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?""When was juncker elected as an MEP? When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?"He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes."So you won't answer the two questions then. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then."You know the answer to the questions. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions. "And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were."Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me."Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?"He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party "Is Juncker an MEP? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?"Google is your friend. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend."You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party "No he wasn't How can someone who has never been an MEP be a candidate to lead a parliamentary group? Juncker is not the leader of any party or group in the EU parliament and never has been. Methinks you are making this up as you go along. For someone who is so obsessed with "facts" you should start checking your own. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
No he wasn't
How can someone who has never been an MEP be a candidate to lead a parliamentary group?
Juncker is not the leader of any party or group in the EU parliament and never has been.
Methinks you are making this up as you go along. For someone who is so obsessed with "facts" you should start checking your own. "https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_People%27s_Party You'll see Jean-claude Juncker right next to where it says "Leader" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?"No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
No he wasn't
How can someone who has never been an MEP be a candidate to lead a parliamentary group?
Juncker is not the leader of any party or group in the EU parliament and never has been.
Methinks you are making this up as you go along. For someone who is so obsessed with "facts" you should start checking your own.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_People%27s_Party
You'll see Jean-claude Juncker right next to where it says "Leader""On my Wiki page is says someone called Joseph Daul is the leader of the EPP (the party) and Manfred Weber is chairman (de facto leader) of the EPP parliamentary group. Juncker isn't even on the committee. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. "Alec Douglas-Home inherited his peerage when his father died. When Macmillan became ill, Douglas-Home became leader and renounced his peerage in order to serve as PM. Unfortunately, his stuffy aristocratic image never left him and he didn't survive the next General Election. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
No he wasn't
How can someone who has never been an MEP be a candidate to lead a parliamentary group?
Juncker is not the leader of any party or group in the EU parliament and never has been.
Methinks you are making this up as you go along. For someone who is so obsessed with "facts" you should start checking your own.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_People%27s_Party
You'll see Jean-claude Juncker right next to where it says "Leader"
On my Wiki page is says someone called Joseph Daul is the leader of the EPP (the party) and Manfred Weber is chairman (de facto leader) of the EPP parliamentary group.
Juncker isn't even on the committee. "I'll copy and paste it for you. Leader Jean-Claude Juncker PEC (LU) President Joseph Daul MEP (FR) Group leader Manfred Weber MEP (DE) Secretary-General Antonio López-Istúriz White MEP (ES) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. " So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe." The last time Jean-Claude Juncker fought an election, was back in October 2013 in Luxembourg. He was successful despite losing 3 seats. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe." "Running" in what sense? In the UK, we don't directly elect our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for candidates from parties, and the leader of that party becomes the PM. The president of the European commission is elected in the same way. He is the leader of the largest party in the European Parliament. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe. "Running" in what sense? In the UK, we don't directly elect our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for candidates from parties, and the leader of that party becomes the PM. The president of the European commission is elected in the same way. He is the leader of the largest party in the European Parliament. " All very true, except that should the leader of the largest party elected in the UK not secure a seat in the Commons, then they could not sit in the Commons, and therefore could not be PM | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe. "Running" in what sense? In the UK, we don't directly elect our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for candidates from parties, and the leader of that party becomes the PM. The president of the European commission is elected in the same way. He is the leader of the largest party in the European Parliament. All very true, except that should the leader of the largest party elected in the UK not secure a seat in the Commons, then they could not sit in the Commons, and therefore could not be PM " In that case they would likely be made a Lord and be PM from the lords. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe. "Running" in what sense? In the UK, we don't directly elect our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for candidates from parties, and the leader of that party becomes the PM. The president of the European commission is elected in the same way. He is the leader of the largest party in the European Parliament. All very true, except that should the leader of the largest party elected in the UK not secure a seat in the Commons, then they could not sit in the Commons, and therefore could not be PM In that case they would likely be made a Lord and be PM from the lords. " I'm not sure that the 21st Century UK would accept such Victorian practices! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe. "Running" in what sense? In the UK, we don't directly elect our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for candidates from parties, and the leader of that party becomes the PM. The president of the European commission is elected in the same way. He is the leader of the largest party in the European Parliament. " But the President of the European Commission isn't elected in the same way. President of the European Commission is appointed by national leaders (heads of state or government of EU countries) with the approval of the European Parliament. EU citizens have no direct say in who is their President. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Is Juncker an MEP? Google is your friend. You sound like Kinky now. I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP? No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. So the person running the EU is not elected by the people of Europe. "Running" in what sense? In the UK, we don't directly elect our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for candidates from parties, and the leader of that party becomes the PM. The president of the European commission is elected in the same way. He is the leader of the largest party in the European Parliament. But the President of the European Commission isn't elected in the same way. President of the European Commission is appointed by national leaders (heads of state or government of EU countries) with the approval of the European Parliament. EU citizens have no direct say in who is their President. " Are you saying there is no relationship at all between the parties elected in the European Parliament and the position of President of the European commission? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember. "Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later. The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP. Juncker is not an elected MEP. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP."You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
"Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911. Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned. Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Back in those times, there was no Labour party and some of the Commons were nobility or their representatives. Parliament evolves over time as it should. There are already calls to reform the way that Private Members Bills are put through. " Yep, and Labour MP Frank Field is putting forward a motion this week to abolish the House of Lords. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
"Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up. "How many EU citizens voted for Juncker? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
How many EU citizens voted for Juncker?"More inane questions for people who don't understand how the EU works. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
How many EU citizens voted for Juncker?
More inane questions for people who don't understand how the EU works. "I understand perfectly. Who elected him to the party of which he became lead candidate to be EU commissioner? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up. "So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first. You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up. "Yep, and the PM is a democratically elected MP. The President of the European Commission is not a democratically elected MEP. Glad we've got all that cleared that up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up. "Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM. No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand. Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
How many EU citizens voted for Juncker?
More inane questions for people who don't understand how the EU works.
I understand perfectly. Who elected him to the party of which he became lead candidate to be EU commissioner?"He probably paid his membership fee to join. I'm a member of a political party, no one elected me to be a member, I paid my fee and that's it. It's obvious that you DON'T understand how it works, otherwise I wouldn't have to keep schooling you on it. You wouldn't keep asking inane questions and you wouldn't keep on emphasising just how ignorant you are of the workings of the EU. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
Yep, and the PM is a democratically elected MP. The President of the European Commission is not a democratically elected MEP.
Glad we've got all that cleared that up.
"
Yep, spot on and snap. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
Yep, and the PM is a democratically elected MP. The President of the European Commission is not a democratically elected MEP.
Glad we've got all that cleared that up.
Yep, spot on and snap. "No one said he was! Look at you lot celebrating your ignorance and high fiving each other over which one knows the least about the EU | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
How many EU citizens voted for Juncker?
More inane questions for people who don't understand how the EU works.
I understand perfectly. Who elected him to the party of which he became lead candidate to be EU commissioner?
He probably paid his membership fee to join. I'm a member of a political party, no one elected me to be a member, I paid my fee and that's it.
It's obvious that you DON'T understand how it works, otherwise I wouldn't have to keep schooling you on it. You wouldn't keep asking inane questions and you wouldn't keep on emphasising just how ignorant you are of the workings of the EU. "Just like our PM, lol you’re hilarious mate | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
How many EU citizens voted for Juncker?
More inane questions for people who don't understand how the EU works.
I understand perfectly. Who elected him to the party of which he became lead candidate to be EU commissioner?
He probably paid his membership fee to join. I'm a member of a political party, no one elected me to be a member, I paid my fee and that's it.
It's obvious that you DON'T understand how it works, otherwise I wouldn't have to keep schooling you on it. You wouldn't keep asking inane questions and you wouldn't keep on emphasising just how ignorant you are of the workings of the EU.
Just like our PM, lol you’re hilarious mate "I think its funnier that you think you have to be elected to join a party. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Clcc would you like a little possible future scenario of the shit you support?" Nothing I have said can be construed as support for an individual, I have simply been explaining how an institution works. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Clcc would you like a little possible future scenario of the shit you support? Nothing I have said can be construed as support for an individual, I have simply been explaining how an institution works." I will start a thread on the EU 2019 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Clcc would you like a little possible future scenario of the shit you support? Nothing I have said can be construed as support for an individual, I have simply been explaining how an institution works. I will start a thread on the EU 2019" So from the other thread you seem to be agreeing with me that the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that right? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Clcc would you like a little possible future scenario of the shit you support? Nothing I have said can be construed as support for an individual, I have simply been explaining how an institution works. I will start a thread on the EU 2019 So from the other thread you seem to be agreeing with me that the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that right? " I never said he wasn’t | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister. "You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected. How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?"Who said he was an MEP? No one. He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken? "And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM. Am I correct? Is that correct? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?"You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?
You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against. "CLCC seems to be morphing into Kinky (you answer my question before I answer yours, lol).
And you've admitted yourself on this thread Juncker is unelected and is not an MEP | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?
You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against.
CLCC seems to be morphing into Kinky (you answer my question before I answer yours, lol).
And you've admitted yourself on this thread Juncker is unelected and is not an MEP "Still showing off your ignorance, he is elected, by every one who voted for people who sit in his party, that's how he became the president of the European Commission. Even other brexiters have started threads proving you wrong, asking what will happen if people vote for a far right party and a far right President of the European commission. Why haven't you told them that they are wrong? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?
You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against.
CLCC seems to be morphing into Kinky (you answer my question before I answer yours, lol).
And you've admitted yourself on this thread Juncker is unelected and is not an MEP
Still showing off your ignorance, he is elected, by every one who voted for people who sit in his party, that's how he became the president of the European Commission.
Even other brexiters have started threads proving you wrong, asking what will happen if people vote for a far right party and a far right President of the European commission. Why haven't you told them that they are wrong? "So again you're admitting Juncker is not directly elected by the people and he is not an MEP. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?
You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against.
CLCC seems to be morphing into Kinky (you answer my question before I answer yours, lol).
And you've admitted yourself on this thread Juncker is unelected and is not an MEP
Still showing off your ignorance, he is elected, by every one who voted for people who sit in his party, that's how he became the president of the European Commission.
Even other brexiters have started threads proving you wrong, asking what will happen if people vote for a far right party and a far right President of the European commission. Why haven't you told them that they are wrong?
So again you're admitting Juncker is not directly elected by the people and he is not an MEP. "They vote for his party, he is elected. Jesus, do I have to write it in crayon or something? Or maybe on the side of a bus? Is it because I'm telling the truth? Is that why you are finding it so difficult? Would you prefer I told you that he was elected by the 7 unicorns of Benelux who consulted their magic truth rings which foretold of the coming of a grey man? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?
You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against.
CLCC seems to be morphing into Kinky (you answer my question before I answer yours, lol).
And you've admitted yourself on this thread Juncker is unelected and is not an MEP
Still showing off your ignorance, he is elected, by every one who voted for people who sit in his party, that's how he became the president of the European Commission.
Even other brexiters have started threads proving you wrong, asking what will happen if people vote for a far right party and a far right President of the European commission. Why haven't you told them that they are wrong?
So again you're admitting Juncker is not directly elected by the people and he is not an MEP.
They vote for his party, he is elected. Jesus, do I have to write it in crayon or something? Or maybe on the side of a bus?
Is it because I'm telling the truth? Is that why you are finding it so difficult? Would you prefer I told you that he was elected by the 7 unicorns of Benelux who consulted their magic truth rings which foretold of the coming of a grey man? "Again you're admitting Juncker is not directly elected by the people and Juncker is not an MEP. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?
You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against.
CLCC seems to be morphing into Kinky (you answer my question before I answer yours, lol).
And you've admitted yourself on this thread Juncker is unelected and is not an MEP
Still showing off your ignorance, he is elected, by every one who voted for people who sit in his party, that's how he became the president of the European Commission.
Even other brexiters have started threads proving you wrong, asking what will happen if people vote for a far right party and a far right President of the European commission. Why haven't you told them that they are wrong?
So again you're admitting Juncker is not directly elected by the people and he is not an MEP.
They vote for his party, he is elected. Jesus, do I have to write it in crayon or something? Or maybe on the side of a bus?
Is it because I'm telling the truth? Is that why you are finding it so difficult? Would you prefer I told you that he was elected by the 7 unicorns of Benelux who consulted their magic truth rings which foretold of the coming of a grey man?
Again you're admitting Juncker is not directly elected by the people and Juncker is not an MEP. "Juncker is elected. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The migrant crisis in the EU is coming to a head, and provoking political change. If factions in Germany align themselves with the right in Austria and Italy, this might well have enough strength to cause the EU problems. At the present time, the EU needs Merkel to see this crisis through. More interesting times ahead, and it will be interesting to see what outcomes there will be, from the next EU summit meeting at the end of this month How can member states cause the EU problems? The member states are the EU. Without them, there is no EU. That's right. They all think alike. No problems at all in Hungary or Bulgaria. The Italians are quite happy having nearly a million migrants and then being lectured by France on their responsibilities. No problems at all with the Dutch telling the EU that budgets need to be cut when the UK leaves. Maybe I see it differently and it's just one big happy party in Brussels.
You see the EU as an existential other, something seperate from the member states, it's not. The EU is simply the manifestation of the collective will of the member states.
It is an existential other in that the EU has its own flag, it's own anthem and it's own Parliament in Brussels.
Who would sit in the European parliament if there were no member states?
The unelected commission, pricks like Juncker and Tusk.
So the commission would become Members of the European Parliament?
You don't have to be an MEP to sit in the European Parliament. Anyone who has watched any footage of European Parliament proceedings will tell you Juncker often sits in there and contributes to debates, Juncker in not an MEP.
Juncker got his position by being the "lead candidate" of the party which won the largest number of seats in the European parliament. You know, EXACTLY how we select our PM!
So without MEPs, there is no president of the European commission, so he won't be talking either.
By the way, you failed to answer the actual question. You know, the question that you deliberately edited out of your response:
"So who would be in the commission if there were no member states to send commissioners?"
When was juncker elected as an MEP?
When was the last time our PM wasn't an elected MP?
He was the lead candidate of the party that got the most votes.
So you won't answer the two questions then.
You know the answer to the questions.
And clearly you don't, because the choice of Juncker and the choice of our PM are not exactly tge same process, as you said they were.
Both are leaders of the largest party in parliament, sounds pretty similar to me.
Please tell me which party Juncker is the leader of?
He was the lead candidate for the European People's Party
Is Juncker an MEP?
Google is your friend.
You sound like Kinky now.
I'm asking you. Is Juncker an MEP?
No, he's not an MEP, but he is the leader of the biggest party, the EPP. This is exactly the same as we have in the UK for choosing our PM. It's not my fault that you are ignorant of the fact. The last PM who sat in the House of Lords, rather than Commons was Alec Douglas-Home in 1963, which I'm sure some of our older forumites will remember.
Actually, he became PM on 18th October 1963, he gave up his place in the HoL on 23rd October 1963, to become PM, and within a couple of weeks of becoming PM he stood for election as an MP for Kinross, which was part of the deal of him becoming PM. He became PM because MacMillan was very ill, and was only ever seen as a stop-gap. He lost the GE a year later.
The accepted rule in the UK is that to be PM you have to be an elected MP.
Juncker is not an elected MEP.
You have just confirmed that when he became PM he wasn't an MP
No one has claimed that Juncker is an MEP.
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil was PM from the Lords, so was John Russell, so was Disraeli, Lord Liverpool was PM for 14 yrs from the Lords.
Yes, when the Lords and aristocracy were all powerful. This changed with the Parliament Act of 1911.
Since then the PM has come from the HoC, with the one exception already mentioned.
Of course, as you probably know, until 1905 the title of Prime Minister did not officially exist.
Right, so getting back to where we were, the president of the European commission is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament, and the PM is the leader of the largest party in the house of commons. I'm glad we have got that all cleared up.
So you've admitted the UK Prime Minister is elected by the people to be an MP and can only sit in the House of Commons as an MP to then be Prime minister after being elected by the people as an MP first.
You've admitted Juncker is NOT elected by the people as an MEP, but still gets to sit in the European Parliament. So nothing like the system we have here in the UK. I'm Glad we got that all cleared up.
Oh dear Centaur, you got the wrong end of that stick, you must have missed the last twenty or so posts that prove you don't have to sit in the commons to be PM.
No one has said that Juncker is an MEP, so that straw man won't stand.
Juncker is president of the European commission because he is the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Just. Like. Our. Prime. Minister.
You must have missed the bit where the only non-elected MP since the end of the 19th century to become PM actually stood for election as an MP within weeks of him becoming PM as a condition of him becoming PM...and was elected.
How many weeks into his tenure did Juncker stand for election as an MEP?
Who said he was an MEP? No one.
He was elected to the position of President of the European commission by virtue of being the leader of the largest party in the European parliament. Is that correct, or am I mistaken?
And the only person since the 19th century to become the PM without being elected as an MP first stood to be elected as an MP within weeks of his being asked to be PM.
Am I correct?
Is that correct?
You obviously expect me to answer your question, yet refuse to answer mine. The point is, Centaur said that Juncker is unelected, and he's wrong. Yet again, the staunchest Brexiter is shown to be the most ignorant of the institution he rallies against.
CLCC seems to be morphing into Kinky (you answer my question before I answer yours, lol).
And you've admitted yourself on this thread Juncker is unelected and is not an MEP
Still showing off your ignorance, he is elected, by every one who voted for people who sit in his party, that's how he became the president of the European Commission.
Even other brexiters have started threads proving you wrong, asking what will happen if people vote for a far right party and a far right President of the European commission. Why haven't you told them that they are wrong?
So again you're admitting Juncker is not directly elected by the people and he is not an MEP.
They vote for his party, he is elected. Jesus, do I have to write it in crayon or something? Or maybe on the side of a bus?
Is it because I'm telling the truth? Is that why you are finding it so difficult? Would you prefer I told you that he was elected by the 7 unicorns of Benelux who consulted their magic truth rings which foretold of the coming of a grey man? "But the President of the European Commission and the individual Commissioners are not directly elected by the peoples of Europe. Under the provisions of the EU treaty, the Commission has the sole right to propose EU legislation, which, if passed, is then binding on all the EU member states and the citizens of these member states. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
