|
Hey, sorry to break up your debate on the meaning of the word "socialist" in 2016 politics, but, I wanted to put numbers on how crazy hosed the situation is in France. So, I told you earlier that the left wasn't able to file its motion of non-confidence. That's because you need at least one tenth of the Assemblée to sign on it. That requires 58 signatures. They only had 56. This is where it gets hosed. For the motion of non-confidence to pass, you need the majority of all sitting members of the Assemblée to vote on it, and only the votes in favor are counted. (Meaning abstaining is as good as voting against) Strictly counting the members of the UDI and UMP group, who filed the motion, you have 226 votes. Depending on who you add, you get between 230 and 250 votes. (Jean-Luc Mélenchon claims it's 234, while members of the UDI claim it's at 252, which seems crazy, but, hey, I don't have their math) Now, the majority in the Assemblée is set at 288. So, if you add the 56 who signed the leftist motion of no-confidence, you'd need exactly 232 votes for it to pass. Which would be entirely plausible to get. But many of the people who signed that motion do not want to vote for the UDI-UMP motion, because its text basically says the government isn't loving worker's rights enough. However, voting for a motion of non-confidence is different from signing it, and, accompanying it with a text is just a formal procedure that has no impact on the vote itself, since, it's not about the law, but the government that puts its responsibilty on the table in order to pass it. Which means that, theorically, counting all the members of the Assemblée that are for the motion of no-confidence, there's enough votes for it to pass, but it won't, because the PS is threatening its members with exclusion from the party, possibly a dissolution, and a major political crisis on the left in any case. And that's how we are hosed. French politics!
|
# ? May 11, 2016 22:59 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 08:04 |
|
ElNarez posted:because the PS is threatening its members with exclusion from the party I'm just amazed that these delegates (the "frondeurs") are turning this opportunity down. The PS has taken a beating in the public opinion, and chances are they'll lose big in the next series of elections, in particular the legislative elections. They could take this exclusion as an opportunity to position themselves (locally) as being "true to the promises" of PS 2012, whilst at the same time being free to pick the best horse in 2017, either on the far left, the centre (lol), or whatever happens to the PS when it breaks following their vote of no-confidence.
|
# ? May 11, 2016 23:20 |
|
Getting out of the PS means you don't get their money and infrastructure when campaigning. And you've got an official PS candidate running against you with both, and splitting the votes, meaning you might not even make it to the second round of voting, and that's pretty much giving seats away to the right, or, worse, the FN. It might not mean much in what's a losing proposition anyway, but it still means enough to be scary.
|
# ? May 11, 2016 23:31 |
|
Nothing says democracy like "vote how we say or lose the funding you need to represent your constituents."
|
# ? May 12, 2016 00:09 |
|
ChainsawCharlie posted:There is no fooling going on.There is no silent majority earning for the great socialist revolution.the electorate is what it is.there is no fringe left.the fringe IS the left. there's actually a ton of leftism in france it's just that it's the anarchist and trotskyst kind of leftism where if you put 10 special snowflakes in a room they'll make 10 split parties. unlike in portugal where the cool and good orthodox communist party that will never give up on lenin's sacred flag forced the government to raise minimum wage, decrease electricity bills and encouraged Benfica to a very valorous quarter-final place in the champions league.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 00:20 |
|
Mans posted:unlike in portugal where the cool and good orthodox communist party that will never give up on lenin's sacred flag forced the government to raise minimum wage, decrease electricity bills and encouraged Benfica to a very valorous quarter-final place in the champions league. This sounds like it reduces corporate profits and having consulted with some Austrians I'm assured that what you're doing is literally worse than slavery.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 00:23 |
|
Tesseraction posted:This sounds like it reduces corporate profits and having consulted with some Austrians I'm assured that what you're doing is literally worse than slavery. Corporate welfare is the only welfare.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 00:41 |
|
blowfish posted:Corporate welfare is the only welfare. It is good to see that despite sharing a country with Frankfurt you have your heart in the right place: Austria.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 00:44 |
|
Whaaaaaat. The CSU is contemplating a split with the CDU over immigration, Islam, and differences concerning the handling of AfD: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/merkel-conservatives-divided-by-right-wing-afd-a-1091491.htmlquote:The rise of the right-wing populist AfD has driven a wedge between Merkel's Christian Democrats and their Bavarian sister party. The CSU is now threatening to go it alone, with officials saying they may campaign against the chancellor in the 2017 election.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 08:50 |
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:A good thing is that article 49.3 may only be used once per year. A bad thing is that it can be used at all. quote:Why exactly is Manuel Valls in the Socialist Party at all? He seems to be even worse at it than Tony Blair.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:11 |
LemonDrizzle posted:Whaaaaaat. The CSU is contemplating a split with the CDU over immigration, Islam, and differences concerning the handling of AfD: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/merkel-conservatives-divided-by-right-wing-afd-a-1091491.html Well, amicably splitting and thereby getting a larger share of votes while still closely collaborating seems like a very smart play, at least in theory.
|
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:18 |
|
GaussianCopula posted:Well, amicably splitting and thereby getting a larger share of votes while still closely collaborating seems like a very smart play, at least in theory. Doesn't this beg the question of whether the German electorate are stupid enough to fall for it?
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:23 |
Tesseraction posted:Doesn't this beg the question of whether the German electorate are stupid enough to fall for it? Fall for what? They would go into the elections with a clear statement that they want to govern together and the results would influence the concrete policies that will be followed after the election. What is the point in voting for any party that is not projected to get an absolute majority otherwise?
|
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:29 |
|
Tesseraction posted:Waterloo? The Restauration of the monarchy and of his Grace Louis the XXth. Toplowtech posted:Are you sure about the time limit i remember Rocard using it like 20+ times and i don't remember him being prime minister for that long.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:33 |
|
GaussianCopula posted:Fall for what? They would go into the elections with a clear statement that they want to govern together and the results would influence the concrete policies that will be followed after the election. What is the point in voting for any party that is not projected to get an absolute majority otherwise? That would be the opposite of smart if they did that, because then the electorate wouldn't trust them to maintain the hardline opposition to the CDU they're trying to get a hold of. It'd be trying to weasel into the votes the AfD gets except with an explicit promise to not deliver on their mission statement.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:38 |
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:The Restauration of the monarchy and of his Grace Louis the XXth. Oh yeah, i forgot they put more stuff than just the quite boring "MEN/WOMEN PARITY" thing and the actual Court des comptes changes.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:42 |
|
GaussianCopula posted:Fall for what? They would go into the elections with a clear statement that they want to govern together and the results would influence the concrete policies that will be followed after the election. What is the point in voting for any party that is not projected to get an absolute majority otherwise? So you don't see a problem with a party loudly declaring "WE WON'T STAND FOR THIS ANYMORE" and then promptly riding that wave of popularity into continuing on as if nothing happened?
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:47 |
|
I mean, the Tories pull that poo poo all the time but they also own the media so lol no-one notices.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:47 |
|
GaussianCopula posted:Well, amicably splitting and thereby getting a larger share of votes while still closely collaborating seems like a very smart play, at least in theory.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 11:50 |
|
Toplowtech posted:Oh yeah, i forgot they put more stuff than just the quite boring "MEN/WOMEN PARITY" thing and the actual Court des comptes changes. hey fun fact: that disposition was a concession made to the PS, who were for removing the 49.3 entirely chief among them? Manuel Valls.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 14:33 |
|
Kassad posted:https://twitter.com/HouseofCards/status/730375464590684160 i groaned
|
# ? May 12, 2016 14:37 |
|
forget about lack of voting discipline, holding Churchill as a political paragon should be grounds for instant expulsion from any left-wing political party
|
# ? May 12, 2016 14:48 |
|
That's what a left-wing party should do, yes. It's pretty clear why it was never gonna happen to Valls.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 16:48 |
|
icantfindaname posted:forget about lack of voting discipline, holding Churchill as a political paragon should be grounds for instant expulsion from any left-wing political party b-b-but post-war consensus
|
# ? May 12, 2016 17:53 |
|
Tesseraction posted:So you don't see a problem with a party loudly declaring "WE WON'T STAND FOR THIS ANYMORE" and then promptly riding that wave of popularity into continuing on as if nothing happened? It's the perfectly pragmatic thing to do for a party that sees being in power as its primary goal. What do you mean you believe politicians should do what's best for their voters.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 17:56 |
|
The votes are in! Valls can stay!
|
# ? May 12, 2016 17:57 |
|
246 votes in favor. The motion of no-confidence failed. No votes in favor from the PS. Full breakdown by groups: 196 LR 27 UDI 1 RRDP (Center-left group,) 2 EELV (Green party) 11 GDR (Communists) 9 NI (Unregistered) ElNarez fucked around with this message at 18:11 on May 12, 2016 |
# ? May 12, 2016 18:01 |
|
blowfish posted:It's the perfectly pragmatic thing to do for a party that sees being in power as its primary goal. What do you mean you believe politicians should do what's best for their voters. No, the perfectly pragmatic thing to do for a party that wants to be in power in CSU's position is to not loving break from the CDU, because in the current arrangement they are actually guaranteed to be in power as long as the CDU doesn't poo poo itself. A break from the CDU would completely jeopardise that, no matter the intention.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 18:04 |
|
ElNarez posted:246 votes in favor. The motion of no-confidence failed. No votes in favor from the PS. Forever cowards.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 19:25 |
|
YF-23 posted:No, the perfectly pragmatic thing to do for a party that wants to be in power in CSU's position is to not loving break from the CDU, because in the current arrangement they are actually guaranteed to be in power as long as the CDU doesn't poo poo itself. A break from the CDU would completely jeopardise that, no matter the intention. not if they intend to enter the default CDU/CSU coalition as the almost-reactionary party.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 20:32 |
|
blowfish posted:not if they intend to enter the default CDU/CSU coalition as the almost-reactionary party. That's assuming the CDU would accept them back in after they break. They risk the CDU being able to go it alone or with the SPD or FDP. And if they plan to just rejoin the same status quo coalition, they either have to 1. lie about that being their intention, ruining their reputation in the foreseeable future, or 2. just flat out tell the electorate they're talking bullshit about the break, which just makes the break itself a confusing nonsensical mess.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 20:39 |
|
YF-23 posted:That's assuming the CDU would accept them back in after they break. They risk the CDU being able to go it alone or with the SPD or FDP. And if they plan to just rejoin the same status quo coalition, they either have to 1. lie about that being their intention, ruining their reputation in the foreseeable future, or 2. just flat out tell the electorate they're talking bullshit about the break, which just makes the break itself a confusing nonsensical mess. Exactly. Or, as I put it when GC first contested it: Tesseraction posted:Doesn't this beg the question of whether the German electorate are stupid enough to fall for it?
|
# ? May 12, 2016 20:42 |
|
Tesseraction posted:Exactly. Or, as I put it when GC first contested it: The electorate is never as smart as you think. The electorate is never as dumb as you think.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 21:04 |
|
blowfish posted:The electorate is never as smart as you think. The electorate is never as dumb as you think. That's a cool platitude, but it doesn't make a fake break from the CDU a "smart move" that would in any way be beneficial to the CSU.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 21:06 |
|
Speaking from experience,blowfish posted:The electorate is never as smart as you think. Agreed. blowfish posted:The electorate is never as dumb as you think. Disagreed. Source: lmao have you seen my government
|
# ? May 12, 2016 21:09 |
|
YF-23 posted:That's a cool platitude, but it doesn't make a fake break from the CDU a "smart move" that would in any way be beneficial to the CSU. Well, they could siphon up the Erika Steinbach voters and cheastbeat about bringing Mutti back to the right path.
|
# ? May 12, 2016 21:13 |
|
Get excited for Ukraine-Russian war part II: electric boogaloo everyone!!!
|
# ? May 14, 2016 23:40 |
|
The Belgian posted:Get excited for Ukraine-Russian war part II: electric boogaloo everyone!!! Amazingly Poland - Ukraine - Russian ended up as the triumvirate... Yet people believe it's the Swedes, not the Slavs who decide the Eurovision trneds.
|
# ? May 14, 2016 23:44 |
|
steinrokkan posted:Amazingly Poland - Ukraine - Russian ended up as the triumvirate... Yet people believe it's the Swedes, not the Slavs who decide the Eurovision trneds. swedes make like half the songs
|
# ? May 15, 2016 01:19 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 08:04 |
|
So I'm watching Michael Moore's Where to Invade Next. How accurate does this film depict Europe's benefits and entitlements?
|
# ? May 15, 2016 01:31 |