|
Good OP. The British press has been talking up Helle Thorning-Schmidt as a potential compromise candidate for the presidency of the commission - is she considered plausible elsewhere in Europe?
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:36 |
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Thorning-Schmidt definitely has the papers for the job, but my money is still on Schultz - I know he wants the job badly. Anyway, the average of the UK polls conducted this month give Labour 31% of the vote, UKIP 28%, the Tories 23%, the Lib Dems (our only major pro-EU party  ) 9%, and the greens 4%We'll be sending a whole load of crazy in your general direction, I'm afraid.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
It makes absolutely zero sense to castigate a minor party in a democracy for working with other groups in cases where their interests align.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Mans posted:My optimism is that the European vote reaches 10% and only full on neoliberals reach power so we can accelerate the austerity cult process.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
The Belgian posted:Would it be a good idea to vote verhofstadt just because I support his scheme for a federal europe and he seems the quickest way to get there? Or are some of the more left leaning groups also quite pro a stronger europe? Plus at least he's competent even if I don't agree with him. He did a great job of building coalitions as a centrist in Belgium, but in Europe I imagine that he'd be far too outspokenly federalist to get anything of note done - he'd alienate huge chunks of the EPP and a large fraction of S&D right from the get-go. Regardless, it's all a bit academic since he's got no hope of taking the presidency. Are there any figures on projected turnouts around the union? edit - re: Blair, I think he gets an unfairly bad rap from the left on non-Iraq issues. People tend to forget that Labour ran on its traditional socialist platforms four times between 1979 and 1992 and lost horribly each time, even when the Tories were pushing policies that literally started riots and tanked the economy. Most of his domestic policies were reasonable compromises given that the public clearly had little appetite for unreformed social democracy, and New Labour did have a number of notable and unambiguously positive achievements that tend to get glossed over or straight up disregarded. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 08:10 on Apr 24, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
Iraq's undoubtedly the defining issue of his premiership, but it's not like the invasion of random middle eastern countries was some kind of central plank of New Labour policy - it was just a badly thought out reaction to global events. If you compare his domestic aims to his actual accomplishments, he did fairly well. And of course, he turned an unelectable shitshow of a party that was riven by perpetual infighting into a crushingly successful election winner; if nothing else, he should be thanked for saving us from the prospect of Prime Minister Iain Duncan Smith. e: since this thread's about the EU, it's also worth noting that he did a pretty good job on that front, maintaining the UK's halfway in position without pissing too many people off. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 09:17 on Apr 24, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2014 09:03
|
|
|
Mans posted:They don't have an unfairly bad rap from the left, they decided the interests of the working class (labor, if you will) should play second fiddle to winning elections and putting their boys in good jobs, meaning you can't depend on Labor to avoid pointless imperialistic wars, gutting the wellfare state or letting financial institutions run the country like a feudal state.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:Whatever happened to those calls to democratise the EU? Seems like ages ago that I heard about that. Well, of the three main bodies of the union the Parliament is directly elected and the Council is made up of representatives of the national governments of the member states (who are, obviously, elected). That only leaves the Commission, whose president is indirectly elected in that they're chosen by the Parliament; the president then selects the other 27 commissioners. The Commission could certainly be made more democratic (maybe by having each commissioner elected within their own country), but that aside it's not bad. The bigger issue is that its workings aren't well understood by the citizens of the member states and there haven't been many well-executed efforts to explain them, so it's easy for eurosceptics to misrepresent things for their own ends.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Making the Commissioners directly electable would guarantee a non-existent turnout, I think; who the hell is going to enthusiastically go out and vote for the Commissioner for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries? Besides; which country gets which Commission post is a huge horse-trade inside the Council. We don't elect the Directors-General of our national departments either, and I'm happy for it to stay that way. I actually think the PR problems go deeper than people not knowing what the Commission's doing: in the UK at least, most people don't know what the Commission/Council/Parliament are, never mind what they're up to at any given moment. There's also a woeful lack of coverage of goings-on in Brussels even when it concerns things that are of interest to the public - the only UK paper that had any decent coverage of the recent movements towards banking union and the new regulations on bailing in and out was the Financial Times.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
How much direct interaction do European civil servants have with MEPs?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
Van Rompuy does kind of have a point - how many European citizens have even heard of Schultz or Juncker, never mind actually wanting one of them to have arguably the most powerful job in EU politics? OTOH, I wonder how he feels about making common cause with Farage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
Juncker and Schultz are absolute charisma vacuums, aren't they?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Hey so I'm a European right, and I just read your OP, and this guy sounds alright. So how do I vote for him? Many representative democracies have candidates who can only be voted for directly if you reside in a specific region. That doesn't stop them from being democracies. Also, assuming you're Dutch/resident in the Netherlands, you can support Tsipras by voting for a candidate representing a GUE/NGL party.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2014 13:08
|
|
|
mortons stork posted:Well, ever since the Italian government kindly helped France relieve them of their other privileged gas and oil supplier Lybia, violating several treaties in the process as well, I'd say we as a country have the full right to shut the gently caress up about Russia's foreign policy and thank them for having been able to heat our houses this winter too. I don't agree with Putin's expansionist ambitions either, believe me, but I still prefer foreign policy that puts us in a better spot overall, as opposed to idealistic or morally motivated postures. We've always been close to the Russian bloc, and we've always, one way or another, benefited from it. Now we are close to dependent on those diplomatic and trade ties with them and we are in no position to side against them. I don't think you can reasonably claim that your desire for cheap energy should trump the security and territorial integrity of other EU member states.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2014 13:41
|
|
|
Postorder Trollet89 posted:I guess we should thank our lucky stars that there are no such threats. The Russian boogie man simply don't exist anymore, it's a propagandist fantasy living on amongst conservatives in a post cold war EU. The Russian boogie man has annexed territory from two of its neighbours in the last few years. I don't think that it's unreasonable to suggest that it may continue doing so or that the concerns of Poland and the Baltic states are somehow illegitimate. Also, what exactly do foreign policy concerns have to do with laissez-faire economics, and how is EU foreign and trade policy an unreasonable thing to discuss in a thread about EU elections?
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
I thought that sort of thing was par for the course in Italian politics.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 10:23
|
|
|
mortons stork posted:Also no, even that poo poo ain't par for the course in our politics and I hope they get relentlessly ridiculed for that. TBH though, trying to sell politics with a bit of T&A hardly seems any less absurd than electing Berlusconi several times or the fact that Beppe Grillo is a serious political figure in Italy.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 13:12
|
|
|
So, how crazy are your eurosceptics? I feel that ours have struck a fairly crushing first blow that other countries with inferior frothing eurosceptics will struggle to match, but maybe yours can do better! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO2ij6EorAc
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
Jose's real mad about the UK. Makes me feel all unloved.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Is Tsipras' spoken English good enough to participate in a televised debate like this without being at a gross disadvantage? edit: when they were talking about the financial crisis, Verhofstadt and Schultz clashed over France's deficit - apparently a few months ago, Schultz was arguing that France should be given more time to bring its deficit back within the limits required by the stability & growth pact whereas Verhofstadt was saying that the Commission should not countenance any such thing. What punitive measures can the EU take against eurozone states that are in violation of the pact's terms? Looking at wikipedia, it basically seems limited to telling the offending state off and asking them to behave themselves. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 18:33 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
I was actually quite impressed with the quality of Bove's English - a few oddities aside, he's been very good. From a British perspective, it's astonishing how strongly all of the candidates are in favour of an integrated EU military. Interesting to see Schultz gushing over Ashton too. e: 500 million citizens, 375 million voters, ~600 people watching the presidential candidates debating.  e2: everyone's in favour of a unified european immigration policy for non-eu citizens. eurosceptic/nativist parties could make a lot of hay out of that, surely? ahahahaaa verhofstadt arguing for giving the unemployed of eu countries with few employment opportunities assistance in migrating to those with jobs. UKIP heads will explode. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 19:25 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Mans posted:Outside of Germany and France a thousand euros is a massive amount of Euros for the common worker. Schultz only knows the reality of Germans and the interest of Germans, but anyone who believes otherwise is voting out of self-illusion. An income below 1k euros/month (or the equivalent in GBP/SEK/DKK) would be low enough to put you into economic hardship almost anywhere in northern/western Europe, and well below the minimum wage for a full time employee in those NW european countries that have one. It's a perfectly reasonable value to use as a hardship threshold.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Is there any chance at all than an anti-austerity party might get a plurality of seats in the EP? Yes. The S&D are anti-austerity and have a good chance of taking the greatest number of seats.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Mans posted:Are they? Locally their S&D satelite has been pretty adamant in saying that the changes of the recent years can't be abandoned and that this course is the way to go but with Change! and Improvement! and every positive word they can find but without actually saying anything concrete. http://socialistsanddemocrats.eu/sites/default/files/sd_100_days_updated_april_2014_EN.pdf quote:An end to austerity Their policies include a europe-wide jobs guarantee for unemployed people under 25 and abolishing the Troika, among other things.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
KoldPT posted:Yes, but it's important to look at, say, the french example to realize just how much of those policies are bullshit. You can't really blame the EP for actions taken by national governments - they're separate entities. The S&D have been quite vocal and consistent about their criticisms of austerity, and I don't really see any particular reason to doubt their sincerity. NihilismNow posted:But even if you could you can't vote for them because you live in the wrong country. Anyway, UK national polls now have UKIP taking a plurality of the vote. GG. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 09:05 on May 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2014 09:03
|
|
|
Nektu posted:I think we are doubting the feasibility, not the sincerity. Also, please don't pretent that the EP has the power to go against the council's wishes at the current time. I don't think you can assume that what was true in the past will remain true in future. The Parliament has gained a lot of power in recent years that it didn't previously have and may be effectively determining the composition of the Commission. That gives it indirect control over one arm of the Troika and the EU's executive body, which would further strengthen its position relative to the national governments. The FT's got an interesting article that covers the expansion of the Parliament's powers and its conflicts with national governments: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8b347498-d9c4-11e3-b3e3-00144feabdc0.html quote:Once derided as a powerless talking shop, the parliament has through perseverance and some low cunning grabbed hold of almost all EU policy: financial reform, banker pay, trade pacts, data protection rules and a trillion-euro budget. I don't think the Council of ministers would be overly bothered if Juncker became Commission president, but Schultz could set some feathers flying.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
Lagotto posted:The general view of Juncker is that he's an alcoholic who is passed his prime and who kept on bungling poo poo up in the debt crisis because he couldn't keep his mouth shut. I honestly am not convinced any of the 'candidates' are acceptable. When you say "acceptable", do you mean to you personally or to the council? AFAIK, our government's not-very-secret position is that they'll tolerate Juncker or whichever EPP candidate takes his place after the voting's done but they'll do whatever they can to prevent Schulz from getting the Presidency - that's part of the reason our press has been quietly talking up Thorning-Schmidt as a compromise S&D candidate if the S&D take a plurality of the votes.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
Electronico6 posted:I can't believe this, but I'm agreeing with the weirdo French Euronews commentators* in that these debates shouldn't have been done in English. None of the candidates were native-English speakers, and only Keller and Schultz were at ease to not be constantly tripping. Tsipras outright refused to, and Juncker did the same for the last debate. Nothing was really gained from having them speaking in English, other than make the whole affair more pointless than already was. The whole thing was done, as it's said in Portuguese, para Inglês ver.("for English to see" No real effect) English is by far the most widely spoken language in the EU - a shade over 50% of the population has it as a first or second language. The next closest is German, IIRC, which is spoken by something like 25% of all citizens. If you're going to do a pan-European debate without the awkwardness of translators, English is the only sensible option. Lingua anglica motherfuckers. Also, as a member of the native English-speaking master race, I don't have a problem with Verhofstadt's accent or speech patterns. None of the presidential candidates sounded remotely like native speakers, but he was perfectly clear and comprehensible.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 11:12
|
|
|
Nektu posted:Can anybody guess what that sensible explanation would look like?
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
How could anyone possibly think of associating Italian-Americans with any sort of major organized criminal syndicate???
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
Electronico6 posted:But regardless, after these elections the EU has planned a bunch of legislation to reinforce itself as a political and federal force, a lot of it including an anti-corruption task force with far reaching powers, more power to the Euro-Court, an attorney general at the European level, and the most surprising thing to come out of the Commission debates, was that the 5 major parliament wings(as represented by the candidates) were all in favour of an European army. As the years pass by, walking out of the EU will stop being a real option, much like an American state can't secede even though it's a "State Right". How much influence does Sarko have in France these days? He's sounding positively Cameron-ish here: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b48b34a4-e107-11e3-b59f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz32LahCq1F quote:Former French president Nicolas Sarkozy has called for a radical shake-up of the EU on the eve of European parliamentary elections expected to result in big gains for populist parties. I particularly like the bit about eternal Franco-German supremacy with the other pretend european countries just getting to like it or lump it. Regardless, if that last line reflects Merkel's sentiments then any parliamentary hopes for further integration/federalization/expansion of powers are dead in the water.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
Electronico6 posted:Because of British and Dutch election laws, but mostly because they hate the working class so they hold elections on a week day. Actually, we don't have any laws mandating that elections be held on any particular day of the week. They're traditionally held on Thursdays because it enables the incoming government to get set up over the weekend so that business can resume as usual on the Monday. Gotta be efficient about these things what what, can't have any disruption of Commerce.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:As for Flanders, N-VA is almost certainly going to do well here.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
What's this likely to mean for the presidency of the commission? The EPP 'won' the day, which in principle means it should be Juncker. However, given the strong eurosceptic showing, the EPP's scepticism towards the whole concept of spitzenkandidaten, and the potential need for a greater degree of unity between the broadly pro-european factions, the door seems open for a new 'consensus' candidate. Hopefully the established parties will take this result as a wakeup call and realise that they need to be communicating more effectively about how the EU works and what it does - the perception that it's a bunch of grey unelected eurocrats handing down legislation from on high makes it absurdly easy for populists to run against. A strong and charismatic commission president could potentially go a long way towards addressing that issue.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2014 08:54
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:My guess would be that Junker gets the job and Schulz get's to keep his as president of the parliament.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2014 09:58
|
|
|
Interesting article from the FT on the horsetrading surrounding the presidency of the Commission: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/077473da-e4df-11e3-9b2b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz32qHbZkYuquote:The struggle over the EU’s future is due to be joined on Tuesday, when EU leaders gather for dinner in Brussels to weigh the region’s new leadership. At least two prime ministers, Britain’s David Cameron and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, were working to block the candidacy of veteran Brussels fixer Jean-Claude Juncker, frontrunner for the EU’s most high-profile post. Kind of funny for Cameron to be desperately sucking up to the EPP member parties after having thrown a tantrum and walked out of the group in 2009.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Mofstok posted:Terrible damage in your one-dimensional socialist perspective on life.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:You see corrupt governments, but you don't see Merkel patting them in the back and saying "good job keep going".
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
If you want a better example of a recently-formed party that has rapidly risen to national and European prominence despite considerable opposition from the establishment, UKIP was founded in 1993 by an oddball academic and is run by someone who had no previous political experience...
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:36 |
|
|
Ia! Ia! Juncker Fh'tagn!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2014 19:18
|
|