EPTOn April 05 2016 00:18 xM(Z wrote:
2 weeks self-ban, betting on a Clinton.
2 weeks self-ban, betting on a Clinton.
lol make it 20 years and i'll take you up on this bet.
European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 448
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
lol make it 20 years and i'll take you up on this bet. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5299 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6343 Posts
http://app.nos.nl/datavisualisatie/referendum-2016/ | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
On April 06 2016 01:00 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Iceland Prime Minster has stepped down. - France 24 OR HAS HE?! + Show Spoiler + If you ask him, then no EDIT: I guess he now finally has. | ||
|
pmh
1416 Posts
Next to vote will be England this summer,more then likely a NO as well. Then other states will seriously begin to ask themselves the question if its worth to continue. Go down with Europe or try make it on their own. The people they have made their decision quiet a while ago already but the politicians and corporate europe are not willing to give up their dream just yet | ||
|
Yurie
12136 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:35 pmh wrote: Finally given the opportunity to make a vote about a European subject and more or less the eu in general the dutch jumped to the occasion with a massive NO. Next to vote will be England this summer,more then likely a NO as well. Then other states will seriously begin to ask themselves the question if its worth to continue. Go down with Europe or try make it on their own. The people they have made their decision quiet a while ago already but the politicians and corporate europe are not willing to give up their dream just yet As always it is a bit of both things for people. I want a global government. A part of that is likely EU and similar blocks forming up. As long as it doesn't fail horribly I can live with a few mistakes here and there since it is a long journey. Seen nothing out of EU that makes me want to disband it thus far. They are doing a pretty good job on most fronts. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22492 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:28 zeo wrote: Looks like Holland went red. http://app.nos.nl/datavisualisatie/referendum-2016/ Guess we hate the EU more then we hate Russia :p No was expected the win and as expected the turnout was about as low as expected. I am interested in how this goes forward now tho. If the EU goes right on ahead anyway then the Anti-EU sentiment (which caused the no in the first place) is only going to get worse. Doesn't help that your current government is obsessed with being the good kid in class. On April 07 2016 06:35 pmh wrote: Finally given the opportunity to make a vote about a European subject and more or less the eu in general the dutch jumped to the occasion with a massive NO. Next to vote will be England this summer,more then likely a NO as well. Then other states will seriously begin to ask themselves the question if its worth to continue. Go down with Europe or try make it on their own. The people they have made their decision quiet a while ago already but the politicians and corporate europe are not willing to give up their dream just yet I still think the EU should have never gone past a trade union. Europe has a long and bloody history of fighting for our own states and we're not going to give that up to some unelected bureaucrat trying to create the United States of Europe. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6343 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:39 Gorsameth wrote: Guess we hate the EU more then we hate Russia :p No was expected the win and as expected the turnout was about as low as expected. I am interested in how this goes forward now tho. If the EU goes right on ahead anyway then the Anti-EU sentiment (which caused the no in the first place) is only going to get worse. Doesn't help that your current government is obsessed with being the good kid in class. What does this mean for the Dutch government? Will the cabinet have to resign if they ratify the deal anyway against the referendum results? | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18400 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:39 Gorsameth wrote: Guess we hate the EU more then we hate Russia :p No was expected the win and as expected the turnout was about as low as expected. I am interested in how this goes forward now tho. If the EU goes right on ahead anyway then the Anti-EU sentiment (which caused the no in the first place) is only going to get worse. Doesn't help that your current government is obsessed with being the good kid in class. I still think the EU should have never gone past a trade union. Europe has a long and bloody history of fighting for our own states and we're not going to give that up to some unelected bureaucrat trying to create the United States of Europe. Yes, and no. I think this entire referendum was retarded and refused to vote in it. This referendum isn't about the EU, but the no camp is using it as a proxy for voicing discontent with the EU. I wonder how many other people like me, could care less about Ukraine and the treaty, but do have an opinion on the EU (in my case, in favor, and in favor of Dutch membership). | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18400 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:47 Ghostcom wrote: Danish media report that the turn-out might have been too low to make the vote binding. Would be interesting to see what happens then. Have you heard anything to that effect Gorsameth? 1. It's a non-binding referendum in any case. 2. Turnout was 32%, which means the government is obligated to consider the outcome (over 30%). Of course, a verypossible outcome is that the government says "we considered it, but seeing as only about 20% of the population felt strongly enough against this treaty to show up and vote against it, we have decided to continue with the treaty as if nothing happened". | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6343 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:47 Ghostcom wrote: Danish media report that the turn-out might have been too low to make the vote binding. Would be interesting to see what happens then. Have you heard anything to that effect Gorsameth? Its just damage control, pro-Euro news outlets don't know how to cover the results. 'Well even if it passed it doesn't matter and even if it matters it barely passed', pathetic really. They can play it down all they want, its over 30%. On April 07 2016 06:50 Acrofales wrote: 1. It's a non-binding referendum in any case. 2. Turnout was 32%, which means the government is obligated to consider the outcome (over 30%). Of course, a verypossible outcome is that the government says "we considered it, but seeing as only about 20% of the population felt strongly enough against this treaty to show up and vote against it, we have decided to continue with the treaty as if nothing happened". And only 8% of the population want the deal. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22492 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:46 zeo wrote: What does this mean for the Dutch government? Will the cabinet have to resign if they ratify the deal anyway against the referendum results? The referendum is not even binding so no they won't have to resign. The opposition is going to burn them as best they can but the cabinet has a majority in the 2nd chamber (our House eq) and have never had a majority in the 1e (Senate eq) anyway. I think all it will do is grow the already increasing EU resentment and influence the next elections which are in a year. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6343 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:53 Gorsameth wrote: The referendum is not even binding so no they won't have to resign. The opposition is going to burn them as best they can but the cabinet has a majority in the 2nd chamber (our House eq) and have never had a majority in the 1e (Senate eq) anyway. I think all it will do is grow the already increasing EU resentment and influence the next elections which are in a year. But its political suicide to go against the referendum results no? Even if its non-binding why even have it if you are just going do whatever you want. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18400 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:55 zeo wrote: But its political suicide to go against the referendum results no? Even if its non-binding why even have it if you are just going do whatever you want. They didn't want to have the referendum. They were forced into it by a law that states that if 300,000 people sign a petition requesting a referendum (and some further requirements), the government is obligated to hold a non-binding referendum. If that referendum has > 30% attendance rate, then they are obligated to take that result under consideration. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22492 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:55 zeo wrote: But its political suicide to go against the referendum results no? Even if its non-binding why even have it if you are just going do whatever you want. Its already been signed by most of the EU, our little country going 'No' is not going to have the EU change the treaty so all it has done is put the cabinet in a very awkward position. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18400 Posts
On April 07 2016 06:50 zeo wrote: Its just damage control, pro-Euro news outlets don't know how to cover the results. 'Well even if it passed it doesn't matter and even if it matters it barely passed', pathetic really. They can play it down all they want, its over 30%. And only 8% of the population want the deal. 12% (38% of 32%), but yes. Only12% feel strongly enough in favour of the treaty to go out and vote for it. In other words, 68% of the population does not give enough of a fuck to go out and vote (could be interpreted as: status quo is fine by me). Given that the vast majority of the population does not give a fuck, why would the government change course? | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6343 Posts
On April 07 2016 07:01 Acrofales wrote: 12% (38% of 32%), but yes. Only12% feel strongly enough in favour of the treaty to go out and vote for it. In other words, 68% of the population does not give enough of a fuck to go out and vote (could be interpreted as: status quo is fine by me). Given that the vast majority of the population does not give a fuck, why would the government change course? In a general election you also don't give a fuck about what the 45% of the population that didn't turn out think. You look at who won the vote, and in this case 68% of the people left the decision making to the 32%. Its called democracy. Something un-elected officials sitting in Brussels don't know the meaning of. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18400 Posts
On April 07 2016 07:12 zeo wrote: In a general election you also don't give a fuck about what the 45% of the population that didn't turn out think. You look at who won the vote, and in this case 68% of the people left the decision making to the 32%. Its called democracy. Something un-elected officials sitting in Brussels don't know the meaning of. In the general election you don't have a choice. There are 150 (or however many there are in any given country) parliamentary seats to be divided. Also, the Dutch turnout for general elections in the last 20 years or so has been over 70% (and probably that way or higher since the 2nd world war), so far more representative of the Dutch population as a whole. That said, you could definitely make a case that the European parliament does not in any way, shape, or form represent the European people, with atrocious turnout rates across the EU for it. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
| ||
