| 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. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On April 05 2017 07:38 farvacola wrote: Has she attained her place in French politics mostly because of her lineage then, I take it? To put it simply, she's there because she's the daughter of her father. No more no less. The Front National pretty much developed as a family mafia. She's the heir. | ||
|
lastpuritan
United States540 Posts
Actually I don't know Belgium that much. Can't stereotype her into my wesoongonnawar list. Leonidas is delicious, Godiva is a cool name. Wish Fellaini was my buddy. The Walloons are bad people! And true Belges speak French! My wisdom ends here. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Fildun
Netherlands4123 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
lastpuritan
United States540 Posts
Back to topics, will Francois Asselineau have chance with his Frexit plan? He's strongly promising it but I doubt public will agree with him? | ||
Nixer
2774 Posts
On April 05 2017 14:11 lastpuritan wrote: Spare my little trolling, people were going hard at each other, thread needed a friendly troll. Back to topics, will Francois Asselineau have chance with his Frexit plan? He's strongly promising it but I doubt public will agree with him? Do not troll, especially in this thread. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12417 Posts
Only problem I have is that Mélenchon-Le Pen is the only match-up that she can actually win. | ||
|
nojok
France15845 Posts
On April 05 2017 07:23 Big J wrote: Abort plan, the French remembered about belgium. Walloons aren't even considered as foreigners in France. On April 05 2017 16:56 Nebuchad wrote: I kind of wish Hamon would just go away at this point. Socialists always talk about "useful vote" now it seems he's the one not being very useful in the equation. From a quick glance I believe I'm more aligned with Hamon than with Mélenchon politically but well... Only problem I have is that Mélenchon-Le Pen is the only match-up that she can actually win. I think Hamon considered it as he's the one who initiated the talks but he's the figure of an historical party, he can't resign like that. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7999 Posts
On April 05 2017 04:53 a_flayer wrote: Is it just me or does Le Pen speak a different kind of French from the others? It sounds very crude or harsh somehow. Maybe it is just her voice... Also, Lassalle must be nicknamed 'The Nose' right? Holy crap. Is the leftist gal also against the EU and its 'financial dictatorship'? I'd do a lot better if it was written French. I can't follow this at all. To be fair with Le Pen, the level of the french spoken by politicians has been in constant decline since the 90's. Now politicians speaking a very good french are actually rare, and Le Pen is just in the average. Sarkozy couldn't put two words together without making a horrendous grammar mistake. Mélenchon speaks bery well, and Christiane Taubira, a former socialist minister speaks an extremely good french (almost old fashionned). As for Le Pen she is just horrendously vulgar. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On April 05 2017 12:42 LegalLord wrote: Word on the grapevine says Melenchon won the debate. Is that accurate? Two polls say that he did well: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://www.ouest-france.fr/sites/default/files/styles/image-640x360/public/2017/04/05/debat-melenchon-juge-le-plus-convaincant-des-candidats.jpg?itok=d4NwQ1W6) Who was the most convincing? The same poll also asks “Who has the best project for France”? 1. Macron (23%) 2. Mélenchon (22%) 3. Fillon (18%) 4. Le Pen (15%) 5. Hamon (11%) The interesting thing is that Mélenchon is the only one who does better than his current voting intentions (15%). Le Pen does considerably less than hers (25%). For the rest, it pretty much matches their scores in polls. The same poll also asks “Who has the necessary qualities to be president?” 1. Macron (27%) 2. Mélenchon (21%) 3. Fillon (20%) 4. Le Pen (13%) 5. Hamon (10%) The same poll also asks “Who best understands people like you?” 1. Mélenchon (26%) 2. Le Pen (14%) 3. Poutou (12%) 4. Macron (12%) 5. Fillon (10%) 6. Hamon (9%) + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://www.lepoint.fr/images/2017/04/05/8128527lpw-8128961-jpg_4205491.jpg) Who was the most convincing? At the left, the whole sample; at the right, people who intend/are sure to vote From the same Opinion Way poll, 17% of the people who are sure to vote declared that they changed their vote intention. Mélenchon gets first (28%) in the “new voting intentions” for those who changed but the sample is down to 247 people here, so naturally the volatility is high. From the same poll, Mélenchon is the only one who enhanced his image yesterday (+27 -12 = +15) while all others are negative [= perception of them is worse after than before the debate], from -7 to -25 (Fillon). On April 05 2017 14:11 lastpuritan wrote: Spare my little trolling, people were going hard at each other, thread needed a friendly troll. Back to topics, will Francois Asselineau have chance with his Frexit plan? He's strongly promising it but I doubt public will agree with him? Should get a confidential score. On April 05 2017 16:56 Nebuchad wrote: I kind of wish Hamon would just go away at this point. Socialists always talk about "useful vote" now it seems he's the one not being very useful in the equation. From a quick glance I believe I'm more aligned with Hamon than with Mélenchon politically but well... Only problem I have is that Mélenchon-Le Pen is the only match-up that she can actually win. Mélenchon's image changed and got much better recently, so I think he would win. Hamon would have even more problems against Le Pen in my opinion, he's weaker and the radicalized right-wing electorate would never vote for him. | ||
|
Philoctetes
Netherlands77 Posts
On April 05 2017 06:57 bardtown wrote: We are the 2nd largest net contributor, you moron. By your logic you owe us somewhere in the region of £300 billion. We eagerly await the cheque. User was warned for this post I would concede the point to you that the 60 billion number EU negotiators came up with is probably too high. I say this not because I did the counting, but because I suspect it is a negotiating tactic. Both parties know the actual number is somewhere in between the numbers both sides came up with now. So somewhere between 15 and 60 billion euro. The notion that you propose that the UK will get paid money to leave is preposterous. Yes, this whole Brexit will cost the UK taxpayer a lot of money. But that was their conscious decision. They voted to get poorer but with more sovereignty. That's what the Brexit voters wanted. Now if you want me to say that the majority of the people that will live with the consequences of Brexit would rather have had more money and a bit less sovereignty, I'd concede that as well. But we mainland EU'ers are already busy enough with the democratic deficit in our own countries and in the EU as a whole. We cannot fix the huge democratic deficit within the UK. Why? Because the UK has it's own sovereignty. That your own right wing neoliberal politicians want to blame their mistakes on the EU, that is not my problem. All these grievances that people had and that made them vote Brexit, that's directly connected to Thatcher, Blair etc. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7999 Posts
On April 05 2017 20:52 Philoctetes wrote: I would concede the point to you that the 60 billion number EU negotiators came up with is probably too high. I say this not because I did the counting, but because I suspect it is a negotiating tactic. Both parties know the actual number is somewhere in between the numbers both sides came up with now. So somewhere between 15 and 60 billion euro. The notion that you propose that the UK will get paid money to leave is preposterous. Yes, this whole Brexit will cost the UK taxpayer a lot of money. But that was their conscious decision. They voted to get poorer but with more sovereignty. That's what the Brexit voters wanted. Now if you want to concede me that the majority of the people that will live with the consequences of Brexit would rather have more money and a bit less sovereignty, I'd concede that as well. But we mainland EU'ers are already busy enough with the democratic deficit in our own countries and in the EU as a whole. We cannot fix the huge democratic deficit within the UK. Why? Because the UK has it's own sovereignty. That your own right wing neoliberal politicians want to blame their mistakes on the EU, that is not my problem. All these grievances that people had and that made them vote Brexit, that's directly connected to Thatcher, Blair etc. It's an illusion that Brexit means more sovereignty, it certainly means much less. The EU will have the UK by the balls and the UK will need to conform to rules and decisions they will have no say about, just like Norway for example. The EU is made of a council of elected government representatives and a parliament. The UK was part of both. To have 15% of the decisional power in an ensemble of which you account for 15% is not a diminushed sovereignty. The same way, Texans wouldn't be more politically powerful if Texas was independant. They would be able to make theit own decisions, but would lose the very, very big weight they have in Washington. You lose from the left hand what you just won from the right. The difference is that while the UK has lost all power to influence the EU rules, it will most probably have to keep following them unless it wants to do a commercial and economic sepukku. | ||
|
ZBiR
Poland1092 Posts
On April 05 2017 20:52 Philoctetes wrote: Yes, this whole Brexit will cost the UK taxpayer a lot of money. But that was their conscious decision. They voted to get poorer but with more sovereignty. That's what the Brexit voters wanted. Haha! | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On April 05 2017 21:34 Biff The Understudy wrote: It's an illusion that Brexit means more sovereignty, it certainly means much less. The EU will have the UK by the balls and the UK will need to conform to rules and decisions they will have no say about, just like Norway for example. The EU is made of a council of elected government representative and a parliament. To have 15% of the decisional power in an ensemble of which you account for 15% is not a loss of sovereignty. The same way, Texans wouldn't be more politically powerful if Texas was independant. They would be able to make theit own decisions, but would lose the very, very big weight they have in Washington. You lose from the left hand what you just won from the right. The difference is that while the UK has lost all power to influence the EU rules, it will most probably have to keep following them unless it wants to do a commercial and economic sepukku. We're leaving the single market. We're not following your rules, except where appropriate for our exporters who actually trade with you. And we're now able to trade with the rest of the world without your protectionist tariffs. And make our own trade deals. And laws. And border controls. The mental gymnastics you have to go through to justify the EU and claim that being a member of a would-be superstate gives you more sovereignty are frankly embarrassing. On April 05 2017 20:52 Philoctetes wrote: We cannot fix the huge democratic deficit within the UK. Why? Because the UK has it's own sovereignty. That your own right wing neoliberal politicians want to blame their mistakes on the EU, that is not my problem. All these grievances that people had and that made them vote Brexit, that's directly connected to Thatcher, Blair etc. We are fixing our own democratic deficit by leaving the EU. Thank you for your concern, though. And you're right that it has everything to do with Thatcher, who took us into the single market, and Blair, who pushed the Lisbon Treaty through against his promise to hold a referendum. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On April 05 2017 05:45 mustaju wrote: As I said before, there are few options left considering the existence of these russians in the Baltics is illegal in the first place. The ethnic russians have 0 grounds for citizenship other than having lived here, since it's strictly illegal for an occupying force (as the Soviet Union was) to resettle population. This is not to be confused with natural immigration, Narva is a great case in point. It now has less than 5% Estonians compared to the 54% that lived there before the war, with a large portion forced away from their homes or sent to Siberia. Every resettled russian is a breach against the Fourth Geneva convention, which, co-incidentally, is also a huge conflict issue between Israel and Palestine, though legally more dubious. While it is individually tragic to put the russian population through this ordeal, the citizenship test is widely considered fair (the article LL linked briefly mentions this), except, of course, in Russia and in remote border regions where Estonian is barely spoken. According to the latest census, any change in this system would mostly affect 65+ year old people who have so far refused to integrate in the first place. If this were racism institutionalized, you would not see vastly increasing citizenship (54%!) in the period 1991-2011. My current girlfriend is ethnically Russian, a naturalized citizen, and so are quite a few of my friends. (insert your own my best friend is black joke here) While there certainly are problems after long periods of occupation, LL overblows them and inadvertently insults a large part of the integrated population. He also fails to mention the spectacular failure of Russian resettlement programs from the Baltic nations inviting ethnic Russians back to the motherland, because it does not support his narrative. This is such great post. Shame that LL is gonna ignore it as with any actual arguments against his "narrative". It's really plain an simple: Russia has no right to be pissy about "bad treatment of Russians" in countries that they used to occupy! They really should be glad that all those Russians werent forced to Russia in 1991. Would suck for the people, but Russia would be to blame for it. We actually did that to Germans in 1945 - it wasnt nice, many people were killed and harmed, but those causalities go towards Nazism, not us. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On April 05 2017 21:37 bardtown wrote: We're leaving the single market. We're not following your rules, except where appropriate for our exporters who actually trade with you. And we're now able to trade with the rest of the world without your protectionist tariffs. And make our own trade deals. And laws. And border controls. The mental gymnastics you have to go through to justify the EU and claim that being a member of a would-be superstate gives you more sovereignty are frankly embarrassing. We are fixing our own democratic deficit by leaving the EU. Thank you for your concern, though. And you're right that it has everything to do with Thatcher, who took us into the single market, and Blair, who pushed the Lisbon Treaty through against his promise to hold a referendum. How common is the Biff "you're actually losing sovereignty" or Philo "the problems with EU membership are the result of Thatcher/Blair" (aside from the trivial case of first inclusion) arguments in UK remainders? I want to think that's the left-wing fringe and moderates find leaving is more trouble than it's worth, the costs/regulatory burdens were manageable, the diminished sovereignty wasn't that bad. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2395 Posts
| ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On April 05 2017 22:01 Danglars wrote: How common is the Biff "you're actually losing sovereignty" or Philo "the problems with EU membership are the result of Thatcher/Blair" (aside from the trivial case of first inclusion) arguments in UK remainders? I want to think that's the left-wing fringe and moderates find leaving is more trouble than it's worth, the costs/regulatory burdens were manageable, the diminished sovereignty wasn't that bad. It's the position of the Liberal Democrat party who are essentially the opposite of UKIP. About 10% vote share. Some Labour figures made the argument too, so I would say it's more common than you would expect, but then again some Labour figures used UKIP arguments too. On April 05 2017 22:04 warding wrote: Is the plan for the UK to have its own regulations as substitute of CE marking? That would be a big cost on both importers (bad for consumers) and exporters (bad for UK competitiveness), for no perceptible advantage unless you believe British people are somehow better at creating regulations. It's a choice between lack of sovereignty and insularity. Yes, we will make our own regulations. If you want to export into a certain market then you abide by the regulations of that market. But it's safe to say that the UK will be more liberal and deregulated than the EU so it won't be any cost to exporters who already import to the EU, for example. The UK is much more serious about capitalism and competitiveness than the EU as a whole, so you can rest assured that where possible money will be saved. | ||
|
Philoctetes
Netherlands77 Posts
if you think it is a fringe argument, maybe. But that doesn't mean it isn't accurate or not a correct analysis. May has already said she wants to keep the UK inside the single market with some special deal. If they make such a deal, then the UK will be inside the single market, like they are now, but they will have no say in what kind of a market the EU single market is, as they are not a member. So yes, in that respect they will love sovereignty. There will also be coming more refugees to the UK as there won't be any agreement with the EU. Right now, we have bad agreements about refugees. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Sharp vs Scan
Rain vs Mong
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Soulkey vs Ample
JyJ vs sSak
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
hero vs YSC
Larva vs Shine
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
