tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
yes, but that is culturally germanic rather than "german" - they actually came from what is now Scandanavia
Current Affairs EU In or Out
- Thread starter micknick
- Start date
- Status
yes, but that is culturally germanic rather than "german" - they actually came from what is now Scandanavia
Anyone can write a book and get published these days. If your barometer is that they researched it and wrote it down then it's really not reinforcing your point.
Do you have their names maybe their credentials or other work? Other studies and previously written material.
Otherwise you could say you read and interesting piece on reddit or in that rag we dont speak off or well here.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
What’s it about, bringing European nations together under an all powerful bureaucracy or something ?......
OnlyBlueWillDo
Player Valuation: £35m
There are several books, well know tabloid after tabloid in the UK and around the world, with articles pointing out voting for Eurovision is political.
Kiwi
Say NO to Ginger Managers
Tabloids are the peak of scientific discussion
Oddly enough, what you’ve done here perfectly exemplifies why we’re in this much of a mess.
1)displays xenophobic tendencies
2)justifies this by saying foreign people don’t like us also.
3)looks for possible examples of foreign people not liking us ‘of course Eurovision!’
4) Googles ‘Eurovision political voting’
5) sees a load of people have been arsed to write about the voting trends of a jumped up talent contest.
6) reinforces beliefs
You could replace ‘xenophobic’ with ‘misogynistic’ or outright ‘racist’ etc etc. The fact is, you can find ‘evidence’ to back up your beliefs in any part of the internet. Previously it was just ‘man in the pub’ chat
I've always loved the idea that viewers of Eurovision, which is well known for progressive and liberal attitudes, run to the phone when the voting starts, go to dial the UK vote number and think "I really like the song, it truly honours the legacy of the Beatles, Stones, Bowie, etc, but my dislike of the country and people is so much that I cannot bring myself to give them a vote in what is essentially a meaningless talent show. I'll just vote for our neighbours to reinforce our political ties."
Rather than neighbouring countries voting for each other 'politically', it's perhaps more a case that they often share many cultural aspects. Also, more recently, most entrants are the winners of their country's X Factor or similar so may already be a local celebrity across a few borders, giving them and their song early exposure. For some reason the BBC thinks it can just pluck nobodies, has-beens and professional Mick Jagger impersonators and they'll magically just win without any real effort. It was a while ago now but when they made a big deal about getting Lloyd-Webber involved and had one of the stars of his shows as the performer we did pretty well, 5th I think.
Rather than neighbouring countries voting for each other 'politically', it's perhaps more a case that they often share many cultural aspects. Also, more recently, most entrants are the winners of their country's X Factor or similar so may already be a local celebrity across a few borders, giving them and their song early exposure. For some reason the BBC thinks it can just pluck nobodies, has-beens and professional Mick Jagger impersonators and they'll magically just win without any real effort. It was a while ago now but when they made a big deal about getting Lloyd-Webber involved and had one of the stars of his shows as the performer we did pretty well, 5th I think.
It hasn't been the height of debate for sure, but some of the rhetoric churned out has been genuinely head scratching.
OnlyBlueWillDo
Player Valuation: £35m
People were trolling me suggesting I was a crank and an idiot at mentioning Eurovision voting could be a barometer as to the attitude towards you as a country, that the voting that goes on is very political, there are a lot of clever people have wrote and aired similar views on the subject.
I think a lot of it is projection. They instinctively don't like foreigners so find a way to justify it by convincing themselves 'the foreigners started it'.
Kiwi
Say NO to Ginger Managers
I mean it's a barometer in the same way that you can use a toothpick to stir your coffee. It just isn't the best tool for the job
D
Deleted member 48881
Guest
Who you gonna call?
How Parliament can stop Boris Johnson’s no-deal Brexit
The prime minister has sidelined Parliament and set a course for no-deal. MPs must act now to stop him
One by one, the principles on which the Brexit campaign was fought have been exposed as hollow. Before the referendum, Leavers argued that victory would enable them to negotiate a brilliant deal with the European Union. Now they advocate leaving with no deal at all. Before the vote they said that Brexit would allow Britain to strike more free-trade agreements. Now they say that trading on the bare-bones terms of the World Trade Organisation would be fine. Loudest of all they talked of taking back control and restoring sovereignty to Parliament. Yet on August 28th Boris Johnson, a leading Leaver who is now prime minister, announced that in the run-up to Brexit Parliament would be suspended altogether.
His utterly cynical ploy is designed to stop MPs steering the country off the reckless course he has set to leave the EU with or without a deal on October 31st. His actions are technically legal, but they stretch the conventions of the constitution to their limits. Because he is too weak to carry Parliament in a vote, he means to silence it. In Britain’s representative democracy, that sets a dangerous precedent.
But it is still not too late for MPs to thwart his plans—if they get organised. The sense of inevitability about no-deal, cultivated by the hardliners advising Mr Johnson, is bogus. The EU is against such an outcome; most Britons oppose it; Parliament has already voted against the idea. Those MPs determined to stop no-deal have been divided and unfocused. When they return to work next week after their uneasy summer recess, they will have a fleeting chance to avert this unwanted national calamity. Mr Johnson’s actions this week have made clear why they must seize it.
Of all her mistakes as prime minister, perhaps Theresa May’s gravest was to plant the idea that Britain might do well to leave the EU without any exit agreement. Her slogan that “no deal is better than a bad deal” was supposed to persuade the Europeans to make concessions. It didn’t—but it did persuade many British voters and MPs that if the EU offered less than perfect terms, Britain should walk away.
In fact the government’s own analysis suggests that no-deal would make the economy 9% smaller after 15 years than if Britain had remained. Mr Johnson says preparations for the immediate disruption are “colossal and extensive and fantastic”. Yet civil servants expect shortages of food, medicine and petrol, and a “meltdown” at ports. A growing number of voters seem to think that a few bumpy months and a lasting hit to incomes might be worth it to get the whole tedious business out of the way. This is the greatest myth of all. If Britain leaves with no deal it will face an even more urgent need to reach terms with the EU, which will demand the same concessions as before—and perhaps greater ones, given that Britain’s hand will be weaker.
Mr Johnson insists that his intention is to get a new, better agreement before October 31st, and that to do so he needs to threaten the EU with the credible prospect of no-deal.Despite the fact that Mrs May got nowhere with this tactic, many Tory MPs still see it as a good one. The EU wants a deal, after all. And whereas it became clear that Mrs May was bluffing about walking out, Mr Johnson might just be serious (the fanatics who do his thinking certainly are). Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor, said recently that Britain should come up with a plan in the next 30 days if it wants to replace the Irish backstop, the most contentious part of the withdrawal agreement. Many moderate Tories, even those who oppose no-deal, would like to give their new prime minister a chance to prove his mettle.
They are mistaken. First, the effect of the no-deal threat on Brussels continues to be overestimated in London. The EU’s position—that it is open to plausible British suggestions—is the same as it has always been. The EU’s priority is to keep the rules of its club intact, to avoid other members angling for special treatment. With or without the threat of no-deal, it will make no more than marginal changes to the existing agreement. Second, even if the EU were to drop the backstop altogether, the resulting deal might well be rejected by “Spartan” Tory Brexiteers, so intoxicated by the idea of leaving without a deal that they seem ready to vote against any agreement. And third, even if an all-new deal were offered by the EU and then passed by Parliament, ratifying it in Europe and passing the necessary laws in Britain would require an extension well beyond October 31st. Mr Johnson’s vow to leave on that date, “do or die”, makes it impossible to leave with any new deal. It also reveals that he is fundamentally unserious about negotiating one.
That is why Parliament must act now to take no-deal off the table, by passing a law requiring the prime minister to ask the EU for an extension. Even before Mr Johnson poleaxed Parliament, this was not going to be easy. The House of Commons’ agenda is controlled by Downing Street, which will allow no time for such a bill. MPs showed in the spring that they could take temporary control of the agenda, when they passed a law forcing Mrs May to request an extension beyond the first Brexit deadline of March 29th. This time there is no current legislation to act as a “hook” for an amendment mandating an extension, so the Speaker of the House would have to go against precedent by allowing MPs to attach a binding vote to an emergency debate. All that may be possible. But with Parliament suspended for almost five weeks there will be desperately little time.
So, if rebel MPs cannot pass a law, they must be ready to use their weapon of last resort: kicking Mr Johnson out of office with a vote of no confidence. He has a working majority of just one. The trouble is that attempts to find a caretaker prime minister, to request a Brexit extension before calling an election, have foundered on whether it should be Jeremy Corbyn, the far-left Labour leader whom most Tories despise, or a more neutral figure.
If the various factions opposed to no-deal cannot agree, Mr Johnson will win. But if they needed a reason to put aside their differences, he has just given them one. The prime minister was already steering Britain towards a no-deal Brexit that would hit the economy, wrench at the union and cause a lasting rift with international allies. Now he has shown himself willing to stifle parliamentary democracy to achieve his aims. Wavering MPs must ask themselves: if not now, when?
How Parliament can stop Boris Johnson’s no-deal Brexit
The prime minister has sidelined Parliament and set a course for no-deal. MPs must act now to stop him
One by one, the principles on which the Brexit campaign was fought have been exposed as hollow. Before the referendum, Leavers argued that victory would enable them to negotiate a brilliant deal with the European Union. Now they advocate leaving with no deal at all. Before the vote they said that Brexit would allow Britain to strike more free-trade agreements. Now they say that trading on the bare-bones terms of the World Trade Organisation would be fine. Loudest of all they talked of taking back control and restoring sovereignty to Parliament. Yet on August 28th Boris Johnson, a leading Leaver who is now prime minister, announced that in the run-up to Brexit Parliament would be suspended altogether.
His utterly cynical ploy is designed to stop MPs steering the country off the reckless course he has set to leave the EU with or without a deal on October 31st. His actions are technically legal, but they stretch the conventions of the constitution to their limits. Because he is too weak to carry Parliament in a vote, he means to silence it. In Britain’s representative democracy, that sets a dangerous precedent.
But it is still not too late for MPs to thwart his plans—if they get organised. The sense of inevitability about no-deal, cultivated by the hardliners advising Mr Johnson, is bogus. The EU is against such an outcome; most Britons oppose it; Parliament has already voted against the idea. Those MPs determined to stop no-deal have been divided and unfocused. When they return to work next week after their uneasy summer recess, they will have a fleeting chance to avert this unwanted national calamity. Mr Johnson’s actions this week have made clear why they must seize it.
Of all her mistakes as prime minister, perhaps Theresa May’s gravest was to plant the idea that Britain might do well to leave the EU without any exit agreement. Her slogan that “no deal is better than a bad deal” was supposed to persuade the Europeans to make concessions. It didn’t—but it did persuade many British voters and MPs that if the EU offered less than perfect terms, Britain should walk away.
In fact the government’s own analysis suggests that no-deal would make the economy 9% smaller after 15 years than if Britain had remained. Mr Johnson says preparations for the immediate disruption are “colossal and extensive and fantastic”. Yet civil servants expect shortages of food, medicine and petrol, and a “meltdown” at ports. A growing number of voters seem to think that a few bumpy months and a lasting hit to incomes might be worth it to get the whole tedious business out of the way. This is the greatest myth of all. If Britain leaves with no deal it will face an even more urgent need to reach terms with the EU, which will demand the same concessions as before—and perhaps greater ones, given that Britain’s hand will be weaker.
Mr Johnson insists that his intention is to get a new, better agreement before October 31st, and that to do so he needs to threaten the EU with the credible prospect of no-deal.Despite the fact that Mrs May got nowhere with this tactic, many Tory MPs still see it as a good one. The EU wants a deal, after all. And whereas it became clear that Mrs May was bluffing about walking out, Mr Johnson might just be serious (the fanatics who do his thinking certainly are). Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor, said recently that Britain should come up with a plan in the next 30 days if it wants to replace the Irish backstop, the most contentious part of the withdrawal agreement. Many moderate Tories, even those who oppose no-deal, would like to give their new prime minister a chance to prove his mettle.
They are mistaken. First, the effect of the no-deal threat on Brussels continues to be overestimated in London. The EU’s position—that it is open to plausible British suggestions—is the same as it has always been. The EU’s priority is to keep the rules of its club intact, to avoid other members angling for special treatment. With or without the threat of no-deal, it will make no more than marginal changes to the existing agreement. Second, even if the EU were to drop the backstop altogether, the resulting deal might well be rejected by “Spartan” Tory Brexiteers, so intoxicated by the idea of leaving without a deal that they seem ready to vote against any agreement. And third, even if an all-new deal were offered by the EU and then passed by Parliament, ratifying it in Europe and passing the necessary laws in Britain would require an extension well beyond October 31st. Mr Johnson’s vow to leave on that date, “do or die”, makes it impossible to leave with any new deal. It also reveals that he is fundamentally unserious about negotiating one.
That is why Parliament must act now to take no-deal off the table, by passing a law requiring the prime minister to ask the EU for an extension. Even before Mr Johnson poleaxed Parliament, this was not going to be easy. The House of Commons’ agenda is controlled by Downing Street, which will allow no time for such a bill. MPs showed in the spring that they could take temporary control of the agenda, when they passed a law forcing Mrs May to request an extension beyond the first Brexit deadline of March 29th. This time there is no current legislation to act as a “hook” for an amendment mandating an extension, so the Speaker of the House would have to go against precedent by allowing MPs to attach a binding vote to an emergency debate. All that may be possible. But with Parliament suspended for almost five weeks there will be desperately little time.
So, if rebel MPs cannot pass a law, they must be ready to use their weapon of last resort: kicking Mr Johnson out of office with a vote of no confidence. He has a working majority of just one. The trouble is that attempts to find a caretaker prime minister, to request a Brexit extension before calling an election, have foundered on whether it should be Jeremy Corbyn, the far-left Labour leader whom most Tories despise, or a more neutral figure.
If the various factions opposed to no-deal cannot agree, Mr Johnson will win. But if they needed a reason to put aside their differences, he has just given them one. The prime minister was already steering Britain towards a no-deal Brexit that would hit the economy, wrench at the union and cause a lasting rift with international allies. Now he has shown himself willing to stifle parliamentary democracy to achieve his aims. Wavering MPs must ask themselves: if not now, when?
OnlyBlueWillDo
Player Valuation: £35m
Well respected jouro's have shared my views, you are off your nut lad suggesting it is racist to hold the view we as a country are not well liked in Europe.
Terry Wogan resigned from doing Eurovision after he'd had enough of Europe voting against us for political reasons, was Terry a big bad racist lad?
I’ve been to most countries in Europe as an English man. Never had any problems. Tend to find people are generally decent to you as long as you’re not a dick. Think we can all learn something from that in these turbulent times...
NilSatisOptimum
Player Valuation: £70m
Im putting this down to PMT( Pre Match Tension). I'm confident we will beat Wolves.
- Status