Who should you vote for in the EU elections?

Page 1 of 2 [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,508
Location: Lancashire, UK

20 May 2014, 1:09 am

http://eu1.euvox.eu/

My three top results were:

The UK Independence Party - 85%
The Party for Freedom in the Netherlands - 60%
The Party of Free Citizens in the Czech Republic - 52%

I thought PVV would be higher up than that, but sadly not.

The Free Citizens Party look like a good bunch, but they probably won't win anything.



TallyMan
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,833

20 May 2014, 2:07 am

I'm not voting.
a) I didn't even know I could vote until the other day - but it is too late to register now; besides I don't know if my vote is here in France or by proxy in the UK.
b) Either way it is too much bureaucratic hassle to sort out.
c) I have no confidence in any of the candidates anyway; they are all a bunch of self serving wankers.


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,508
Location: Lancashire, UK

20 May 2014, 2:21 am

TallyMan wrote:
c) I have no confidence in any of the candidates anyway; they are all a bunch of self serving wankers.


Yup - the major French parties don't seem worth the salt. I wouldn't vote FN.



TallyMan
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,833

20 May 2014, 2:29 am

Tequila wrote:
TallyMan wrote:
c) I have no confidence in any of the candidates anyway; they are all a bunch of self serving wankers.


Yup - the major French parties don't seem worth the salt. I wouldn't vote FN.


They are the last party I'd vote for anyway! If they ever get in power, France will be out of the EU and likely those Brits with an income less than X kicked out of the country back to the UK. Assuming of course that we don't just get put into rail-road cattle trucks and disappear along with all the muslims, jews, romanies and anyone else who isn't native French...


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,697
Location: Reading, England

20 May 2014, 4:34 am

I'm not sure the test works too well for me, as many of the issues I consider more important were not discussed.

In the UK, I scored Green-Labour-Lib Dem-Conservative-UKIP. I'm surprised Labour outscored the Lib Dems.

Europe wide, my strongest matches were the Belgian social democrats, the Croatian social democrats, and the Croatian greens.



FeralRobot
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 182
Location: a daydream

20 May 2014, 6:24 am

Not eligible to vote yet (under 18 ) but took the test anyway.
For here in the UK, I got the strongest match as the Green Party.
Europe-wide:
1. Podemos (We), in Spain (83.1)
2. Die Linke (The Left), Germany (77.5)
3. Syriza, Greece (75.0)


_________________
"?I love not man the less, but Nature more.? - Byron
"Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you" - Nirvana
I am an animal. Not normal is not bad. Question all. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all!


thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,434
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

20 May 2014, 10:01 am

...Jesus christ *facepalm*

Image


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,697
Location: Reading, England

20 May 2014, 3:07 pm

So I tried to verify if that was true, and found this: http://metro.co.uk/2014/05/19/ukip-hope ... t-4733572/

Have I woken up inside a sit-com written by Mark Steel?



The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,697
Location: Reading, England

20 May 2014, 3:12 pm

OK, I don't see how the picture Thomas posted can be legitimate, but that is a genuine quote from Helmer.

Seems like a really nasty piece of work: http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/10/r ... test-hits/



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,986
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

20 May 2014, 5:04 pm

Any UKIP supporter because Thomas81 hates them so much. :P


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,508
Location: Lancashire, UK

21 May 2014, 2:35 am

Raptor wrote:
Any UKIP supporter because Thomas81 hates them so much. :P


We're coming
We're coming
We're coming down the road
We're the volunteers of UKIP
And we're coming down the road

Hopefully the Greens in England will lose a seat. That would be nice.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,508
Location: Lancashire, UK

21 May 2014, 2:46 am

thomas81 wrote:
Image


I get his point entirely, which is different. He wasn't advocating for that. I quite agree with him in that if a gay person wants that kind of service, they shouldn't be prevented from having it. He's not advocating that a gay person take up that service.

I can debunk some of them:

With the 'homophobia' comments, what he meant was that there are few people that actually fear homosexuality and gay people. They just don't like them (or hate them, or whatever) - so the term "anti-gay" would be better. His point is to do with terminology.

He doesn't think climate change is a lie, he disagrees with the concept of AGW.

As for the comments on 'rape' - they were part of a long article and comments that I'd like to dig up and re-read again. Helmer is sort of embarrassed that he made those comments because they are detracting from his campaign in Newark.

As for the shooting rioters and arsonists - I agree with him. Again, he's not suggesting shooting rioters straight off, but do whatever makes them stop. Most countries do the same thing (or worse). Get progressively tougher until the rioters stop. In Poland, for instance, riots don't last long because the police there are brutal.



Magneto
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Age: 25
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,083

21 May 2014, 3:15 am

Well, I can't say I care much whether the tyrant lives in Brussels or Westminster. I'm /voting /pirate.


_________________
...and the state must be destroyed.

http://needsmoremarshmallows.blogspot.co.uk/


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,697
Location: Reading, England

21 May 2014, 3:19 am

Tequila wrote:

He doesn't think climate change is a lie, he disagrees with the concept of AGW.

Oh, well, that's OK then. I can see no possible issues with someone who is totally ignorant of the most important issue facing our society assuming elected office :roll:



Cornflake
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,969
Location: Over there

21 May 2014, 8:59 am

Tequila wrote:
I get his point entirely, which is different. He wasn't advocating for that. I quite agree with him in that if a gay person wants that kind of service, they shouldn't be prevented from having it. He's not advocating that a gay person take up that service.
So he's standing against some sort of oppression of gays who are apparently prevented from being "turned"?
That's not how it reads to me - both as it stands and in the context of his other wafflings about homosexuality, and even if it reads as claimed - it seems rather an odd issue to make a campaign poster about.
"A vote for Roger is a vote for better support for gays who don't want to be gay" - really now? Nope; still whiffs of a hidden agenda.

Quote:
With the 'homophobia' comments, what he meant was that there are few people that actually fear homosexuality and gay people. They just don't like them (or hate them, or whatever) - so the term "anti-gay" would be better. His point is to do with terminology.
Ah yes, he's playing a pedant card and attempting to dilute the issue.
Denigrate and remove the word widely used to describe an issue and the issue goes away, eh? Straight out of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and I expect Goebbels would be proud.
Roger Helmer wrote:
So to the extent that the word has any meaning at all, it describes something which simply does not exist. ?Homophobia? is merely a propaganda device designed to denigrate and stigmatise those holding conventional opinions, which have been held by most people through most of recorded history.
Wikipedia wrote:
Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia
Stonewall wrote:
Homophobia is the irrational hatred, intolerance, and fear of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people.

These negative feelings fuel the myths, stereotypes, and discrimination that can lead to violence against LGB people.
https://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_home/se ... s/2697.asp

I especially liked this: "stigmatise those holding conventional opinions, which have been held by most people through most of recorded history" - which applies equally to slavery, the oppression of women, child labour, etc.
Presumably he also wants to retain the "conventional opinions" which made all those things acceptable? No, thought not.

He has some other interesting opinions related to homosexuality too:
Roger Helmer wrote:
Although I deny that it constitutes discrimination. It is just that same-sex couples have chosen to enter into a relationship in which marriage is not relevant, or appropriate, or indeed possible.
http://rogerhelmermep.wordpress.com/200 ... ome-stick/ (plus the earlier quote above. The comments are worth a scan to see the wider disagreement with this crap)

Quote:
He doesn't think climate change is a lie, he disagrees with the concept of AGW.
Then he is a fool.

Quote:
As for the comments on 'rape' - they were part of a long article and comments that I'd like to dig up and re-read again. Helmer is sort of embarrassed that he made those comments because they are detracting from his campaign in Newark.
So, not embarrassed because of their content, just "sort of" embarrassed because they're interfering with his campaign?
Well, that's Ok then... :roll:
Roger Helmer wrote:
It is naive for a woman to undress and get into a man?s bed and not expect him to draw the obvious conclusion.
http://rogerhelmermep.wordpress.com/201 ... lly-right/

Quote:
Again, he's not suggesting shooting rioters straight off,
Not yet, anyway...
Quote:
but do whatever makes them stop.
Oh wait, he is.


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.