Yep, take in account the FDP leader is pro-Putin on foreign policy. To put it well, he said Crimea should be considered as part of Russia by now.
German Elections 2017
- Thread starter Kasper
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
They are also getting votes from the ederly who see their villages and small towns slowly dieing (no shops, no doctors, no shools, etc.), because the youth moves away to see any perspective. They get votes from workers, who do worthwile work, work that perhaps doesn´t take an university degree, but is essential for our society to function and make life for all more comfortable, but are extremely poorly payed and forces them to receive money from the state. They get votes from people having trouble to find apartments as rents are exploding in the cities.
For the most part, they get votes from the people that don´t feel heard and be left alone by the government, so they latch onto the loudest voice that opposes the government. They don´t vote for the AfD because they share their views or stand behind their programm, the statistics are clear on that. Most don´t even want them in power, but an actual opposition who challenges the government.
Don´t get me wrong, voting the AfD is horribly short sighted but desperation tends to have such effect.
Ironically the result that came from their voting is that the social democrates are forced to go into oppositon and have to reinvent themelves to regain their voter base. Maybe they will be wise to actually listen to these people then and give them believable options to make their lives a little bit better. Maybe they learn a thing or two in the process, aswell.
Yeah, definitely.Consider yourself lucky that it's only 13% I guess
30%+ in the East; Christ.
Let's bloody hope so.
You're right, Sphaero - same with the USA & Trump, IMO (regarding the first part in bold).
I guess these votes come from the far-left. From what i know of East Germany, many feel like "second-rate" citizens out there.Yeah, definitely.
30%+ in the East; Christ.
Could you give links to surveys of that kind?
Where do you get all this from? I read several studies that the AfD voter base does very well financially.
http://www.zeit.de/2017/26/afd-waehler-studie-interview
http://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2017-03/iw-studie-afd-waehler-gehalt-bundesdurchschnitt
http://www.focus.de/politik/videos/...-denn-die-waehlen-ganz-anders_id_6277346.html
etc.
It's a misconception that they are poor people who feel left out. The simple truth is: They are white supremacists. They vote for a party which slanders muslims because they don't like muslims.
There was a survey from the state TV during the elections asking arund 100k people questions about their thought process for the election. 65-70 % of the surveyed AfD voters made their decision not based on the programm, but because they opposition towards the other parties. It is statistically the clearest example of a protest vot I have seen until now.
Well, party program can mean a lot: economic policy, education policy, foreign policy for example. I don't expect the majority of AfD voters to have much interest in the party's views on these topics (except perhaps the relationship to Russia).
But when it comes to right-wing populist core issues like xenophobia, nationalism, revisionism, I'd be surprised if only ~30% consent with them. (But not so much if a high percentage of sympathisers deny their views amount to that.) Opposition to mainstream politics (...the media, the EU etc.) isn't contradictory to these stances as such; they are certainly compatible and for a common type of protest voter they're practically synonymous.
Did that report get more specific on particular topics?
I landed in Berlin about 5 hours ago. Loads of people protesting and it got bigger and bigger. Police blocking the streets and stuff. Didn't know who they were or what they were protesting at first.
They probably want you out, good job.
From the top of my head, I think there was the item "The AfD does not renounce extreme right views enough", which only 40% of AfD voters affirmed.
its strange how in the last 5 years immigration has pretty much become the biggest issue in world politics.
http://wahl.tagesschau.de/wahlen/2017-09-24-BT-DE/umfrage-afd.shtml
Here's the AfD polls that were shown on ARD last night. [in German]
Here's the AfD polls that were shown on ARD last night. [in German]
Not really. Immigration has exploded in recent years and it is having a huge impact on communities, it's not surprising it's become a major issue in politics. Failure to plan for and address it is why we are seeing this now.
I do wonder whether it's a Blair/Labour style ploy to introduce cheap labour and future guaranteed votes to the EU.
Petry just stated that she won't be a part of the AfD in the Bundestag 
What a joke of a party.
What a joke of a party.Here's hoping she'll take a bite out of the party and take others with her. Reduce the influence of extreme right dickheads like Gauland even further.Petry just stated that she won't be a part of the AfD in the Bundestag
She wants a sort of moderate right-wing party, not a nazi one.Petry just stated that she won't be a part of the AfD in the Bundestag
Doubt that highly. She was ousted by all the other AFD leaders and it was only a matter of time until she would have become a fringe element within the party. She simply chose the moment to leave the party, so she would not have faced further scrutiny and isolation.
i don't think so, Blair didn't seem to plan anything for the long term, i'd guess he was after the quick buck and sod what happens in a few years, that seems to have been his style of government.
Im wondering if going forward liberal parties are going to take a more hard line view on immigration(like they are in Australia and New Zealand) just so it we don't end up with right wing parties taking advantage of this issues to push more extreme agendas.
That's because an endless flow of illegal immigrants is not good for Europe especially since they tend to lack either the skills or/and the attitude to fit in Europe.
Who knows with Blair although many on the left who now hate him thought he was the second coming back in the 90s/early 00s.
I think the European parties have to address it, and fairly soon. The current immigration levels are not sustainable and there are supposedly 200 million people who desire to live in the EU if they can get there. I personally think we will have a real problem on our hands in 5-10 years time as recent migrants fail to assimilate into European culture, and Germany will be one of the worst.
This is the key factor, the illegality!
There are nations in Europe who need legal immigrants to restore 'factory and industry fodder' after decade's of low birth rates, but just opening the doors as Merkel did was nonsensical, it spawned even more and sophisticated 'people smuggling' and other related 'smuggling crimes' it gave lots of people false hope, it destroyed the 'good will' that might have been harnessed towards immigrants per se by host populations, it forced rifts between EU countries, that arguably led to Brexit, and may lead Huexit, Poexit, it encouraged Putin to up the stakes in the Ukraine, notice there are not millions trying to get into Russia (legally or illegally).
Control of borders has to be re-established in Europe, the freedom of movement issue has to be re-visited with quotas, if these matters aren't addressed then even more demand for the return of sovereignty to nations will be demanded by smaller countries and meanwhile the southern EU countries will be overrun. Turkey now realises it has a stranglehold over the EU and with its own democracy in turmoil will seek to exert all sorts of pressure on Merkel. Unfortunately with her own battles now to fight in Germany Mrs Merkel will be distracted and although the EU may eventually see sense, it could be much too late to save its skin.
Merkel tried to bring some relief to South European countries whose been carrying this burden on Europe’s behalf for far too long. I can’t really blame her for doing the right thing.
Stating that, burden sharing is not the long term solution to this problem. Europe should be able to defend and close its outer borders by all means necessary. That include
Currently we’ve got a situation where
a- Immigrants are allowed to travel across many safe countries (and sometimes continents) only to claim asylum in Europe.
b- Where safe countries can actually refuse to take their own citizens back and get away with it. That must stop.
c- Were so called transit countries are allowed to turn illegal immigration into a lucrative business and get away with it.
d- Were third party countries can cause wars at Europe doorstep with total disregard of the consequences such actions will bring
That must stop.
Regarding FOM between European countries I don't think its really an issue as long as its not abused. You can't really expect unrestricted access to someone's market and then say no to its people can you?
What exactly was that, I don't think it was successful was it? Since Merkel had started the whole debacle she could hardly walk away could she? I'm sure all those southern EU states still overwhelmed with immigrants are very pleased to hear you are not blaming Merkel!
What's stopping it then?
Yes, of course you can, by operating mutually agreed controls. Trade should be completely separated from immigration/populations issues, its only by mixing these two up the EU has got into many of its current problems. When there were eight member states of the Common market all living cheek to cheek (as it were) sharing borders etc. it was not really a problem, but now with 28 (soon to be 27) member states, spread over thousands of miles, experiencing (amongst other things) climate differences, road and rail infrastructures that vary, police and security differences, etc. its a nonsense.
What a load of bullshit. Leaving the EU would be suicide for Poland, even the dumbasses ruling atm know that. There's zero backing for that in the population. Similar in Hungary. GB and brexit was a special case. Most things the EU got blame for there aren't even in EU responsibility. There's isn't really anything the EU could have done to change that result.
As for Ukraine, if you would have put even the most limited amount of effort into your cute little rant, you would have realized that Crimea was already officially annexed by Russia more than a year before the refugee crisis started. Why do people don't want to go to Russia? Because it's poor as feck
As for what Merkel did: please, elaborate the alternatives she had that very day despite shooting people down at the border. Let's not forget that the influx of people died down pretty shortly afterwards and is barely an issue today, apart for people desperately searching for issues to support their respective agendas.
Last edited:
Trade doesn't operate in a vacuum though. For it work you need people for pretty much every step of the process. Trade in regards to wages/efficiency etc is inherently linked to the workers you have, your population and how it either drives wages up/down etc. The EU principle of freedom of movement is inherently about the freedom of workers to move all around Europe. There's little reason for Europe to allow us prioritised access to their markets if we aren't going to comply with their desire for workers to be able to travel freely and work between member states.
You're amazingly void of knowledge about political procedures and recent history tbh. Your main question is so pointless, it really only deserves one answer: it's not that easy.
I think it helped
A- To raise awareness of the challenges South European countries were facing on a daily basis. That paved the way to deals with Turkey and Libya which were previous frowned upon during the Berlusconi-Gheddafi administration.
B- Many SE counties appreciated Merkel's help greatly. That contributed in turning Germany from a big EU player into the EU leader.
Its not as easy as it sounds. We're dealing with people who don't mind sinking boats cramped with innocent people just to force the Italian authorities to save them. Recently there were videos of Turkish immigrants threatening to let a boy sink unless given refugee into Greece and there many reports of boats taking in a token heavily pregnant woman per boat as it increased their chances for safe passage into europe.
Illegal immigration is big business which generate millions to home countries, transit countries and traffickers. They will defend it to the end.
Its morally wrong to expect unrestricted access to someone's market and money and then say no to its people. Its the typical little Englander mentality which is both unrealistic and stupid. The UK will learn that soon enough. Actually its already learning it the hard way as both India and Australia had stated that there won't be any serious trade deal talks unless the UK agrees to open its access to their people.
You are a way better person than I am. Probably because my temper is already used up in the evening up after encountering people like him due to work every other day.
Last edited:
I think that many are still stuck to the British empire times were gunboat diplomacy allowed the UK to cherry pick any deal it wanted. Things had changed since then
No you are correct it would appear the EU can't change anything really can it? Its an monolithic entity sailing towards a cliff edge?
On the day nothing earlier, keeping her mouth shut and inviting immigrants to Germany via normal channels, which could have been organised with the EU states the immigrants had to pass through. Up till that point (from outside Germany anyway)Mrs Merkel seemed to have hardly put a foot wrong politically, but then in one mind blowing moment, in football terms she gave a way a penalty and got a red card, certainly with the Southern EU states
PS liked your bit about 'cute rant, thank you!
Southern EU states can either save immigrants at sea or else they can let them drown (which is also illegal according to maritime law). I assure you no one down there invites immigrants in .
You mean your version of it? I suspect Putin didn't annexe Crimea on a whim, he knew the EU was not only powerless to intervene but lacked the will, and the USA would rant and do little else!
Ukraine is neither an EU country nor in Nato. Should Europe start WW3 because of a third country? Did we had enough WW's for our liking?
The only thing the EU could have done was to bend over completely to the right wing voters in the UK. It's amazing how Brexiteers always point to their 4 point lead in the referendum as the ultimate expression of the will of the people while at the same time they expected and continue to expect the EU to ignore 27 countries to fulfill the wishes of half the population or less of the 28th.
Your last paragraph is, btw just exactly what she did that week. If you would have paid even the slightest bit of attention. She didn't "invite" anyone btw. She opened the borders to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe, the Balkan was filled with refugees long before that.
Get your timeline straight.
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Are you really trying to rescue that one? Just admit you got your facts wrong or ignore it but don't start the next bullshiz discussion! I guess in your view, we should just have invaded Russia to defend a country that is neither part of the EU nor NATO?
In the end, the EU did what is within their limited capabilities in such a case and issued sanctions