I give our new left wing Government 1½ year before it collapses or give in to their true nature and deport non- socialist to the gulags...
I saw a story about gay smears on Neil Kinnock's son. He looks like Troels Hartmann :ph34r:
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on September 15, 2011, 04:34:46 PM
I give our new left wing Government 1½ year before it collapses or give in to their true nature and deport non- socialist to the gulags...
:weep:
Don't gulags go against some EU treaty or something? :hmm:
...
Forgot to mention we are going to have our first ever female prime minister, unfortunately... :yuk:
Is her name Rasmussen?
Quote from: Sahib on September 15, 2011, 05:06:35 PM
Is her name Rasmussen?
Nope, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, she is married to Stephen Kinnock son of some british ex-labor leader...
Hooray!
What a wonderful, wonderful day.
Quote from: Ideologue on September 15, 2011, 05:58:23 PM
Hooray!
Why would Denmark sponging money off of the productive states in the EU make you happy?
Quote from: Neil on September 15, 2011, 07:20:55 PM
Why would Denmark sponging money off of the productive states in the EU make you happy?
The amount of money you can sponge off the EU is a function of your relative income and how much your country's name rhymes with trance, not the kind of government you have.
Quote from: Neil on September 15, 2011, 07:20:55 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on September 15, 2011, 05:58:23 PM
Hooray!
Why would Denmark sponging money off of the productive states in the EU make you happy?
Don't poop on my May Day parade.
This is a disaster!
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1223.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd505%2Ffaina4%2Ftumblr_lltcm7d92p1qaocoq.gif&hash=36cd6cdb6f1a269f00506f751d996492b2e38299)
Read about this today, it is indeed strange it would be Kinnock`s daughter in law (I don`t follow Danish politics at all so had no idea about her existance and who she was married to).
Anyway. Seems a smart move by Denmark given the recent shennanigans of the right.
Good riddance to the racist fucks. May this be the promise of Europe starting to lean left again. :swiss:
Quote from: Habsburg on September 15, 2011, 07:49:13 PM
This is a disaster!
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1223.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd505%2Ffaina4%2Ftumblr_lltcm7d92p1qaocoq.gif&hash=36cd6cdb6f1a269f00506f751d996492b2e38299)
1. Cut this stuff already.
2. Why this is a disaster?
Quote from: Neil on September 15, 2011, 07:20:55 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on September 15, 2011, 05:58:23 PM
Hooray!
Why would Denmark sponging money off of the productive states in the EU make you happy?
Denmark is one of the few countries in the world with effectively no budget deficit. It also is not part of the Eurozone. Are you spouting this bullshit just to show how stupid you are or is there a deeper meaning to it?
Quote from: Martinus on September 16, 2011, 04:29:34 AM
1. Cut this stuff already.
It's an homage to Weatherdan.
Does it mean Denmark will end up as Malmö in a few years time?
If only King Wilhelm had accepted Denmark's offer of joining the German Confederation, this could have all been avoided. :shakeshead:
Quote from: Martinus on September 16, 2011, 04:31:15 AM
Quote from: Neil on September 15, 2011, 07:20:55 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on September 15, 2011, 05:58:23 PM
Hooray!
Why would Denmark sponging money off of the productive states in the EU make you happy?
Denmark is one of the few countries in the world with effectively no budget deficit. It also is not part of the Eurozone. Are you spouting this bullshit just to show how stupid you are or is there a deeper meaning to it?
No, it just means that it's easy for a small, racially homogenous and somewhat productive land to adopt leftist policies provided that they have a larger, wealthy neighbour that maintains more sound policies.
You sure are a stupid faggot that likes to read too much into statements. You should kill yourself today.
http://jp.dk/uknews/article2547799.ece?page=1
QuoteSocial Democrat leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt put an end to a decade in opposition for her party tonight, when her centre-left coalition mustered enough votes to win a slim five-vote majority in parliament.
The electoral win puts a woman in the prime minister's office for the first time in Danish history while at the same time ousting the Liberal-Conservative government, and its backers in the right-wing Danish People's Party.
Addressing a crowd late Thursday evening Thorning-Schmidt proclaimed "we did it".
"Today is change-day in Denmark. The Social Democrats are ready to work," Thorning-Schmidt told a crowd of party faithful gathered at Copenhagen's Vega concert hall.
The centre-left had campaigned on a platform of reinvigorating the social welfare state, and in her acceptance speech Thorning-Schmidt pledged to work for a society that "included everyone, and where everyone got a second chance – and another second chance".
Continuing a theme that has laced this general election, Thorning-Schmidt also pledged to seek broad-based compromise and called on "everyone", politicians and ordinary voters alike, to take part in that effort.
The new Social Democrat-led government and its allies are projected to have won control of 92 seats in the 179-member parliament. The Liberal-led alliance of now-former PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen is forecast to end with 87 seats.
Election night proved bittersweet for Rasmussen. Despite the centre-right bloc being forced into opposition, his Liberal party surpassed the Social Democrats to become parliament's largest party with 47 seats, one more seat than the party earned in 2007.
The strong result had Rasmussen cautioning Thorning-Schmidt not to get too comfortable in her position.
"Take care of the keys to the Prime Minister's Office, they are only yours to borrow," Rasmussen said during his concession speech.
While it was Thorning-Schmit that claimed victory as the country's new leader, it was two of her allied parties, the centrist Social Liberals and the far-left Red-Green Alliance that were the election night's biggest winners.
Both parties more than doubled their representation in parliament and will wield significant influence over a minority Social Democrats-Socialist People's Party government.
Also adding seats was the Liberal Alliance, a centre-right party supporting lower taxes and a smaller state.
Both the Social Democrats and the Socialist People's Party lost seats in the election, as did the Danish People's Party – the first time the party has suffered an electoral setback since entering parliament in 1998.
Part of the responsibility for the centre-right's defeat is also due to be pinned on the Conservatives, who lost more than half of their representation and is now parliament's smallest party.
Factfile | 2011 election results
Centre-left parties
% votes
% +/- (2007)
seats
+/- (2007)
Social Democrats 24.9% -0.6% 44
-1
Social Liberals
9.5%
+4.4%
17
+8
Socialist People's Party 9.2%
-3.8%
16
-7
Red-Green Alliance
6.7%
+4.5%
12
+8
Centre-right parties
Liberals
26.7%
+0.4%
47
+1
Danish People's Party
12.3%
-1.6%
22
-3
Liberal Alliance
5%
+2.2%
9
+4
Conservatives
4.9%
-5.5%
8
-10
All votes counted / 87.7% voter turnout
The Copenhagen Post
Commies (yes they are the real deal) in the same government as the social liberals which are center-right economically. Yeah thats totally going to work. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Cecil on September 16, 2011, 09:13:59 AM
Commies (yes they are the real deal) in the same government as the social liberals which are center-right economically. Yeah thats totally going to work. :rolleyes:
The commies won't be in the government. They'll only support it with their parliamentary votes. Same thing which worked for 10 years in the 90ties. Anyway the commies aren't the biggest problem for the social democrats. The commies will never help remove the social democrats in exchange for a liberal conservative government supported by the far right. All they require are some trinkets now and then so the commie members of parliament can tell the party members (who think the real commie work should take place in the unions, work places etc.) that they matter.
The socialist and the social liberals will be the biggest problem. Especially since this election shows that the voters want a "blue" economic policy (retirement reform) and don't really believe in the red policy (work more if the unions agree + taxes). In other areas all three parties (socialist, social democrats and the bluish social liberals) can probably reach an agreement.
For national parliament elections thats fairly normal, if a little higher than average :)
We are very democratic :D
V
Quote from: Valdemar on September 19, 2011, 02:49:30 AM
For national parliament elections thats fairly normal, if a little higher than average :)
We are very democratic :D
V
We could make it a capital crime not to vote and we still would not get 80%+ turnout.
Well, what difference does it make who you vote for in the US? The Democrats and Republicans are pretty much indistinguishable at this point, except for slight differences like one acts more in the interests of corporations, while another acts more in the interests of trial lawyers.
Quote from: Valmy on September 19, 2011, 08:11:08 AM
Quote from: Valdemar on September 19, 2011, 02:49:30 AM
For national parliament elections thats fairly normal, if a little higher than average :)
We are very democratic :D
V
We could make it a capital crime not to vote and we still would not get 80%+ turnout.
AFAIK, Denmark has proportional elections with no minimum threshold of entry, meaning every vote counts. Could be that this correlates positively with the turnout - on the other hand, when many voters feel unrepresented (because their candidates/parties have no chance - which is often the case in majority systems, or systems like Poland with a relatively high entry threshold), this may affect the turnout. Just a thought.
Quote from: Martinus on September 19, 2011, 08:58:45 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 19, 2011, 08:11:08 AM
Quote from: Valdemar on September 19, 2011, 02:49:30 AM
For national parliament elections thats fairly normal, if a little higher than average :)
We are very democratic :D
V
We could make it a capital crime not to vote and we still would not get 80%+ turnout.
AFAIK, Denmark has proportional elections with no minimum threshold of entry, meaning every vote counts. Could be that this correlates positively with the turnout - on the other hand, when many voters feel unrepresented (because their candidates/parties have no chance - which is often the case in majority systems, or systems like Poland with a relatively high entry threshold), this may affect the turnout. Just a thought.
2% threshold. But yes every vote counts. The "surplus" votes in a given electorate are distributed evenly. Only votes for parties not getting in might be lost. However, only one party had that happen this time with less than 0.8% of the votes... Go Kristendemokraterne :D
V
Poland has a 5% threshold for parties and 7% for coalitions of parties, but we also use the d'Hondt method of proportional vote counting, which favours big parties, whereas (according to wikipedia) you guys use the Saint Lague method which is more equal.
Edit: Never mind. It seems you use d'Hondt method too.
I wish more countries would use the don't method.
Quote from: The Brain on September 19, 2011, 11:53:21 AM
I wish more countries would use the don't method.
D'Hondt give me that Lague.