- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
This is how democracy works in Europe…
Posted on 7/9/26 at 4:16 pm
Posted on 7/9/26 at 4:16 pm
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. This is how “DEMOCRACY” works in Europe:
314 vote AGAINST mass surveillance.
276 vote FOR it.
But because it isn't a supermajority (361) it isn't rejected
MASS SURVEILLANCE WINS.
Then the same bureaucratic hypocrites travel the world lecturing everyone about democracy and their so-called “European values.”
WELCOME TO THE EUSSR.
This post was edited on 7/9/26 at 4:17 pm
6
Posted on 7/9/26 at 4:18 pm to Placekicker
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. This is what it does-
Platforms can now scan your private messages again, officially "voluntary," in practice blanket surveillance.
Here's the democratic scandal: 314 MEPs voted against it. Only 276 voted for it.
It passed anyway... because an absolute majority of all MEPs was required to reject it, not just a majority of those present.
More people voted no than yes. It still passed.
Pushed through on an urgent procedure just before summer recess, when absences are highest and attention is lowest.
This is how rights disappear folks. Not in one dramatic moment, but in procedural fine print, on a slow news day, while everyone's looking at Tehran.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 4:33 pm to Placekicker
Embarrassing
Posted on 7/9/26 at 4:36 pm to Placekicker
Are we going to pretend that Europe is the only place where legislative bodies sometimes require actual majority votes? 
ETA: everyone should note that OP and the embedded are lying. A super majority was not required. A simple majority of the whole body was required, not just the majority of those present.
ETA: everyone should note that OP and the embedded are lying. A super majority was not required. A simple majority of the whole body was required, not just the majority of those present.
This post was edited on 7/9/26 at 5:09 pm
Posted on 7/9/26 at 4:47 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Are we going to pretend that Europe is the only place where legislative bodies sometimes require actual majority votes?
Super majority. It required a super majority to shoot down. Not simple majority. That’s shady as hell.
The votes against it won, but since it didn’t have a SUPER MAJORITY, it passed anyway. That’s wrong on so many levels.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 5:02 pm to Placekicker
quote:
Super majority. It required a super majority to shoot down. Not simple majority. That’s shady as hell. The votes against it won, but since it didn’t have a SUPER MAJORITY, it passed anyway. That’s wrong on so many levels.
Nope. Your own posts say absolute majority. Not a super majority, which is different.
There are 720 MEP’s. 361 is an absolute majority, not a super majority.
In any event, the US Congress has items that require absolute majorities and others that require supermajorities of one or both chambers. So do many state legislatures.
This post was edited on 7/9/26 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 7/9/26 at 6:11 pm to Placekicker
quote:
The European Union is turning into an anti-democratic surveillance apparatus.
It's happening here too.
We fricked the dog with the Patriot Act, we keep getting FISA extensions and now the gov is tapped into Ring Cams and has the whole Flock network at their disposal, as well as the unrealized agreements we've all entered just to operate our cell phones that spy on us and collect every keystroke including what I'm typing right now.
People here just largely ignore it. It's a surveillance State with the illusion of liberty.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 6:19 pm to Placekicker
The more I’ve read on WW2 the more I’ve always asked, “how did they let it get that far”? Now the world can see it in plain site and they aren’t doing it in a dim lit back room. It’s out front for the world to see.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 6:51 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
In any event, the US Congress has items that require absolute majorities and others that require supermajorities of one or both chambers. So do many state legislatures.
How would you feel about a bill like the Save Act or birthright citizenship getting 45 votes for, 48 against, but it passes because the “nos” didn’t have a super majority??
Posted on 7/9/26 at 7:20 pm to Placekicker
quote:
How would you feel about a bill like the Save Act or birthright citizenship getting 45 votes for, 48 against, but it passes because the “nos” didn’t have a super majority??
Why do you keep saying “supermajority”?
What was required here was NOT a supermajority. It required a majority of the full body. Your issue is with the huge number of people that couldn’t be bothered to show up.
I don’t even think requiring an actual majority is a bad thing.
This post was edited on 7/9/26 at 7:22 pm
Posted on 7/9/26 at 7:29 pm to Placekicker
Posted on 7/9/26 at 7:33 pm to Indefatigable
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Why do you keep saying “supermajority”?
Because that’s what the article says…
Posted on 7/9/26 at 7:35 pm to Placekicker
That’s fricked up government.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 7:52 pm to Placekicker
And as I’ve told you multiple times, that is a lie.
361 out of 720 IS NOT a supermajority.
It’s just a majority.
361 out of 720 IS NOT a supermajority.
It’s just a majority.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 7:54 pm to Placekicker
I can’t wait for the inevitable outcome of the EU.
I can’t fricking wait for a general European uprising.
I can’t fricking wait for a general European uprising.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 8:09 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
the US Congress has items that require absolute majorities and others that require supermajorities of one or both chambers. So do many state legislatures.
Those are required in order to PASS a piece of legislation, not reject it.
These idiots are allowing something to pass that was overwhelmingly rejected by the voters but becomes law because the overwhelming majority wasn't overwhelming enough.
To put it another way: these fricksticks are saying that even if the vote was 230 FOR, and 360 AGAINST, it STILL would have passed, because they supposedly need 361 votes to stop this legislation.
In Euro-math, apparently 39 percent beats 61 percent, or in this actual case 47 percent beat 53 percent. That is NOT how voting is supposed to go.
By that math, Kamala whipped Trump's arse in 2024.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 8:38 pm to Placekicker
It is disturbing that 276 voted for it.
Just let Europe die already
Just let Europe die already
Posted on 7/9/26 at 10:00 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Are we going to pretend that Europe is the only place where legislative bodies sometimes require actual majority votes? ?
ETA: everyone should note that OP and the embedded are lying. A super majority was not required. A simple majority of the whole body was required, not just the majority of those present.
In no world does it make sense for a law to pass when more people vote against it.
You are completely missing the point. A law should not pass unless a majority approve it. Non-votes are not approval. The default should always be rejection.
It was set up this way for no other reason than to allow unfavorable bills to pass while giving the corrupt politicians cover. It allows authoritarians to pass bills with a minority of approval. It's corruption, plain and simple.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News