Daniel Hannan compares American and British/European politics

[Deleted]

He's a bit of a nut but he quotes shakespeare so that's alright.

[Austilias]

A lot more than the guy you linked, I live in the SE of England and have never heard of him, shows how famous he is.

To be fair he's an MEP. I think most people would be hard-pressed to recall their local MEPS; I certainly don't know mine off the top of my head.

[Nakura Chambers]

A lot more than the guy you linked, I live in the SE of England and have never heard of him, shows how famous he is.

He has represented you for the past 15 years and you haven't heard of him?

[Deleted]

Or perhaps it shows that you need to brush up on British politics, as he has represented you for the past 15 years and you haven't heard of him?

Or maybe Americans care more about pointless British politicians than the British do.

[Aqua]

A lot more than the guy you linked, I live in the SE of England and have never heard of him, shows how famous he is.

Same as Rich up here, he like anyone else around these here parts, believes his words shine light upon the unwashed masses, and makes a show of it to only like-minded individuals. (Which darn, seems like it ain't much in this country)

Same old, same old.

[Kalis]

I never said that libertarians were a majority in Britain, or even close to it. Though Nigel Farage, a British classical liberal, is generally considered the most admired politician in Britain. I'm not a libertarian, nor do I claim to be, but a lot of what Daniel Hannan and Nigel Farage say resonate with me. I can't say that I'm particularly anti-EU, but I do understand the concerns that many Europeans have with the European Union.

You claim that classical liberal principles are almost non-existent in Britain, yet the UK Independence Party represents between 20% and 30% of the British population. While certainly many people are drawn to the UK Independence Party due to it's anti-EU stance, many of those people are being exposed to classical liberalism and in some cases even American-style libertarianism, for the first time. Not to mention these classical liberal views have attracted many young activists to the party and ideology.

Linking a poll where Stephen Hawking is ranked below David Beckham proves a lot Seriously, at least try to pretend you aren't back to doing what you previously admitted doing.

You don't have a clue about British politics; it isn't just some people people that are drawn to UKIP due to its anti-EU stance...it's all of them. That is the entire point of the party, without that they wouldn't have a single supporter.

Nobody gives a toss about their other policies - they barely even had any other ones until Farage got fed up of people taking the piss - they just don't like the EU and as all the main parties take a broadly similar stance on the matter, they are a protest vote. All UKIP have done is take the anti-euro portion of the Tories, which people are slightly grateful for as that meant the BNP didn't get them.

They don't represent between 20-30% of the British population, their Westminster representation is a grand total of 0%.

If you want to discuss British politics, then learn about it first. Go to the country, speak to the people there, find out what makes us tick.

Let's not get into British newspaper biases. For ever slur against the Daily Mail and Telegraph, there are an equal number of slurs against the New Statesman and Guardian.

I'm a Conservative voter - the Torygraph is far too right, and the Daily Mail is off the charts into batshit insane territory.

However my politics are mainly economy based, not driven by a fear of those damn wogs coming into the country and stealing our precious toilet cleaning jobs.

- - - Updated - - -

Or maybe Americans care more about pointless British politicians than the British do.

I doubt even MEPs care about who MEPs are.

I'm sure some European countries think they are important, but the only time they garner any interest in Britain is when the likes of Nick Griffin get elected, or someone makes a speech insulting Belgians.

[Nakura Chambers]

Linking a poll where Stephen Hawking is ranked below David Beckham proves a lot Seriously, at least try to pretend you aren't back to doing what you previously admitted doing.

You don't have a clue about British politics; it isn't just some people people that are drawn to UKIP due to its anti-EU stance...it's all of them. That is the entire point of the party, without that they wouldn't have a single supporter.

Nobody gives a toss about their other policies - they barely even had any other ones until Farage got fed up of people taking the piss - they just don't like the EU and as all the main parties take a broadly similar stance on the matter, they are a protest vote. All UKIP have done is take the anti-euro portion of the Tories, which people are slightly grateful for as that meant the BNP didn't get them.

They don't represent between 20-30% of the British population, their Westminster representation is a grand total of 0%.

If you want to discuss British politics, then learn about it first. Go to the country, speak to the people there, find out what makes us tick.

Oh really?

[tiporispit]

Daniel Hannan is a joke. He is a slightly more eloquent British equivalent of Ted Cruz and ilk. He lives in a imaginary fictional world of his own, disconnected from reality pandering to the Eurosceptic faction of UK politics. Not to mention he has a disturbing hard on for the U.S.

The only thing in which he makes sense is the call for an electoral reform.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a joke. She is a slightly more eloquent American equivalent of Alexandra Kollontai and ilk. She lives in an imaginary fictional world of her own, disconnected from reality pandering to the Euroworshipping faction of American politics. Not to mention she has a disturbing clit on for the E.U. The only thing in which she makes sense is the call for Flood Insurance Reform, Affordability.

This is an example of why your post is the real joke. It's utter, opinionated nonsense complete with a bevy of logical fallacy. It's typical Demublican asshattery. Liberals will jack off to your post, and conservatives will jack off to my parody of it. It's why you're both clueless clowns who always have to resort to ad hominem and other garbage. The average American just doesn't have what it takes to think independently. What will Rachel Maddow tell you to think tomorrow? What will Rush Limbaugh tell them to think? Sheeple.

[Austilias]

You don't have a clue about British politics; it isn't just some people people that are drawn to UKIP due to its anti-EU stance...it's all of them. That is the entire point of the party, without that they wouldn't have a single supporter.

Nobody gives a toss about their other policies - they barely even had any other ones until Farage got fed up of people taking the piss - they just don't like the EU and as all the main parties take a broadly similar stance on the matter, they are a protest vote

They did have policies long before they stood a chance of any degree of political success. I know this because I took the opportunity to acquaint myself with some of their manifestos for A-Level British Politics so that I could refer to something other than Labour/Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. It may well be that for some, the party is a protest vote; but when you have the likes of the European Council Vice President (Viviane Reding) calling for a "United States of Europe", then such a protest vote is hardly difficult to understand. The 'point' of the party is to inspire serious change either with regard to the EU, or with respect to the UK's relationship with the EU. Farage himself has said that; they can achieve their goals without even getting elected, if it comes to it. All they need do is inspire policy change in the main parties; and i'd say having garnered enough support/fear within the main parties to have a EU Membership Referendum secured is not a bad start.

I'm a Conservative voter - the Torygraph is far too right, and the Daily Mail is off the charts into batshit insane territory.

And likewise, i'm a Conservative supporter - The Guardian is too far left, and the New Statesman may as well be published by the Labour Party at this point.

[Kalis]

Oh really?

Oh really what? What are you trying to say with that link?

We don't for the leader of a party, unless he happens to be your local MP, so their approval ratings are irrelevant.

UKIP having 17% in the polls doesn't give them seats in Westminster, that is what General Elections are for. They haven't even won a by-election against a government widely regarded as incompetent.

- - - Updated - - -

They did have policies long before they stood a chance of any degree of political success. I know this because I took the opportunity to acquaint myself with some of their manifestos for A-Level British Politics so that I could refer to something other than Labour/Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. It may well be that for some, the party is a protest vote; but when you have the likes of the European Council Vice President (Viviane Reding) calling for a "United States of Europe", then such a protest vote is hardly difficult to understand. The 'point' of the party is to inspire serious change either with regard to the EU, or with respect to the UK's relationship with the EU. Farage himself has said that; they can achieve their goals without even getting elected, if it comes to it. All they need do is inspire policy change in the main parties; and i'd say having garnered enough support/fear within the main parties to have a EU Membership Referendum secured is not a bad start.

And how many UKIP supporters went to the party for anything other than their euro-sceptic stance? One? Two? We both know it is zero, and they could well have declared every Tuesday as banana bending day and nobody would have noticed, or cared.

And likewise, i'm a Conservative supporter - The Guardian is too far left, and the New Statesman may as well be published by the Labour Party at this point.

I only read Amy Lawrence in the Guardian, mainly due to her being a fellow Arsenal fan and a decent sports writer. I don't ever recall having picked up the New Statesman, let alone having read it.

[Nakura Chambers]

Oh really what? What are you trying to say with that link?

We don't for the leader of a party, unless he happens to be your local MP, so their approval ratings are irrelevant.

UKIP having 17% in the polls doesn't give them seats in Westminster, that is what General Elections are for. They haven't even won a by-election against a government widely regarded as incompetent.

You think a poll from four years ago is a more reliable indicator of political opinion, than every single election poll that has taken place since 4 years ago? If you think that, then we might as well just do away with elections altogether, since apparently nothing can change in four years.

As for the by-elections, they've been securing second place in most of them, which is great out of four major parties (five if you count the Greens or Respect/BNP).

[Austilias]

And how many UKIP supporters went to the party for anything other than their euro-sceptic stance? One? Two? We both know it is zero.

The real answer is that we don't know. Whatever peoples' reasons for voting, what counts are the results on election day.

[Nakura Chambers]

And how many UKIP supporters went to the party for anything other than their euro-sceptic stance? One? Two? We both know it is zero, and they could well have declared every Tuesday as banana bending day and nobody would have noticed, or cared.

You'd be surprised. I'm not even anti-EU, but I'm drawn to the party for it's positions on education, electoral reform and civil liberties.

[Netherspark]

Nigel Farage, a British classical liberal, is generally considered the most admired politician in Britain.

I...have no words...

[Kalis]

You think a poll from four years ago is a more reliable indicator of political opinion, than every single election poll that has taken place since 4 years ago? If you think that, then we might as well just do away with elections altogether, since apparently nothing can change in four years.

You stated that they represented 20-30% of the British population, which is blatantly wrong as they represent 0%.

You're not grasping how this works, are you? 0 seats = 0% representation. 17% of voters thinking you are the bees knees in a poll = 0% representation.

If/when they actually obtain a seat in Westminster, then they'll represent the British people, until that point they represent 0%.

I can see if I can work in 0% more times into a post if it helps you understand it better.

As for the by-elections, they've been securing second place in most of them, which is great out of four major parties (five if you count the Greens or Respect/BNP).

We don't usually have four major parties in by-elections. There are usually one or two contesting it, whilst the rest shouldn't have even bothered turning up. Coming second in a first past the post election system isn't really much of an achievement, especially considering that by-elections are famous for being the time that the electorate registers their protest vote against the current government.

- - - Updated - - -

You'd be surprised. I'm not even anti-EU, but I'm drawn to the party for it's positions on education, electoral reform and civil liberties.

I wouldn't be surprised at all. It's zero.

[Nakura Chambers]

Every single opinion poll shows them with at least 13% of the vote, with many polls showing even higher.

[Austilias]

You stated that they represented 20-30% of the British population, which is blatantly wrong as they represent 0%.

I think there are two opinions on representation here; Parliamentary representation, and the representation of what people may think/feel. Arguably, Parliamentary representation is the only one that really matters; but it would be foolish to ignore the latter.

[Kalis]

I think there are two opinions on representation here; Parliamentary representation, and the representation of what people may think/feel. Arguably, Parliamentary representation is the only one that really matters; but it would be foolish to ignore the latter.

Not really, the Lib Dems used to regularly poll 25-30% of the vote, but never gained anything like a quarter of the seats, and they only became a relevance when the Tories couldn't get a majority. From Thatcher until Blair, the third party in British politics has been meaningless.

As you know, first past the post means that there is no point in being the second most popular party in every constituency, if you can't be the most popular in any of them.

There hasn't been anything to show they will win a large number of seats, and even if they win a few it will likely be an insignificant amount - they wouldn't even be considered as possible partners in a coalition, as they don't have any common ground with the Tories or Labour.

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

I'm watching these now and they're incredibly interesting. Daniel Hannan is a British MEP for the Conservative Party and a long-time libertarian. In the videos he discusses the importance of open primaries in the United States, how political institutions shape culture and how America shouldn't follow the road to welfare-statehood that many European countries currently have. I'm interested in what you guys think?

You should know, that in the UK becoming an MEP is like a show-jumping horse being put out to pasture. You can't get rid of the horse, because kids like to come to the stables and give it sugar lumps and apples, but you want it out of the way because it is just a waste of space and nobody cares about it any more. It is a 5 year ego-trip for political hasbeens that are at the end of their career because they would cost the party votes at the next general election if they were to stand for election. Their views are, therefore, rather fringe and totally irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. They might stir up local by-elections, but their existence is merely a blip on the national election radar. Just like that other MEP you idolize, Nigel Farage.

You can, therefore, rest assured that this man is one of a very, very small minority in the UK.

[Nakura Chambers]

Not really, the Lib Dems used to regularly poll 25-30% of the vote, but never gained anything like a quarter of the seats, and they only became a relevance when the Tories couldn't get a majority. From Thatcher until Blair, the third party in British politics has been meaningless.

As you know, first past the post means that there is no point in being the second most popular party in every constituency, if you can't be the most popular in any of them.

There hasn't been anything to show they will win a large number of seats, and even if they win a few it will likely be an insignificant amount - they wouldn't even be considered as possible partners in a coalition, as they don't have any common ground with the Tories or Labour.

There have already been moves for a UKIP-Tory coalition, even before the next election takes places and the next government is formed. "Insignificant?" Right. Is that why all three of the other parties are scared? Is that why they are likely going to enter a coalition, because they're "insignificant?"