Macedonia referendum: Balkan nation fails to approve EU and NATO membership

[-:Undertaker:-]

It made me laugh, Bliar was asked what would happen in the event of a second Leave vote and he said...

LISTEN: Blair Doesn't Rule Out THIRD Referendum https://t.co/i2icdohQ5r pic.twitter.com/JGDJ5OcRqt

— Global Guido (@GloboGuido) January 4, 2018

Ok but 4real this one IS meant to be ignored right that's the point of invalidating it

It depends. Given the measure did not pass, the EU has no grounds to continue with membership talks. If they do proceed with EU membership for Macedonia, then they have no grounds to do so given the referendum on the issue was invalid.

[lawrawrrr]

36% turnout is shockingly poor for something as big as changing your country's NAME???

[dbgtz]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7453378.stm
https://leave-the-eu.com/eu-quotes/
http://www.politicalscrapbook.co.uk/...eat-eu-quotes/

"The No vote in Ireland has not solved the problems which the Lisbon Treaty is designed to solve... The European Commission believes the remaining ratifications should continue to take their course... The treaty is not dead. I believe the treaty is alive." - Jose Manuel Barroso, EU Commission President

"Naturally we are disappointed, it is a hard blow. Nevertheless, I am convinced that we need this treaty. Therefore we are sticking with our goal for it to come into force. The ratification process must continue." - The then-German Foreign Minister

“[Norway] held a referendum [on the EU] that went the wrong way.” - Lord Hurd, former British Foreign Secretary

“If it’s a Yes we will say “on we go”, and if it’s a No we will say “we continue”.’ - Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Council

“The substance of the Constitution is preserved. That is a fact.” - German Chancellor Angela Merkel on the Lisbon Treaty

“They must go on voting until they get it right.” - Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission

“I believe neither the French nor the Dutch really rejected the constitutional treaty.” - Jean-Claude Juncker, Prime Minister of Luxembourg

“Let’s be clear about this. The rejection of the constitution was a mistake that will have to be corrected.” - Valéry Giscard d’Estaing

“The ‘no’ votes were a demand for more Europe, not less.” - Romano Prodi, former President of the European Commission

I'm going to start this bit by saying an unreputable site with a date attached to some words is not a credible source. So that's that last site ignored as a search in a few of those quotes brings up nothing.
In the second site I actually googled one of the articles in that "despite brexit" part and it literally said "However, the UK's vote to leave the EU meant that Ryanair had reduced its planned UK growth in 2017 from 12% to about 5%.". I also googled about the quote with Viviane Reding and it's actually a partially false quote so hardly the most unbiased of sources there.

So the only ones there that can be somewhat fairly attributed, especially since they're "pro eu".
In quote #1 Barroso said it was going ahead, didn't say they were forcing Ireland in it. As can be seen in many things such as the Euro.
quote #4 looking at it and the context, what it seems to actually be saying is either they go ahead with the treaty changes or continue as they are. Why would they flat out say they were ignoring it? That would only damage their image.
quote #6 I can't find any context of, so quite frankly "they" could refer to the law makers i.e. the legislation has to be right for the people otherwise they would just keep voting no, surely?
quote #9 I can't find any evidence of anywhere.

I ignored the others as if it is as bad as you think (didn't really read into it), then it only highlights my initial point that your issues are with individual governments than the EU itself.

The direction of the EU is ultimately made by the Commission, ECJ and the member states in the Council of Ministers. If they accepted a democratic outcome, such as the rejection of the European Constitution, then that would be the end of it. No more integration. But as such, the EU and those pushing European integration never accept no for an answer - so the project marches in regardless, known as the rachet effect.

Right except you didn't actually address any point I just made. The "EU institutions" (which involve representatives of all member states) may choose the direction, but no member state is forced into anything. That's why you have so many segmentations and opt outs and all that Jazz.

And as for multiple referendums, I find it strange that you're arguing being made to vote over and over again is perfectly fine yet only before we voted to Leave I recall you arguing that we shouldn't be having a referendum (despite the last one being over 40 years ago) as we were too stupid or something to know enough about it. Yet now you're seemingly in favour of more referendums! - until you get a certain outcome.

That's all completely irrelevant to what I just said. Just because I disagree with referendums doesn't mean I'm too dumb to recognise the change of circumstance between the first and the second.

[FlyingJesus]

It depends. Given the measure did not pass, the EU has no grounds to continue with membership talks. If they do proceed with EU membership for Macedonia, then they have no grounds to do so given the referendum on the issue was invalid.

A referendum isn't a requirement of entry though so they definitely still have grounds to carry on with talks - the low turnout means that this referendum essentially never happened either way and can't affect anything

[-:Undertaker:-]

So the only ones there that can be somewhat fairly attributed, especially since they're "pro eu".In quote #1 Barroso said it was going ahead, didn't say they were forcing Ireland in it. As can be seen in many things such as the Euro.

Excuse me, but how exactly can a country "opt-out" of a Constitution which is to become the main pillars of EU law? If you knew anything about Lisbon you'd know it changed the EU's legal framework from the former pillars/treaty model. Barroso was quite clear, that despite democratic rejections of the countries lucky enough to vote on it - it wasn't going to stop it.

quote #4 looking at it and the context, what it seems to actually be saying is either they go ahead with the treaty changes or continue as they are. Why would they flat out say they were ignoring it? That would only damage their image.

The quotes I have posted are only a small fraction of the frankly hideous things we've heard over the years from the mouths of those behind European integration. You only needs to look at Jean Monnet, Jacques Delor and so on quotes to see just how little they care about what people think about their project - and why should they care what our image of them is like? We can't exactly vote them out.

quote #6 I can't find any context of, so quite frankly "they" could refer to the law makers i.e. the legislation has to be right for the people otherwise they would just keep voting no, surely?

Oh dear... well you can believe that if you wish.

I ignored the others as if it is as bad as you think (didn't really read into it), then it only highlights my initial point that your issues are with individual governments than the EU itself.

My issue is with both. But ultimately, those who support and advance European integration in both the European Union itself and from within national governments are those I have an issue with. They're building a state and outright ignore what people actually want in regards to it. How crazy is that?

Let me ask you, why do you think they fear public opinion on this issue? Do you think people want more European integration?

A referendum isn't a requirement of entry though so they definitely still have grounds to carry on with talks - the low turnout means that this referendum essentially never happened either way and can't affect anything

It depends if Macedonian constitutional law requires referenda on these issues, which was my impression.

If it does, and the referendum failed to pass, then there is no mandate to press ahead.

[dbgtz]

Excuse me, but how exactly can a country "opt-out" of a Constitution which is to become the main pillars of EU law? If you knew anything about Lisbon you'd know it changed the EU's legal framework from the former pillars/treaty model. Barroso was quite clear, that despite democratic rejections of the countries lucky enough to vote on it - it wasn't going to stop it.

I'll read up on this at some point and get back to this

The quotes I have posted are only a small fraction of the frankly hideous things we've heard over the years from the mouths of those behind European integration. You only needs to look at Jean Monnet, Jacques Delor and so on quotes to see just how little they care about what people think about their project - and why should they care what our image of them is like? We can't exactly vote them out.

The quotes which most seem to to be either edited, deliberately misquoted, lacking any real souce or even outright false?
You also can't vote out any member of government but I don't see you complaining about that.

Oh dear... well you can believe that if you wish.

Maybe provide some actual context to the quote than be patronising.

My issue is with both. But ultimately, those who support and advance European integration in both the European Union itself and from within national governments are those I have an issue with. They're building a state and outright ignore what people actually want in regards to it. How crazy is that?

Let me ask you, why do you think they fear public opinion on this issue? Do you think people want more European integration?

No real evidence "they're" building a state. Yes, I'm sure you can find evidence of people who will like it but I can't see any grand conspiracy to create the EU Superstate™. No evidence suggests "they" fear public opinion. It is also pointless to speculate at what people want.

Nice ignoring the latter parts of what I said though