In the Abacus poll, 46 per cent of respondents said they would support Canada becoming a member state of the EU, and 44 per cent said the Canadian government should definitely or probably look into joining it.
In the Abacus poll, 46 per cent of respondents said they would support Canada becoming a member state of the EU, and 44 per cent said the Canadian government should definitely or probably look into joining it.
The European Union could help safeguard those borders.
Since we/The EU will be soon buying even more US weapons, I seriously doubt that.
What was once a region of the world populated with so many smart and bright people has now become the proud land of the dumb. The EU is like a headless chicken running around. And it seems rather happy about what it has become, I’m afraid to say so.
There are people happy about what it is becoming*
The EU is not a finished project :)
Thx for helping me improve my lacking English. Much appreciated (I mean, really ;)
Are you sure about that?
I mean, looking at who people are actually voting for (here again, an existential grammar doubt if you don’t mind me asking: should I instead say ‘who they voted for’ or ‘who they vote for’ as it’s an ongoing and repetitive action but also an already finished task since, obviously, we can count their votes?) Back to what I was saying: people are voting not for the EU and have been voting not for the EU more and more openly. And to me votes is the only data worth considering when discussing politics, not what people may say out loud. Their vote is them being honest with themselves, not trying to look good.
Like with our dear US-friends swearing they hate on Trump and on his politics but still have elected the dude twice.
Should we think Trump is really just that, a sad accident that happened twice (almost) in a row in the history of the USA, or wouldn’t it be safer to consider the possibility that, maybe, a majority of the US population is indeed supporting what they voted for twice and that they want their country to become exactly what it is becoming? And they want their leaders to treat the rest of the world like they’re doing?
As a fervent EU proponent myself, I wish to see some meaningful election giving me hope we still have some common future as a Union, and not just because we share some common borders.
Your English wasn’t incorrect, it’s that disagreed with what you wrote. You used it has become which is the tense you use for something completed (as in, it has finished), while I believe it is not completed and for that reason wrote is becoming which is the same verb but in a different tense (as in, it is happening). I’m no native speaker, so might not be the best explanation. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong.
I think in your last comment all forms are all correct, and the tense in which you the verb to vote has different nuance but i wouldn’t think something of it in this particular case. If you use ‘are voting for’ you basically mean how people would vote if they would have to vote today (or this week) and you would use ‘voted for’ mainly if it is relevant that it is different then how people would vote today. (Will) vote for, is voting for, will be voting are basically interchangeable, unless I am missing the nuance myself. You explain it correctly yourself so I think you understand it but I made you doubt yourself. Sorry for that.
There are many politicians who consider the EU as not fully formed. The changes don’t happen very fast, but it is in my view still an ongoing proces. For example, which countries are part of it continues to change (England left and others joined, more will likely join later), the euro itself hasn’t changed but the countries it is used in still changes (Bulgaria is expected to switch over to the Euro next year) and also what is and isn’t in the Schengen area changes, even this year with Gibraltar joining.
Another example of how, according to some, the EU would be more finished is with a ‘multi-tier membership options’, in which some countries have a tighter bond to the EU and others have a looser (think of how Norway and Switzerland aren’t in the EU, but they are not entirely outside of it either).
There is lot has already been decided, so maybe it is already 90% finished, but there still is an ongoing debate on what the EU should end up looking like.
Since brexit leaving the EU hasn’t looked like a very attractive option but still there is a lot of discussion on whether the EU should be smaller (e.g. having borders controlled by each individual member-state) or bigger (e.g. having a single combined army). In other words, there is still room to decide on what topics the EU should be big and on which it should be small. That makes the EU as it is right now very different than the US for example, where most of the expansion and integration happened two to three centuries ago (around the civil war mainly I think, but I’m no expert on US history either).