RayC

I'm afraid that you must have landed on one of those misinformation sites then. Your comment is incorrect. A member of the UK public can post whatever they want on social media so long as what is posted does break any laws. That's how things work throughout the rest of Europe as well.

Can you elaborate please?

That may be true? Unfortunately, many parts of the world have never had free elections. Those of us in Western Europe do. Agreed Misplaced, condescending arrogance without a shred of evidence to support it.

You implied that the recent German election was not free and fair, it is therefore up to you to provide evidence to support that contention not for others to disprove it.

Well, there's a simple solution ....

And whose fault was that? The UK seemed to think that it could have all the benefits of the Single Market and Customs Union without any of the obligations and responsibilities associated with it. When the EU, unsurprisingly, said that such 'cherry picking' wasn't acceptable, the UK was at a total loss regarding what its' next step should be.

So your accusations are baseless then.

Disappointing. I'd never previously thought of you as a member of the 'Mindless Ranter' brigade.

(Nearly missed this latest excuse for the Brexit disaster). Over 5 years and 3 presidents - Trump 1 & 2 + Biden - since we left the EU and not a sign of a trade deal with the US - or China or India for that matter - and that's all Lammy's and Starmer's fault for calling Trump some hurty words. Yeah, right.

And that's the nub of it. The accusation of 'EU interference' is a regular occurrence. However, when challenged to provide evidence to support this accusation, nothing of any substance is supplied. The replies usually entail some sort of conspiracy theory.

Policing, Welfare, Health care, the Armed Forces. That's off the top of my head. Most law which originated from the EU is either directly or indirectly related to protecting the integrity of the Single Market and/or Customs Union. In any event, wherever EU law holds primacy, it is only because the Member States agreed (voted) to delegate responsibility to Brussels.

It's a strange sort of authoritarian, (almost) totalitarian institution that allows a member state to leave by simply submitting an Article 50 letter, don't you think? You can hardly blame the EU because you swallowed the 'they need us more than we need them' pill.

And yet - as Brexit proved - each individual member state is perfectly entitled to leave this authoritarian, (almost) totalitarian institution if it wants.

I'd classify national elections as important, wouldn't you?

Where there is a conflict EU law does indeed have primacy over the domestic laws of the EU member states but there are many areas, such as this, which are matters of domestic, not EU, law so your conclusion is incorrect.

I certainly don't have the answers for everything but I have opinions on subjects where I have some knowledge e.g. the EU. I avoid commenting on subjects where I have little knowledge. It works for me. I don't have a patent on it, so feel free to try it out yourself. The President of the European Commission will have previously been a politician in their home country and will therefore have a personal political bias as will members of the European Parliament. And? Really? Any evidence to support those accusations? The links you provide certainly don't. What has that to do with the EU institutions? I'd suggest that depends on the results of May's re-run election. In any event, Romania 2025 is different to Ukraine 2014. Imo you are correct: The US did 'fuel the flames' of the Maïdan révolution but it was exactly that: The fire was already raging. Assuming that the Trump administration has any interest in reducing Russian influence in Romania this time, the US will have to be a lot more direct and active.

😂 Did you deliberately forget to include Kenneth Williams?

No. If they did Hungary and Italy would have different leaders.

No.

Do I really need to explain the difference between 'cheering on' and 'direct involvement'?

Again, no idea. The linked article talks about 3 domestic issues in Romania, Germany and the UK - which I repeat is NOT an EU member state - and makes only passing reference to the EU. The linked article is tangential to the headline of this thread, 'The EU Is Authoritarian and Hates Democracy', and certainly does not offer much in the way of evidence to support your contention.

The EU did not negate the results of the Romanian election. That is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact. You should stop posting misinformation.

No idea. With apologies to any Romanian readers I have little interest in their domestic politics. I suggest that you research the matter if you are that interested.

Dude is not President. The Romanian Supreme Court ruled against him. The EU are not involved.

Romania is a member of the EU. National elections are the responsibility of the individual member states and independent of the EU. The judiciaries in the individual member states are independent of the EU. The interpretation of national law is a matter for the individual member states' judiciaries. You really should familarise yourself with some of the basic facts about the relationship between the individual member states and the EU institutions.