To repeat an old correction, the commission president candidates were not on voting papers:
It where not commission president candidates either, but that even seems to confuse you. It are basicly C candidates, so first the EU n eeds to call out populism because looking in the mirror isn't possible, it always breaks. Then they start in brown envelloppe style talking about who has the done the most dodgy deals to justify then candidate, and this ''19 elections Germany had someone so incompetent that the person would be perfectly fit to chair the Eu and the rest is history. And considering the impressive amount of failures so far they really found the best candidate.
And the green deal eu bobo could'nt be a better choice, when he announced his candidacy he had to make a PR photo in the train because the last picture of him in a train was 20 years ago.. live is good in a EU diesel limousine.
But it turns out election froms are quite confusing and differ a lot per member state not only with different country candidates but belgium for example his certain ''voting districts'' where poeple can only voto within their district.
It does not take away that the system of spritzencanidat still is very confusing and bad for the trust in Eu democracy. seperate from the fact that it is a dream on itself.
Was it bad for the impression of UK democracy every time the pre-election leader of the largest party after the election didn't survive as prime minister?
It was, but like i said before, that the uk might be an bad example now doesn't make the EU any better or worse they are two seperate things. i know it's popular on this forum the say the tories suck balls, and maybe they do but that is not important while discussing the eu. I once again report back to your own words(granted you had fancier words to say the same) that the uk is old king ruled country converted into a democracy the EU doesn't have that, so it should be better. Yet time and time again it turns out not to be the case.
