Trump calls to congratulate Erdogan after votes grant sweeping powers

[IAMX 3,055]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

You can be fine with it, that's okay. I was specifically addressing another poster claiming Trump was "democratically elected".

 

He was PROPERLY elected, based on our current rules, to be sure. But our current rules for electing the President is not through a "democratic" process. It is through a system of representatives.

How to pedant over petty details. 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

3 hours ago, IAMX said:

Putin - Democratically elected

Its not so much that Putin was democratically elected it was just that all of his opponents just seemed to fade away.

Murdering enemies

The list of people suspected murdered on orders from the Russian leader or people close to him is long. It includes several of Putin’s early critics (paywall), among them liberal politician Boris Nemtsov, investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya, and exiled former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko. A UK government report showed that Litvinenko’s death—he was poisoned using polonium in London—while was “probably” approved by Putin.

Both Politkovskaya and Litvinenko had tried to investigate a series of bombings in 1999, when Putin was prime minister, that killed some 300 people in four Russian cities. The authorities blamed the bombings on Chechen rebels and used them as a pretext to unleash a war on Chechnya, but there are strong suspicions 1 that they were a “false-flag” attack by Russia’s own own security services.

3 hours ago, IAMX said:

 

 

I can see why this offends the left. Dictators when it doesn't go their way, democracy when it does.

 

 

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, ccneat said:

Its not so much that Putin was democratically elected it was just that all of his opponents just seemed to fade away.

Murdering enemies

The list of people suspected murdered on orders from the Russian leader or people close to him is long. It includes several of Putin’s early critics (paywall), among them liberal politician Boris Nemtsov, investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya, and exiled former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko. A UK government report showed that Litvinenko’s death—he was poisoned using polonium in London—while was “probably” approved by Putin.

Both Politkovskaya and Litvinenko had tried to investigate a series of bombings in 1999, when Putin was prime minister, that killed some 300 people in four Russian cities. The authorities blamed the bombings on Chechen rebels and used them as a pretext to unleash a war on Chechnya, but there are strong suspicions 1 that they were a “false-flag” attack by Russia’s own own security services.

 

 

"Anonymous sources"

 

 

[Dashinka 24,964]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

You can be fine with it, that's okay. I was specifically addressing another poster claiming Trump was "democratically elected".

 

He was PROPERLY elected, based on our current rules, to be sure. But our current rules for electing the President is not through a "democratic" process. It is through a system of representatives.

It might be more appropriate to say he was Constitutionally elected.  Since much like socialism fails as an economic system, true democracies are also prone to failure.

[CaliCat 3,957]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

It might be more appropriate to say he was Constitutionally elected.  Since much like socialism fails as an economic system, true democracies are also prone to failure.

 

In the case of the last election it was the Constitutional process that caused true democracy to fail.

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, CaliCat said:

 

In the case of the last election it was the Constitutional process that caused true democracy to fail.

Then you can say that about elections the last 2 centuries because it's never changed. 

 

But it's cute to see people suddenly stop believing in a Democratic process just because the outcome doesn't go their way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bcking 3,157]

23 minutes ago, IAMX said:

How to pedant over petty details. 

I don't consider whether someone was elected by a democracy a "petty" detail. You seemed to have not known the difference, and it is quite a big one.

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, bcking said:

I don't consider whether someone was elected by a democracy a "petty" detail. You seemed to have not known the difference, and it is quite a big one.

Trump's election was considered by people in English speaking countries to be democratic. If one chooses to pedant over a narrow/specific definition of it, that's their problem. Have fun with it.

[bcking 3,157]

3 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Trump's election was considered by people in English speaking countries to be democratic. If one chooses to pedant over a narrow/specific definition of it, that's their problem. Have fun with it.

Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true.

 

The truth is it wasn't a democratic election. Our presidential election never has been. What people "consider" doesn't matter.

[IAMX 3,055]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true.

 

The truth is it wasn't a democratic election. Our presidential election never has been. What people "consider" doesn't matter.

Nah, it was democratic. A random person on the internet believing it isn't because of his own definitions of what democratic is, is 100% irrelevant.

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, IAMX said:

Nah, it was democratic. A random person on the internet believing it isn't because of his own definitions of what democratic is, is 100% irrelevant.

...You can believe whatever you want but it really wasn't. Democracy has a specific meaning, and our presidential election does not apply that specific meeting. The president was elected by "electors". The democratic vote did not decide the outcome, it was decided by the total number of electors.

 

Our country has a mixture of both democratic institutions and republican ones. Our presidential election, since it's inception, was not designed to be a democratic election process. We only added the popular vote after the fact, and even then it doesn't actually decide the victor.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

37 minutes ago, IAMX said:

"Anonymous sources"

 

 

Not really this is in what you would call the fake news ..very public.  Not sure how you can defend Putin.

[IAMX 3,055]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

...You can believe whatever you want but it really wasn't. Democracy has a specific meaning, and our presidential election does not apply that specific meeting. The president was elected by "electors". The democratic vote did not decide the outcome, it was decided by the total number of electors.

 

Our country has a mixture of both democratic institutions and republican ones. Our presidential election, since it's inception, was not designed to be a democratic election process. We only added the popular vote after the fact, and even then it doesn't actually decide the victor.

The popular votes are in the states. The college is a foregone conclusion. 

 

However, when people say someone was democratically elected, it's clear they mean they were elected by their populace, whether through "direct" democracy or otherwise. The difference is irrelevant, except to those who wish to pedant on their own narrow definition of "democracy" which is irrelevant. Feel free to keep trying to prove this to yourself.

 

 

2 minutes ago, ccneat said:

Not really this is in what you would call the fake news ..very public.  Not sure how you can defend Putin.

Must be in bed with the Russians. #Resist

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, IAMX said:

The popular votes are in the states. The college is a foregone conclusion. 

 

However, when people say someone was democratically elected, it's clear they mean they were elected by their populace, whether through "direct" democracy or otherwise. The difference is irrelevant, except to those who wish to pedant on their own narrow definition of "democracy" which is irrelevant. Feel free to keep trying to prove this to yourself.

 

A democratic election would be, as you state, an election by the populace. 

 

A democratic election therefore would not elect someone who did not obtain a majority of the vote of the populace.

 

Our system allows for that to happen because it is not a purely democratic process. You can try to cover the fact that you were wrong by saying it "doesn't matter", but you not caring doesn't mean the distinction isn't important.

 

I'll just leave it at that since this is going nowhere.

[Dashinka 24,964]

16 minutes ago, bcking said:

Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true.

 

The truth is it wasn't a democratic election. Our presidential election never has been. What people "consider" doesn't matter.

I agree, it wasn't democratic and it wasn't supposed to be.  Democracies are not the best form of government especially from the eyes of the minorities.  Trump's election was in fact Constitutional which is all that should matter to people.  As I said before, the President is not supposed to be a direct representative to the people.  This is very similar to Canada's and Britain's parliamentary government.  How do you think the PMs are chosen in those countries?