I don't speak Spanish >.< Chavez in critical condition

[luiz]

You can get your points across without those words, and you know it. You do it for effect and it works, annoyingly.

I don't think "caudillo" is an inflammatory word. Even if it is, it's a perfect description of Chávez and I explained why in detail. Dictator is a bit more of a stretch, but still hardly inflammatory. In the aftermath of the 2010 elections calling Chávez a dictator is appropriate IMO, as it seems that he will just use discretionary power to effectively nullify any election that goes against his wishes.

And my point was only that the opposition can't be too strong, well liked, or filled with ideas if they STILL can't take down Chavez (after the 2010 elections, the PSUV barely won the popular vote but still has 33 more seats). If you recall, I have never been a Chavez supporter, but the opposition hasn't given the Venezuelan people much more hope.

That's the thing: the PSUV lost the popular vote (they got 48.2% of the popular vote, compared to 47.17% of MUD and 3.14% of PPT - both of which are opposition parties. So the opposition got over 50% popular vote). PSUV only got a lot more seats because Chávez messed up the districts just shortly before the elections. They managed to nearly win a 2/3 majority even though the opposition got more votes.

Not only did they win the popular vote, but fact is the opposition faced an uphill battle from the start. Chávez controls a vast propaganda machine, and has shut down dozens of radios and newspapers that supported the opposition. He even shut down RCTV, the strongest media company opposed to him. Several key opposition figueres were arrested on bogus charges, including governors and mayors. Judges that rule in favour of opposition politicians were sacked.

And if the above was not enough, Chávez knew that by messing up the districts he could assure a big majority, but not a 2/3rds majority needed to re-write the Constitution as he wishes. So he made the old Congress, which was still 100% controlled by his party, pass a law just shortly before the elections that would give Chávez the power to rule by decree in the next years, including changes to the Constitution. The excuse used was the usual natural catastrophes, but the effect was to make Congress useless and the last elections null.

So if I can't accuse this man of being a caudillo and employing dictatorial tactics we might as well abolish those words.

 

[Ajidica]

Winning an election even though he lost the popular election is hardly unheard of, otherwise Bush Jr. is a dictator. Gore/Nader got over 50% of the vote, but they weren't running together so Bush Jr. got lucky with his <50% vote.

While you can call him a dictator for other things, calling him a dictator for winning the election with less then 50% of the vote if it is a multi party election is dishonest.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

If he dies, they'll probably add him to Tropico

 

[luiz]

Winning an election even though he lost the popular election is hardly unheard of, otherwise Bush Jr. is a dictator. Gore/Nader got over 50% of the vote, but they weren't running together so Bush Jr. got lucky with his <50% vote.

While you can call him a dictator for other things, calling him a dictator for winning the election with less then 50% of the vote if it is a multi party election is dishonest.

Read the whole post. I was not calling Chávez a dictator "just" for winning the election while losing the popular vote.

He changed the rules just shortly before the elections. Did Bush change the rule shortly before the elections? No, he wasn't even the incumbent.

There's also the brutal harassment of the opposition, including arresting several of its highest profile politicians, sacking judges who tried to stop this, and shutting down (literally) dozens of radios and newspapers, as well as the country's biggest TV station.

And then there's the Rule by Decree Law which he passed right after the elections which made sure that losing his 2/3rds majority would be completely meaningless. In fact, Congress for the next couple of years is meaningless.

So where is the dishonesty and how are any comparissons with Bush even remotely valid?

 

[JollyRoger]

That's the thing: the PSUV lost the popular vote (they got 48.2% of the popular vote, compared to 47.17% of MUD and 3.14% of PPT - both of which are opposition parties. So the opposition got over 50% popular vote). PSUV only got a lot more seats because Chávez messed up the districts just shortly before the elections. They managed to nearly win a 2/3 majority even though the opposition got more votes.

Bush lost to Gore & Nader. Most states in the U.S. can gerrymander where representative ratios are out of sync with popular ratios. Chavez could probably make a competent governor of Texas.

 

[RedRalph]

As we almost all agreed last time we discussed this, gerrymandering, while not particularly kosher, is a widespread practise all across the world. it happens all the time and the idea that it makes him a dictator is laughable. But, you know, you have to question some people's ability to define political terminology.

 

[luiz]

What you got to question is the reading skills of some people who claim to be adults.

Let me re-phrase my argument for calling him a dictator in a way an average 7 year old can understand:

It's not only the gerrymandering, kids!

1.He changed the rules just shortly before the elections. Did Bush change the rule shortly before the elections? No, he wasn't even the incumbent.

2. There's also the brutal harassment of the opposition, including arresting several of its highest profile politicians, sacking judges who tried to stop this, and shutting down (literally) dozens of radios and newspapers, as well as the country's biggest TV station.

3.And then there's the Rule by Decree Law which he passed right after the elections which made sure that losing his 2/3rds majority would be completely meaningless. In fact, Congress for the next couple of years is meaningless.

1+2+3 does no equal "just gerrymandering"!

Would drawing a picture help?

Moderator Action: In your next post try not to insult people. It doesn't help in getting your point through either.

 

[luiz]

Sorry about that.

Clearly the above post was the first insulting and trollish post on this entire thread, and clearly I am the one who has been trolling and generally trying to drag this discussion into the mud.

I applaud CFC's unbiased modding, really, you guys do a great job, keep it up.

 

[JollyRoger]

Would drawing a picture help?

We'll see:

The point is, that Chavez seems very competent at things that go on all over the world - manipulating the system to his advantage. That doesn't make him a dictator, though.

 

[RedRalph]

Sorry about that.

Clearly the above post was the first insulting and trollish post on this entire thread, and clearly I am the one who has been trolling and generally trying to drag this discussion into the mud.

I applaud CFC's unbiased modding, really, you guys do a great job, keep it up.

You know, it can be hard to admit one's errors, and I applaud you for doing so. I should probably do so more often myself.

And I agree, the mods do a great job.

 

[civ_king]

We'll see:

The point is, that Chavez seems very competent at things that go on all over the world - manipulating the system to his advantage. That doesn't make him a dictator, though.

Mine is more purdy

 

[El_Machinae]

Moderator Action: Thread closed on time-out. PM a mod for a re-opening
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889