Politics

Discussion relating to current events, politics, religion, etc
Message
Author
User avatar
mockbee
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:05 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Politics

#51 Post by mockbee » Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:03 pm

We've had celebrity candidates win every presidential election, with the exeption of HW Bush, for the last 40 years. Why would that change now? If anything, it is just astronomically more imperative to be a celebrity. If Democrats put up boring policy person or person who does not dominate the media game, they will lose.

Not speaking to populist platform above of course. But Bernie is almost a populist, his credo is approaching anti-corporate and anti-globalist. I think that's what really piqued the interest of not on left coast/east coast/college campus.
Dems can't run their typical campaign. Globalization is not working for a lot of people. Middle America isn't going to spring for an all out "european" democratic socialist platform, but many of the policies would be well received. I think a lot like the ACA if that makes sense. The delivery and bravado is key.
I'd say the best scenario is run as a leftist populist and govern as a democratic socialist.
:noclue:

User avatar
mockbee
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:05 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Politics

#52 Post by mockbee » Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:48 pm

Even then, I don't really see how that works. People are fed up. Yeah, populism is dangerous, but I really don't see how we avoid an elitist backlash with people being more and more squeezed.

I really don't see a wave of pragmatism sweeping the nation. Maybe the view is different from up there. :lol:

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#53 Post by SR » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:25 am

Hype wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:02 am
SR wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:27 am
Yup; he is. I almost put up Michelle, but I believe her when she says she won't run. My omission was because he'd been mentioned and I don't like him. And yes,

Beto
Just as I predicted for Clinton (who I preferred over Obama in the run-up to 2008), I feel like I need to reassert the very same claim that I made back then: the United States is racist, but it is still more misogynist. As great as many of the current crop of Democratic women leaders are (Kirsten Gillibrand is awesome, Warren is impeccable, etc), put up against Trump, they will lose, even though they shouldn't. But a light-skinned, Ivy-educated black dude with balls like Booker will have an advantage, especially if vying for the nomination against Bernie. I realize race and gender shouldn't be playing a role in this at all, and all things considered, I'd prefer a far-left candidate (further left than Sanders). But in the spirit of unseating an incumbent President with an insane populist base? ... I have to go with a democratic quasi-sociopath centrist man.
The US just elected a record number of women to congress. That isn't to say we aren't more mysogonistic than racist, but we'll never know, though I tend to disagree. Polling suggests that people who state they will vote for a woman, will...and those who state they'll vote for a black candidate, will not. Too, voter suppression efforts are accomplished in plain sight and universally targeted at the black vote, only half of which are women. I think a light skinned woman with balls may have a real shot; Kamala is flawed, but I think a strong choice. She is more than able to field trump's ad hominems. The elecrtoral college has something to say here as we learned yet again in '16. Popular votes favored a woman by 3 million votes. Warren scares me. Because of the populist/nationalist tendemcies that helped trump to the throne, she would be red meat for trump in a campaign. And it shouldn't be forgotton that our racism extends well beyond those who reside here.

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#54 Post by SR » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:41 am

mockbee wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 1:41 pm
Hype wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:28 pm
SR wrote:
Fri Nov 09, 2018 8:16 am
These are some of the dems that I think will take the field in '20

Beto
Gillum
Harris
Gillibrand
Sanders
Warren
Biden
Cuomo
Holder
Booker is a big deal. Also, Fox News must think so too, because they're using Michael Moore to suggest that Americans don't like him enough. https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/m ... elle-obama

“No," he said about Harris. "Love her. No, not going to happen. Cory — love him. No. We cannot run a politician against [Trump]. We will lose.”
I'll admit that Moore is an opportunist, but he was right about Trump very early on, and he is right about 2020.

With the electoral college, if rural issues, such as quality jobs, quality healthcare, addressing the opioid crisis and quality education for the rural working class isn't addressed; Trump will win in 2020. He doesn't give a damn about those issues, but he's a mouthpiece for the fear and anger of being left behind. Somehow make those issues provocatively dramatic and democrats have something. Lip service from Democrats in Washington isn't going to cut it. Someone from outside or just arrived who loves limelight and knows how to handle the media has to step up. Barrack Obama was a perfect example in 2008. It's not that specific issues aren't being addressed (even though they are not), it's the emotion of being left behind that people are voting on.

Trump is a master manipulator and somehow many Democrats and most of the media still don't get it, they take the bait every time. Actually, more concerning is that I think big media totally gets it... they have a stake in this as well, mayhem is their bread and butter. Policy is boring.

Kanye 2024


:wavesad:
Trump's base is shrinking. That is a fact. But I also think another sector with the same issues will ascend to replace it. Yuval Harari mentions this in Sapiens....the useless class. Sooner, rather than later simply stating that coal jobs and Blockbuster will return will cease to pass the acid test. The reality is that the obsolete worker will continue to grow, and they can't be lied to forever. What you label celebrity is really charisma and though it will remain a requisite characteristic, it will have to be paired with strength and compassion (and real leadership). As for the remaining base trump maintains, they'll follow him no matter the dischord and repulsive bs he vomits. Ok, but two years won't make a huge difference. He just demonstrated he can turn out huge numbers in the mids.

User avatar
Hype
Posts: 7028
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm

Re: Politics

#55 Post by Hype » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:55 am

mockbee wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:48 pm
Even then, I don't really see how that works. People are fed up. Yeah, populism is dangerous, but I really don't see how we avoid an elitist backlash with people being more and more squeezed.

I really don't see a wave of pragmatism sweeping the nation. Maybe the view is different from up there. :lol:
You do it by removing fear. Obama was exceptionally good at this, despite the bigot backlash from like, the KKK, and people who are going to be angry no matter what happens. But a significant amount of the anger that motivates protest voting is manipulated (by Facebook, by Fox, etc). And it can be destroyed. The Democrats have just been struggling to figure out how to do that with 70 year old candidates. Trump succeeded because of a carefully orchestrated campaign (not his own doing, but Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, Sheldon Adelson, and almost certainly Russian money and influence), and he couldn't even get a majority of the votes -- so they had to game the electoral college in a way that the Democrats weren't prepared for. They should be prepared for it now.

I think it's a mistake to think enough Democrats will vote for Sanders in 2020, over a sitting President (even one as stupid and gross as DJT).

Don't forget that four years is long enough for a lot of people at the beginning and end of their voting lives to turn 18 or die.

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#56 Post by SR » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:59 am

Hype wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:55 am
mockbee wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:48 pm
Even then, I don't really see how that works. People are fed up. Yeah, populism is dangerous, but I really don't see how we avoid an elitist backlash with people being more and more squeezed.

I really don't see a wave of pragmatism sweeping the nation. Maybe the view is different from up there. :lol:
You do it by removing fear. Obama was exceptionally good at this, despite the bigot backlash from like, the KKK, and people who are going to be angry no matter what happens. But a significant amount of the anger that motivates protest voting is manipulated (by Facebook, by Fox, etc). And it can be destroyed. The Democrats have just been struggling to figure out how to do that with 70 year old candidates. Trump succeeded because of a carefully orchestrated campaign (not his own doing, but Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, Sheldon Adelson, and almost certainly Russian money and influence...and Brad Parscale), and he couldn't even get a majority of the votes -- so they had to game the electoral college in a way that the Democrats weren't prepared for. They should be prepared for it now.

I think it's a mistake to think enough Democrats will vote for Sanders in 2020, over a sitting President (even one as stupid and gross as DJT).

Don't forget that four years is long enough for a lot of people at the beginning and end of their voting lives to turn 18 or die.

User avatar
mockbee
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:05 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Politics

#57 Post by mockbee » Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:21 pm

SR wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:41 am
mockbee wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 1:41 pm


I'll admit that Moore is an opportunist, but he was right about Trump very early on, and he is right about 2020.

With the electoral college, if rural issues, such as quality jobs, quality healthcare, addressing the opioid crisis and quality education for the rural working class isn't addressed; Trump will win in 2020. He doesn't give a damn about those issues, but he's a mouthpiece for the fear and anger of being left behind. Somehow make those issues provocatively dramatic and democrats have something. Lip service from Democrats in Washington isn't going to cut it. Someone from outside or just arrived who loves limelight and knows how to handle the media has to step up. Barrack Obama was a perfect example in 2008. It's not that specific issues aren't being addressed (even though they are not), it's the emotion of being left behind that people are voting on.

Trump is a master manipulator and somehow many Democrats and most of the media still don't get it, they take the bait every time. Actually, more concerning is that I think big media totally gets it... they have a stake in this as well, mayhem is their bread and butter. Policy is boring.

Kanye 2024


:wavesad:
Trump's base is shrinking. That is a fact. But I also think another sector with the same issues will ascend to replace it. Yuval Harari mentions this in Sapiens....the useless class. Sooner, rather than later simply stating that coal jobs and Blockbuster will return will cease to pass the acid test. The reality is that the obsolete worker will continue to grow, and they can't be lied to forever. What you label celebrity is really charisma and though it will remain a requisite characteristic, it will have to be paired with strength and compassion (and real leadership). As for the remaining base trump maintains, they'll follow him no matter the dischord and repulsive bs he vomits. Ok, but two years won't make a huge difference. He just demonstrated he can turn out huge numbers in the mids.
I'm not concerned about Trumps base, it's the fact that his overall support has expanded. Trumps approval ratings are right in line with Reagan, Obama and Clinton at this point in their presidencies. That is terrifying.
Yes, the rural populations who control the electoral college are being lied to, but without options, Trump still prevails.

User avatar
mockbee
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:05 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Politics

#58 Post by mockbee » Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:53 pm

Hype wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:55 am
mockbee wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:48 pm
Even then, I don't really see how that works. People are fed up. Yeah, populism is dangerous, but I really don't see how we avoid an elitist backlash with people being more and more squeezed.

I really don't see a wave of pragmatism sweeping the nation. Maybe the view is different from up there. :lol:
You do it by removing fear. Obama was exceptionally good at this, despite the bigot backlash from like, the KKK, and people who are going to be angry no matter what happens. But a significant amount of the anger that motivates protest voting is manipulated (by Facebook, by Fox, etc). And it can be destroyed. The Democrats have just been struggling to figure out how to do that with 70 year old candidates. Trump succeeded because of a carefully orchestrated campaign (not his own doing, but Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, Sheldon Adelson, and almost certainly Russian money and influence), and he couldn't even get a majority of the votes -- so they had to game the electoral college in a way that the Democrats weren't prepared for. They should be prepared for it now.

I think it's a mistake to think enough Democrats will vote for Sanders in 2020, over a sitting President (even one as stupid and gross as DJT).

Don't forget that four years is long enough for a lot of people at the beginning and end of their voting lives to turn 18 or die.
I agree with most everything you are saying, except for the part about Democrats being prepared. I don't think they are. I think the Party is still quite ignorant about what is going on. They got stupidly lucky with Obama. We can only hope they get so lucky again for 2020.

I think Sanders running in 2020 would be ridiculous.

Also, to frame trump as the old white guy candidate is a mistake. It means that Dems (or opposition) are not taking seriously why the non-racist's vote for him. And if the opposition believes that anyone who would consider voting for Trump is a racist/bigot, then that is an even bigger problem. Trump is on track for reelection, calling 40-50% of the population racists and bigots doesn't help.

User avatar
Hype
Posts: 7028
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm

Re: Politics

#59 Post by Hype » Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:31 pm

I can see how someone who isn't racist might have voted for an already racist candidate. But I can't see how anyone who isn't racist could vote for him again and still not be racist. Voting for Trump in 2020 will be a racist act whether anyone likes it or not. Listen to Steve Bannon. Whether this "helps" or not is irrelevant. It needs to be said.

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#60 Post by SR » Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:51 am

Hype wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:31 pm
I can see how someone who isn't racist might have voted for an already racist candidate. But I can't see how anyone who isn't racist could vote for him again and still not be racist. Voting for Trump in 2020 will be a racist act whether anyone likes it or not. Listen to Steve Bannon. Whether this "helps" or not is irrelevant. It needs to be said.
Agree with the former and it already applies to the gop in congress. As for the former, if they did so knowingly I do not see how they could have done it.

User avatar
mockbee
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:05 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Politics

#61 Post by mockbee » Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:49 am

Hype wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:31 pm
I can see how someone who isn't racist might have voted for an already racist candidate. But I can't see how anyone who isn't racist could vote for him again and still not be racist. Voting for Trump in 2020 will be a racist act whether anyone likes it or not. Listen to Steve Bannon. Whether this "helps" or not is irrelevant. It needs to be said.
I agree it would be a racist act, and I think that it was a racist act the first time. It should be acknowledged.

If it is framed that 50% of Americans are beyond redemption, out and out racists by a group of elite liberals though, that just won't work. Democrats can't let Trump frame that debate.

Obama was really, really smart.

User avatar
Hype
Posts: 7028
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm

Re: Politics

#62 Post by Hype » Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:26 am

mockbee wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:49 am
Hype wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:31 pm
I can see how someone who isn't racist might have voted for an already racist candidate. But I can't see how anyone who isn't racist could vote for him again and still not be racist. Voting for Trump in 2020 will be a racist act whether anyone likes it or not. Listen to Steve Bannon. Whether this "helps" or not is irrelevant. It needs to be said.
I agree it would be a racist act, and I think that it was a racist act the first time. It should be acknowledged.

If it is framed that 50% of Americans are beyond redemption, out and out racists by a group of elite liberals though, that just won't work. Democrats can't let Trump frame that debate.

Obama was really, really smart.
Yeah. So, I have it on pretty good authority that Booker is that same type, at least in theory, and always has been (I know people who knew him at Oxford / Yale -- like Clinton, Obama, etc., he was thinking 20 years ahead...). That's why I've said that he's likely to have a good shot at beating Trump, unless he does something disastrously stupid, or fails to capture enough of the Midwest vote that Clinton absolutely tanked.

lollapaloser
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Politics

#63 Post by lollapaloser » Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:35 pm

Booker's got a confirmed groping in his past though doesn't he?

User avatar
mockbee
Posts: 3468
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:05 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Politics

#64 Post by mockbee » Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:14 pm

lollapaloser wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:35 pm
Booker's got a confirmed groping in his past though doesn't he?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... c233484719

This would be a non-issue with a swing voter, but I don't know how he gets out of a competitive primary in our current climate.

I've not been terribly impressed by the guy. :noclue:

User avatar
Hype
Posts: 7028
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm

Re: Politics

#65 Post by Hype » Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:12 pm

mockbee wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:14 pm
lollapaloser wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:35 pm
Booker's got a confirmed groping in his past though doesn't he?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... c233484719

This would be a non-issue with a swing voter, but I don't know how he gets out of a competitive primary in our current climate.

I've not been terribly impressed by the guy. :noclue:
That is a very different case than the MeToo stuff though... :confused: We'll see.

User avatar
chaos
Posts: 5024
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:23 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Politics

#66 Post by chaos » Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:33 pm


Hokahey
Site Admin
Posts: 5394
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:51 pm

Re: Politics

#67 Post by Hokahey » Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:49 pm

chaos wrote:
Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:33 pm
That pause makes it sooooo awkward and funny.

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#68 Post by SR » Wed Apr 17, 2019 4:49 am


User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#69 Post by SR » Thu Apr 18, 2019 6:32 am

And taking office in Alberta as Premier-designate, Jason Kenney? Is this a pervasive shift in Canada? :banghead:

User avatar
Hype
Posts: 7028
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm

Re: Politics

#70 Post by Hype » Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:07 am

SR wrote:
Thu Apr 18, 2019 6:32 am
And taking office in Alberta as Premier-designate, Jason Kenney? Is this a pervasive shift in Canada? :banghead:
Yes. Russian money has been funding anti-Trudeau sentiment for years on social media.

There's a concerted effort of fascist-minded wealthy elites in foreign places to mess with the international order. This sounds like a conspiracy, but it's not unified, it's just that it makes a lot of sense for a place as fucked as Russia to do what they're doing, and they've been perfecting it for a while, so now we're seeing the results.

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#71 Post by SR » Fri Apr 19, 2019 4:42 am

He's poisoned so much and the march continues. Putin is formidable

User avatar
chaos
Posts: 5024
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:23 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Politics

#72 Post by chaos » Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:07 pm


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48007487

Ukraine election: Comedian Zelensky wins presidency by landslide
22 April 2019

Ukrainian comedian Volodymyr Zelensky has scored a landslide victory in the country's presidential election.

With nearly all ballots counted in the run-off vote, Mr Zelensky had taken more than 73% with incumbent Petro Poroshenko trailing far behind on 24%.

"I will never let you down," Mr Zelensky told celebrating supporters.

Russia says it wants him to show "sound judgement", "honesty" and "pragmatism" so that relations can improve. Russia backs separatists in eastern Ukraine.

The comments came from Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, in a Facebook post on Monday (in Russian).

He said he expected Mr Zelensky to "repeat familiar ideological formulas" that he used in the election campaign, adding: "I have no illusions on that score.

"At the same time, there is a chance to improve relations with our country."

Mr Poroshenko, who admitted defeat after the first exit polls were published, has said he will not be leaving politics.

He told voters that Mr Zelensky, 41, was too inexperienced to stand up to Russia effectively.

Mr Zelensky, a political novice, is best known for starring in a satirical television series Servant of the People, in which his character accidentally becomes Ukrainian president.


Image


He told reporters he would "reboot" peace talks with the separatists fighting Ukrainian forces and volunteers in the east
.
"I think that we will have personnel changes. In any case we will continue in the direction of the Minsk [peace] talks and head towards concluding a ceasefire," he said.

There are sporadic skirmishes and the situation also remains tense around Crimea, annexed from Ukraine by Russia in 2014.


User avatar
Hype
Posts: 7028
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:44 pm

Re: Politics

#73 Post by Hype » Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:29 pm

chaos wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:07 pm

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48007487

Ukraine election: Comedian Zelensky wins presidency by landslide
22 April 2019

Ukrainian comedian Volodymyr Zelensky has scored a landslide victory in the country's presidential election.

With nearly all ballots counted in the run-off vote, Mr Zelensky had taken more than 73% with incumbent Petro Poroshenko trailing far behind on 24%.

"I will never let you down," Mr Zelensky told celebrating supporters.

Russia says it wants him to show "sound judgement", "honesty" and "pragmatism" so that relations can improve. Russia backs separatists in eastern Ukraine.

The comments came from Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, in a Facebook post on Monday (in Russian).

He said he expected Mr Zelensky to "repeat familiar ideological formulas" that he used in the election campaign, adding: "I have no illusions on that score.

"At the same time, there is a chance to improve relations with our country."

Mr Poroshenko, who admitted defeat after the first exit polls were published, has said he will not be leaving politics.

He told voters that Mr Zelensky, 41, was too inexperienced to stand up to Russia effectively.

Mr Zelensky, a political novice, is best known for starring in a satirical television series Servant of the People, in which his character accidentally becomes Ukrainian president.


Image


He told reporters he would "reboot" peace talks with the separatists fighting Ukrainian forces and volunteers in the east
.
"I think that we will have personnel changes. In any case we will continue in the direction of the Minsk [peace] talks and head towards concluding a ceasefire," he said.

There are sporadic skirmishes and the situation also remains tense around Crimea, annexed from Ukraine by Russia in 2014.

This is way easier to understand if you take into account that Russia has tried to insist on Russian-friendly (i.e., puppet) leaders for former Soviet states since their independences in the early 90s. There was an "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine back in the early 2000s after a pro-Putin leader named Yanukovych was "elected" in widely disputed elections. After protests, a recount/runoff was held, and it was determined that one of the leaders of the revolution, Viktor Yushchenko, would be the new President. At the time, it was widely believed that Yushchenko had been poisoned with digoxin (presumably by the Russians), which left him with a disfigured face. Yushchenko and Yulia Timoshenko were widely held as pro-European heroes who would bring closer ties with the E.U.

Fast-forward a few years, and there appears to have been some infighting between these two, with Timoshenko ending up in considerable trouble (including being jailed for corruption). There were also harsh winters where Russia simply turned off the natural gas to Ukraine (accused them of stealing it), and insisted that they pay market rates, despite historic reasons why Ukraine was, like the rest of the ex-Soviet states, in no position to be paying Western market rates for gas from their former imperial overlords (a very tricky situation). Then, Yushchenko loses an election to, you guessed it, the old Russian-backed Yanukovych, who becomes President again. This time... it seems that Ukraine has simply realized it's time to get closer to Russia again, though Yanukovych had appeared to be ready to sign an "association agreement" with the EU, despite trying to also maintain closer ties to Russia. Yanukovych's reneging on the association agreement seems to have been the main impetus for the Euromaidan protests in 2013. (But it's also possible that Russia was involved in fomenting this as a pretext for the later invasion.) These protests led to the ouster of Yanukovych, who fled to Russia, and new elections. Weirdly, around this time audio was leaked of United States officials backing a guy named Arseniy Yatsenyuk for Prime Minister. Whether through direct or indirect means, American support seems to have paid off and Yatsenyuk, along with chocolate baron Poroshenko end up as the new leaders, with a decidedly pro-Western outlook. Meanwhile, Russia is engaging in an invasion without admitting it, and manage to annex Crimea under the pretext of a referendum which independent reporters widely suspected was a sham (though there is admittedly fairly widespread pro-Russian support in these regions).

That's the backdrop for what has just happened -- as far as I can tell, Russian backing seems to be behind Zelenskiy's win, and that seems born out in his subtle backtracking of the pro-EU Poroshenko policies, especially regarding the ongoing war in the east of the country.

It's really a mess though.

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7840
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Politics

#74 Post by SR » Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:57 am

His reach is extending rapidly. It's really alarming. Here in the US, by the limited info being reported (and distorted), all indicators are that we have lost the battles in the last few years and the war looks almost insurmountable....willful ignorance/willing victims. :banghead:

User avatar
drwintercreeper
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:57 am

Re: Politics

#75 Post by drwintercreeper » Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:38 am

I am waiting to see how the dust settles. Zelensky won nearly every region of Ukraine except the far west (and he still did well there), so in that sense this election was the cleanest yet in that it didn't break down across traditional cleavages (language being the most salient). I wonder if this was more of a rejection of Poroshenko and his record or a rejection of his nationalist party platform (army/language/faith).

Post Reply