3 ms·

As a Bahraini friend told me, "Iran has democratic elections." To which I replied, "What about the weeding out and approval process required for candidates?"

• sidlls 8y ago
  Some would argue the process we (Americans) use to select candidates is different only by appearance, for offices that actually have any power anyway.
  • adventured 8y ago
    The some that would argue that, are easily refuted by the facts. Bill Clinton came from poverty, had no father, was a nobody governor for Arkansas with a mixed record of success in politics. He defeated a very powerful patriarch of the Bush dynasty - former CIA head, former Vice President, WW2 hero, former member of Congress - who was backed by Ronald Reagan (an extraordinarily popular President). He also defeated one of the richest and most famous people in the country at the time in Ross Perot (of course some would say Perot actually defeated Bush, which is interesting as well as Perot was a political outsider). Barack Obama had no father in a similar manner as Bill Clinton. Grew up in a still difficult time to be half white and half black, raised by a white family. He didn't come from a dynasty or impressive wealth. He admitted doing drugs, admitted being interested in alternative culture and Marxist ideas in his youth. He got soundly elected by knocking the more conservative Clinton dynasty out of the way, despite the enormity of the money and support behind Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump, a billionaire, was opposed by nearly every layer of power in the US, including nearly all of the media, nearly all celebrities, nearly all journalists, and including nearly the entire Republican Party and most of its big money backers. He's the first political outsider to win the Presidency in more than a century and is still openly opposed at every step by the same forces that opposed his candidacy. Bernie Sanders - openly a Socialist in a nation that has historically aggressively rejected most variations of Socialism - came one step away from competing with Trump for the Presidency. He had to be thwarted by his own party, sabotaged in numerous ways, to prevent that outcome. That is a case where the more powerful group prevailed using under-handed tactics. However it's non-the-less impressive how far Sanders got, when most of the system clearly opposed him and his policies. It's blatantly clear the US system isn't only different by appearances. It still enables outcomes that would be impossible if it were truly only an oligarchy style pre-selected system (this is where I acknowledge that the US does have aspects of pre-selection and some oligarchy-like power structures, it's obvious). All the power structures in the US opposed Trump and still do, including essentially all of its wealthiest persons; he flat-out was not supposed to win. Hillary Clinton, as the more powerful dynastic insider candidate, would have won against either Obama or Trump if the US primarily operated by pre-selection (Trump would have never gotten beyond Jeb Bush in that case).
    • onemoresoop 8y ago
      Bernie Sanders is a self described Social Democrat.
  • StreamBright 8y ago
    Well I am not sure how different your presidents are, if you only looking at the foreign policy the picture is kind of blurry. https://www.ranker.com/list/the-twelve-worst-us-presidents-based-on-body-counts/dralcarroll https://www.ranker.com/list/the-twelve-worst-us-presidents-b...
• mistermann 8y ago
  > Well, you can't have a sheep herder run for President and win. Or a progressive Democrat like Bernie Sanders.
  • tivert 8y ago
    >> To which I replied, "What about the weeding out and approval process required for candidates?" >> Well, you can't have a sheep herder run for President and win. > Or a progressive Democrat like Bernie Sanders. No one was stopping Sanders from running as an independent.
    • mistermann 8y ago
      This is true, but it is also true that there were several individuals and organizations involved in ensuring that his run as a Democrat would be unsuccessful.