4 ms·

Bold to assume there are going to be elections. All it needs is some kind of emergency, genuine, imaginary or self-inflicted, and ‘Oh no, we can’t possibly hol

Bold to assume there are going to be elections. All it needs is some kind of emergency, genuine, imaginary or self-inflicted, and ‘Oh no, we can’t possibly hold elections until our time of national crisis is over.’

koolba 2y ago
You mean like Ukraine?
- multjoy 2y ago
  They’re literally fighting for their lives. Nobody wants elections in wartime, not least because polling stations become targets. You need to lay off the MAGA talking points.
  - koolba 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - thatcat 2y ago
    The conscripted might disagree and desire a leader who will pursue a peaceful solution, this conclusion is supported by the high number of deserters.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - sorcerer-mar 2y ago
      Very possible, but you should provide data. The data we have suggests that Zelensky's approval is extremely high among the public and the consensus not to violate the constitution to hold elections during wartime is unanimous within the government.
      - eru 2y ago
        I guess unanimous is too high a bar amongst any larger group of people. But I can very well believe that the consensus is virtually unanimous.
        sorcerer-mar 2y ago
        The parliament held a vote and it was unanimous. You’re right that parliament isn’t “the government” writ large though.
        eru 1y ago
        Thanks for that detail!
    - mikeyouse 2y ago
      Public opinion shows there’s nobody more supportive than the continued military defense of Ukraine than the Ukrainians. Even the conscripted would prefer more modern weapons to permanently ceding Ukrainian territory to Russia.
    - multjoy 2y ago
      Peaceful solution to an invasion? How does that work, exactly?
      - eru 2y ago
        Well, the invader is the last party to want a war: they'd be happy to just take over. Russia's takeover of Crimea in 2014 was almost as 'peaceful' as the German takeover of the Sudetenland in the 1930s. All in all, my comment is just a convoluted way that sometimes the price to pay for peace is too high. In addition, there's also pre-commitments that make everything more complicated: as a potential victim of invasion, you might want to pre-commit to defending long beyond any reasonable threshold, in the hopes that this will deter invasion. Sometimes your bluff gets called, and then you need to actually fight to maintain your credibility. Compare mutual assured destruction in nuclear war: nuking Moscow in retaliation for the Soviets nuking New York isn't going to bring anyone back from the dead. But it's what you pre-commit to in order to deter the bombing of New York in the first place.
    - rat87 2y ago
      Zelensky was elected in part on a platform of trying to negotiate with Russia but it fell apart because Russia wasn't interested in negotiating and instead decided it wanted to massively expand the war. If Russia shown the smallest sign that they had given up on conquering Ukraine and were willing to seek peace Zelensky would be interested. Zelensky is also more popular then most potential political opponents and they would rather the election would be held after the war when they'd have more of a chance(wartime popularity doesn't always transfer over to peacetime, Winston Churchill lost his post war election). And any credible challenges would likely be more hawkish on Russia not less
  - Ray20 2y ago
    >Nobody wants elections in wartime THE GOVERNMENT doesn't want elections in wartime. Most people want. >not least because polling stations become targets. I think this is pure gaslighting. If we are talking about Ukraine, Putin is one of the main supporters of holding elections there. And almost certainly not because he wants to bomb some polling stations, but because he is confident that people will vote for a candidate who will de-facto offer to surrender, and not for Zelensky with his busifications.
    - sorcerer-mar 2y ago
      Ah yes and Putin is sooo above bombing locations that are likely to vote more heavily Zelensky. Totally outrageous concern.
    - mopsi 2y ago
      The only likely candidate close to Zelenskyy in popularity is Zaluzhnyi, the former commander of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. That's not a person who sees surrender as an option. All major political factions oppose holding elections now, because they expect Zelenskyy's popularity to fade after the war ends and believe their candidates will have better chances then.
      - eru 2y ago
        > All major political factions oppose holding elections now, because they expect Zelenskyy's popularity to fade after the war ends and believe their candidates will have better chances then. Well, that, and also the constitution doesn't allow election during wartime.
    - multjoy 2y ago
      >Putin is one of the main supporters of holding elections there Because he will interfere, like he has across Europe. He is a tyrant and has only his own interests at heart.
  - eru 2y ago
    > Nobody wants elections in wartime, not least because polling stations become targets. Nobody is a strong word. Lots of people want elections, especially in wartime. And lots of other people don't want elections. But it doesn't matter: the constitution of Ukraine doesn't allow elections during wartime. I think by default constitutional rules should be followed, unless there are very good reasons not to.
    - EasyMark 2y ago
      Also if the Ukrainians hated it so much they would just side with Russia and form rebel militias all over and apparently that is not happening, I think they know which side has their best interests at heart and which is trying to genocide them.
      - eru 1y ago
        Well, from 2014 onward there were supposedly rebel militia groups in the south and east. (Most people think they were Russian puppets however.) > [...] I think they know which side has their best interests at heart and which is trying to genocide them. Doesn't even need to be their best interest, really. The Ukrainian government had and has its fair share of flaws. (They exist in the real world after all.) But it's enough that they are a lot better than Russia.
- sethammons 2y ago
  > Asked whether he’d trade his office for peace, Zelensky told a journalist, “I can trade it for NATO.” https://thehill.com/policy/international/5159951-ukraine-president-peace-nato/ https://thehill.com/policy/international/5159951-ukraine-pre... Zelensky is not seizing power. Elections suspended during active, home-turf wartime is normal.
  - mikeyouse 2y ago
    Especially when Russia is currently occupying huge swaths of territory that would make holding elections there impossible.
- sorcerer-mar 2y ago
  It is unconstitutional to hold elections during wartime in Ukraine.
immibis 2y ago
Congress already ruled that time isn't passing, allowing a temporary state of national emergency to become permanent. There's no reason to think they won't find some asinine excuse to deny elections or defer them indefinitely. They might not even need an excuse. They could just not hold elections and say "what are you going to do about it?"
netsharc 2y ago
Probably much easier to rig the elections, just like dozens of "we're democratic!" dictators have done. Erdogan, Putin, Mugabe, Suharto...
- yread 2y ago
  You mean like requiring ppl to have a proof of citizenship disenfranchising 21 million https://apnews.com/article/congress-save-act-citizenship-voting-elections-a37c139461d11eb5f82086680b67ffe7 https://apnews.com/article/congress-save-act-citizenship-vot...
  - netsharc 2y ago
    I thought you're agreeing with me about disenfranchisement and how it's evil, but I can see you can also infer that "Did you know 21 million undocumenteds voted?"... As your article discusses, requiring that proof means paperwork, paperwork some people might not have (e.g. wives who changed their names). For example in the UK, the Windrush scandal 1) deported British subjects because the government made irrational demands for documents to prove that they're citizens. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windrush_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windrush_scandal
- EasyMark 2y ago
  they're already trying to jail the guy who kept 2020 election safe. It's a bad sign lol.
eru 2y ago
> Bold to assume there are going to be elections. I'm happy to bet. What odds to do you offer?

koolba 2y ago

You mean like Ukraine?

multjoy 2y ago
They’re literally fighting for their lives. Nobody wants elections in wartime, not least because polling stations become targets. You need to lay off the MAGA talking points.
- koolba 2y ago
  [flagged]
- thatcat 2y ago
  The conscripted might disagree and desire a leader who will pursue a peaceful solution, this conclusion is supported by the high number of deserters.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - sorcerer-mar 2y ago
    Very possible, but you should provide data. The data we have suggests that Zelensky's approval is extremely high among the public and the consensus not to violate the constitution to hold elections during wartime is unanimous within the government.
    - eru 2y ago
      I guess unanimous is too high a bar amongst any larger group of people. But I can very well believe that the consensus is virtually unanimous.
      - sorcerer-mar 2y ago
        The parliament held a vote and it was unanimous. You’re right that parliament isn’t “the government” writ large though.
        eru 1y ago
        Thanks for that detail!
  - mikeyouse 2y ago
    Public opinion shows there’s nobody more supportive than the continued military defense of Ukraine than the Ukrainians. Even the conscripted would prefer more modern weapons to permanently ceding Ukrainian territory to Russia.
  - multjoy 2y ago
    Peaceful solution to an invasion? How does that work, exactly?
    - eru 2y ago
      Well, the invader is the last party to want a war: they'd be happy to just take over. Russia's takeover of Crimea in 2014 was almost as 'peaceful' as the German takeover of the Sudetenland in the 1930s. All in all, my comment is just a convoluted way that sometimes the price to pay for peace is too high. In addition, there's also pre-commitments that make everything more complicated: as a potential victim of invasion, you might want to pre-commit to defending long beyond any reasonable threshold, in the hopes that this will deter invasion. Sometimes your bluff gets called, and then you need to actually fight to maintain your credibility. Compare mutual assured destruction in nuclear war: nuking Moscow in retaliation for the Soviets nuking New York isn't going to bring anyone back from the dead. But it's what you pre-commit to in order to deter the bombing of New York in the first place.
  - rat87 2y ago
    Zelensky was elected in part on a platform of trying to negotiate with Russia but it fell apart because Russia wasn't interested in negotiating and instead decided it wanted to massively expand the war. If Russia shown the smallest sign that they had given up on conquering Ukraine and were willing to seek peace Zelensky would be interested. Zelensky is also more popular then most potential political opponents and they would rather the election would be held after the war when they'd have more of a chance(wartime popularity doesn't always transfer over to peacetime, Winston Churchill lost his post war election). And any credible challenges would likely be more hawkish on Russia not less
- Ray20 2y ago
  >Nobody wants elections in wartime THE GOVERNMENT doesn't want elections in wartime. Most people want. >not least because polling stations become targets. I think this is pure gaslighting. If we are talking about Ukraine, Putin is one of the main supporters of holding elections there. And almost certainly not because he wants to bomb some polling stations, but because he is confident that people will vote for a candidate who will de-facto offer to surrender, and not for Zelensky with his busifications.
  - sorcerer-mar 2y ago
    Ah yes and Putin is sooo above bombing locations that are likely to vote more heavily Zelensky. Totally outrageous concern.
  - mopsi 2y ago
    The only likely candidate close to Zelenskyy in popularity is Zaluzhnyi, the former commander of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. That's not a person who sees surrender as an option. All major political factions oppose holding elections now, because they expect Zelenskyy's popularity to fade after the war ends and believe their candidates will have better chances then.
    - eru 2y ago
      > All major political factions oppose holding elections now, because they expect Zelenskyy's popularity to fade after the war ends and believe their candidates will have better chances then. Well, that, and also the constitution doesn't allow election during wartime.
  - multjoy 2y ago
    >Putin is one of the main supporters of holding elections there Because he will interfere, like he has across Europe. He is a tyrant and has only his own interests at heart.
- eru 2y ago
  > Nobody wants elections in wartime, not least because polling stations become targets. Nobody is a strong word. Lots of people want elections, especially in wartime. And lots of other people don't want elections. But it doesn't matter: the constitution of Ukraine doesn't allow elections during wartime. I think by default constitutional rules should be followed, unless there are very good reasons not to.
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    Also if the Ukrainians hated it so much they would just side with Russia and form rebel militias all over and apparently that is not happening, I think they know which side has their best interests at heart and which is trying to genocide them.
    - eru 1y ago
      Well, from 2014 onward there were supposedly rebel militia groups in the south and east. (Most people think they were Russian puppets however.) > [...] I think they know which side has their best interests at heart and which is trying to genocide them. Doesn't even need to be their best interest, really. The Ukrainian government had and has its fair share of flaws. (They exist in the real world after all.) But it's enough that they are a lot better than Russia.
sethammons 2y ago
> Asked whether he’d trade his office for peace, Zelensky told a journalist, “I can trade it for NATO.” https://thehill.com/policy/international/5159951-ukraine-president-peace-nato/ https://thehill.com/policy/international/5159951-ukraine-pre... Zelensky is not seizing power. Elections suspended during active, home-turf wartime is normal.
- mikeyouse 2y ago
  Especially when Russia is currently occupying huge swaths of territory that would make holding elections there impossible.
sorcerer-mar 2y ago
It is unconstitutional to hold elections during wartime in Ukraine.

immibis 2y ago

Congress already ruled that time isn't passing, allowing a temporary state of national emergency to become permanent. There's no reason to think they won't find some asinine excuse to deny elections or defer them indefinitely. They might not even need an excuse. They could just not hold elections and say "what are you going to do about it?"

netsharc 2y ago

Probably much easier to rig the elections, just like dozens of "we're democratic!" dictators have done. Erdogan, Putin, Mugabe, Suharto...

yread 2y ago
You mean like requiring ppl to have a proof of citizenship disenfranchising 21 million https://apnews.com/article/congress-save-act-citizenship-voting-elections-a37c139461d11eb5f82086680b67ffe7 https://apnews.com/article/congress-save-act-citizenship-vot...
- netsharc 2y ago
  I thought you're agreeing with me about disenfranchisement and how it's evil, but I can see you can also infer that "Did you know 21 million undocumenteds voted?"... As your article discusses, requiring that proof means paperwork, paperwork some people might not have (e.g. wives who changed their names). For example in the UK, the Windrush scandal 1) deported British subjects because the government made irrational demands for documents to prove that they're citizens. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windrush_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windrush_scandal
EasyMark 2y ago
they're already trying to jail the guy who kept 2020 election safe. It's a bad sign lol.

eru 2y ago

> Bold to assume there are going to be elections. I'm happy to bet. What odds to do you offer?