3 ms·

>Our other elected representatives have blocked his plans many times but he always forces them through via the supreme court As have all the governments before

>Our other elected representatives have blocked his plans many times but he always forces them through via the supreme court As have all the governments before him, with the only exception of Bolsonaro who was dumb enough to provoke the Supreme Court against him. This is something that Trump did better in the US, as he moved loyal conservatives there. Which bring us to this failed model of the executive being able to appoint judges to the supreme court (both in the US and Brazil), which totally affects the division of power between Executive and Judiciary. Something I'm sure we agree on here. > Plenty of doubt can be raised regarding the trustworthiness of elections conducted via our voting machines Here you are replicating talking points from Bolsonaro (who BTW copied it from Trump), who couldn't find any trustful source to back his claim (I remember that pathetic argentinian guy they got before the elections) that has the only objective of supporting him on his failed coup. And those same "flawed machines" were used in Bolsonaro election. >Especially since these exact same judges also control the electoral courts and through them the electoral process As the other commenter said, remember that it wasn't Lula that appointed Moraes, who is historically right wing. It's nice to tell a conspiracy story of Moraes and Lula drinking champaign together and planning the communist/socialist/whatever domination, but the truth is they play their own games individually. In my opinion, Moraes go after Bolsonaro more as a personal vendetta because of his stupid attacks against the Supreme Court in 2020. >These are my honest opinions on what's going on in my country I believe that you believe that, but I also believe that those are not your opinions, are influences from the social bubble your are inserted in. You believe the "evidence" that is presented to you when you should really be double checking everything, even what is confirming your views. The world is not black & white, left & right. You should doubt not only what comes from the "other side", but everything that is presented to you. That is usually my position, which I can tell you, is not an easy one, as all groups will consider you to be from the other side, nobody like their bias challenged.

matheusmoreira 1y ago
> As have all the governments before him I don't know. As far as I can tell it's a recent phenomenon. I can't recall any other instance where failed political maneuvers were judicialized like this, can you cite any? > Which bring us to this failed model of the executive being able to appoint judges to the supreme court > Something I'm sure we agree on here. We absolutely agree on this. > Here you are replicating talking points from Bolsonaro Not at all. I've always doubted these voting machines. I'm even more of a radical than Bolsonaro ever was. Being a programmer helps. It's just that before Bolsonaro won I didn't even bother with politics because I had written off this country as a lost cause. The only talking point I replicate is that of Germany. They ruled that voting machines are unconstitutional because laymen do not understand the technology and therefore cannot audit elections. That's the most sensible argument in my opinion. > who couldn't find any trustful source to back his claim The report provided by the armed forces was plenty for me. It revealed that unaudited libraries were downloaded from the network and linked. It revealed that builds were not reproducible and thus correspondence between source and executable could not be proven. They didn't even have access to source control. I really feel sorry for all the laymen who asked for source code on the streets. They could have released the sources and it still wouldn't have proven anything. It would have been an embarrassment. It's a red herring anyway. It's up to TSE to prove beyond doubt that this system is secure. The judge made extraordinary claims: the machines are UNQUESTIONABLE. The standards of perfection he set require extraordinary evidence. He's offered nothing but censorship and persecution. This is the system through which power is transferred from the people to our representatives, any doubt at all and power should not be transferred. The key issue is whether votes are counted correctly and not diverted to some specific candidate. This concern could have been completely bypassed had they implemented the paper trail as proposed. We could have had the best of both worlds. > truth is they play their own games individually We agree on this. Lula is certainly a communist, as is Dino. The other ministers probably aren't. They aren't anti-communists either, so they still help their agenda. > In my opinion, Moraes go after Bolsonaro more as a personal vendetta because of his stupid attacks against the Supreme Court in 2020. Agreed, though his abusive conduct certainly precedes those attacks. The "fake news" inquisition began in 2019. Also, his attacks on the court may have been stupid but were certainly deserved, given their constant interference. For some reason the court would always find a reason to get in his way. Now that Lula's in power, they don't bother to block anything. > I believe that you believe that, but I also believe that those are not your opinions, are influences from the social bubble your are inserted in. I don't think so. My views diverge significantly from those of the "bubble". We merely align on some key points. The only politician who truly represented me is dead: Enéas Ferreira Carneiro. > You believe the "evidence" that is presented to you when you should really be double checking everything, even what is confirming your views. Testing my world view is the number one reason why I post these comments here. I actively seek out debates. Either I'll win the argument or I'll be forced to change my world view. I'm relying on adversaries to present conflicting evidence. Obviously this doesn't work if people refuse to debate in good faith.

matheusmoreira 1y ago

> As have all the governments before him I don't know. As far as I can tell it's a recent phenomenon. I can't recall any other instance where failed political maneuvers were judicialized like this, can you cite any? > Which bring us to this failed model of the executive being able to appoint judges to the supreme court > Something I'm sure we agree on here. We absolutely agree on this. > Here you are replicating talking points from Bolsonaro Not at all. I've always doubted these voting machines. I'm even more of a radical than Bolsonaro ever was. Being a programmer helps. It's just that before Bolsonaro won I didn't even bother with politics because I had written off this country as a lost cause. The only talking point I replicate is that of Germany. They ruled that voting machines are unconstitutional because laymen do not understand the technology and therefore cannot audit elections. That's the most sensible argument in my opinion. > who couldn't find any trustful source to back his claim The report provided by the armed forces was plenty for me. It revealed that unaudited libraries were downloaded from the network and linked. It revealed that builds were not reproducible and thus correspondence between source and executable could not be proven. They didn't even have access to source control. I really feel sorry for all the laymen who asked for source code on the streets. They could have released the sources and it still wouldn't have proven anything. It would have been an embarrassment. It's a red herring anyway. It's up to TSE to prove beyond doubt that this system is secure. The judge made extraordinary claims: the machines are UNQUESTIONABLE. The standards of perfection he set require extraordinary evidence. He's offered nothing but censorship and persecution. This is the system through which power is transferred from the people to our representatives, any doubt at all and power should not be transferred. The key issue is whether votes are counted correctly and not diverted to some specific candidate. This concern could have been completely bypassed had they implemented the paper trail as proposed. We could have had the best of both worlds. > truth is they play their own games individually We agree on this. Lula is certainly a communist, as is Dino. The other ministers probably aren't. They aren't anti-communists either, so they still help their agenda. > In my opinion, Moraes go after Bolsonaro more as a personal vendetta because of his stupid attacks against the Supreme Court in 2020. Agreed, though his abusive conduct certainly precedes those attacks. The "fake news" inquisition began in 2019. Also, his attacks on the court may have been stupid but were certainly deserved, given their constant interference. For some reason the court would always find a reason to get in his way. Now that Lula's in power, they don't bother to block anything. > I believe that you believe that, but I also believe that those are not your opinions, are influences from the social bubble your are inserted in. I don't think so. My views diverge significantly from those of the "bubble". We merely align on some key points. The only politician who truly represented me is dead: Enéas Ferreira Carneiro. > You believe the "evidence" that is presented to you when you should really be double checking everything, even what is confirming your views. Testing my world view is the number one reason why I post these comments here. I actively seek out debates. Either I'll win the argument or I'll be forced to change my world view. I'm relying on adversaries to present conflicting evidence. Obviously this doesn't work if people refuse to debate in good faith.