Romanian court validates presidential election, rejecting defeated candidate’s challenge to results
Romanian court validates presidential election, rejecting defeated candidate’s challenge to results
It's the same all over the world. "If we win it's the will of the people. If we lose it's all a big scam."
I think it should disqualify you from ever being elected again if you challenge election results without any evidence.
You can challenge results based solely on the request of having ballots recounted. You want to go that far?
Yes. Undemocratic forces use democracy to dismantle it. We need to really explore what democracy is actually about if we want to keep it.
If I'm in any kind of relatinship and I challenge the other party on a whim without any evidence, that relationship will take severe damage.
Currently, we keep discussing matters without context which makes it easy to shortchange the public due to their limited imagination.
If you use democracy witbout faith, you dont have democracy. You have cold war.
I would go further. If a party would show a pattern of asking questions solely based on ethnicity of people (current strategy of the german fascist party) they should be excluded from government. Also, a party that is deemed fascist should be excluded by default and have to prove that thats not the case instead of the other way round.
Fascism is not an opinion. It is not compatible with democracy and needs to be eradicated with force.
Yes. Undemocratic forces use democracy to dismantle it. We need to really explore what democracy is actually about if we want to keep it.
Agreed.
If I'm in any kind of relatinship and I challenge the other party on a whim without any evidence, that relationship will take severe damage.
I understand your point but it is not a good equivalence. This isn't about a relationship; that implies, at the very least, the smallest of slivers of respect. This isn't the case.
Currently, we keep discussing matters without context which makes it easy to shortchange the public due to their limited imagination.
As it is, what is being constantly brought in front of the public eye is not to generate discussion; it is about generating disagreement. But this is the modus operandi of politics at large. It is easier to provide distractions and scape goats than create, explain and put in place real solutions for concrete problems.
If you use democracy witbout faith, you dont have democracy. You have cold war.
Exploitation of democratic system is solely for its own dismantling. It's not a cold war. Bullets may not be flying (yet) but the war is there.
I would go further. If a party would show a pattern of asking questions solely based on ethnicity of people (current strategy of the german fascist party) they should be excluded from government. Also, a party that is deemed fascist should be excluded by default and have to prove that thats not the case instead of the other way round.
If a constitution doesn't have the necessary safeguards to defend itself of hostility, it is lacking. If it has but they are not enforced by courts, it's disinformation to the public and indiference from the courts.
Fascism is not an opinion. It is not compatible with democracy and needs to be eradicated with force.
Authoritarianism is as old as humans. Most people still revere the leader image. It is extremely hard to be fully responsible of one's one actions. So it is easy to fall prey of charismatic figures and easy to follow speech.
Not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing or something in between but I think some points added well to my thoughts. Thanks for that.
I still think that democracy requires basic respect. Otherwise its just called democracy. People who dont respect others the very smallest of ways are not democrats.
I agree on how you explained your point, although I disagree with it. Healthy disagreements help clarifying points of view.
Removing someone's right to run for elections only on the basis of contesting a result is excessive. I'm in favour of cutting funds and putting heavy fines on such actors. And not after a lenghty court run: as an administrative punitive action, something already prescribed by law.
Thats a pretty good idea. What countries does that exist in? Germany and the US either dont have it or dont use it.
To my knowledge, there is none. But it should.
It's not as blatant as in the US but I've heard it suggested in my country in the EU. And now post-Trump it'll get worse.