Leading brazilian presidential candidate stabed by leftist

[MiniCraque]

No. The previous expansion of social programs, of public interest-oriented regulations, of democratic initiatives, and of due process rights under the previous post-dictatorship administrations is the reason why there is room to go backwards.

It seems strange to me that you would say that it's standard Latin American practice to advocate rule that is explicitly diametrically opposed to the public good.

To be fair, Rod1 is right in that there's a significant amount of low-key support for a would-be new dictatorship. It's actually kinda scary to see how many people seemingly long for it. It manifests in different ways like "we should burn it all to the ground and start from scratch" (not realizing who would fill the power vacuum) or "things actually worked back then".

Bolsonaro was the first to effectively thug at the heartstrings of people who feel this way, but it's not a new sentiment.

 

[Trotsky]

To be fair, Rod1 is right in that there's a significant amount of low-key support for a would-be new dictatorship. It's actually kinda scary to see how many people seemingly long for it. It manifests in different ways like "we should burn it all to the ground and start from scratch" (not realizing who would fill the power vacuum) or "things actually worked back then".

Bolsonaro was the first to effectively thug at the heartstrings of people who feel this way, but it's not a new sentiment.

I'm well aware. Things in the United States do work reasonably well, at least administratively and in terms of outright corruption, and we still have people producing mad pantie juices for dictatorship.

 

[DespicablePeep]

This is not true. Ibope and Datafolha had him at 41% (trending upwards) of valid votes. You can look them up for yourself.

Wtf does "they tried to get it right on the last couple of days" mean? They showed a trend of growth (low 30s, then mid 30s, then low 40s, ending with mid 40s). They were right. It's a lot harder to get mad at stats when you actually know how to read them.

There's a lot to be said about polls being outpaced by rapidly changing voter trends, but they're still a more reliable source of information than "well this is what I see in the streets".

Show me a link with 41% and no word on Senate results for Minas and Sao Paulo?

 

[JSN]

Wtf is stabing?

 

[MiniCraque]

I'm well aware. Things in the United States do work reasonably well, at least administratively and in terms of outright corruption, and we still have people producing mad pantie juices for dictatorship.

I actually think it's more understandable in the US since it's more of a pipe dream. People living under a 250 years democracy can't really draw from experience when it comes to domestic dictatorships.

It's way more stupid coming from people that are separated from the reality of it by one full generation at best. People who were already born when the military cronies tortured, murdered and bankrupted the country somehow want them back. It's mind-boggling.

 

[MiniCraque]

Show me a link with 41% and no word on Senate results for Minas and Sao Paulo?

https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleic...olsonaro-41-haddad-25-ciro-13-alckmin-8.ghtml

Don't give a fuck about senate seats from other states. Should we mention all the results that they predicted correctly? It might take a while.

 

[Trotsky]

I actually think it's more understandable in the US since it's more of a pipe dream. People living under a 250 years democracy can't really draw from experience when it comes to domestic dictatorships.

It's way more stupid coming from people that are separated from the reality of it by one full generation at best. People who were already born when the military cronies tortured, murdered and bankrupted the country somehow want them back. It's mind-boggling.

Yeah, I mean...dictatorships can be nice and benevolent in some instances. Yugoslavia comes to mind as the best, where the considerable majority of former Yugoslavs miss the republic. Other like in Libya and Cuba have legitimately provided for considerable improvement in living standards. Others like in Iran provided a sense of independence and security from outside bad actors. Even with more flawed ones like China and Vietnam, it at least brought stability to a perpetually unstable people.

But, from what I've read, it's hard to find any such silver lining in Brazil's experience with dictatorship. From what I gathered, it pretty well sucked in every way, other than I guess the meek and humble middle class types might have had less fear of street violence, maybe? It seems to me that one of the biggest factor in Brazilian national identity being amenable to support of dictatorship is the palpable frustration with always being told your country is on the cusp and has the potential to be a world power, yet never getting there. Combine that growing frustration with what I also understand to be a pretty proud and machismo culture, and it starts to make a little more sense.

Bolsonaro's criticism of Venezuela and use of the country's current predicament as an opposition is....interesting, though.

 

[DespicablePeep]

https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleic...olsonaro-41-haddad-25-ciro-13-alckmin-8.ghtml

Don't give a fuck about senate seats from other states. Should we mention all the results that they predicted correctly? It might take a while.

The senate is not important right?

Such a dumb fuck.

Polls got everything wrong, from governor to senate. Presidency the margin of error was 2% they were off at least 5%.

Polling is very important but in Brasil they get away with mistakes that are not common elsewhere.

 

[MiniCraque]

The senate is not important right?

Such a dumb fuck.

Polls got everything wrong, from governor to senate. Presidency the margin of error was 2% they were off at least 5%.

Polling is very important but in Brasil they get away with mistakes that are not common elsewhere.

Dunno why you would resort to name calling, but I guess you're showing your true colors.

You asked for one poll showing 41%. I provided it to you. Learn to eat crow and bow out gracefully. This isn't a good look.

 

[Brazilian HKD]

It's way more stupid coming from people that are separated from the reality of it by one full generation at best. People who were already born when the military cronies tortured, murdered and bankrupted the country somehow want them back. It's mind-boggling.

Well, to be fair, in some cities, there are still lots of stories of ressentment on what the commie coluna Prestes did to the local populations. That without counting what Prestes himself did to the memory of his own wife killed in the Holocaust.
My point is that sometimes these issues don't only happen for a lack of memory, but because of enduring memories too.

 

[Bald1]

Wtf is stabing?

Unsuccessful murder attempt by sharp pointy object. Stabbing lite.

 

[Fawlty]

If it's true that he's openly calling for dictatorship, military destruction of checks and balances, and the murder of his political opponents, it is morally defensible to murder him, and it may even be a moral imperative, depending on the circumstances. I don't know enough about the context or Brazilian politics to say for sure in this instance, but it's not automatically wrong to commit political violence.

 

[TheGreatA]

If it's true that he's openly calling for dictatorship, military destruction of checks and balances, and the murder of his political opponents, it is morally defensible to murder him, and it may even be a moral imperative, depending on the circumstances. I don't know enough about the context or Brazilian politics to say for sure in this instance, but it's not automatically wrong to commit political violence.

I suppose the question is whether this is just macho posturing for certain demographics, or whether he's actually going to go through with it.

From the sound of it, I'd say that he's just bullshitting, and playing the "hard man". Most of such statements appear to be from the 90's, it's possible that his views have matured a bit in the past 20 years or so.

I suppose I'll leave it to the Brazilians to make the judgments regarding that.

 

[Fawlty]

I suppose the question is whether this is just macho posturing for certain demographics, or whether he's actually going to go through with it.

From the sound of it, I'd say that he's just bullshitting, and playing the "hard man". Most of such statements appear to be from the 90's, it's possible that his views have matured a bit in the past 20 years or so.

I suppose I'll leave it to the Brazilians to make the judgments regarding that.

Yeah for sure the Brazilian people should judge that. I think it's very important to take people at their word for the bad things they say they are going to do, because it's such a huge moral hazard to brush something like that off and then find out the person wasn't bullshitting.

 

[TheGreatA]

Yeah for sure the Brazilian people should judge that. I think it's very important to take people at their word for the bad things they say they are going to do, because it's such a huge moral hazard to brush something like that off and then find out the person wasn't bullshitting.

It gets more and more difficult to take people at their word in an era of attention-seeking, publicity stunts, sensationalist clickbait journalism, and such.

It could be that we will inevitably get "burned" by a man who actually ends up doing as he says. But then again, our society does not necessarily cultivate such people.

To a Donald Trump, having his diet coke sent to his room at frequent intervals, is more important than accomplishing a totalitarian mission while dodging grenades and thwarting knife attacks.

 

[Rod1]

Yeah, I mean...dictatorships can be nice and benevolent in some instances. Yugoslavia comes to mind as the best, where the considerable majority of former Yugoslavs miss the republic. Other like in Libya and Cuba have legitimately provided for considerable improvement in living standards. Others like in Iran provided a sense of independence and security from outside bad actors. Even with more flawed ones like China and Vietnam, it at least brought stability to a perpetually unstable people.

I always call BS on benevolent dictatorships, unless said benevolent dictatorship directly resulted in the creation of a liberal democratic state. Most of these "developments" was just the world moving ahead an dragging them ahead with them.

Weird that you also forgot to mention Pinochet as a "benevolent" dictatorship considering the overall success story of Chile post-Pinochet.

Libya and Yugoslavia i can understand since these dictators kept ethnic conflicts in check, but most latin American dictators were just crappy people that harmed their countries

 

[TheGreatA]

I always call BS on benevolent dictatorships, unless said benevolent dictatorship directly resulted in the creation of a liberal democratic state. Most of these "developments" was just the world moving ahead an dragging them ahead with them.

Weird that you also forgot to mention Pinochet as a "benevolent" dictatorship considering the overall success story of Chile post-Pinochet.

Libya and Yugoslavia i can understand since these dictators kept ethnic conflicts in check, but most latin American dictators were just crappy people that harmed their countries

There are some "benevolent dictators" in history that I would regard as not complete pieces of shit. In most cases, they were ones who brought about a greater level of freedom for the citizens, though. I consider Alexander II of Russia to be such, unfortunately he was followed by two complete buffoons who smashed all of his attempts of establishing a parliamentary monarchy, beyond repair.

Actually I always wondered about what do the Mexicans generally think of Maximilian I, the Austrian dude who was used as a French putz in order to take hold of Mexican territory? He seemed like a decent dude who was put in a shitty position. Is he just a forgotten piece of history, at this point?

 

[CauseImbetta]

Leftists are nuts.

 

[Rod1]

Actually I always wondered about what do the Mexicans generally think of Maximilian I, the Austrian dude who was used as a French putz in order to take hold of Mexican territory? He seemed like a decent dude who was put in a shitty position. Is he just a forgotten piece of history, at this point?

He is seen as part of the broader topic of French intervention, like a second independence war, he isnt portrayed as either a villain or a hero, just another faction in the long war between liberals and conservatives.

There is some type of revindication among Mexican center-right folk because he was actually more liberal than the liberals which was one of the reasons he was abandoned to his fate and certainly i wouldnt call him a dictator since he wanted to establish a parliamentary monarchy.

 

[TheGreatA]

He is seen as part of the broader topic of French intervention, like a second independence war, he isnt portrayed as either a villain or a hero, just another faction in the long war between liberals and conservatives.

There is some type of revindication among Mexican center-right folk because he was actually more liberal than the liberals which was one of the reasons he was abandoned to his fate and certainly i wouldnt call him a dictator since he wanted to establish a parliamentary monarchy.

Sounds like an objective way of looking at it.

He ended up being a man without a country. That was the fate of quite many liberal-minded (and sometimes absent-minded) European monarchs of the 19th century, leading to the subsequent monarchs being conservative reactionaries (who all completely collapsed by WW1).

I consider my country quite lucky for having ditched the idea of a German-born monarch ruling the country, in favour of a proper democracy. Of course, all of that required a bloody Civil War, as it often does.