|
|
On May 12 2014 01:40 Mc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. By the way, I'm a US citizen and live in the US - you can dispense with the whole "brainwashed by Russian propaganda" BS that you keep spouting. I hardly watch Russian news. On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:Let me ask you this, and i'd like you to answer honestly and direct - do you actually think this is even close to a voting that could have any legitimate outcome? As in, any result other than being a farce beyond anything i personally have ever seen? Do I think that these elections will run without any questionable procedures? No. Do I think that these elections will have a legitimate outcome? Maybe. We'll see the general public reaction after the vote, because that isn't very easy to fake. Do I think that this is a farce beyond anything you have ever seen? Look no further than the May 25 elections, which essentially have no representation for East Ukranians because any pro-Russian candidates were chased out of Kiev by mob violence. Uhhhh, there are plenty of pro-Russian candidates remaining in Ukraine. Just because Yanukovych fled, doesn't mean that all pro-Russian politicians have fled. The party of regions still exists and still holds a lot of seats in parliament (I think about 25% if you read wiki). How about a faction leader of the party of regions Oleksandr Yefremov? He is clearly pro-Russian and clearly still in Ukraine ( link)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2014#Candidates
One pro-Russian candidate in the entire group, supported by 4% of opinion polls.
If that's not a farce of an election, I don't know what is.
|
On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share.
Preferably people would be informed ahead of time so they could reach the regions where the vote was to happen or at least a system for letter voting. There is no "reasonable" solution in the situation because the "planning" has been far too rushed.
|
On May 12 2014 01:50 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share. Preferably people would be informed ahead of time so they could reach the regions where the vote was to happen or at least a system for letter voting. There is no "reasonable" solution in the situation because the "planning" has been far too rushed.
That's the real issue here. But given the fact that the referendum wasn't going to be moved, this seems like a reasonable enough solution.
On May 12 2014 01:45 m4ini wrote:
How about not rushing the vote for whatever reason? You know, have a proper, planned voting?
Easy to say when you live in a Western democracy.
In a country with as much corruption and internal struggle as Ukraine, it's simply never going to happen. What is the proper procedure for voting to break away from an illegitimate government that won't recognize the results of a vote?
|
On May 12 2014 01:52 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:50 radiatoren wrote:On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share. Preferably people would be informed ahead of time so they could reach the regions where the vote was to happen or at least a system for letter voting. There is no "reasonable" solution in the situation because the "planning" has been far too rushed. That's the real issue here. But given the fact that the referendum wasn't going to be moved, this seems like a reasonable enough solution.
Again, there is nothing "reasonable" about having a different country (which isn't even neutral on the issue) organize & supervise part of a referendum over political change in a country.
|
On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:
If you have a better solution to that issue, do share.
Wait till the votes on the 25th are finished and the proposed laws for federalization have been passed. Then talk to the government in Kiev and figure out what people should vote about. This vote has no legitimization at all. As Bavaria can't just simply vote itself out of Germany , administrative regions can't just simply vote itself out of Ukraine.
|
On May 12 2014 01:49 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:40 Mc wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. By the way, I'm a US citizen and live in the US - you can dispense with the whole "brainwashed by Russian propaganda" BS that you keep spouting. I hardly watch Russian news. On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:Let me ask you this, and i'd like you to answer honestly and direct - do you actually think this is even close to a voting that could have any legitimate outcome? As in, any result other than being a farce beyond anything i personally have ever seen? Do I think that these elections will run without any questionable procedures? No. Do I think that these elections will have a legitimate outcome? Maybe. We'll see the general public reaction after the vote, because that isn't very easy to fake. Do I think that this is a farce beyond anything you have ever seen? Look no further than the May 25 elections, which essentially have no representation for East Ukranians because any pro-Russian candidates were chased out of Kiev by mob violence. Uhhhh, there are plenty of pro-Russian candidates remaining in Ukraine. Just because Yanukovych fled, doesn't mean that all pro-Russian politicians have fled. The party of regions still exists and still holds a lot of seats in parliament (I think about 25% if you read wiki). How about a faction leader of the party of regions Oleksandr Yefremov? He is clearly pro-Russian and clearly still in Ukraine ( link) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2014#CandidatesOne pro-Russian candidate in the entire group, supported by 4% of opinion polls. If that's not a farce of an election, I don't know what is.
Perhaps this is the general public opinion you spoke of a few posts before?
|
On May 12 2014 02:00 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:
If you have a better solution to that issue, do share. Wait till the votes on the 25th are finished and the proposed laws for federalization have been passed. Then talk to the government in Kiev and figure out what people should vote about. This vote has no legitimization at all. As Bavaria can't just simply vote itself out of Germany , administrative regions can't just simply vote itself out of Ukraine.
I would agree that this vote would be better on the 25th.
But they refused to move it, so it comes down to one of two possibilities: either refuse to represent absentee voters, or allow Russia to take care of the logistics.
On May 12 2014 02:03 Roman666 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:49 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:40 Mc wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. By the way, I'm a US citizen and live in the US - you can dispense with the whole "brainwashed by Russian propaganda" BS that you keep spouting. I hardly watch Russian news. On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:Let me ask you this, and i'd like you to answer honestly and direct - do you actually think this is even close to a voting that could have any legitimate outcome? As in, any result other than being a farce beyond anything i personally have ever seen? Do I think that these elections will run without any questionable procedures? No. Do I think that these elections will have a legitimate outcome? Maybe. We'll see the general public reaction after the vote, because that isn't very easy to fake. Do I think that this is a farce beyond anything you have ever seen? Look no further than the May 25 elections, which essentially have no representation for East Ukranians because any pro-Russian candidates were chased out of Kiev by mob violence. Uhhhh, there are plenty of pro-Russian candidates remaining in Ukraine. Just because Yanukovych fled, doesn't mean that all pro-Russian politicians have fled. The party of regions still exists and still holds a lot of seats in parliament (I think about 25% if you read wiki). How about a faction leader of the party of regions Oleksandr Yefremov? He is clearly pro-Russian and clearly still in Ukraine ( link) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2014#CandidatesOne pro-Russian candidate in the entire group, supported by 4% of opinion polls. If that's not a farce of an election, I don't know what is. Perhaps this is the general public opinion you spoke of, a few posts before?
Laughable. Look at the demographics of Ukraine and you will see that it simply is not the case.
|
On May 12 2014 01:52 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:50 radiatoren wrote:On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share. Preferably people would be informed ahead of time so they could reach the regions where the vote was to happen or at least a system for letter voting. There is no "reasonable" solution in the situation because the "planning" has been far too rushed. That's the real issue here. But given the fact that the referendum wasn't going to be moved, this seems like a reasonable enough solution.
I don't buy that. The referendum should have been moved if they wanted a reasonably reliable outcome. That it wasn't is a sign of a lacking due dilligence and respect for the bureaucracy needed to make the outcome reasonably trustworthy by democratic standards.
Also, the lack of specificity of the options on the ballot is a sign of too little information for the voters. Having at least four different interpretations of what a "yes" means is pretty bad.
|
On May 12 2014 02:03 LegalLord wrote:
Laughable. Look at the demographics of Ukraine and you will see that it simply is not the case.
What is the case then? I have no other idea how to measure public opinion than by poll or legitimate elections.
|
On May 12 2014 02:05 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:52 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:50 radiatoren wrote:On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share. Preferably people would be informed ahead of time so they could reach the regions where the vote was to happen or at least a system for letter voting. There is no "reasonable" solution in the situation because the "planning" has been far too rushed. That's the real issue here. But given the fact that the referendum wasn't going to be moved, this seems like a reasonable enough solution. I don't buy that. The referendum should have been moved if they wanted a reasonably reliable outcome. That it wasn't is a sign of a lacking due dilligence and respect for the bureaucracy needed to make the outcome reasonably trustworthy by democratic standards. Also, the lack of specificity of the options on the ballot is a sign of too little information for the voters. Having at least four different interpretations of what a "yes" means is pretty bad.
A few questions.
1. Who do you refer to by "they" in your post? Russia, or the ones running the referendum in Ukraine?
2. Who do you think has the power to change the date of the vote?
On May 12 2014 02:09 Roman666 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 02:03 LegalLord wrote:
Laughable. Look at the demographics of Ukraine and you will see that it simply is not the case. What is the case then? I have no other idea how to measure public opinion than by poll or legitimate elections.
A sizeable fraction of Ukraine is pro-Russia and a sizeable fraction is not. The East is more pro-Russia than the West. Look at which parts of the country raised Russian flags when Yanukovich was removed from office.
There is no chance for a legitimate election, and the polls don't seem to be particularly representative of the overall population, so I suppose you don't have any other measure of public opinion if that's all you have to go by if that's all you trust.
|
On May 12 2014 01:49 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:40 Mc wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. By the way, I'm a US citizen and live in the US - you can dispense with the whole "brainwashed by Russian propaganda" BS that you keep spouting. I hardly watch Russian news. On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:Let me ask you this, and i'd like you to answer honestly and direct - do you actually think this is even close to a voting that could have any legitimate outcome? As in, any result other than being a farce beyond anything i personally have ever seen? Do I think that these elections will run without any questionable procedures? No. Do I think that these elections will have a legitimate outcome? Maybe. We'll see the general public reaction after the vote, because that isn't very easy to fake. Do I think that this is a farce beyond anything you have ever seen? Look no further than the May 25 elections, which essentially have no representation for East Ukranians because any pro-Russian candidates were chased out of Kiev by mob violence. Uhhhh, there are plenty of pro-Russian candidates remaining in Ukraine. Just because Yanukovych fled, doesn't mean that all pro-Russian politicians have fled. The party of regions still exists and still holds a lot of seats in parliament (I think about 25% if you read wiki). How about a faction leader of the party of regions Oleksandr Yefremov? He is clearly pro-Russian and clearly still in Ukraine ( link) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2014#CandidatesOne pro-Russian candidate in the entire group, supported by 4% of opinion polls. If that's not a farce of an election, I don't know what is.
So the fact that the only pro-Russian candidate is gaining 4% in opinion polls means that the election is a farce? wtf? The people don't want to vote pro-Russian (according to numerous opinion polls you cited), so the election is a farce? Nice logic. Pro-Russian politicians are eligible to run in the elections. The fact that no one wants to vote for them, doesn't make it a farce. It seems like most Ukrainian's want a non-extreme politician that is for fighting corruption and working with the West to develop the economy/democracy.
Just take a look at how much votes Tyahnybok from Svoboda is getting (2%!!!). It seems like Ukrainian's don't want a right-sector/nationalist president and don't want a pro-Russian president. That would make sense given the past few years.
Also you forgot about Tihipko who currently has 6.7 to 8.8 percent of the votes. He also is Russian-leaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serhiy_Tihipko
|
1. The leaders of the Donetsk People's Republic and its supporters in Russia
2. same
|
On May 12 2014 02:11 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 02:05 radiatoren wrote:On May 12 2014 01:52 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:50 radiatoren wrote:On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share. Preferably people would be informed ahead of time so they could reach the regions where the vote was to happen or at least a system for letter voting. There is no "reasonable" solution in the situation because the "planning" has been far too rushed. That's the real issue here. But given the fact that the referendum wasn't going to be moved, this seems like a reasonable enough solution. I don't buy that. The referendum should have been moved if they wanted a reasonably reliable outcome. That it wasn't is a sign of a lacking due dilligence and respect for the bureaucracy needed to make the outcome reasonably trustworthy by democratic standards. Also, the lack of specificity of the options on the ballot is a sign of too little information for the voters. Having at least four different interpretations of what a "yes" means is pretty bad. A few questions. 1. Who do you refer to by "they" in your post? Russia, or the ones running the referendum in Ukraine? 2. Who do you think has the power to change the date of the vote?
I am assuming several things here. "They" are the separatists. I assume it is possible to hold an otherwise decent vote, I assume they have some understanding of what a referendum means and I assume they are in charge of both the Ukraine and Moscow election.
Russia as such is pretty friendly towards the separatists by allowing this to begin with, but I don't hold Russia responsible for the outcome even though it would be extremely problematic if Russians were the actual responsible party for this booth.
|
On May 12 2014 02:03 LegalLord wrote:
Wait till the votes on the 25th are finished and the proposed laws for federalization have been passed. Then talk to the government in Kiev and figure out what people should vote about. This vote has no legitimization at all. As Bavaria can't just simply vote itself out of Germany , administrative regions can't just simply vote itself out of Ukraine.
I would agree that this vote would be better on the 25th.
But they refused to move it, so it comes down to one of two possibilities: either refuse to represent absentee voters, or allow
The only reasonable solution would have been for Russia to ignore the vote and support the presidential elections and encourage the people in Eastern Ukraine to stop doing what they're doing. Instead they're again trying to escalate the situation by supporting an illegitimate vote.
|
On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share.
Here's the solution: Don't allow absentee ballots. This vote is for people who are living in Ukraine, not people who live in Russia.
Not a good enough solution for you?
Solution 2: Absentee ballots in every country. Don't worry, I'll run the operations in the US. And I will definitely make sure that everyone who votes has a Ukrainian passport (those are the ones with the crazy russian letters, right?)
|
On May 12 2014 02:26 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 02:03 LegalLord wrote:
Wait till the votes on the 25th are finished and the proposed laws for federalization have been passed. Then talk to the government in Kiev and figure out what people should vote about. This vote has no legitimization at all. As Bavaria can't just simply vote itself out of Germany , administrative regions can't just simply vote itself out of Ukraine.
I would agree that this vote would be better on the 25th.
But they refused to move it, so it comes down to one of two possibilities: either refuse to represent absentee voters, or allow The only reasonable solution would have been for Russia to ignore the vote and support the presidential elections and encourage the people in Eastern Ukraine to stop doing what they're doing. Instead they're again trying to escalate the situation by supporting an illegitimate vote.
That possibility went out the window when Ukraine refused to cease military operations in the East. There is no chance of a legitimate vote and so Russia's actions are definitely reasonable, if unpopular with other countries.
On May 12 2014 02:16 Mc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:49 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:40 Mc wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. By the way, I'm a US citizen and live in the US - you can dispense with the whole "brainwashed by Russian propaganda" BS that you keep spouting. I hardly watch Russian news. On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:Let me ask you this, and i'd like you to answer honestly and direct - do you actually think this is even close to a voting that could have any legitimate outcome? As in, any result other than being a farce beyond anything i personally have ever seen? Do I think that these elections will run without any questionable procedures? No. Do I think that these elections will have a legitimate outcome? Maybe. We'll see the general public reaction after the vote, because that isn't very easy to fake. Do I think that this is a farce beyond anything you have ever seen? Look no further than the May 25 elections, which essentially have no representation for East Ukranians because any pro-Russian candidates were chased out of Kiev by mob violence. Uhhhh, there are plenty of pro-Russian candidates remaining in Ukraine. Just because Yanukovych fled, doesn't mean that all pro-Russian politicians have fled. The party of regions still exists and still holds a lot of seats in parliament (I think about 25% if you read wiki). How about a faction leader of the party of regions Oleksandr Yefremov? He is clearly pro-Russian and clearly still in Ukraine ( link) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_presidential_election,_2014#CandidatesOne pro-Russian candidate in the entire group, supported by 4% of opinion polls. If that's not a farce of an election, I don't know what is. So the fact that the only pro-Russian candidate is gaining 4% in opinion polls means that the election is a farce? wtf? The people don't want to vote pro-Russian (according to numerous opinion polls you cited), so the election is a farce? Nice logic. Pro-Russian politicians are eligible to run in the elections. The fact that no one wants to vote for them, doesn't make it a farce. It seems like most Ukrainian's want a non-extreme politician that is for fighting corruption and working with the West to develop the economy/democracy. Just take a look at how much votes Tyahnybok from Svoboda is getting (2%!!!). It seems like Ukrainian's don't want a right-sector/nationalist president and don't want a pro-Russian president. That would make sense given the past few years. Also you forgot about Tihipko who currently has 6.7 to 8.8 percent of the votes. He also is Russian-leaning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serhiy_Tihipko
I would believe that only 4% of Ukranians are pro-Russian as I would believe an opinion poll that said that 90% of Americans are planning to vote for the Democratic candidate. Demographically, that just makes no sense.
I didn't forget about Tihipko - I just think that the circumstances under which he was expelled from his own party are suspect enough to question what happened in that situation. In any case, significantly more than 15% (giving you the most generous number by those estimates) of actual Ukraine supports Russia. The fact that the polls don't represent this makes the polls themselves inaccurate.
|
On May 12 2014 02:37 LegalLord wrote:
That possibility went out the window when Ukraine refused to cease military operations in the East. There is no chance of a legitimate vote and so Russia's actions are definitely reasonable, if unpopular with other countries.
What was the Ukrainian government supposed to do? Just let armed separatists occupy buildings as they please? We can argue about how these military operations happen, but no government would just sit there while people are taking over public buildings. If that stuff would have happened in Russia I bet it wouldn't have taken a day until the Russian military would have intervened.
|
On May 12 2014 02:37 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 02:26 Nyxisto wrote:On May 12 2014 02:03 LegalLord wrote:
Wait till the votes on the 25th are finished and the proposed laws for federalization have been passed. Then talk to the government in Kiev and figure out what people should vote about. This vote has no legitimization at all. As Bavaria can't just simply vote itself out of Germany , administrative regions can't just simply vote itself out of Ukraine.
I would agree that this vote would be better on the 25th.
But they refused to move it, so it comes down to one of two possibilities: either refuse to represent absentee voters, or allow The only reasonable solution would have been for Russia to ignore the vote and support the presidential elections and encourage the people in Eastern Ukraine to stop doing what they're doing. Instead they're again trying to escalate the situation by supporting an illegitimate vote. That possibility went out the window when Ukraine refused to cease military operations in the East. There is no chance of a legitimate vote and so Russia's actions are definitely reasonable, if unpopular with other countries.
How about the armed separatists? You realize that they are the ones who took up arms in the first place, right? How about they cease their operations first, and then we have the national vote which would actually be legitimate instead of the farce going on this sunday?
There is absolutely nothing "reasonable" about Russia's actions. How is destabilizing, and even militarily annexing part of another country reasonable again?
|
On May 11 2014 23:28 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 22:27 Cheerio wrote:On May 11 2014 22:09 LegalLord wrote:
Not sure how much of the population supports secession, but I know that Kiev certainly didn't win any favors by sending in the military against its own people. I wouldn't be surprised if a majority supports it now. The assumption that a minor piece of news that is totally in line with the recent developments somehow changes the big picture is quite amusing. The assumption that a military intervention that involves the shooting of fellow citizens (justified or not) by the Ukranian military is a minor piece of news is quite troubling.
Haven't seen any footage that citizens were shot during todays Krasnoarmeysk events. Care to share your sources?
On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:
Do I think that this is a farce beyond anything you have ever seen? Look no further than the May 25 elections, which essentially have no representation for East Ukranians because any pro-Russian candidates were chased out of Kiev by mob violence.
Really, so what mob violence did Tygybko (the major East Ukrainian candidate) face?
|
On May 12 2014 01:43 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:38 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:34 kwizach wrote:On May 12 2014 01:25 LegalLord wrote:On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:On May 12 2014 00:48 LegalLord wrote:According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport. That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting. You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote? So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure. There absolutely is something utterly wrong about the procedure, namely that a country is opaquely supervising on its own soil a referendum supposed to lead to major political change in another country. Logistically, it would be just about impossible for the current Donetsk/Donbass government to account for absentee voting, and it isn't exactly fair to prohibit voting just because people left the area (possibly because they didn't want to risk violence?). If you have a better solution to that issue, do share. You mean apart from not holding an referendum that has no legal value whatsoever? It's their problem if there are "logistical problems" - that doesn't change the fact that it's ludicrous to have another country overview on its own soil such a voting procedure.
not just another country, but the one that separatists are planning to join, and the one having a very rich recent history of vote frauds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
