Political Discussion and Commentary
A place to discuss politics and offer political commentary. Self posts are preferred, but links to current events and news are allowed. Opinion pieces are welcome on a case by case basis, and discussion of and disagreement about issues is encouraged!
The intent is for this community to be an area for open & respectful discussion on current political issues, news & events, and that means we all have a responsibility to be open, honest, and sincere. We place as much emphasis on good content as good behavior, but the latter is more important if we want to ensure this community remains healthy and vibrant.
Content Rules:
- Self posts preferred.
- Opinion pieces and editorials are allowed on a case by case basis.
- No spam or self promotion.
- Do not post grievances about other communities or their moderators.
Commentary Rules
- Don’t be a jerk or do anything to prevent honest discussion.
- Stay on topic.
- Don’t criticize the person, criticize the argument.
- Provide credible sources whenever possible.
- Report bad behavior, please don’t retaliate. Reciprocal bad behavior will reflect poorly on both parties.
- Seek rule enforcement clarification via private message, not in comment threads.
- Abide by Lemmy's terms of service (attacks on other users, privacy, discrimination, etc).
Please try to up/downvote based on contribution to discussion, not on whether you agree or disagree with the commenter.
Partnered Communities:
• Politics
• Science
view the rest of the comments
Just reading though the Wikipedia page, he ruled by decree for a while, then ran elections that had results very different from the results of polls prior to the election.
You are right that elections were watched internationally but the conclusion was that the 2024 result was almost certainly won by the opposition. Manduro's government announced he had won without even providing any tallys.
I'm not an expert on Venezuela, but I do want to note that the exact same thing happened for Trump's first presidency. All the polls said Hillary Clinton would win.
Not an expert either, just the first numbers i found: the us polls had a 2-5% lead for clinton. And they were (basically) correct. Clinton won the popular vote by a 2% margin. Thats on the lower end of the estimate, but i dont see a reason to assume some (widespread) fraud from this.
From this guardian article, it seems in venezuela, the numbers were wildly different
Note that they arent speaking of polls, but the actual voting tallies of the election. If these are indeed the real tallies, there couldnt be such a wide margin of difference
Yeah but even in the US, polls had Trump getting more than 16% of the vote.
And there were watchers polling people about who they voted for as they left voting booths, and the results showed the main opposition candidate winning by a landslide. Plus the whole thing where the Manduro government said he won by a close margin but didn't release tabulated results so it was just "trust me, I won".
Results were released. Not sure what you mean by tabulated, but I assume you're repeating the talking point about the tallies, which are the tallies from the individual polling stations. Those were also released. But the criticism was that the government announced the results before releasing those individual polling station tallies, citing technical problems.
A point on ruling by decree: Maduro was already democratically elected when he requested approval to rule by decree, and extended it or re-requested many times to combat Venezuela's deepest crisis in history. The rule by decree doesn't negate the election he won.
On your second point: that's the conclusion from sources with a clear bias and partisan funding. The tallies were released. You're probably talking about tallies from the individual polling stations, which were released with a short delay, citing technical issues. And by the way, the US elections, for example, do not publish such tallies at all. So it is strange to call Maduro a dictator without saying the same of every US president, and every other world leader whose elections do not make polling station tallies available at all (let alone before announcement).
I want to be clear here, I am simply answering your question about why people think Maduro was a dictator. I'm sure there are counterpoints. Though ruling by decree is a notable feature of dictatorships, and knowing no more about it, it seems odd that a decree was needed if he was already ruling.
On a side note as my comments may come across as supportive of the actions of the US, if we were going to have a world police there is no way I'd want the US involved.
Yes you're right, I think the fact that the Wikipedia article emphasizes the rule by decree without explaining further can explain why many people arrive to they conclusion, you're right. I appreciate your answer there!
To add a bit more detail about why the rule by decree was needed, it wasn't about a need to stay in power. Venezuela's government system has limited presidential powers. The decree granted him more powers in order to be able to respond to the economic crisis.
The decrees that he requested often times would last 30 days, 60 days, etc. Although the longest one exceeded a year iirc. I'm adding that as a clarifying detail on the role of the decree.