Russia - worrying?

[Steve_uk]

     Both Navalny and Duntsova are so irrelevant, it is a joke that you take this nonsense seriously. The equivalent would be Tass or RT entertaining their readers with tales of farcical UK elections from Tommy Robinson and Nick Griffin and passing it off as serious political commentary. This is not serious reporting on Russian politics, Steve. Duntsova is less than irrelevant, as the story admits, and Navalny is irrelevant and a fraudster and criminal. At least use credible sources.

So why not let them stand? It makes me think the Russian propaganda machine is so fragile that it has to bar any serious contender lest momentum be accrued and Putin heaven forbid loses to them.

[Steve_uk]

I'll say one thing about the former Soviet Union, tyrannical and despotic as it was: they always kept the legal agreements they signed.

[gringo]

So why not let them stand? It makes me think the Russian propaganda machine is so fragile that it has to bar any serious contender lest momentum be accrued and Putin heaven forbid loses to them.

    Why do you think that they are not allowed to stand? Do you think they are serious people? Communists are the largest opposition bloc and "allowed" to stand. Why aren't they banned? People like Navalny and Duntsova are western media promoted irrelevances. They get barred on purpose by failing to comply with the rules for candidacy. This is then spun to the gullible as "tyrannical Putin banning opposition parties". It is nonsense and obvious agitprop rather than serious analysis or commentary. I am not surprised that you gulp down such obvious propaganda.
     Does it never occur to you, Steve, that Putin has high approval in Russia? He has no need to ban serious opposition. If he did, Duntsova and Navalny wouldn't be banned, they would be allowed to run to give the facade of choice. They are fringe nutcases and not taken seriously by anyone but other fringe nutcases.

[ngb1066]

As for some member's avatar involving profanity towards a state which attacked nobody and to which on a previous occasion I made an objection in private, says more about the moderators of this site than it does about the individual member in question, who has been given more leeway due to his mental state than in my opinion is warranted.

Once again you have been unable to resist attacking the moderation team here and you do not limit yourself to criticism of a decision made, but have to make it personal.  The avatar to which you refer is not one I would choose and we did consider whether action was necessary in the light of objections, but the difficulty is that the avatar was in direct response to another here and if we insisted on removal of one we would feel it necessary to insist upon the other being removed.  We do not want to censor members more than absolutely necessary.  It is at times difficult to know where to draw the line but we do our best. 

I also think you you refrain from making personal comments about another member, as you have done in your post.  It is inappropriate.

   

[David1819]

Once again you have been unable to resist attacking the moderation team here and you do not limit yourself to criticism of a decision made, but have to make it personal.  The avatar to which you refer is not one I would choose and we did consider whether action was necessary in the light of objections, but the difficulty is that the avatar was in direct response to another here and if we insisted on removal of one we would feel it necessary to insist upon the other being removed.  We do not want to censor members more than absolutely necessary.  It is at times difficult to know where to draw the line but we do our best. 

I also think you you refrain from making personal comments about another member, as you have done in your post.  It is inappropriate.

   

That avatar does put the forum in a bad light. There are far more appropriate ways of getting your views across.

[David1819]

Why do you think that they are not allowed to stand? Do you think they are serious people? Communists are the largest opposition bloc and "allowed" to stand. Why aren't they banned?

Because they are controlled and systemic opposition. They are given sanction purely because they don't pose a threat to the status quo. Much like the the North Korean KSDP.

https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/d28ay6/russias_communist_party_real_or_controlled/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

[David1819]

Does it never occur to you, Steve, that Putin has high approval in Russia?

Wow. I guess Ceausescu's 98% percent of the vote actually reflected his peoples private sentiments just five years prior to revolting against him en masse.

I guess Saddam Hussein's 99% from a 100% turnout in 1995 actually reflected his peoples private sentiments also. Despite mass murdering tens of thousands of Shia's and Kurds just four years prior for insubordination

You are either naive in the extreme or taking us for complete idiots.

[ngb1066]

That avatar does put the forum in a bad light. There are far more appropriate ways of getting your views across.

I agree there are, but that does not mean censorship is the answer. I am not keen on your strapline but I have not stopped you using it.  The avatar complained about was in response to your strapline and I understand the sentiment behind it, even though I would not myself use something like that.

 

 

[Roch]

Whose avatars are being referred to here?

[David1819]

Wow. I guess Ceausescu's 98% percent of the vote actually reflected his peoples private sentiments just five years prior to revolting against him en masse.

I guess Saddam Hussein's 99% from a 100% turnout in 1995 actually reflected his peoples private sentiments also. Despite mass murdering tens of thousands of Shia's and Kurds just four years prior for insubordination

You are either naive in the extreme or taking us for complete idiots.

Putin's current government style is straight out of Napoleon Bonapartes play book - an iron fist in a velvet glove.

Try challenging him and his cronies directly or disputing your nullified election candidacy. You will either find yourself facing a pile of bogus criminal charges suddenly appearing in the district attorneys office. Sick in hospital with doctors too afraid to produce an honest toxicology report. Falling out a window in an "accident" or falling from 15,000ft in an aircraft "malfunction". Case closed.

[ngb1066]

Whose avatars are being referred to here?

nugnug and David1819

[Roch]

nugnug and David1819

Ah, I see. Thanks.

[gringo]

Wow. I guess Ceausescu's 98% percent of the vote actually reflected his peoples private sentiments just five years prior to revolting against him en masse.

I guess Saddam Hussein's 99% from a 100% turnout in 1995 actually reflected his peoples private sentiments also. Despite mass murdering tens of thousands of Shia's and Kurds just four years prior for insubordination

You are either naive in the extreme or taking us for complete idiots.

     David, the popularity of Putin is not disputed even by western media. Do you think that your concern with domestic politics should be closer to home? You know nothing but agitprop about Russia. I make no comment on their electoral system but it is simply objectively true that Putin enjoys high poll ratings. What has Ceausescu got to do with anything? And Saddam. You just prove you have nothing of any value to add.
     That you consider the Communist Party as "controlled opposition" is based on nothing other than your ignorance. You regard the likes of Navalny and Nemtsov as credible opposition leaders/voices when they are nothing of the sort.
     I have no opinion and nor do I care about the intricacies of the Russian electoral system. I am more concerned with the shortcomings of our own system because that affects me. I'm not gullible enough to get worked up by fake anger of western propagandists, unlike you. The fact that you ever refer to Navalny as some credible politician outs you as ill informed. Gullible, ill informed and a sucker for whatever propaganda is being served up to you.
       

[gringo]

So why not let them stand? It makes me think the Russian propaganda machine is so fragile that it has to bar any serious contender lest momentum be accrued and Putin heaven forbid loses to them.

    They could stand if they were serious people who filled out paperwork correctly. Duntsova's application to stand because of mistakes in the paperwork is the work of people who aren't seriously trying to stand. There is more value for propagandists in the story of Putin stopping "rivals" from standing hence the deliberate sabotaging of her own application. It is laughable. See below;

     
"Duntsova said that she planned to appeal the decision in court, although she did not dismiss claims that there had been errors in the filed paperwork, saying the application had been put together on short notice and she had difficulty finding a lawyer to assist her in certifying the paperwork"
"She also said that she intended to ask the Yabloko party to nominate her as a candidate.
Later that day, Yabloko party leader Grigory Yavlinsky said in an interview that he was unsure if the party would consider Duntsova's nomination"
[/i]

    She is allowed to stand, Steve. She just needs to act in a professional manner expected of a Presidential candidate. Her own admitted failure to even provide the paperwork correctly tells all you need to know. As I say, any presidential run would show the deep unpopularity of idiots such as Navalny, Nemtsov and now Duntsova. It is better for western propaganda purposes to manufacture a story whereby the tyrannical Putin has prevented candidates from running. Only the hard of thinking fail to see through such childish nonsense.

[Steve_uk]

    They could stand if they were serious people who filled out paperwork correctly. Duntsova's application to stand because of mistakes in the paperwork is the work of people who aren't seriously trying to stand. There is more value for propagandists in the story of Putin stopping "rivals" from standing hence the deliberate sabotaging of her own application. It is laughable. See below;

     
"Duntsova said that she planned to appeal the decision in court, although she did not dismiss claims that there had been errors in the filed paperwork, saying the application had been put together on short notice and she had difficulty finding a lawyer to assist her in certifying the paperwork"
"She also said that she intended to ask the Yabloko party to nominate her as a candidate.
Later that day, Yabloko party leader Grigory Yavlinsky said in an interview that he was unsure if the party would consider Duntsova's nomination"
[/i]

    She is allowed to stand, Steve. She just needs to act in a professional manner expected of a Presidential candidate. Her own admitted failure to even provide the paperwork correctly tells all you need to know. As I say, any presidential run would show the deep unpopularity of idiots such as Navalny, Nemtsov and now Duntsova. It is better for western propaganda purposes to manufacture a story whereby the tyrannical Putin has prevented candidates from running. Only the hard of thinking fail to see through such childish nonsense.

Please don't insult members' intelligence. Boris Nemtsov was a Professor of Physics at Moscow University. Some idiot. https://youtu.be/vM04zNbsaJg

They tried to kill Navalny. Now he's been arrested on trumped up charges. https://youtu.be/mQUGx0JBE9E

I don't know much about Yekaterina Duntsova. Maybe she was a lightweight. Or maybe Putin didn't want a repeat of the Belarussian election in 2020, which many claim Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya won. https://youtu.be/v5lrRikWWzI