Why democracy works in Venezuela but fails in the US as it did in the 2 previous elections.?

Question

Last2 US elections were a failure of demoracy were the majority were against Having Bush but the Oil machine stole the elections twice , thus , democracy failed. Why?.Why is it that the bush administration and many call Venezuela a third country, however, democracy lives and it flourishes better in Venezuela then in the US.! As we saw the pass weekend,Why.?Why venezuelans say no to Chaves but North Americans citizens can'nt say no to Bush.Why.?

Answer 1

That is interesting. Venezuela said NO to their would be dictator. Neo-cons embrace America's first dictator.

Answer 2

We live in two different worlds.
Chaves was very brave to put his future up to the electorate. I'm personally glad he failed. I only hope that the democratic forces in Venezuela are consistently strong enough to keep Chaves in his place and Venezuela's constitution in place.

Don't let Chaves turn your wonderful nation into a Cuba.

Regarding Bush's elections. You are correct. The Republican Party was so strong that they were able to influence the media which destroyed a generation of honest government in the USA. History will look sadly upon the GW Bush presidency, and the failure of the US Constitution to protect the people of this country. When the government fails us, we have the obligation to change it. That is about to happen, legally and fairly this time. Or there may be more than a few chads hung in this countries streets.

Answer 3

12 365 days? incorrect, attempt all of historic previous. human beings have comments, and are aloud to voice them. Your going to get lots of BS solutions here, yet i'm purely going to grant you info, no comments. the reason the US has been much less useful then that's been interior the previous, is for the reason that's swerving faraway from its roots. the US replaced into no longer, and is not any longer a Democracy. that's a Republic Democracy. It takes products of the two. the main important areas taken are (from democracy) a public ideal to elect. And from the Republic end, capacity to the numbers, to no longer somebody. Now, do no longer omit understand me. maximum Republics have a ruler (The Republic of China case in point). That area replaced into skipped over. the capacity is interior the senate. And no, the President isn't a 'ruler' or a minimum of he's not meant to be. the US replaced into based, with separation of powers. The President is meant to have the smallest volume of capacity out of the branches. specially he's meant to be a determine head. post WWII, the president has been taking greater capacity, alongside with maximum different politicians. alongside with this, the US has been commencing up to lean greater to the Democracy edge of issues. lower back, are not getting me incorrect, it would be undesirable in the event that they began leaning too a how you are able to the Republic edge of issues too. that's meant to be balanced. that's the way it replaced into made to artwork. Like a gadget, it purely works one way. once you commence changing the way it runs, (like including greater operations to a gadget) it stops working right. Politicaly there is what some refure to because of the fact the pendulum. whilst one person steps into the spotlight, the individuals anylize him. whilst this starts off, you have a considerable majority to that person. As time is going on, especialy with Presidents, they get greater extremist services, and so do people who persist with them. Then the individuals start to get closer to splitting 50 50. quickly after that, chaos comes, and anarchy follows. that's whilst issues commence over. ok, time to take the thumbs down.

Answer 4

You may not have liked the outcome of the last two elections but the process worked.

Presidential elections are based on the electoral college not on the majority vote. That protects the voice of the states with smaller populations.

Americans voted for Bush in 2004 because they didn't like the Kerry/Edwards ticket.
We hated it so much Kerry is regarded as a failure and Edwards doesn't stand a chance this time around.

Answer 5

True, a large amount of the population in Venezuela supports Chavez. In that sense he's a true democrat.

But this mess up he's doing with your constitution, the control of the press, the way he treats the opposition and the demonstrating students...

Answer 6

bush didnt steal anything. he was elected. just because you dont support him does not mean he stole anything. i love how democrats are the ones who claim elections are rigged, yet they are the ones against laws to clean up elections (like voter id laws)

if you like socialist venezuela so much you should try to move there

have a nice day

Answer 7

Licking your commy wounds after losing the elections in Venezuela today I see. Don't worry, Chavez will hold elections every six months until he get's his way. The mean time will be spent silencing dissent and harrassing voters.

You can not suggest that the U.S. has a worse democracy than Venezuela without having a very obvious agenda or being bat crazy.

Answer 8

Your question has me in stitches buddy. Is this the new liberalism - something is stolen if our party does not win?
And, where did you get the 2 election schtick? Fact is that he won both elections and the contest in the first was decided by the highest court in the land. So, if you don't like our laws do you just choose to ignore them??

Answer 9

It would work here too, except Repubes will go to any means (even if that means violating election rules) to get their candidate elected (or selected, rather). But the Dems are also to blame because they could have done more about it, instead of whining and pouting.

Answer 10

The U.S.A. is a democratic republic . . . a technical difference. I was very proud of Venezuela today . . . We do say no to Bush but our system is different then yours . . .

Answer 11

For some reason it worked. the bushes won via our constitution. However| it failed in 1960 when all the dead voted in chicago.