Another crisis 1999-2002

El chabon said:
Kirchner lost the elections in 2003 and Cristina didn't have a majority in 2007

Thank you for supporting me :).

Néstor Kirshner was nobody when he became President. He got 22.2% of the votes but Menem realized that at ballotage Néstor was going to win, so he retired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor_kirshner

Cristina on 2007 won with 45.3% of the votes but the second one was 22% behind her, so there wasn´t ballotage again.

On October 2011, she won with 54.1% and 37.3% over the second candidate.

So, the K project grew from 22% up to 54.1% from the first to the last election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cristina_Kirchner

So, when Nestor become President, people voted him because they didn´t want Menem, nobody knew him, but even Mr. nobody was a better option.

When they voted Cristina the second time, they knew very well who she was, so, it is a huge lack of respect to call voted zombies when facts show that they knew what they were doing.

Regards
 
I haven't found out what is more sad:

Losing an election and celebrating just that in Velez full of people who are obligated to come or winning an election because the 'olivos pacto' highly favors whoever is in power.

Zombies are the one's who voted for Cristina who were either not eligble or had died.
 
El chabon said:
or winning an election because the 'olivos pacto' highly favors whoever is in power.
.

What are you talking about, the Pacto de Olivos gave a place at Congress to the third most voted. That´s why the radicales still exist even they get a few % of votes.

Regards
 
Bajo_cero2 said:
What are you talking about, the Pacto de Olivos gave a place at Congress to the third most voted. That´s why the radicales still exist even they get a few % of votes.

Regards

Main goal was reelection and winning the elections with 40% of the valid votes.

And make it possible for a non-Catolic to become Argentine president
 
Wow, this thread has pretty much gone down the drain.

I will reply to your post later Bajo_cero2, I see you are having a moment with El Chabon and I don't wanna disturb you guys just yet!
 
To Bajo_cero2:

Alright I wrote a whole reply to you and then I clicked "Post Quick Reply" and the website had somehow forgotten my login credentials and when I entered it all, it decided to forget the whole thing I wrote.

So I am basically done with this thread.

Summary:

You like CFK, I don't.

You seem to like fascism and you produce an oxymoron "Argentina is fascist with civil liberties". Please read up on fascism and also on what an oxymoron is so you don't take it the wrong way. I don't like fascism and I laugh at the idea that you have civil liberties in Argentina. You have the appearance of it, that I agree with.

You don't agree with my idea of democracy which you seem to think is the US model. I would suggest you not guess around about who I am. Last time I checked, I was born in Saudi Arabia and later moved to the UAE, both dictatorships. Argentina is the only (pseudo)democratic country I have ever lived in (visited many) in my mere 26 years of life.

Having been closely involved with the Egyptian side of the mess that is known as the Arab Spring, it is okay to say that the majority can get things wrong. Argentina's problem is no respect for RULE OF LAW. And that is also why private enterprise doesn't work in Argentina, and for that matter, neither does the public.

Just because I don't agree with you, don't accuse me of wanting military dictatorship. That argument might have worked with Argentines for you, for me its just a copout.

To you Peron was a great leader. To me he was a fascist dictator who got what he wanted through repression. You respect that but, given the chance, I would fight against it.

You love to say that people have dogmas yet you have one yourself, yours goes something like: "if you don't agree with CFK and me, then you're dogmatic!" Like I said before we all have our "dogmas" or ideologies upon which we build the rest of who we are and what we think is right.

You love to criticize Adam Smith and liberal economics and also criticize neoliberal economics, yet you do not seem to know what they are.

I wasn't talking about neoliberal economics or any other "thought" on the matter in my last post. I was just saying that Cristina's policies don't work. And now you can see Brazil taking action against Argentine exports. Yeah great going. Let's see how you turn that trade deficit around now.

You just say "you're dogmatic" yet you're parroting the party line. Let's hear it from you, how has CFK and her policies been good for Argentina and how will they sustain those policies and how are they going to be beneficial in the future. Please, write your heart out about them. Don't tell me you'll give me books. I know how to read. I wouldn't be writing here if it was all about the books.

Put your ideas on the table instead of shaking your head everytime you see someone else disagreeing with you.

Anyway, I am done with this thread like I said. The childish diatribe between you and El chabon kinda screwed up the whole thread.
 
Back
Top