Did Nicolás Maduro Just Steal Another Election?
And if the results are proven false, will Venezuela finally move away from authoritarian rule?

The government-controlled electoral authority has declared Nicolás Maduro the winner of Venezuela's presidential election, securing his third consecutive six-year term. But the opposition is crying foul, contending that the authoritarian socialist did not, in fact, receive the most votes.
With 80 percent of the ballots counted, the National Electoral Council (CNE) announced on Monday that Maduro had won 51 percent of the vote while opposition candidate Edmundo González, of the Democratic Unitary Platform, garnered 44 percent.
In his victory speech, Maduro described the results as "a triumph of peace and stability, republican ideals, and the ideas of equality."
But the electoral authority has yet to release the official voting tallies from polling centers. Maduro claims this delay was caused by an unnamed country hacking into the electoral council's system. "The demons and the devils did not want the total to be counted," the Venezuelan leader declared in a statement.
González has countered that the election results are fraudulent, and his party is demanding that the electoral authorities verify the outcome by presenting the tallies issued by the voting machines.
"The Venezuelans and the entire world know what happened," González said at a press conference.
Voting in Venezuela is electronic—voters press a button selecting their preferred candidate on a machine machine, which sends the results to the CNE. Each machine also prints a paper receipt that is placed in a ballot box for potential recounts. The opposition plans to obtain these printed tallies to see if they match the results announced by the CNE.
So far, the opposition has obtained voting tallies from only about 40 percent of the ballot boxes. According to Venezuela's law, independent witnesses are allowed to remain at the polling booths to count paper receipts to prevent tampering and ensure fairness. But opposition members claim they have been denied access and were forcibly removed from the premises.
The CNE has also allegedly halted data transmission from the local polling stations to its headquarters, preventing additional votes from being processed. It remains unclear when the authorities plan to announce the full results.
The opposition claims that González actually won the election, receiving 70 percent of the votes against Maduro's 30 percent.
"We have not only defeated them politically, morally, and spiritually, today we defeated them with our votes in all of Venezuela," opposition leader María Corina Machado, a pro-market politician who Maduro barred from running in the elections, said at the news conference.
World leaders have voiced skepticism about the official results. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressed "serious concerns that the result announced does not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people." The European Union's foreign policy chief wrote on X, "Ensuring full transparency in the electoral process, including detailed counting of votes and access to voting records at polling stations, is vital." The sentiment was echoed by several Latin American and European presidents.
Maduro received congratulations from the presidents of Cuba, Honduras, and Bolivia, as well as messages of support from Russia, China, and Iran. Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel said "the dignity and bravery of the Venezuelan people had triumphed over pressure and manipulation." Russian President Vladimir Putin put out a statement declaring his confidence that Maduro's "activities at the head of state will continue to contribute to their progressive development in all directions."
This is not the first time Maduro's legitimacy has been questioned. In 2018, then–U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo dismissed Venezuela's vote as a "sham" due to multiple irregularities. The government banned opposition candidates from participating, jailed others, and allegedly intimidated voters. The results led to mass protests and global condemnation.
Maduro, who succeeded Hugo Chávez in 2013, faces drug trafficking and corruption charges in the U.S. and is under investigation by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. Almost 8 million Venezuelans have fled the country amid hyperinflation, shortages of essential goods, and rampant corruption. Many more have expressed their desire to leave if Maduro remains in power.
If the election results announced by the CNE are proven false, it could mark a pivotal moment for Venezuela to move away from authoritarian rule.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how."
Had to look that one up. Attributed to Joseph Stalin by Boris Bazhanov but not until four decades after Stalin was dead. Generally considered to be apocryphal.
Did he ever defeat moose and squirrel?
https://x.com/DagoSupremacy/status/1818033715278397519?t=iGnpW-pcrYeZwQhFS18jFw&s=19
If this continues the way it tends to go…American shitlibs should pay attention to what ends up happening to Maduro
[Link]
The Dems will just denounce them for tearing down statues of their hero.
But the electoral authority has yet to release the official voting tallies from polling centers. Maduro claims this delay was caused by an unnamed country hacking into the electoral council's system. "The demons and the devils did not want the total to be counted," the Venezuelan leader declared in a statement.
González has countered that the election results are fraudulent, and his party is demanding that the electoral authorities verify the outcome by presenting the tallies issued by the voting machines.
*leans back, crosses arms*
Be very careful what you say next...
Wonder what time Maduro's mail-in ballot dump dropped.
Around 3:00 AM.
Same as here.
Independent exit polling showed that Gonzáles received approximately 65% of the vote, to Maduro's 31%. The government and regime media claim that Maduro won 51.2% to 44.2%.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-29/venezuela-election-result-maduro-declared-winner-despite-turnout
Thank goodness that can’t happen here.
In November, whichever side loses will claim the other side cheated. Neither the Left nor the Right will accept that the other can legitimately win the Presidency.
Incorrect. Some of us are still reality based.
But are there any people left who are both loyal to one of the major parties in the US and also still reality based?
In November, whichever side loses will claim the other side cheated. Neither the Left nor the Right will accept that the other can legitimately win the Presidency.
In November, the side that actually lost in 2020 will again claim victory, and will again try to put their puppet in the White House in a flurry of manufactured ballots
This time, they won't succeed
Let’s hope all wine aunts are passed out on Election Day.
Let's hope not!
Claiming that the other party cheated only counts as "criminal" when it's done by the party who doesn't have the MSM carrying their water.
With the support of WaPo, NYT, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, and NPR, it's acceptable to continute to deny that any loss by one's party was "illegitimate". Sort of like how it's now criminal for a non-winning presidential campaign to assemble their slate of "fake" electors, although nobody has ever asked for clarification about what law prohibits such a thing.
Spoiler alert: it's not only legal, it's commonplace since every candidate on the ballot submits the names of their electors in every state and they're all listed on the papers submitted to Congress for certification. Don't take my word for it though, get on the National Archives website and check out the letters sent by any State to Congress as part of the Electoral Count certification for any election in the last 60 years (or look at all 3000 of them, if you've got the time).
We can't actually do exit polling thanks to mail in balloting. You can interrogate a mail box but you'll get nothing. Believe me I've tried.
Exit polls haven’t been accurate for a long time then? Mail voting had been trending up for a long time prior to 2020.
In Trump’s 2016 victory, 21% of all ballots were cast by mail. Three states won by Trump cast more than 50% of its ballots by mail. (Utah, Montana, and Arizona) Five more states won by Trump that year cast between 20 and 30% by mail. (Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, and Ohio). Republicans were just as involved in expanding absentee voting as anyone else until Trump started making a big deal about it. There also was not a significant partisan advantage for either side, which explains why it wasn’t a partisan issue.
If exit polling is that important to trusting election results, you could still survey people and ask on election day or the day after how they voted as well as other questions. Really, though, the main purpose of exit polls is to get a sense of what caused people to vote the way that they did. All polls have margins of error anyway, so they would have limited value in verifying official results anyway.
70% to 30% is quite a margin of error.
I've been told it's very insurrectionny to question vote totals or claim that an election was stolen.
Even if it was "proven false," who's going to force him out? The UN? The ICC? The country's military is specifically geared towards stopping internal overthrows by the domestic population. They aren't doing shit, either, and even if they decided to go off the chain, Maduro could easily put it down without anything other than another bunch of toothless sanctions.
>The country’s military is specifically geared towards stopping internal overthrows by the domestic population.
Venezuela changed my mind on universal military service.
I was thinking the same thing. OK, there's a "moment for Venezuela to move away from authoritarian rule." Is it going to move away from authoritarianism by itself? Is Maduro going to feel bad, apologize, and step down? I don't see how this happens without bloodshed. Initial revolts behind the Iron Curtain resulted in suppression and bloodshed, and even though they transformed relatively peacefully later, that only seemed possible because the Soviet Union collapsed under its own weight.
Initial revolts behind the Iron Curtain resulted in suppression and bloodshed, and even though they transformed relatively peacefully later, that only seemed possible because the Soviet Union collapsed under its own weight.
And really, the main reason it even happened then was because the US finally perfected its color revolution playbook. At the time, it was all looking very spontaneous to normies, but that's not how it was actually being played out behind the scenes.
Duh the ipcc will stop him! ...and those brave warriors of just stop oil will glue themselves to something and he will see the error of his ways. Anyways, this is just another example of the leftists saving democracy by subverting democracy, another bullet dodged.
He'll never be forced out, and now he can now borrow pages out of the democrat's playbook in cracking down on anyone who wants to question, or "steal" (GASP) the election. The democrats in ZERO moral grounds to criticize anything he does to remain power in the name of election integrity.
The American media spread the lie that J6 was an "insurrection" for years now. How do you think Maduro's lapdog will media characterize to his opposition? What happens if Gonzalez urges his supporters to fight and some of the riot? Throw in jail for incitement, right?
Did Gonzalez not report fees for haircut and pilates class as campaign finance? If he did, he might be be guilty of election interference in America. A region of which country concocted a federal election interference coverup case out of a local misclassification of a lawyer's fee that occurred AFTER the election? Venezuela, or America? Maduro can just copy and paste everything Alvin Bragg or Fani did and..... what can we say?
But at least Gonzalez has more compelling case of an election being stolen from him than Trump, right? Who cares? When crooks are in charge of ethics, the end result isn't integrity. The democrats will never act against ballot harvesting, despite known incidents of activists pressuring nursing residents and collecting their ballots. Ballots sent to dead people and nonexistent addresses - what gets done? So why would Maduro behave any different than other socialists who technically run democracies?
"We have not only defeated them politically, morally, and spiritually, today we defeated them with our votes in all of Venezuela," opposition leader María Corina Machado, a pro-market politician who Maduro barred from running in the elections, said at the news conference.
*starts sweating profusely*
World leaders have voiced skepticism about the official results. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressed "serious concerns that the result announced does not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people." The European Union's foreign policy chief wrote on X, "Ensuring full transparency in the electoral process, including detailed counting of votes and access to voting records at polling stations, is vital." The sentiment was echoed by several Latin American and European presidents.
*loosens collar, checks heart rate: 125bmp*
The sand of these people to make these demands after acting in an actual conspiratorial manner to ensure Trump wasn’t re-elected is nuclear-level.
Maduro should tell them, "I'll show them mine if you show them yours."
And when you say "these people" I assume you are referring to Reason editors?
I guess Maduro was not saving democracy.
Know what leader does not have a problem with the election?
The VP. She says the people of Venezuela have spoken.
Here's my solution to all this.
* In person voting only. No absentee voting, no vote by mail (or telegram). If you physically cannot vote, sorry, too bad. Clean elections outweigh a few individuals' right to vote.
* When you vote, you get a copy of your ballot with no personally identifying information -- no name or address, not even the time. Only the votes and the election date/location, and a randomized ballot ID.
* All ballots are published -- all votes and the randomized ballot ID.
* People who care check their ballot to make sure it was reported correctly. If not, they'd have to go public and show how they voted to protest the vote, but for most people, that would be a small price to pay for prosecuting a corrupt election.
* If even one voter shows their vote was corrupted, a whole lot of other voters will check theirs. The risk and penalty is simply too high for anyone to modify or delete ballots.
* Poll watchers provide counts of voters, and while they may be off by one or two, any larger discrepancy will raise issues and probably force the entire precinct to revote.
* Because all ballots have been published, everyone can add them up.
Scrapped because NPR
paidfound a 96 yr old black grandmother who couldn't find a ride to the polls that day.Black people don't need IDs. They don't drive cars and they don't have bank accounts. They keep all of their money in cash like big Fani. Only a racist would suggest otherwise.
It's amazing how those racist Republicans can get away with such memes for so long without the Democrats calling them out.
Oh, wait ....
Black people don’t need IDs. They don’t drive cars and they don’t have bank accounts. They keep all of their money in cash like big Fani. Only a racist would suggest otherwise.
Do you think that everyone must have an ID in order to function in society? Does everyone drive or have a bank account?
There are people that don't have the kinds of ID that states with stricter laws require, even if it is a small percentage of eligible voters. It is certainly possible that among that small percentage, some races and ethnic groups are over-represented relative to the total population.
It's been a really, really long time since I first looked this up and found it, but I clearly recall the ruling in the case over Texas's ID law from about 10 years ago or so. In it, was the state's own data in its brief showing that the overall numbers of eligible voters without the IDs that this Texas law required was around 3%, but for Blacks and Hispanics, it was around double that.
So, what, right? If 6% of Blacks eligible to vote didn't have the right kind of ID to simply walk in and cast a ballot, that doesn't mean that they'd get turned away. First, it doesn't mean that they'd even want to vote. Next, I think they could cast a provisional ballot and show up at the election office within a couple of days with other documentation to establish their identity and have their ballot counted. No big deal, it would seem.
The argument over IDs is not that it is impossible for them to get IDs or even unreasonably difficult. The argument is that the extra hurdles mean that some will end up not voting because it means dealing with a lot of bureaucratic hoops to jump through, and "ain't nobody got time for that."
If an election comes down to 1-2%, then it doesn't take much to swing the election to the other side. Finding a perfectly legal way to end up with a +1-2% greater turnout for my side's voters than the other side's voters sounds like an obvious tactic to use. This is why early voting and mail ballots end up becoming partisan issues. Each side perceives that there is a small advantage to be had in either using or not using those things.
Does everyone drive or have a bank account?
Yes. Any more stupid questions?
The argument is that the extra hurdles mean that some will end up not voting because it means dealing with a lot of bureaucratic hoops to jump through, and “ain’t nobody got time for that.”
Well, tough fucking shit. If you don't care enough to be arsed to get an ID such that we can ensure the integrity of elections, your input to the vote just isn't that valuable.
Do you think that everyone must have an ID in order to function in society? Does everyone drive or have a bank account?
What do those things have to do with having ID?
There are people that don’t have the kinds of ID that states with stricter laws require, even if it is a small percentage of eligible voters. It is certainly possible that among that small percentage, some races and ethnic groups are over-represented relative to the total population.
Voting laws in *picks random country* Canada:
The idea that you can't have a functioning democracy because you need to verify if someone is eligible to vote is weapons grade horseshit.
The argument over IDs is not that it is impossible for them to get IDs or even unreasonably difficult. The argument is that the extra hurdles mean that some will end up not voting because it means dealing with a lot of bureaucratic hoops to jump through, and “ain’t nobody got time for that.”
And?
Oh, one addendum: You just proved that gun laws are racist.
"There are people that don’t have the kinds of ID that states with stricter laws require"
Or drink, or buy a car, buy a house, rent a house, credit card, or get social security. They don't have ids right? They just get paid in cash and do nothing. Government just drops off cash at their house not a check.
Wait, you are right these people also don't fly right? Can't board a plane without ID.
Funny, everything requires an ID but voting. Basically, you are saying minorities are too dumb to get an ID - birth cert, SS, driver lisence or anything else.
If 6% of Blacks eligible to vote didn’t have the right kind of ID to simply walk in and cast a ballot, that doesn’t mean that they’d get turned away - racist much that you state it's only blacks without ids huh?
I'd have no problems with that kind of remote voting, as long as it includes enough poll watchers and other independent entourage to make fraud harder, and the remote voter has someone less decrepit who can check the published ballot later.
How idiotically naive. Do you think that a Maduro and his lot would be incapable of stealing an election under those conditions?
Tell me how then. If you don't, you're just another liar with a big mouth.
You threaten poll watchers or their families, the first person to complain gets arrested, you control who publishes the ballots, etc.
Your deficient imagination is not an argument.
Direct threats are a lot more noticeable than altered ballots and not suitable for mass fraud. You really think you could threaten enough voters to change an election and no one would complain?
You lose #1.
You think arresting complainers would not be noticed?
You lose #2.
"You control who publishes the ballots" is stupid and meaningless, because voters compare their copies against what is published. You lose #3.
The point of the scheme is to prevent hidden fraud, not dictatorship fraud.
Your deficient reading is not an argument. You lose, period.
How about we just enforce the Bill of Rights, especially the first, second, fourth, fifth, ninth and tenth, and then elections become as meaningful as deciding on what TV channel to watch.
The way I look at things, it is our voting rights that best protect our other rights, not the other way around. If we don't vote for candidates that won't uphold our basic rights, then we can be more confident that they will be enforced. If we do vote for candidates that won't uphold them, then that is who we would be putting in charge of enforcing them.
The conclusion I draw is that the most important right to protect is our right to vote.
How can you protect the right to vote, when you don't enforce if the vote is legitimate?
Should illegals vote? Non-citizens. Your view is yes because it's so hard to show id.
Funny, people used their right to vote in Venezuela, yet the government cheated. Luckily, there are receipts.
The president should be the most powerful official elected, appointed or career. He or she should have sole power to pardon turkeys at Thanksgiving and supervise Easter egg rolls or hunts.
Here’s my solution to all this.
* In person voting only. No absentee voting, no vote by mail (or telegram).
For your ballot copies ideas, I don't see how that can preserve the secret ballot.
Also, what does any of that have to do with Venezuela?
The core problem there is that no one in Venezuela trusts the people in charge of running elections to be honest, and for good reason.
1. What does in person voting have to do with anonymity? The printed ballot has no name, address, or other personally identifiable information.
2. Venezuela is one of those stupid marginal dictatorships which tries to pretend its voting is valid. Notice the outcome is “close” to plausible. They couldn’t do that under my scheme. The full-on 99.99% approval dictatorships don’t care what the world wants.
ETA: If half or 90% of voters throw out their copy so no one can know how they voted, that still leaves a lot of people who will check votes. Or those half or 90% can give their ballot copies to some watchdog group.
He's an idiot. He wants his side to be able to cheat. He doesn't care about integrity, just as long as he gets his outcome.
He can't understand Venezuela. If the people didn't trust the election to be honest, no one would have voted. They believed their vote mattered.
Has your online computer banking ever made a single mistake on your account? If not, then in-person banking is not more accurate or secure than online banking – and neither is in-person voting. The only reason in-person voting might be better would be to prevent one person at home from voting for a spouse or other relative through intimidation. If you give each voter a coded receipt in-person, then that fails in the same way because the abuser would know how you voted in-person. On the other hand, online banking is much more secure than ANY government-organized voting system since bankers are more honest than government officials or their contractors.
""According to Venezuela's law, independent witnesses are allowed to remain at the polling booths to count paper receipts to prevent tampering and ensure fairness. But opposition members claim they have been denied access and were forcibly removed from the premises.""
I feel like I've heard this before.
According to Venezuela’s law
Maduro is Venezuela's law. He declared himself the winner and so he is the winner under Venezuela's law.
It does sound like 1876...
2024 Democrat presidential primaries?
More large blue cities in 2020.
Did Nicolás Maduro Just Steal Another Election?
Anyone asking this question is a Threat to Democracy.
I'd like to see a "Maduro based" scorecard for Congressional votes; IE how closely does a congress member's votes align with the policies of Maduro. I'm guessing there would be a lot of 80% and above scores.
How many Republicans voted to impeach Trump?
Democrats take copious notes.
Why would they need notes?
They wrote the book.
Incoming Fiona article on the need for more Venezuelan immigrants.
My yard needs mowing. It's a job Americans don't want to do. Except my grandson but he wants 12 bucks an hour. Ha! Not gonna happen.
I hope you at least teared up a little at him negotiating for a wage.
Got to respect that.
Victims of communism don’t want more of it when they get here.
But we have good, happy communism in the US. George Clooney told me so.
President-For-Life Pootin praised the election and congratulated fellow socialista bolivariano Maduro (pero no cai). Pootin's vote counters gave him 89% of the vote 4 months ago, so he oughtta know! Didn't Donnie just now promise Christians a Enabling Act like Hitler's? "You won't have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians. I love you Christians...We'll have it fixed so good you're not gonna have to vote." Christian National Socialists dispensed with elections from 1934 through May of 1945. Eleven years is what Maduro had tallied before this latest miracle.
Ya know who else dispensed with elections Hank? The comedy genius in Ukraine. And the Biden regime says it's totally cool. If only the Libertarians had the foresight they would have fixed that in the 1974 party platform.
Holding elections when a significant portion of the country is occupied by enemy forces or actively engaged in war is a little tricky. But if he declares himself dictator for life I guess you'll be proven right.
Holding elections when a significant portion of the country is occupied by enemy forces or actively engaged in war is a little tricky.
You mean the areas that are mostly pro-Russian? Wouldn't that make re-election easier?
Yes, it would make his re-election easier. And yet, he hasn't done it...
Possibly because it would also legitimize Putin's annexation of chunks of Ukraine?
Yes, those mostly pro-Russian areas that voted overwhelmingly to form the new Ukraine even though they knew at the time that ethnic Russians would then be in a minority in that new Ukraine. But by all means spin it any way you like.
Russia invaded Ukraine. Ukraine was never looking to invade Russia.
None of yall remember the NAP?
Yeah, good thing Lincoln canceled the 1864 election.
Yeah, he would have definitely lost!
So WHAT?
Maduro claims this delay was caused by an unnamed country hacking into the electoral council's system.
Was the unnamed country Venezuela?
Those dastardly Russians are at it again.
Rocky and Bullwinkle will stop them!
I thought South American countries just loved a good dictator.
Did Nicolás Maduro Just Steal Another Election?
Well duh.
People here are just bitter that Trump’s attempt to steal the 2020 election wasn’t as successful as Maduro’s.
Trump was President at the time, but he's such a strong and effective leader that he wasn't really in control of anything (except the good things).
ObviouslyNotSpam 7 hours ago
It will hardly matter if Trump manages to make voting no longer necessary.
LOL, seriously, make up your mind.
Should I have put "strong and effective leader" in scare quotes for you?
People here are just bitter that Trump’s attempt to steal the 2020 election wasn’t as successful as Maduro’s.
Well, yeah, Trump doesn't control the self-described "cabal" in the US like Maduro does in Venezuela.
You do realise that for some entity to be called “self-described”, that entity (or its members) has to be the one doing the describing, right? So who in this alleged cabal is calling it a cabal?
We're fortunate that Republicans like Barr and Pence and some others, who might have helped form a cabal to attempt to keep Trump in office did not in fact form or join one.
You do realize that according to your logic, someone like Tracey Abrams or even the democrat party can be compared to Trump, because they questioned and attempted to alter the election outcome? The court rejected the democrat's effort on selection recount in FL. Scrutiny over purported fraud is not "stealing an election", and Mike Pence rejecting the vote wouldn't make the election simply disappear.
You don't think Maduro throw the dem's "Questioning election undermines democracy and is insurrection" rhetoric right in their face when they question HIS legitimacy? What do they say if Maduro throws Gonzalez in jail because he told his supporters who fight and some of them engage in riots? Well gee, he obviously incited them so he's guilty.
Saying "according to your logic" doesn't make it so.
Had Trump merely scrutinised purported fraud, that would not have been attempting to steal an election. Filing numerous meritless lawsuits, getting fake slates of electors, trying to get Raffensperger to find votes, having lawyers like Squidney Powell and Giuliani publicly lie about fraud, stirring up mindless hordes by claiming voter fraud leading to the march on the Capitol to disrupt the EC count - those things do constitute, or contribute to, attempts to steal the election.
Losing 60+ lawsuits was a perfectly legitimate expenditure of Trump's (rubes') funds. I'd assume they will do exactly that again if they lose again. Not a problem.
"Filing numerous meritless lawsuits"
SRG2 - In America that's how we settle non-criminal disputes. Your attempt to obfuscate is doubly egregious because you only know whether they're "meritless" AFTER they have been filed, AND in hindsight they turned out NOT to all be totally meritless. Many, many voting system irregularities have been documented since then although I totally agree that Trump's minions also told a lot of lies in their complaints and to the press at the time.
You do realise that for some entity to be called “self-described”, that entity (or its members) has to be the one doing the describing, right? So who in this alleged cabal is calling it a cabal?
Time Magazine, February 4, 2021:
That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.
But Time is not part of this alleged cabal. Where is this self-description? Why not just admit you were lazy in your writing?
"Even thought it sounds like a paranoid fever dream - a well funded cabal of powerful people".
Try reading for comprehension., Time Magazine is talking about a (beneficial) conspiracy to prevent voter suppression and Trump's stealing the election. That is not the same as a cabal - self-described or otherwise - stealing an election for one or other candidate.
Try again.
Well, to be fair - Time Magazine IS part of the cabal working behind the scenes etc. It's the up-front public product that sometimes tries to appear to be fair and balanced.
Aren’t you questioning election result certified by the government, just like Trump? Meaning you and Maduro’s opponent are trumpian?
Don’t worry, Maduro will do what the democrats failed to do - charge his opposition as insurrectionists and throw them in jail. He won’t concoct an election interference case out if a misclassification offense that occurred after the election. Even dictators have standards.
Aren’t you questioning election result certified by the government,
Aren't you by implication accepting the election result? Hence a supporter of Maduro?
As the article makes clear, Maduro's people control the election apparatus in Venezuela. There is no equivalent in the US. But you know this.
This is not true. The difference between Maduro in Venezuela and the Democrats in the United States is that Venezuela is mostly centrally controlled, while the United States consists of many, many voting regions, each controlled more or less by the local political machine entrenched in power there, like the Big Blue Cities for example which are frequently surrounded by Rural Red districts.
So first you restrict your comparison to Democrats, as though Republicans either lack control in the states or areas they, er, control, or don't do the bad things, and second, you show that it is true by showing the key lack of centralisation in the US
Duh the ipcc will stop him! ...and those brave warriors of just stop oil will glue themselves to something and he will see the error of his ways. Anyways, this is just another example of the leftists saving democracy by subverting democracy, another bullet dodged.
What makes you think some outside force will stop injustice from occurring? Sorry, that's very unlikely (and very impossible, when it happens in the USA). The center must hold.
Nah. We're annoyed that Biden's was just as successful as Maduro's.
After '20 no one in US government (let alone a member of the party that stole the election) should ever comment on election integrity elsewhere.
The US has been fortifying elections around the world for decades.
You never know, the dummies might vote against their best interests.
Sometimes they even openly brag about it, like when they interfered in Russia’s 1996 election to get Yeltsin back in office.
I even remember it happening during one of my deployments when Ghani was installed as President of Afghanistan over his more Islamist opponent.
No party stole the US election, you aluminium-hatted clown. But Trump did attempt to.
What a naive article. The politicians with guns to the heads of their people don't have to worry about how much hand-wringing goes on in the rest of the world.
Sometimes, in the case of Bukele, they've done such an effective job that they can tell the west and the globalists to fuck off anyway.
It works for Vlad.
Did Nicolás Maduro Just Steal Another Election?
Yes
And if the results are proven false, will Venezuela finally move away from authoritarian rule?
No
In the United States revolution led to the establishment of the first nation on earth where individuals granted themselves unalienable rights and established a system of government whose chief purpose was to guard and protect and enforce those rights. Everywhere else in the world the people were assumed to be subjects of the government and any rights they might have were granted to them by the government.
In the United States a revolution by the Confederacy led to emancipation of the slaves and extension of the Bill of Rights over state law, although it also weakened the balance of power which would eventually come back to bite us on the ass.
What we are witnessing now is a last-ditch effort to re-establish the intended Constitutional balance of power between state and Federal; and the intended checks and balances among the Congress, and the Executive and Judicial branches. I hope it succeeds, but until the two-party election system is eliminated and replaced by a proportional representation system in every state legislature and the House of Representatives I am not optimistic!
Notice you mentioned Bliken, but didn't mention Harris congrating Maduro while people where being killed in the streets.
" US Stands with the people of Venezuela who expressed their voice in today's histroic presidential election. The will of the Venezuelan people must be respected. Despite the many challenges, we will continue to work toward a more democratic, prosperous, and sure future for the people of Venezuela"
Posted right after Maduro says he won.
Also, Reason, where is your talk about the VP setting foreign policy now? Humm if there was only some amendment that allowed the VP to take over.
Your interpretation of Harris' post on Xitter is completely disingenuous. She was in no way "congratulating Maduro".
Since you're obviously confused, here is what someone actually congratulating Maduro would have said, "We see that the opposition does not want to accept its defeat, but we believe that the opposition should do this, should congratulate the winner of these elections."
Get an unused CIA sharpshooter from the Trump assassination attempt to put a bullet in his head and save us the trouble of finding housing and jobs for 8 million Venezuelan refugees - er, sorry - "asylum seekers."
Those 8 million Venezuelans have ALREADY left the country and most have fled to countries other than the US. Nobody's found them jobs or housing because almost all have found their own. Sorry if spoiled incompetent US jerks can't or don't want to compete
Venezuela is Maduro's property to do with as he pleases. Nothing short of a violent revolution will change that. The recent election was just a show for those who think it was important. It wasn't.