jrhana, "Every Venezuealan that I know would disagree with everything you just said."
O.k., but what does that matter against Chavez having stood for election/confirmation three times in the last 6 or so years, and been approved by an overwhelming majority each time? In fact, there was such outside interest in the last vote, Jimmy Carter was sent to investigate and he confirmed it.
The hard facts are, 1) Venezuela is a democracy, 2) Chavez is the freely elected head of state, and 3) he has not even attempted to moved the country toward totalitarianism, nor socialism, despite claims to the contrary from those who benefited under former administrations.
Here's something else. When Chavez was first elected, he had a new constitution drafted by highly regarded judges and diplomats, all of whom served other presidents. Chavez approved a provision calling for a new election once the constitution was approved by the national assembly. That was just a year, or so, after his first election. He won again. Further, the constitution included a provision that the president could be recalled after two years of a 6 year term, if a popular initiative met certain criteria. The opposition could not qualify the initiative in more than a few attempts, but under international pressure, Chavez agreed to stand for another vote of approval. It was not an election, per se, it was a popular vote to re confirm his public mandate. He won. |
