Because a sample size of 38 people is not good science, you dimwit.
Personal attacks are resorted to when rational argument is lacking. The sample size is sufficient for an earlier stage, the next stage has a much larger sample. We're still looking at January for a complete rollout if everything goes well.
Except in the US and elsewhere it's not media personalities or the KGB man in chief who decide whether a vaccine gets approved, but a more or less independent government agency.
You must be kidding.
More baseless accusations. I dislike Russia, or rather Putin's regime, because of the constant lies, fakery, propaganda and other KGB bullshit that originates there.
Sure. Your posting history on the subject suggests that you attack everything without supporting evidence to back up your comment, and you're on to the next attack sometime later.
It dislike how it's all designed to be destructive, an exercise in pure nihilism, devoid of ideology.
The Russian Constitution prohibits an overall state ideology to which all must adhere to to have political office. So your ''dislike'' while noted is irrelevant and pointless.
Incredible. Even if you ignore the fact that Putin doesn't allow potentially competitive candidates to run,
There's always several running. If they quit squabbling and united behind one candidate they might get somewhere. But, the opposition is such that they are of the sort that think Putin is too much of a Liberal Westernizer himself. Few of your western style Liberals in Russia...
controls all the important media that show him in a good light and uses the state apparatus to increase turnout for him, a simple look at the results tells us that Russia is not a functioning democracy.
Sure it is, you just don't like the results. If Russians wanted someone different they'd have someone different. As it is, a plurality at the very least don't trust to have anyone else at the helm just yet.
Putin won all the elections (except the first one) with an overwhelming majority (64%/72%/77% of the votes) in the first round (!) over the course of 20 years. This would already be unprecedented in a one-round system, but in a two-round system as in Russia it's evidence for a total lack of democratic competition.
It's called trust in a strong leader. The West hasn't had strong leadership in any country in a rather long time so the attitude towards one when they appear is somewhat ambivalent.
I'm not denying that Russians are probably largely content with this, since they don't know anything else. They've had "kings" for all of their history.
Ah yes, preach to me some more about the wonders of liberal ''representative democracy'' where the only power that rules is the Money Power
Kings are a damn sight better than such swine as we see in Western politicians today.
But man is a fickle and disreputable creature and perhaps, like a chess-player, is interested in the process of attaining his goal rather than the goal itself.