annatar1914 wrote: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.
Sometimes people deserve to be called out for their stupidity.
For next stage of testing it is sufficient.
annatar1914 wrote:You must be kidding.
Not at all, otherwise we would have the same situation as in Russia, with a vaccine already approved.
annatar1914 wrote: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.
I would say I post actual evidence more often than most posters on Pofo.
Sometimes I don't consider a debate to be worthwhile.
annatar1914 wrote: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.
Completely misses the point. Russia doesn't offer anything. It mimics liberal democracy because that's the dominant ideology of the day. It holds elections even though they're a farce. It's all fakery and bullshit. It pretends the West is all fakery and bullshit too to distract from its own hollowness.
annatar1914 wrote: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...
Yes, several are running, those approved by Putin, while actual threats are being eliminated by courts/in the approval process.
annatar1914 wrote: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.
Which can be said about any people under any system. Point it, Russians hardly have a choice.
annatar1914 wrote: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.
In the West we select leaders according to their political programs, that's called democratic competition. "strong leadership" is a completely meaningless apolitical phrase.
annatar1914 wrote:Ah yes, preach to me some more about the wonders of liberal ''representative democracy'' where the only power that rules is the Money Power
Preach me some more about the supposed lack of Money Power in Russia, a country ruled by Putin's gang of oligarchs with the highest wealth inequality in the developed world.