• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran president: 'Not feasible' for Israel to live

RightOfCenter said:
I think you missed that part. Iran has no where near a free electoral system.

There choices are between Supreme Leader Approved Candidate A and Supreme Leader Approved Candidate B.
Click to expand...

Really no different than elections in China where you have CCP-approved candidate A vs. CCP-approved candidate B.
 
shiznit770 said:
Israel has repeatedly demonstrated that it fails at diplomacy and would rather strike at its neighbors to increase its perceived deterrence.
Click to expand...
Lol. Such blatant crappola. Israel has struck at no Arab neighbor in decades with the exceptions of Lebanon (Rocketville I) and Gaza (Rocketville II).
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
To stand for a party they must have the approval of the party. And the only way of becoming president is to be member of one of the two parties. Correct?
Click to expand...

Not correct. Anyone can run, regardless of whether or not you have the approval of the party heirarchy. This is true at most levels and most locales in the US. I ran for a County Commission seat against the wishes of the party leadership in my county in 2000 and won the primary.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
Now you are talking about the primaries. I am talking about becoming a candidate for the primary and be in a primary for one of the two parties, then you have to be accepted by the party "leadership/committee" first, not the whole party and all its voters.
Dont spin this anymore, you perfectly well know my point is valid.
Click to expand...

It isn't valid because it simply is NOT correct.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
None of them have been chosen by the supreme leader..

How many of the presidents in the US have not been approved by their party before they participated in the primaries?
Click to expand...

That is what you don't get. There IS no approval process amongst the party heirarchy. If there were, there would have been no McCain challenge in 2000 because nearly the entire Republican establishment was for Bush. Remember two years ago, nearly all of the Democratic establishment was for Clinton. However, she didn't even win the nomination. Your point has NO merit at all.
 
Tashah said:
Lol. Such blatant crappola. Israel has struck at no Arab neighbor in decades with the exceptions of Lebanon (Rocketville I) and Gaza (Rocketville II).
Click to expand...

How many times has Israel invaded Southern Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank? Three different areas but many separate invasions/attacks.
 
That is what you don't get. There IS no approval process amongst the party heirarchy. If there were, there would have been no McCain challenge in 2000 because nearly the entire Republican establishment was for Bush. Remember two years ago, nearly all of the Democratic establishment was for Clinton. However, she didn't even win the nomination. Your point has NO merit at all.
Click to expand...

How are presidential candidates chosen?

Also, I'm still looking for a full quote about this. So far I have been able to come up with nothing, aside from the fact that this AP article was written by Sarah El Deeb, which isn't really promising.
 
ludahai said:
Except that the Guardian Council has the right to exclude candidates. There is no similar exclusion of candidates in the United States or other democratic republics. Iran is Not Free and most certainly is NOT a democracy.
Click to expand...

Yes there is.. The parties they approve candidates, and we all know without being member of the right party you can never become president or prime minister.
 
ludahai said:
Not correct. Anyone can run, regardless of whether or not you have the approval of the party heirarchy. This is true at most levels and most locales in the US. I ran for a County Commission seat against the wishes of the party leadership in my county in 2000 and won the primary.
Click to expand...

Yes, but if you dont belong to a party you will not become president.. This is especially true in the US and Europe, where you have to belong to one of two parties in the US or the right one in Europe. Else you stand no chance.
 
ludahai said:
That is what you don't get. There IS no approval process amongst the party heirarchy. If there were, there would have been no McCain challenge in 2000 because nearly the entire Republican establishment was for Bush. Remember two years ago, nearly all of the Democratic establishment was for Clinton. However, she didn't even win the nomination. Your point has NO merit at all.
Click to expand...

To stand in the primaries for either the republican or democratic party, you have to be approved by that party. You cant just stand for a party at whatever platform you choose. Only independents can do what you are talking about, and they are never elected president.
 
Imagine if the isreali prime minister said that it was not "feasable" for Gaza to live..... :roll:
 
Khayembii Communique said:
How are presidential candidates chosen?

Also, I'm still looking for a full quote about this. So far I have been able to come up with nothing, aside from the fact that this AP article was written by Sarah El Deeb, which isn't really promising.
Click to expand...

They nominate themselves, but they have to belong to a party to be elected. And if they want to stand in the primaries for either the republican or democrat party which is their only choice of being elected, then they have to be approved by that party.

I am no expert on the US election process, but I am pretty damn sure my description in the last dusin posts are the correct reality.
 
Last edited:
ludahai said:
Really no different than elections in China where you have CCP-approved candidate A vs. CCP-approved candidate B.
Click to expand...

Yes, and in Europe the parties approve their prime minister candidates without any interference by the people. The total vote of such nominations are taken by perhaps 0.01% of the total population(the party leadership and committees).
 
Yes there is.. The parties they approve candidates, and we all know without being member of the right party you can never become president or prime minister.
Click to expand...

There is a small difference between bourgeois democracy and bourgeois dictatorship, which is what Iran is. The Supreme Council holds all the power in the country. The Supreme Council is not voted upon by the people. The representatives voted upon by the people are subordinate to the Supreme Council. Your partisanship is making you distort the truth.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
None of them have been chosen by the supreme leader..

How many of the presidents in the US have not been approved by their party before they participated in the primaries?
Click to expand...

None. All US citizens of that party are free to run in the primary provided they have enough signatures and are a registered voter for that party.
 
None. All US citizens of that party are free to run in the primary provided they have enough signatures and are a registered voter for that party.
Click to expand...

This is why I asked the question. How are presidential candidates chosen? How is the list whittled down to the amount that participate in the primaries?
 
Khayembii Communique said:
There is a small difference between bourgeois democracy and bourgeois dictatorship, which is what Iran is. The Supreme Council holds all the power in the country. The Supreme Council is not voted upon by the people. The representatives voted upon by the people are subordinate to the Supreme Council. Your partisanship is making you distort the truth.
Click to expand...

No, I am not in favor of Iran.. I am just trying to show ho biased you are against Iran and how biased you are in favor of your own version of democracy. Not you specifically, but the people in this thread who claim the Iranian president, who said those nasty things, are not democratically elected.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
This is why I asked the question. How are presidential candidates chosen? How is the list whittled down to the amount that participate in the primaries?
Click to expand...

Technically it amounts to the amount of signatures that a person can get to get on the ballot for state primaries. Since one has to be fairly well known and successful as a politician to get enough signatures in every state its hard for unknowns to get in.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
No, I am not in favor of Iran.. I am just trying to show ho biased you are against Iran and how biased you are in favor of your own version of democracy. Not you specifically, but the people in this thread who claim the Iranian president, who said those nasty things, are not democratically elected.
Click to expand...

KC might be communist, but at least he's an honest debater. You are not.
 
RightOfCenter said:
None. All US citizens of that party are free to run in the primary provided they have enough signatures and are a registered voter for that party.
Click to expand...

Yet in the primaries there are just a dusin or so candidates for each party. Where are all the others? And how were they rooted away? I can imagine thousands of people sign up like you say, but all those arent in the primaries, are they? The primary candidates are somehow approved by the party, and not the whole party electorate.
 
No, I am not in favor of Iran.. I am just trying to show ho biased you are against Iran and how biased you are in favor of your own version of democracy. Not you specifically, but the people in this thread who claim the Iranian president, who said those nasty things, are not democratically elected.
Click to expand...

Do you understand that the president of Iran must be approved by the Supreme Council? That the Supreme Council can reject the candidate that was voted in by the people? This ensures that the president is subordinate to the Supreme Council and will act in the Council's interest. In the entire situation, the Supreme Council is in power, and anything the president does is approved by the Supreme Council. That is not even bourgeois democracy.

And what is my version of democracy, exactly? That sounds pretty laughable.

Yet in the primaries there are just a dusin or so candidates for each party. Where are all the others? And how were they rooted away? I can imagine thousands of people sign up like you say, but all those arent in the primaries, are they? The primary candidates are somehow approved by the party, and not the whole party electorate.
Click to expand...

That is the question I was asking.

Technically it amounts to the amount of signatures that a person can get to get on the ballot for state primaries. Since one has to be fairly well known and successful as a politician to get enough signatures in every state its hard for unknowns to get in.
Click to expand...

I know that different states have different methods for this, but I remember reading that some states actually have councils that select candidates on top of signatures. Do you know where I can find more information on this? It is incredibly difficult to find; I attempted to look into this a while ago, and all I could find was a post on Democratic Underground that explained how the process works in Wisconsin, I think.
 
Last edited:
RightOfCenter said:
KC might be communist, but at least he's an honest debater. You are not.
Click to expand...

Come on.. Iran is a democracy, the US is known to be biased against Iran, and if a US agency says the election is not free and fair, then that doesnt really count as it not being free and fair in my eyes when the people elect the president.

I blame the people of Iran for electing the mr president moron.

I am really trying to show that their leader represents them, and that there is a larger problem than him being a moron alone.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Do you understand that the president of Iran must be approved by the Supreme Council? That the Supreme Council can reject the candidate that was voted in by the people? This ensures that the president is subordinate to the Supreme Council and will act in the Council's interest. In the entire situation, the Supreme Council is in power, and anything the president does is approved by the Supreme Council. That is not even bourgeois democracy.
Click to expand...

I never said Iranian democracy is good, I just said its a democracy, just like the US and European democracies are democracies, even though many people could argue on forever that they arent.


Khayembii Communique said:
And what is my version of democracy, exactly? That sounds pretty laughable.
Click to expand...

I mean, the "generally accepted" version of democracy, which in many ways are flawed as well, and a detriment on society.
 
I never said Iranian democracy is good, I just said its a democracy, just like the US and European democracies are democracies, even though many people could argue on forever that they arent.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that the appointment of officials was democracy.

I mean, the "generally accepted" version of democracy, which in many ways are flawed as well, and a detriment on society.
Click to expand...

You haven't clarified at all. If "my view" of democracy is the "generally accepted" version of democracy, then what is the "generally accepted" version?

Come on.. Iran is a democracy, the US is known to be biased against Iran, and if a US agency says the election is not free and fair, then that doesnt really count as it not being free and fair in my eyes when the people elect the president.
Click to expand...

Here is your logic spelled out:

1. The US says Iran is a dictatorship.
2. I am anti-US and disagree with everything they say.
3. Therefore, I think Iran is a democracy.

I am really trying to show that their leader represents them, and that there is a larger problem than him being a moron alone.
Click to expand...

You clearly know nothing about Iran, then. Unless people love being oppressed? Perhaps they're all masochists.:roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom