Talk:Democratically elected

I'm surprised, with all the talk about people supporting Chavez, no one mentioned the fact that our very own page has this problem. Researcher 21:20, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but there it's a friggin' joke. ħuman 21:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't at the time it was put in. I got in a nasty debate with a user because I was trashing Chavez. Look at the rest of the piece. Researcher 21:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the ref in this article should be to an early diff, not the "current" article then? ħuman 22:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Ooh! Good idea. Will do. Researcher 00:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Hitler

As much as I hate to destroy a near-perfect illustration of Godwin`s Law, I have to point out that Hitler wasn`t fully democratically elected. He applied for the office of the Reichspräsident, the head of state of the Weimar Republic, in 1932, but lost to Paul von Hindenburg Hindenburg with ~32% of the votes to Hindenburgs 53%. He was than appointed to the office of the Reichskanzler by the same Hindenburg, because the NSDAP was the strongest party in the Reichstag, the german parlament, and even though it didn`t have an absolute majority, it was all but impossible to create any ruling coalition without them. Gmb (talk) 19:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

By that logic no British Prime Ministers are democratically elected. ListenerX^TalkerX 19:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

And? Professor Moriarty 19:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

It would be setting the bar impossibly high for what constitutes "democratically elected" if we ruled out a commonplace parliamentary process like that. ListenerX^TalkerX 19:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I rather agree with you. Professor Moriarty 19:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I don`t want to critizise the article as a whole, since I completly agree that winning an election by whatever means doesn`t necessarily give a person a special legitimation. I just want to correct this one special case, since it is a very often used, but nonetheless wrong argument that Hitler managed to win a fair and free election. He used all legal and illegal means at his disposal to rig the two mentioned elections in his favor, and still he didn`t manage to defeat Hindenburg or gain the majority in the Reichstag Gmb (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I understood that the 1932 elections were free, but Hitler rigged the 1933 ones, after he got to be chancellor. ListenerX^TalkerX 20:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Aside from massive propaganda with everything the technology of 1932 had to offer, there was still a little group of several hundred thousand brown-clad guys called the SA roaming the streats before and during the elction...Gmb (talk) 20:14, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Would it be apropos here to mention the Red Front? ListenerX^TalkerX 20:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I never said that the other partys did play by the rules. Hell, even the SPD had their own fighting force. Gmb (talk) 20:45, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Delete

This is not a very good article, and I see nothing much we could scavenge from it, and I'm not sure how useful or on-mission it would be if we did.--^talk 12:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Yea

1. --^talk 12:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
2. Hard to justify a politics article this shallow. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
3. Anything here is covered better on other pages. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 14:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)