I wonder how many people actually have a problem with this. Very few I'd suspect. Zelensky still seems popular within Ukraine, and I think most would agree that this isn't a good time for a change in leadership. Plus elections are expensive and nobody in the occupied space would be able to vote. Yeah I think this was the right call.

[–] fluke@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Yes. This is a inflammatory headline purely to try and push an agenda.

There was literally a poll a couple of months ago that showed something like 80% of Ukrainians were in favour of not having elections.

Not to even mention that Ukraine is under Marshall Law, and per their laws disallows elections. And don't even get me started on the entire premise of running elections in a country where a quarter of the landmass is under enemy occupation and the logistics of getting votes from 100s of thousands of deployed troops and the serious security concerns of the election itself from Russian attacks.

In my opinion Newsweek have just outed themselves here and the question is for who?

[–] whileloop@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Probably trying to paint a narrative that Zelensky is undemocratic and corrupt, which some people in the US might believe.

[–] mufasio@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hahahahahahahaha, oh that’s a good bit. I have never seen better proof of “cut a liberal and a fascist bleeds” than when it comes to Ukraine and Israel. Zelensky came to power after a right wing coup orchestrated by the CIA, his corrupt government has pilfered billions of dollars in aid, and he’s suspended elections. I can’t wait for a couple years from now when these same libs are making excuses for Trump suspending elections and the Supreme Court eliminating presidential term limits.

[–] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

Look at the house GOP who gave a big military aid package to Netanyahu but nothing to Ukraine.

[–] TheUsualButBlaBlaBla@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Most of my Ukranian friends would not vote for him in an election, it’s a bit of an ‘open secret’ in the country that he’s seen as a wartime leader who would be expected to step aside in peacetime.

[–] Hubi@feddit.de 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not much of a secret, he has said so himself.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Did he at least whisper it?

[–] JungleJim@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He was a stand up comedian before? Seems like he thought he'd be a peacetime leader.

[–] stella@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why would they choose someone else, though?

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because he barely had any experience in diplomatic relations before being thrust into Ukrainian Ultimate Commander. He unfortunately has become a wartime politician, even though that was never his intentions.

[–] stella@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

So you think it's better to choose someone else because of experience diplomatic relations?

Are there other people in Ukraine who are considered to be preferred for the job when the war ends?