Totaram posted:
Sean posted:

That for you to find out bai. Jealousy is a very bad thing. Ali has his accreditation as Doctor from UWI. Why don’t you go and ask them. Don’t make a fool of yourself. 

Jealousy ?  No, the question is about morality of a candidate for the highest office in the land having a degree from a non-existent university.  Cheddi Jagan was the the most ethical leader ever.  Is this what has become of his party?  How is this acceptable to anyone with a conscience?

Did you help C. Jorgon fix the ballot box the night before the Brindley Benn vs Balram Singh Rai vote?

Totaram posted:
Dave posted:
Sean posted:
Totaram posted:
Sean posted:

Bai Tolaram, we will find out just over a week.

I man not arguing Guyanese politics as I used to because Guyana is too polarized. No more constructive discussion on Guyana but you are forgetting to admit what Granger did and it was raping the constitution, disregard for the NCV, illegally appointing a GECOM chairman etc. 

It depends on which side of the political fence you are.

The people will decide. We shall see.

Brother Sean, it is Totaram , not Tolaram. Tolaram is me Mamoo from tap side.  On the court cases you mentioned: the appointment of the GECOM chair was unconstitutional as per CCJ ruling and Granger acted accordingly, eventually appointing Justice Singh.  The NCM case is more complicated.  As you know, it also went to the CCJ, which ruled that 33 was the required number of votes but the court refused to set a date for the elections.  With these two cases and several others Granger always expressed his respect for the courts.  For those who liken him to Burnham they can't be more wrong.  I remember the PNC flag being flown on the Court of Appeals building during Burnham's despotic rule.  Now that was a clear signal of disrespect for the rule of law.  Although Granger apparently likes Burnham's ideology, unlike Burnham, he is not a dictator.  As you mentioned, the Guyanese people will decide on March 2.  From my perspective, a government headed Granger is preferable to one headed by Ali.   

I totally disagree and I said before, I prefer not to argue about the elections and await for free and fair election results. I always believe in a fair fight and will respect the results regardless of who wins in an internationally recognized free and fair election.

Bhai, is 7 political parties bank up to challenge 1 - If its a fair fight, PPPC will trash their Arss left, right and centre. 

APNU  already getting a good trashing at the LGE .. and this election will be a massive massive victory for PPPC. 

The LGE was ages ago under very different conditions.  It was the seeming success there that emboldened Jagdeo to conspire with Charandass and others to move the non-confidence motion.  You will note that the turn out in the LGE was very low and should not have been taken as an indicator of what would happen in a general election.  Moreover, the NCM has galvanized the Coalition vote.  Granger correctly observed at one of his rallies that Region 4 will decide the election.  Have a look of at the demographics of that area and you will stop your silly talk about "trashing and massive victory'.

Word on the street has it that sections of Region 4 are leaning heavily to third party voting.  

Last edited by Bibi Haniffa
ksazma posted:
Totaram posted:
ksazma posted:
Totaram posted:
ksazma posted:
Totaram posted:
ksazma posted:

The formula is simple. If the PPP wins, it is legitimate. If the Coalition wins, the PNC rigged the elections. We are already seeing some moves that suggest that the rigging has begun. We will know for sure in due course. Another thing we is know for sure is that if the PNC rigs and the Coalition 'wins', then Guyana will sink further into a despotic state.

Read what you wrote as it betrays a badly biased mindset:  if the PPP wins , it is legitimate.  If the Coalition wins: they rigged.  

I am basing my observation on historical data. It is none other than the PNC's fault that all general elections as well as the bogus 1978 Referendum conducted while they were the government were deemed rigged. The PPP can't boast of that stellar rigging record.

If this is what you meant you surely stated it clumsily.  Indeed the plebiscites you mention were rigged but the following: "The formula is simple. If the PPP wins, it is legitimate. If the Coalition wins, the PNC rigged the elections" suggests a pronouncement on the outcome of the March 2 vote.  

They are one and the same. Everything doesn't need to be spelt out. We are not litigating in a courtroom.

They are not one and the same.  Some are in the past and one is on March 2, 2020.  To make the statement you made about a future event does betray a biased mindset.  

Perhaps you don't understand what 'if' connotes. 

I know what if means and my reading of your statement is the interpretation any reasonable person will make.  

Totaram posted:
ksazma posted:
Totaram posted:
ksazma posted:
Totaram posted:
ksazma posted:
Totaram posted:
ksazma posted:

The formula is simple. If the PPP wins, it is legitimate. If the Coalition wins, the PNC rigged the elections. We are already seeing some moves that suggest that the rigging has begun. We will know for sure in due course. Another thing we is know for sure is that if the PNC rigs and the Coalition 'wins', then Guyana will sink further into a despotic state.

Read what you wrote as it betrays a badly biased mindset:  if the PPP wins , it is legitimate.  If the Coalition wins: they rigged.  

I am basing my observation on historical data. It is none other than the PNC's fault that all general elections as well as the bogus 1978 Referendum conducted while they were the government were deemed rigged. The PPP can't boast of that stellar rigging record.

If this is what you meant you surely stated it clumsily.  Indeed the plebiscites you mention were rigged but the following: "The formula is simple. If the PPP wins, it is legitimate. If the Coalition wins, the PNC rigged the elections" suggests a pronouncement on the outcome of the March 2 vote.  

They are one and the same. Everything doesn't need to be spelt out. We are not litigating in a courtroom.

They are not one and the same.  Some are in the past and one is on March 2, 2020.  To make the statement you made about a future event does betray a biased mindset.  

Perhaps you don't understand what 'if' connotes. 

I know what if means and my reading of your statement is the interpretation any reasonable person will make.  

Well, read it a few more times. At some point it should become clear to you and if it doesn't, well perhaps it was not meant to.

Add Reply

Post

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×