Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

MastersonMcFee t1_iug90q2 wrote

Good news for the rainforest, and the entire planet!

140

No-Owl9201 t1_iug9l6v wrote

The best news for the Amazon, Climate Change and Democracy, I heard for along while!!!!!!!!!

45

Da_Vader t1_iugbeth wrote

Did Bolso concede? He is really unpredictable devil.

22

dianavan20 t1_iugc392 wrote

Bolsonaro is still crying locked in his bedroom and doesn't want to see anyone including his allies. Let's hope he concedes and leaves without inciting violence. Brazil is polarized and the days to come are very challenging but hopefully things will get better.

72

jorsiem t1_iugdcmw wrote

And reddit will tell me this is a good thing.

−57

TheRainbowpill93 t1_iuge5z3 wrote

Congratulations Brazil ! The world is getting somewhat back on track now that the fascists are getting voted out. We as a world community still have much more work to do though , we can’t get too comfortable again.

33

anava_ t1_iugec78 wrote

Good riddance to that prick.

10

arbitraryairship t1_iugevrw wrote

Democracy is nice. Good to see it's still a thing.

123

moon_fairy t1_iugewl8 wrote

Replying to jorsiem (#368,379)

Bolsonaro was going to have too much power if he was elected, the congress is filled with his people and he had plans to put more members on the supreme court so he'd have more power. God knows what he was going to be capable of doing, there is something Bolsonaro currently uses to fund his corruption called "orçamento secreto" or "secret budget" which makes him and his people able to direct funding anywhere they want without repercussion. Imagine what he could do if he had the supreme court on the palm of his hand. Lula was corrupt yes, but Bolsonaro is a whole different breed of evil

24

craiger_123 t1_iugh126 wrote

It's about time Brazil got rid of this JERK.

38

Locke_Fucking_Lamora t1_iughsiv wrote

Faux News headline:

One of the worlds largest democracies elects leftist ex-con as president

Wouldn’t expect any other type of headline from that POS “news” source.

18

dakinekine t1_iugk7bm wrote

I’m sure Neymar is crushed.

2

my20cworth t1_iugozmo wrote

Here we go "the election was stolen".

6

Rogue100 t1_iugq64s wrote

Replying to TheRainbowpill93 (#368,304)

Italy just voted them in, and the US seems set to do the same in a little over a week. I'm happy for the little bit of sanity in Brazil, but I'm not at all convinced the world as a whole is moving in the same direction.

11

hunsnotdead t1_iugy7dq wrote

Replying to jorsiem (#368,379)

Look, in hindsight if Weimar Germany could choose between Nazis + WWII and constant political clusterfuck, "Neither of those were good", im pretty sure what they would choose.

11

EMP_Jeffrey_Dahmer t1_iugzwki wrote

Remember Lula went to jail for embezzlement of billions of dollars.

−33

Aj_Caramba t1_iuh05v9 wrote

Replying to Lord-of-war-Ares (#373,595)

I don't know the situation in Brasil, but for example in Czechoslovakia, our first post Soviet occupation president was also en ex-con, but he was jailed by the totalitarian regime for being against it, so..

21

JayR_97 t1_iuh50j3 wrote

It's says a lot about Brazilians that the election was this close... :/

2

WildFurball2118 t1_iuh6587 wrote

Great! May the Amazon Forest will be preserved well.

2

Bagor519 t1_iuhb7mx wrote

I like seeing how Brazil has gotten back on track, they need to fight for democracy and keep it with them. As much as I hope he stays in office, I fear that another dictator will quickly take his place pretty soon.

2

fabulin t1_iuhdug5 wrote

Replying to dakinekine (#370,027)

he's in great form though. hopefully he decides to protest bolsonaro's failed election by refusing to go to the WC. infact all the bolsonaro footballers should do the same, and the lula supporters in the squad should take the WC off to celebrate lula's win.

as an englishman that's something i would heavily endorse. just need a reason for the french and germans to give it a miss now and we're set.

2

Kptn_Obv5 t1_iuhtkbf wrote

Replying to Lord-of-war-Ares (#373,595)

Where the judge presiding Lula’s case passed on 'advice, investigative leads, and inside information to the prosecutors to 'prevent Lula's Workers' Party from winning' the 2018 elections. His case was appealed to the Supreme Court.

Definitive case tampering.

3

-Clayburn t1_iuhwq42 wrote

Looking forward to the biopic on this.

1

Ipeewhenithurts t1_iuhynm9 wrote

Both are horrible, Bolsonaro being worse. This picture makes Lula a nice guy and he is just a prick.

−4

anlumo t1_iui4zgj wrote

Replying to TypicalExpert6 (#370,479)

The US failed to update its democratic system for the modern times, so it slowly failed. So slowly in fact that the people there only start to realize this now, decades after it happened.

2

justforthearticles20 t1_iuimt2u wrote

Replying to TypicalExpert6 (#370,479)

In the US, we live in a country where 1 in 4 is a wildly fascist fuck, while 1 in 3 don't give a shit, and just over 1 in 3 oppose Fascism. The remaining 7% or so say they oppose Fascism, but most vote for the fascists anyway, because of some other flavor of hate that appeals to them.

5

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iuiroav wrote

Replying to All_I_See_Is_Teeth (#379,745)

so how do you account for :

2003 total loss 25,396 km2

2004 total loss 27,772 km2

Apply that logic here please , and explain it to me how is that plummeted the second he walked in ?

Data is so simple and , you don't / can't even read yet calling me toddler

0

No-Owl9201 t1_iuis201 wrote

Exactly, and a tremendous amount before both of them as well..

1

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iuisl9q wrote

Replying to DragonDai (#392,451)

there were 8 judges and they read his crimes for 4 hours , the only crook was his friend in the supreme court got him out of prison because the trial was supposed to take place in Brasilia instead of Curitiba , he got him out on technicality , not because he was proven innocent

1

DragonDai t1_iuisv0x wrote

Replying to Lord-of-war-Ares (#392,559)

You can deny the truth all you like, it doesn't make it not the truth. The man was convicted by a crooked judge, the conviction was overturned because the only material evidence was fabricated, and he is a free man without that crime on his record.

Keep believing the lies you're being fed of you want. We're done here.

1

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iuitrvd wrote

Replying to No-Owl9201 (#375,259)

1- it's not my information

2- I gave you the link , you are the one who is not looking at numbers

3- you are just a fanatic who is denying numbers blatantly because they don't agree with you

0

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iuiv2yp wrote

Replying to CheesecakeMedium8500 (#375,658)

Is that what happened? he signed the paper but the delivery was slow argument?

The second he walked in the office deforestation increased the first year , the second year was higher than his first year

How do you account that?

−1

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujcdhu wrote

Replying to CheesecakeMedium8500 (#397,166)

By that logic , how do you hold Bolsonaro responsible of deforestation as a president but not Lula as a president?

People can down-vote me as much as they want , doesn't mean anything , I will continue standing by the truth. The ones don't have any argument are being crushed by the facts , not by emotionally driven fanatics

−1

CheesecakeMedium8500 t1_iujevnq wrote

Replying to Lord-of-war-Ares (#399,004)

>By that logic , how do you hold Bolsonaro responsible of deforestation as a president but not Lula as a president?

Now you’re conflating two different ideas. I didn’t say Lula could not change the logging industry. I said he couldn’t totally turn it around in one year.

On that note, removing restrictions and letting the logging companies do whatever they want is A LOT easier than reining them in.

>The ones don't have any argument are being crushed by the facts

I’ve been through your comment history. You haven’t crushed one person with facts. YOU have gotten crushed left and right by irrefutable evidence that you’re wrong.

2

martinswesley9 t1_iujhst2 wrote

Replying to jello1990 (#398,638)

He is not. His allies have already acknowledged Lula's victory and the high ranking military are not in the slighest inclined into doing any kind of coup. He only has his dumbass supporters now and that's not enough for a coup

6

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujofn5 wrote

Replying to CheesecakeMedium8500 (#399,978)

When Lula walked into the office deforestation increased first year in comparison to the previous president , in his second year deforestation increased in comparison to his first year , so we are talking about two years consistently increasing. Numbers don't lie !

So your argument he couldn't in one year is not true

In fact first 4 years of deforestation of Lula's term is more than double of 4 years of Bolsonaro deforestation

You are a fanatic , can't be argued even with facts

0

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujotr2 wrote

Replying to All_I_See_Is_Teeth (#402,315)

I am giving you stats

Deforestation of Lula's term is more than the double of Bolsonaro's term of deforestation , first two years consistently increasing , how's that the "second he walked in plummeted" for an argument?

Data is clear is the only part I can agree with you ! you should look at it sometimes

When you start name calling someone, it's a sign of losing an argument , what a loser .... hahahaa

0

CheesecakeMedium8500 t1_iujqmat wrote

Replying to Lord-of-war-Ares (#403,674)

>in his second year deforestation increased in comparison to his first year

This is an inane and pedantic point. I did not literally mean that deforestation started to drop on 1 January 2004. This distinction you’re trying to make changes absolutely nothing about my point.

>Numbers don't lie !

The numbers show that deforestation fell by 75% while he was president. Why on earth are you only focusing on when he was initially in office and totally ignoring his entire tenure?

>In fact first 4 years of deforestation of Lula's term is more than double of 4 years of Bolsonaro deforestation

Only because bolsenaro had such a low staring point to start from…thanks to his predecessors.

If mayor A managed to reduce the murder rate from 1000 per year to 100 per year, and then mayor B comes in and changes things to where the rate goes up to 500 per year, it would be unequivocally asinine to try to argue that mayor B did a better job at dealing with murder because “more murders happened under mayor A.”

2

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujvp4g wrote

Replying to CheesecakeMedium8500 (#404,663)

Fernando Henrique Cardoso (president of Brazil before Lula)

1999 total loss 17,259
2000 total loss 18,226
2001 total loss 18,165
2002 total loss 21,651

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula)

2003 total loss 25,396
2004 total loss 27,772
2005 total loss 19,014
2006 total loss 14,285

Does that look like 75% less to you?

−1

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujw77h wrote

Replying to Warm_Ad_7572 (#406,567)

Fernando Henrique Cardoso (president of Brazil before Lula)

1999 total loss 17,259

2000 total loss 18,226

2001 total loss 18,165

2002 total loss 21,651

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula)

2003 total loss 25,396

2004 total loss 27,772

2005 total loss 19,014

2006 total loss 14,285

Does this look like an improvement to you?

0

All_I_See_Is_Teeth t1_iujwar1 wrote

Replying to Lord-of-war-Ares (#403,848)

Oh you're definitely giving false and misleading stats

The numbers you seem to love throwing in people's faces don't hold up past the first glance. 2 entire terms of decreasing deforestation and yet you think people are stupid enough to look at your numbers and not be able to immediatley see the truth?

They're higher because he came into power when deforestation was at an all time high. You're the exact same kind of person who argues Obama dropped more bombs than trump. Yeah. No shit. Double the time and way more combat during Said time.

The arguement you so desperately prop up is made of paper. Its over. Lula won. Youve lost. You're either a bot or You're paid to do this.

1

CheesecakeMedium8500 t1_iujxeag wrote

Replying to Lord-of-war-Ares (#406,817)

This is so pedantic.

Lula —> significant net reduction in deforestation.

Bolsenaro —> significant net increase in deforestation.

If mayor A managed to reduce the murder rate from 1000 per year to 100 per year, and then mayor B comes in and changes things to where the rate goes up to 500 per year, it would be unequivocally asinine to try to argue that mayor B did a better job at dealing with murder because “more murders happened under mayor A” even if murders initially jumped to 110 per year for the first two years of mayor A’s tenure.

2

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iuk79so wrote

Replying to CheesecakeMedium8500 (#407,624)

what happened to "deforestation rate plummeted the second he walked in" argument? it became 2 years now?
Bolsonaro did a better job protecting the forest than Lula did according to the numbers
Lula tripled in deforestation , besides the guy is a thief , you don't even know what he is selling from his country
You are such a mindless champagne socialists lot

−1

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iukbbdc wrote

Replying to All_I_See_Is_Teeth (#414,977)

Exposing mindless fanatics , watching them crumble with facts , seeing them not having arguments and consorting name callings is priceless , it gives me immense pleasure

It not my information , it's not my chart , just pure facts you can't stand

1