Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday October 19 2016, @05:09AM   Printer-friendly
from the making-sausage dept.

Authoritarian leaders are seen as far more trustworthy than politicians in more openly democratic countries across the emerging world, according to data compiled by the World Economic Forum.

Leaders in Singapore, the Gulf states and Rwanda are rated as having the highest ethical standards in the emerging markets, closely followed by their Chinese and central Asian counterparts.

In contrast, politicians in democracies such as Brazil, Paraguay, Nigeria, Mexico and Romania are seen as exhibiting the lowest ethical standards.

Overall, among the 20 emerging market countries rated as having the most trustworthy politicians in the 2016 survey, 13 are rated as "not free" by Freedom House, a US government-funded non-governmental organisation, with three classed as partly free and just four classed as free.

Among the 20 emerging markets whose politicians are seen as having the lowest ethical standards, not one is classed by Freedom House as not free, with six free and 14 partly free.

https://www.ft.com/content/79d1ce36-8ca9-11e6-8aa5-f79f5696c731

Might be paywalled, but I got in using my normal combination of noscript, self-destructing cookies, and referrer spoofing (from google.com).

Text without charts: http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/world/2016/10/1823541-polls-show-low-approval-of-the-ethical-standards-of-leaders-in-latin-america.shtml


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 19 2016, @06:04PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 19 2016, @06:04PM (#416256)

    And no, I don't like HRC much better, but I'm voting for the platform and not the candidate anyway. (Not that I expect the platform to be enforced, HRC is much too far right for that, center-left at best.)

    Then, if you aren't shortsighted, you'd do well to vote for a candidate who actually appears to be principled.

  • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Thursday October 20 2016, @04:38AM

    by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Thursday October 20 2016, @04:38AM (#416477)

    "Then, if you aren't shortsighted, you'd do well to vote for a candidate who actually appears to be principled. " Not this year, there isn't one.
    It's far more important to defeat the Creamsicle Charlatan, and besides, our 'Third Parties' are just different weak blendings of the two current ones. Neither one presents a true departure of business as usual. So I vote for the platform I agree with more. Currently Democratic because of the hard right turn in the GOP and their binding themselves so hard to the Evangelicals. I will never vote in favor of theocratic leadership.

    Trumps comments tonight in the debate showed his personality. He tried, and did very well for himself, I'm certain it was difficult for him, but much better than I expected and even sounded inspiring at times. He still came off as intolerable though. And his off the cuff remarks like "Such a nasty woman" I predict will seal his defeat. It was completely uncalled for and I think will take on a very big life in the next few days.
    Since he said basically that he won't accept losing the election, I can't see this man accepting the limitations he would find in the Presidency, nor can I see him debating policy with other nations and controlling his apparent need to insult everyone.
    At worst if he were elected, he would be even less effective than Obama as he would face the opposition of his own party as well as the Democrats, hmm, he might actually unite them for once...LOL!

    Of course we knew Trump would not do well in the debates, he did, after all face a 30 year masterdebater. She's wanked and deflected everyone for a long time so at least we know what we get, and we see here faults clearly without the need to sensationalize them. And hell, even Trump once said, "We had some very good economies under Democrats, and Republicans, but we've had some pretty bad disasters under the Republicans"
    Before I get called out to cite that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCB6RvRojIQ [youtube.com]

    Someday there will be a candidate I can believe in. He (or She, Trans or possibly an android) will probably turn out to be the Anti-Christ Mark III, but, this year I'll go with the good ol' reliable Anti-Christ Mark I, as I find the Mark II model completely unbearable and Satan's pot smoking Republican and Cthulhu's tree-hugging Democrat fail to inspire.....

    --
    Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.