You can't hold an election during a civil war. The opposition cannot canvas for fear of reprisal and voters are scared to visit ballot boxes. That much is obvious- and there are certainly many other factors . I appreciate your efforts to defend the election result - following a US-led illegal coup and a pro-US puppet president- but it's clear to any non-aligned observer that you are a mendacious wretch , conditioned to support any anti-Russian smears and to back-slap any scurrilous puppet promoting the NATO horseshit.
It's nice that you can speculate to support your claims. Do you have any actual evidence?
Zelenskyy got a higher vote total than the Russian backed winner in the 2010 election. That is a fact.
Zelenskyy won the election by over 9 million votes. Also a fact.
In the first round of the election Zelenskyy got more than 3 million more votes than the third place candidate so even if 100% of Donbas had voted, Zelenskyy would have been in the final election. Also a fact.
Subtracting Crimea and the Donbass regions, the voter turnout in 2019 was only a few percentage points less than the 2010 election. Also a fact.
I can find no media reports of anyone calling for a boycott of the 2019 election. Donbas didn't vote because they were actively conducting a civil war but the Donbas region does not have enough votes to overcome the 9 million vote victory. Also a fact.
Over 2,000 election observers from 17 countries were in Ukraine for the election. There were no reports of election fraud or corruption that would have changed the outcome from those observers
I haven't posted any NATO bullshit. I simply posted facts about the 2019 election. I didn't speculate about the 2019 election or why it turned out like it did. I only posted facts.
The above facts can only lead to one conclusion. Zelenskyy was the overwhelming choice of Ukranians even if you include the Donbas region and assume they would have voted 100% for a Russian candidate.
Now you're just floundering and making stuff up. Better still, I name you as a liar.
I hardly think I made up this:
Crimea was always Russian, right back before the Crimean war of the British fighting the Russians for it. It was temporarily part of Ukraine due to some illegal mischief on the part of Kruschev. The Crimeans saw/see themselves as Russian. If NATO hadn't continued to push eastwards perhaps Putin would have left it as it was.
You clearly said it. I didn't make it up. You might want to apologize for calling me a liar for stating "you want to claim Crimea is not part of Ukraine."
Clearly you said that "Crimea was always Russian." If Putin hadn't invaded Russia maybe the election would have turned out different but the invasion was the fault of Putin.
The evidence is the ongoing civil war, dumbass. You really are far more stupid than you think
The ongoing civil war is not evidence of anything about the election. Your speculation about votes not occurring that would have overturned the election is ridiculous based on the facts in evidence. Facts beat speculation every day in the free world. The civil war may have made the Ukranians not in Donbass more likely to vote to get away from Russia but that speculation would again defeat your speculation. Based on facts alone, you have none. I have presented several that lead to one conclusion and one conclusion only unless one is willing to ignore those facts and rely solely on speculation.
