It's hilarious how many European countries have term limits for representative functions (presidents), but the one that actually holds power (prime minister) can stay in power for decades. But of course there is nothing democratic about term limits whatsoever.
What you mean slay kween scientist khaleesi extorter of weak economies and enabler of neonazis did something wrong?
Now that MAS won, especially with a much bigger margin than they did last time, I think it's okay to be a little critical.
Evo just shouldn't have ran again after the vote in favor of term limits happened, Arce would've won and none of this crisis would've ever happened.
Because it's clear that he did 10 percentage points worse in the election than he otherwise would've by running for the extra term after the amendment passed. There was a meaningful number of people that voted against MAS for that reason alone. He could've easily played a role in any future administration. He put the entire socialist movement in Bolivia at risk by running for that extra term.
It isn't about the legitimacy of the referendum or term limits at large. It's that it was clearly unpopular among some of his parties own supporters that he was seeking an extra term.
Isn't taking Arces results after a coup as how he would have performed before having his voter base was massacred wrong? I don't know why MAS decided to have Evo run again, but I'm sure they had reasons that made sense to the party.
