28
Trump says he will meet Machado — and would accept Nobel Peace Prize from her
(www.washingtonpost.com)
Fascist fucker can’t get one any other way
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2026
28 points (100.0% liked)
news
800 readers
1145 users here now
A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.
Rules:
- Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
- Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
- Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
- Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
- No link shorteners
- No entire article in the post body
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
top 30 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Even if Trump were willing to make a deal with a leftist brown woman, which I doubt he would, the Congress War Powers resolution just neutered his power. Any further interference in Venezuela will require either a US Military Coup or otherwise Congress' approval.
Oh definitely... Trump and his administration have broken hundreds of other laws and regulations with absolutely zero repercussions but this one will definitely hold them... right?
Machado is not a leftist, if that's who you were referring to. She's a hard-right capitalist, who's been offering Venezuela's resources to whoever agrees to regime change Maduro.
She also has no real power within Venezuela's government...so it's unlikely that Trump will actually put her in charge. He'll most likely just take the trophy from her and then turn around and cut a deal with the interim president that's currently in power.
He just needs someone there who's willing to give him what he wants, and has the authority to make it happen. It doesn't matter who. That way, Congress wouldn't need to authorize anything, and he still gets what he wants.
Returning to a real democracy is a wide left shift from the current Maduro regime. All Autocracy is Right Wing.
The result being comparatively moderate or right wing to other nations is irrelevant in the context of Venezuela.
Autocracies are not inherently "left" or "right"...they are just autocracies. Anyone of any political or economic ideology can become a dictator if they abandon democratic principles, in favor of maintaining their own power.
Machado is a conservative, free-market Capitalist. That's what makes her right-wing. Why else do you think the folks on Fox News love her so much?
Left is Progress
Right is Conservative
Autocracies will always be a regression into our past and take us away from the path to a better future.
What "progress" is Machado seeking? She wants the country to go back to how it was before Chavez. That makes her "regressive". So, which hand is that, on your political spectrum?
And? She's going to give him her peace prize, in the hopes that he will put her in charge of the country. But, he's already said he's not going to.
Thats what I said.
You also said she was a left-wing. That's what we were talking about.
She is left wing, her leading Venezuela would be progress out of the authoritarianism of Maduro's regime.
That's not the modern definition of "left wing". But, even if you apply that definition, she still qualifies as a conservative because she wants to return to the old system of government, that existed before Chavez. That's not "progress"...it's "regression".
And authoritarianism, is a completely separate metric to that political classification system. Any government, regardless of whether you consider them progressive or conservative, can be authoritarian or not. You can have a perfectly functional democracy, with both progressive and conservative ideas taking part in the process. This cooperation is actually considered essential to a healthy democracy.
Authoritarianism is when one side or the other decides they no longer respect the will of the people, and choose to assert their agenda by force or coercion. That can just as easily be used to enforce change, as it is to prevent it.
I think at a certain point we have to agree that the objective right or left is based on the current position of the sovereign nation in question. Progress to be made here is different than progress to be made there, things we have they don't, etc.
If that's what you think, then you have to admit that your definition of "left" and "right", is meaningless. Either it applies across all instances, or it's entirely subjective.
I think it's pretty rare to have any occurrence of the term without the context of a specific country.
That's probably because you don't actually understand the terms you're using. You're getting them mixed up, which would make it rather hard to use them as defined.
The way you measure socio-political systems is typically using spectrums. There are many different spectrums used to define any given system. Technically, you are correct to say that every country is different. But how you define its position relative to other countries uses multiple axes to measure those different spectrums. And given the complexity of how all those separate lines of measurement intersect...you get a multitude of potential socio-political outcomes. Nothing is ever 2 dimensional.
Authoritarianism has its own spectrum...its own axis of measurement. It is independent of other concepts, and can be measured independently, alongside any of the other criteria.
All Authoritarianism is bad, regressive, and conservative.
You're like a weird, broken record of misunderstanding.
I understand that you desperately want to conclude Tankies like Maduro and others are left wing or some other trite, but the fact is they're eastern maga.
What are you even talking about? I didn't say anything about Maduro.
You called Machado a "leftist". That is categorically false, and shows that you have no idea what that term even means. You are clearly just making this shit up, off the top of your head, and have no intention of arguing in good faith.
To imply Machado is right wing has to imply her direct and complete opposition is left wing.
Tell me your PoliSci education ended with 101 without telling me it ended with 101
Didn't it only pass the House?
It was a senate vote 52 - 47 on Thursday, 5 Republicans voted against their party.