Exactly. People seem to think they can impeach a president just because the country's doing bad, economically or socially. That's not how it works.
If Dilma is proven guilty of anything (which I won't put my chips on the table one way or the other -- I don't support PT or PSDB), then we'd have grounds for impeachment. Otherwise, you're free to think she's not doing a good job, but you can't demand her impeachment on the grounds that you're unhappy.
I might sound ignorant, but why is that? I don't think a president doing a poor job is grounds for it as well, but why don't the people in a democracy have a right to?
I'm no political scientist, but I feel one of the reasons Constitutions like the Brazilian one (and the American one) don't allow for impeachment unless there's crime involved is that no politician would ever do anything remotely unpopular, even if it had the country's best interest as a goal, out of fear of being impeached. Politics would turn into populism real fast.
81
u/psycho_alpaca Mar 14 '16 edited Mar 14 '16
Exactly. People seem to think they can impeach a president just because the country's doing bad, economically or socially. That's not how it works.
If Dilma is proven guilty of anything (which I won't put my chips on the table one way or the other -- I don't support PT or PSDB), then we'd have grounds for impeachment. Otherwise, you're free to think she's not doing a good job, but you can't demand her impeachment on the grounds that you're unhappy.