>>1639
in my opinion he is obviously powerful leader, but his politics seems to be too much totalitarian with all that prohibitions, censorship and propaganda which he establishes inside russia. his outside politics is aggressive and tough, but inside russia the life level goes down, government is corrupted, and on the wave of patriotism he tries to keep the power in his hands
sorry for bad english, i'm a druguser and lightly high now

>>1639

>Russia Today is too pro-russian, while western media is too against Russia.

Yep, it's pretty hard to take middle ground here.
As for Putin, most of the people agree that in current situation it is hardly possible to find any leader better than him. Seriously, his goal is to push current situation into the direction of reconstruction of post-soviet/post-imperial Russian sphere of influence, and he balances political powers in the country to make it steady as possible. No many people know how real political power works, and even that there's quite of opposition inside his own government.

IMHO, this is a major problem of public politics - you can't expect any alternatives until alternative has come. I bet, in the same time he will resign(I think, it's his last term) we will find out that there's another man, maybe not as famous as him, but as capable as him. No, definitely, this level of support can't be explained just by his public image, but instead, by some extraordinary things we witnessed during these years.

>Russia Today

How could this abomination be considered as source of any information? It is not pro-russian but 100% pure pro-kremlin propaganda, just like TV channels of first multiplex.

Russian government is corrupted. Putin is greedy for power and gives no fucks about russians, but tries to keep country under control by carrots, sticks and brainwashing.

>>1639

So is it fair to say he is the George Bush of the Russian people?

Popular to nationalist but to the informed undesirable?

>>1639

Also i will always be amazed at how well Russians are able to translate and respond to English.

>>1647

>So is it fair to say he is the George Bush of the Russian people?

No idea, who the hell is G Bush anyway in that regard? I was thinking about it just now - maybe, Roosevelt is a better analogue?

>>1647

>Popular to nationalist but to the informed undesirable?

More like undesirable for middle class internet users who are aware of situation and could use multiple info sources. Russian nationalism isn't a thing and Putin is popular among all nations inhabiting Russia, expecially in Chechen Republic. 99.6% presence and 99.7% for Putin on last elections, can you believe this?

>>1647
not exactly, national question doesn't matter here, putin is popular among those whose life level increases during his board, and among those who thinks that stability is more important than freedom, human rights, honest judgement, etc. this group of people are called "vatniki", but also lots of people hate putin because he turns the politics to totalitarian way, doesn't keep his promises, for example instead of increasing salaries to budget workers they were decreased, especially among doctors, teachers and scientists, and doubts basic freedoms of person

>>1650
GeeDubyas i thought the world knew of George Bush.

1651
A single Chechenian voting for Putin i find hard to believe yes.

1652
That actually sounds like the politicians here in Canada.

So i would take it most Russians believe Ukraine should be left alone then? And that Putin is forcing Russia to take the east?

>>1653
maybe not most, but there are a lot of russians who think so

>>1652

>stability is more important than freedom, human rights, honest judgement

The image of desirable course of actions in modern society is becoming more and more polarized, as I observed it in last several years. In each of this occasions one can notice a group of people who are young, emotional, unexperienced and they support western values. Maybe not all of them, but just some more attractive, but if you express disagreement, you are immediately becoming the sworn enemy of these people.

>for example instead of increasing salaries to budget workers they were decreased, especially among doctors, teachers and scientists, and doubts basic freedoms of person

They also tend to believe in any nonsense that support their views.

>>1652 and >>1651 are the shining examples of these people. They only see their opponents and the rest of the people do not exist for them. Every "generation" invents a new word to designate their opposition (at least, the most popular word, that encompasses the whole situation). I have an idea that the word itself depends on what ambassador of USA is assigned to the country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_McFaul
Ambassador till the February '14, and the word was "pidarashki".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Tefft
Is a new ambassador, and the new word "vatniki" appeared.

Also, he was an ambassador in Ukraine till autumn of 2013, when there were word "katsap" for every pro-Russian person in Ukraine. Pretty traditional word.
Then he was replaced by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_R._Pyatt and the new word is now "titushki".

>>1659

>and the new word is now "titushki"

Although I forgot to mention that it was changed again after February, because of the situation with Crimea. So it might be a general direction of American policy in the region, and the change of ambassador is the secondary sign.

[world conspiracy intensifies]

>>1665

>>1659

> They also tend to believe in any nonsense that support their views.

that's not nonsense, i'm a lab worker and graduate specialist, and my mother is medical worker, so i could see this with my own eyes

>>1671

>so i could see this with my own eyes

Do not lie to people, what your eyes see is irrelevant. In modern society, salaries of budget workers normally do not drop except for the event of huge economic crisis, like in 2008 - because it would impact public support. Even on that occasion, there are special measures and reserves to keep the budget spendings level. Inflation usually has the greater impact on purchasing power of money which actually influences the wealth, but not in a way of reducing the numbers.

>>1673
i tell the truth, so what works in modern society doesn't work in putin's russia

>>1670
Well, now we have an example of what could happen if your country still isn't in Alliance.