Democracy and violence can ill go together.
Out long national nightmare is over. Our constitution works.
At the end of 4 years, you have a President who turns over all this enormous power without a single shot being fired.
Democracy is an objective. Democratization is a process. Democratization serves the cause of peace because it offers the possibility of justice and of progressive change without force.
In America, we've been around for 240 years. We've had free and fair elections. We've accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them. And that is what must be expected of anyone standing on a debate stage during a general election.
The best way to marginalize the Muslim Brotherhood [in Egypt] is in the ballot box, not through arrests and killing people.
The one way, possibly, out of this is for [Bashar] Assad to abdicate and plead, perhaps to Russia or somewhere else. Would save another wave of civilian casualties if we could get him to abdicate.
I personally call the type of government which can be removed without violence 'democracy,' and the other, 'tyranny.'.
Democracy still has a real hope and chance in Iraq, and true freedom in this country would be the greatest testament to those who gave their lives for it.
We have always said there are two ways to resolve Syria, and both will end up with the same result: a Syria without Bashar Assad.
Now [after election] where it goes into violence, I have a zero tolerance for riots.
My definition of democracy is - A form and a method of Government whereby revolutionary changes in the social life are brought about without bloodshed. That is the real test. It is perhaps the severest test. But when you are judging the quality of the material you must put it to the severest test.
In Syria, if [Bashar al-] Assad had just been a statesman and handed over the reigns in time, Syria would not be heading down the nightmare that it is today.
[Donald] Trump has said he will accept the results of the election - if he wins. And he has said the only way he can lose the election is if it's stolen from him. Weeks before any votes were cast, he was predicting widespread voter fraud. So if he loses, what does he do?
The highest eulogy which can be pronounced on the Revolution of 1688 is this that this was our last Revolution.
The essence of democracy is not that everyone makes and administers laws but that lawgivers and rulers should be dependent on the people's will in such a way that they may be peaceably changed if conflict occurs.
One does not export democracy in an armored vehicle.
In 2001-2002, I told the president that the election was supposed to take place when the war was over, at a time when we could return to peaceful life. We agreed upon that. However, I can see now that the election cannot be delayed any longer.
I even reject and condemn in the strongest terms the idea, the consideration of a military coup. If I had the chance I would stand in front of the people who would attempt such a thing and open my arms and beg them to stop.
One of the things we must be able to agree to is to lose an election and not take to the streets.
If you can resolve this transition of [Bashar] Assad, that is absolutely possible, but you have to have a clarity for everybody about the way forward.
My policy is trust, peace, and to put aside the bayonet. I do not think the wise policy is to decide contested elections in the States by the use of the national army.
Democracy requires you to learn how to lose as well as how to exercise power when you win. And that requires restraint all around. One of the reasons it works is because when you win you don't do things that are so upsetting to the losers that they feel like they have less, they have more to gain by turning over the system.
