Featured

Three quarters of Ukrainians ‘want President OUSTED’ after war

admin
October 15, 2025
0Points
0
0
Three quarters of Ukrainians 'want President OUSTED' after war

Three quarters of Ukrainians want President Volodymyr Zelensky to leave office once the war with Russia draws to a close, a new poll has discovered.

The survey, published by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), found that just 25 per cent of Ukrainians would vote for him to have another term in office.

Despite the figures, analysts from the KIIS said that the support for the Ukrainian President still remains generally high, with 60 per cent of respondents saying they trust him.

Mr Zelensky’s highest levels of public trust hit 90 per cent shortly after the Russian invasion began in February 2022.

Volodymyr Zelensky

Three quarters of Ukrainians want President Volodymyr Zelensky to leave office once the war with Russia comes to an end

|

REUTERS

Prior to the beginning of the war, this figure stood at just 37 per cent.

Polling also showed that 41 per cent of Ukrainians believed the wartime President should remain in the political fold after the war ends.

On the other hand, 36 per cent said he should end his political career and 14 per cent believe should face criminal charges for decision he has taken during his premiership.

However, the survey did not ask respondents which particular crimes he should be charged with.

Ukrainian people

Analysts from the KIIS said that the support for the Ukrainian President still remains generally high

|

GETTY

Support for Mr Zelensky significantly dipped in August and September after he approved a bill which took power away from anti-corruption investigative bodies.

The Ukrainian President said the move was designed to prevent “Russian influence” from targeting the investigations.

Last month, Mr Zelensky confirmed he was prepared to step down once peace is restored to his country.

He said he was “ready not to go for the second term because it’s not my goal”.

UKRAINE – READ THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS: 

The Ukrainian President added that he accepts that his citizens may want “a leader with… a new mandate” as his country attempts to rebuild after the conflict.

The wartime leader suspended last year’s scheduled presidential election under martial law, which he declared shortly after Vladimir Putin’s forces invaded over three years ago.

Although it has been rumoured that an election may be held before the war is over, Ukrainian law does not allow for elections to be held during the state of martial law.

Despite the President having high levels of public support throughout the war, a Gallup poll found that 85 per cent of citizens believe the Ukrainian Government oversaw widespread corruption.

Zelensky/Trump

Mr Zelensky is set to visit President Donald Trump in Washington DC on Friday

| REUTERS

Between 2014 and 2024, the Eastern European nation was regularly featured in the top 10 rankings for perceived corruption worldwide.

Mr Zelensky is set to visit President Donald Trump in Washington DC on Friday.

The Ukrainian leader has pushed the White House to grant Kyiv access to advanced American weapons to carry out strikes inside Russian territory.

After Hamas released the remaining living hostages on Monday, Mr Zelensky wrote on social media: “If that is possible, then Putin can also be forced to restore peace.”

Source link

admin

Related Posts

Featured
9

On April 12, 2021, a Knoxville police officer shot and killed an African American male student in a bathroom at Austin-East High School. The incident caused social unrest, and community members began demanding transparency about the shooting, including the release of the officer’s body camera video. On the evening of April 19, 2021, the Defendant and a group of protestors entered the Knoxville City-County Building during a Knox County Commission meeting. The Defendant activated the siren on a bullhorn and spoke through the bullhorn to demand release of the video. Uniformed police officers quickly escorted her and six other individuals out of the building and arrested them for disrupting the meeting. The court upheld defendants’ conviction for “disrupting a lawful meeting,” defined as “with the intent to prevent [a] gathering, … substantially obstruct[ing] or interfere[ing] with the meeting, procession, or gathering by physical action or verbal utterance.” Taken in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows that the Defendant posted on Facebook the day before the meeting and the day of the meeting that the protestors were going to “shut down” the meeting. During the meeting, the Defendant used a bullhorn to activate a siren for approximately twenty seconds. Witnesses at trial described the siren as “loud,” “high-pitched,” and “alarming.” Commissioner Jay called for “Officers,” and the Defendant stated through the bullhorn, “Knox County Commission, your meeting is over.” Commissioner Jay tried to bring the meeting back into order by banging his gavel, but the Defendant continued speaking through the bullhorn. Even when officers grabbed her and began escorting her out of the Large Assembly Room, she continued to disrupt the meeting by yelling for the officers to take their hands off her and by repeatedly calling them “murderers.” Commissioner Jay called a ten-minute recess during the incident, telling the jury that it was “virtually impossible” to continue the meeting during the Defendant’s disruption. The Defendant herself testified that the purpose of attending the meeting was to disrupt the Commission’s agenda and to force the Commission to prioritize its discussion on the school shooting. Although the duration of the disruption was about ninety seconds, the jury was able to view multiple videos of the incident and concluded that the Defendant substantially obstructed or interfered with the meeting. The evidence is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction. Defendant also claimed the statute was “unconstitutionally vague as applied to her because the statute does not state that it includes government meetings,” but the appellate court concluded that she had waived the argument by not raising it adequately below. Sean F. McDermott, Molly T. Martin, and Franklin Ammons, Assistant District Attorneys General, represent the state.

by admin
October 8, 2025

From State v. Every, decided by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals…

1 of 102
Copyright © 2025 conservdailyusa - .
Copyright © 2025 conservdailyusa - .