Right. But it's not like Orban is squeaking by on some technical majority here.
No but that's not at all what I'm saying. In fact it's almost the opposite.
I think the term elective dictatorship was coined when Thatcher had a large majority in the 80s, it was also used when Blair had an even larger one in the 90s. The point is that if you have a large enough majority that you can do almost what you want. Now in the UK, with a massive majority you can do a lot, but there are certain things you can't do - or at least, not easily, you can't change it so that you can stay in power for twenty years for example (maybe you technically could, you would need to use the parliament act to change the parliament act and then use that changed act to change how things work, but it would quite hard and it would have to get through parliament twice and the lords twice and so on). But an elective dictatorship does mean that you can do almost what you want... in the UK.
And to my mind, it seems that in the US if you have someone like Trump who has a majority in the senate and appoints his own head of the DOJ, his own judges and so on, then it turns out that the checks and balances that are supposed to hold the president to account don't work. The results of an elective dictatorship are even worse.
I reckon it looks similar in Hungary. But obviously I don't know. That's what I'm asking. Am I right in saying that last week he needed 4/5 to vote for it and lost but he brought it back this week and with the second attempt only needed 2/3?