"Renaissance Thinking About the Issues of Our Day"
The electoral process has always been corrupt.
Here is the mathematical proof: http://richardcharnin.com/
- The Democrats won the unadjusted 1988-2008 presidential exit polls by 52-42%, but only by 48-46% in the recorded vote.
- Of the 300 state presidential exit polls since 1988, 137 exceeded the margin of error. Probability ZERO.
- Of the 137 that exceeded the MoE, 132 red-shifted from the Democrat to the Republican. Probability ZERO.
- There were nearly 40 MILLION UNCOUNTED BALLOTS in the 1988-2008 elections. In 1988, nearly 11 million; 1992, 9 million; 1996, 9 million; 2000, 6 million; 2004, 4 million. In 2008, there were 1 million more votes recorded than cast.
- In 2008, Obama won the unadjusted National Exit Poll (17836 respondentsa) by 61.0-37.2%. He won the unadjusted the state exit poll aggregate (83,000 respondents) by 58.0-40.5%. He had 52.9% recorded share. He won by 23 million votes, not the 9.5 million recorded.
- In 2004, Kerry won the unadjusted National Exit Poll (13660 respondents) by 51.7-47.0%. He had 48.3% recorded. He won by 6-10 million votes. He did not lose by the 3.0 million recorded.
- In 2000, Gore won the unadjusted National Exit Poll (13108 respondents) by 50.8-44.5%. He had 48.8% recorded. He won by 6-10 million votes. He did not win by the 540,000 recorded. He did not lose the election.
You get the picture. It happens in every election. The Democrats are obviously complicit in the systemic fraud because they neither say nor do anything about it.
Here is the full set of 1988-2008 election exit poll and recorded vote statistics in one big spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjAk1JUWDMyRdFIzSTJtMTJZekNBWUdtbWp3bHlpWGc#gid=15
Corruption is the issue, reform is the cure.
The corruption and predation of America's corporatism is the democratic result of 99% of voters voting for it — the corporate party's Republican and Democrat sheeple regularly reliably obediently flocking to the polls to only ever vote for whichever of the two money manufactured interchangeable-part "electable" evil candidates they believed might do evil unto others... instead of them.
Don't like the result of getting nothing but evil done unto yourself too, because you always "this election is too important to not vote for evil" voted for more evil?
Join the people who've always been voting for good to be done!
Voter Consent Wastes Dissent:
Jill Stein for President:
Our founding fathers created the two party system because they said having a third party will mean the majority can never rule.....you wind up with a coalition government ruling by consensus. Just look to France, Italy, etc., which have multiple parties....no party gets a majority; rule is always by 20% or 30% of the electorate (if they're lucky).
We have the kind of government we deserve due to our civic engagement and participation. If we continue thinking that nothing can be done about our democracy, nothing will be done! I truly believe that each one of us can make a difference, it is our responsibility to emit our vote and hold people accountable. We are in the situation we are in, because we accepted it due to our distractions placed before us through the television, movies, etc, we should have seen it but it just took so much effort and there are the consequences. We must not give up, we are the 99%!
Beyond corrupt. I feel like many must have felt just prior to the fascists propping up the Nazis in a recovering Germany. I don't know why the DNC (or other progressive) doesn't simply show in an ad contrasting the two visions being sold today.Just think...on the right would be the stark reality (actually a scorched earth) resembling Chernobyl: people in tatters, on the streets, sick and dying.
And even though the momentum hasn't brought us total recovery as yet (only one term); the left would envision celebrating families, happy students, healthy citizens with busy, vital roads, bridges, damns, schools and more.
The comparison is stark, but reality. Which best serves our (and NOT trans-national corporations) needs?
Should those with the (very) deep pockets end up buying this election; and the neo-con brain trusts infiltrate and corrupt the local, county, state and federal governments…I believe I just might depart…as the smart ones did as Nazi Germany took shape.
Thanks for allowing me to vent.Lee
It's the cash. Take the money out of politics and you deincentivize corruption. Pass Bernie Sanders' amendment to overturn Citizens United, institute publicly financed elections, prevent politicians from keeping whatever's in their war chest when the dust settles, and let's elect some people who are at least running because they want the office. Sure, you'll still have corporate schills involved who want the office for corrupt reasons, but at least it won't be naked on its face like it is now.
Cash has always been king, steering elections since the Civil War. The people that get hurt the most usually don't bother to vote or the wealthy use hate and fear to get the votes of those who do. The new world order is now and most don't even know it.
Yes-Canada has a first-past-the-post system. We should have proportional representation. In Alberta for example, a third of the population doesn't vote Conservative, yet they always get 95% of the seats-this really doesn't reflect the will of the people, only the power of big oil, coal and gas. Also Theivin' Harper prorogued (shut down) parliament to prevent a coalition govt.
How do Americans make the lawmakers make laws to stop the lawmakers from taking bribes (Lobby money by any other word). Calls and letters and email don't faze them.
Is that what we call a representative government? They represent who they want or those that pay the most to their "campaign"
For a true democracy to take place I feel that a multiple party platform needs to be adopted. The "lesser of two evils" that we've all been forced to buy into is a false paradigm. I would argue that having only two candidates presented to us is not really giving us free will to choose. Free will becomes irrelevant when the choices are predetermined beforehand. All we are able to vote for is candidate A or candidate B because candidate C is never given a fair shot by design or by the media. Candidates E, F and G never even hit the radar because they dont have big money from corporate billionaire sugar daddy donors, because they refuse to support their corporate interests. Therefore, leaving the interests of the common people unrepresented and to fall on deaf ears. Now that is truly misrepresentation!
It doesn't matter what the situation is, voting is always going to be the better of two evils. Was it Barney Frank who said, "if you believe in most of what I believe in, vote for me. If you believe in everything I believe in, have yourself committed"?