The issue of corruption in American Politics.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Vuurk (6258 posts) -

For those who haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend watching this video. It's about 10 minutes but what takes place is incredibly frightening to witness...especially the fact that this is what is taking place in the United States. How can we take our political system seriously when our vote does not actually count and we no longer have a representative system of government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B39W91O-rUg

#2 Posted by hippiesanta (9984 posts) -
the world should focus on corruption in the 3rd world nation... like Africa and Asia
#3 Posted by super600 (31020 posts) -

the world should focus on corruption in the 3rd world nation... like Africa and Asiahippiesanta

:lol:

#4 Posted by sSubZerOo (43899 posts) -
You do understand that voter fraud is so minor that it accounts for like .0001% of the voter base right?
#5 Posted by Vuurk (6258 posts) -
You do understand that voter fraud is so minor that it accounts for like .0001% of the voter base right?sSubZerOo
This isn't true. They initially said that Santorum won Iowa. Then they said Romney won Iowa. Then finally like 4 months later they declared Ron Paul the winner of Iowa and said that one county fraudulently reported the results. Iowa is the first state to have a caucus. It is an incredibly important state and can change the entire election do to momentum, media recognition, etc.
#6 Posted by El_Zo1212o (6045 posts) -
And no one mentions the DNC vote where Antonio Villaraigosa did the same thing with a vote there? The only difference is that he called the vote 3 times because he couldn't bring himself to steamroll over the issue in his first two attempts. Frankly, I think all these votes should be done with slips of paper.
#7 Posted by AdamPA1006 (6420 posts) -
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]You do understand that voter fraud is so minor that it accounts for like .0001% of the voter base right?Vuurk
This isn't true. They initially said that Santorum won Iowa. Then they said Romney won Iowa. Then finally like 4 months later they declared Ron Paul the winner of Iowa and said that one county fraudulently reported the results. Iowa is the first state to have a caucus. It is an incredibly important state and can change the entire election do to momentum, media recognition, etc.

I also disagree. What about florida when bush barely won, voter fraud could have influenced that extremely tight result.
#8 Posted by AdamPA1006 (6420 posts) -
And no one mentions the DNC vote where Antonio Villaraigosa did the same thing with a vote there? The only difference is that he called the vote 3 times because he couldn't bring himself to steamroll over the issue in his first two attempts. Frankly, I think all these votes should be done with slips of paper.El_Zo1212o
Yeah they just do it by who yells loudest? And the louder party got shut down in that video
#9 Posted by El_Zo1212o (6045 posts) -
[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"]And no one mentions the DNC vote where Antonio Villaraigosa did the same thing with a vote there? The only difference is that he called the vote 3 times because he couldn't bring himself to steamroll over the issue in his first two attempts. Frankly, I think all these votes should be done with slips of paper.AdamPA1006
Yeah they just do it by who yells loudest? And the louder party got shut down in that video

Way precise, right? Basically it doesn't even matter who yells loudest, the winner is whoever the party decides it will be beforehand.
#10 Posted by C2N2 (759 posts) -

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"][QUOTE="Vuurk"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]You do understand that voter fraud is so minor that it accounts for like .0001% of the voter base right?Vuurk

This isn't true. They initially said that Santorum won Iowa. Then they said Romney won Iowa. Then finally like 4 months later they declared Ron Paul the winner of Iowa and said that one county fraudulently reported the results. Iowa is the first state to have a caucus. It is an incredibly important state and can change the entire election do to momentum, media recognition, etc.

I also disagree. What about florida when bush barely won, voter fraud could have influenced that extremely tight result.

A privately held and counted primary for a single party is NOT EQUAL to the US General Election... If you truly think that then you are retarded.

Also the 2000 election Florida controversy... Florida still used punch cards in that election... There were a MULTITUDE of problems in counting them... Such as dented rather than punched cards? Count it? Don't Count it? Two holes punched? One hole punched and another dented? Confusing punch sheet that tried to save space and failed, etc, etc... Done electronically now... Everywhere.