Poll:Do You Believe The Presidential Election Is Fixed?

[silent tone]

Originally posted by: Jinru

Originally posted by: silent tone
Study after study says that electronic voting has egregious security failings in the requirements, design, implementation, deployment & support. Secure voting can be achieved - we choose not to. If voting equipment and processes had to adhere to the standards used for ATM or slot machines, we might be able to at least have votes that can get cast counted accurately.

Paper ballots aren't exempt from fraud though.
New Hampshire Primary, pitiful chain of custody

Nobody except the general public benefits from an accurate, fair voting process. Maintaining the status quo has a significant financial impact to many companies and individuals however. Guaranteeing a particular candidate wins can be even more lucrative for an even smaller set.

Are you kidding me? They leave the ballots in a room with easy access, put a paper on the door as if thats going to stop anyone from coming in, and forget to put the seal on the ballot boxes.

Correction: It is a sticker, not a seal. A seal is destroyed when removed to indicate tampering. A seal is used for security. A sticker is used for security theater.

 

[silent tone]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
OMG some of you are insane who said yes. You think the same government that messed up the intelligence for Iraq, has no fvcking clue what Iran is doing, cannot manage a war to safe its life is smart enough to fix an election in the most visible democracy in the world and get away with it? Hah! Now, it's easy to manipulate outcomes because people are all broken and stupid, but that's not really a fixed election

True, this is where many conspiracies break down. However there needn't be a sophisticated, invisible attack on the vote. A few people are in jail over rigging the 04 Ohio election. 40% of the ballots that were under the protective order of a judge have been illegally destroyed, hindering further investigation. There have been other problems exposed, but the president remains in office. In the end, it may have been clumsy, but clearly effective.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: shortylickens
No, after analyzing the last election I honestly believe a majority of Americans are complete idiots.

Really? I'd arrived at that conclusion long before then.

A knew a LOT of Americans were idiots, just not most.
Say, 33 or 40 percent, now I think its at least 51 and probably closer to 66 percent.

 

[virginiakid]

No matter what you think, it will always be in the back of your mind--whether or not your vote is really going to count. Who said that the people cast the votes but it is those who count the votes that will decide the outcome of the election?

I wouldn't put it past some of these high establishment power mongers.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: virginiakid
No matter what you think, it will always be in the back of your mind--whether or not your vote is really going to count. Who said that the people cast the votes but it is those who count the votes that will decide the outcome of the election?

I wouldn't put it past some of these high establishment power mongers.

I think you mean this

"Those who cast the Votes, they decide nothing. Those who count the votes, they decide everything." Josef Stalin

 

[Dufusyte]

There is a certain amount of vote fraud in every election.

The question is whether it is widespread enough to change the result.

The electronic voting machines are the newest tool of fraud, but their are many other tools as well.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "fixed". Do I believe some shadowy organization picks exactly who wins the election? Nope. But I do think that the parties artificially limit our choices and that corporate donations make a lot of choice for us. If Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, and almost any Republican wins the Republican nomination, I'll basically have two choices...neither of which I really like. Now is that a fixed election? Well, my voice doesn't REALLY count for the kind of person I'd like to see...so it's a little iffy.

It's a little like whether pro wrestling is phony. In a way yes - outcomes are not decided by the athletes' wrestling, injury is exaggerated - yet the athleticism is real and impressive.

Rainsford said it pretty well - they're 'fixed' in the sense that a few people are far more represented in the candidates' agendas than the public, and that's largely kept hidden.

Candidates are almost, in a sense, imployees of those special interests whose job it is to keep the public distracted with bright shiny objects, to keep the public looking at the politician, and not to pay attention to what's actually happening. These interests love when people hate or love George Bush, because it means they're not paying attention to the real policies and issues going on for the super wealthy.

But it's a blend of things - candidates do have an idealism generally as well, they have their own principles they care about, they like to think they're serving the public.

In short, candidates are prisoners of the corrupt system, too, and the ones that win are less likely to change the system, because it worked for them to get power.

We tend to get real leaders by accident - assassination giving us Teddy Roosevelt, a wealthy man's obsession giving us his son John Kennedy, just barely. FDR was a wealthy man who perhaps caught everyone by surprise with his ambitious programs, enabled by the Great Depression.

The system is 'fixed' insofar as money plays a hugely disproportionate role in the selection of candidates, money being how the super wealthy get more power in the system.

But they're not fixed in any larger sense. If they were, we wouldn't have had a peanut farmer from Georgia, a guy from Arkansas, win the presidency.

But unfortunately, few Americans are aware of the extent to which the money and the campaigns it funds limit the public's selection. They have an exaggerated idea about the freedom of choice the public has. You know, RC Cola and Coca Cola are both sugary, cola-flavored drinks, costing about the same amount - but I'm taking bets with anyone who wants to say RC will outsell Coca Cola, even where both are sold to account for differences in distribution. Why is that? If you say the whole answer is taste, I think you're wrong.

 

[manowar821]

I don't "do" parties at all, so I can't answer that poll question, but I answered "I don't know" for the other two. Honestly, I don't "believe" anything, but I think it's possible.

So... I don't know.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Craig234
We tend to get real leaders by accident - assassination giving us Teddy Roosevelt, a wealthy man's obsession giving us his son John Kennedy, just barely. FDR was a wealthy man who perhaps caught everyone by surprise with his ambitious programs, enabled by the Great Depression.

Thats pretty much it. Joe Kennedy Sr. basically built us three presidents.
The first was Joe Jr. Killed in the war.
Second was JFK. Killed in office.
Last was Bobby Kennedy. Killed before he could even get elected.

And Teddy has got to be the biggest disappointment a parent could ever have.