It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why vote in a corrupt sytem? Does it even count?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by stompk
So...

we're just going to sit back and accept this?

If Hillary gets in, it'll be something like 32 yrs of Bush-Clinton rule.

Did anyone check to see if all the money Bill and GB senior received for the Tsunami actually got to the region?

None of the choices make any sense.

Ron Paul interests me, but he's never going to get a chance, if the system is rigged.


And this is by no means a Ron Paul thread. I just think he is interesting, but the main stream news media won't even show him hardly. They never talk about him, unless it's a putdown.

Plus, Ron Paul is a politician. I'm having trouble believing any career politician at the moment, even if his message is interesting.




[edit on 28-11-2007 by stompk]


Their agenda is so perfectly in place there's almost nothing you can do about it.
Sad but true. Just make sure you are aware of things.




posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   
I stopped voting after Gore lost to Bush @ 8 years ago. I know it's my American right, how dare I.... Well no offense but I believe the elections have been tainted since the early 70's. I don't trust all these red neck/yuppy small town/city politicians in charge of our electoral system, and now we use computer systems to vote..... Which leaves even more room for(hacker) sabotage, I know it seems narrow minded to not vote when I have the oportunity to do so, however the once great American electoral system is now nothing more than a corrupt, money laundering, who kisses big business's ass more, bs system which is now imo altering the elections to better fit their(big business) agenda.

One question, why does one have to be a millionair to run for president of our country.... This alone makes me sick to my stomach, the average American should have just as much of a right to the presidency as the "born into money" yuppies do to.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I agree we may no see an honest election until they trash the manipulated voting machines.

And we form militias to protect our voting ballots from the hands of the politically motivated chosen ones.

Honesty has been taken over by groups with agendas.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Why vote indeed.

In truth, despite the fact that it appears candidates are opposite, it is ironic how similar they actually are. It does really appear to be a joke, but the joke is there as long as the masses need it.

Peace

dAlen



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I cant believe this....

you want changes, but you wont vote because you believe the system is corrupted...

this makes no sense to me...
no vote, no right to criticise



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bluess
I cant believe this....

you want changes, but you wont vote because you believe the system is corrupted...

this makes no sense to me...
no vote, no right to criticise



If the system is like a swamp, buried in mud, and smelling like a skunk`s tail what great change would do to plant a rose in the middle??

Sorry for the bad analogy but that's the deal, my friend.

Electing any man/woman (good or bad) doesn't change the rules, doesn't change the way things are done, doesn't stop the outrageous greed in ones country, doesn't change anything significant to us, mere mortals.

There is no "savior" out there that the people can elect and wait for the paradise to come.

Anyone that gets into politics have to play by the rules of those in power. And those in power don't MAKE RULES to change the ways. There will NEVER be anyone in power who will change the rules, the way things are done in the system (the priorities, focus on human matter, etc) UNLESS there's a great change IN THE SYSTEM ITSELF.

May sound harsh, radical or even crazy, but the fact is that unless there are changes in the system, there will never be any other changes.

Peace



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   
You are all foolish to think in the modern world of technical trickery and magic acts that your vote is counted. This election has already been decide in favor of Hillary. All these debates and polls are shames.
This was a deal cut by the first president Bush Sr. The Clintons (NAFTA) and Bushs (immigration ineptness) are open borders/NAU advocates. They both sign orders behind closed doors to open the border and develop the NAU infastructure. The only way to stop it now is overthrow the government. Mark my words, Mexico is moving to your home town, whether you like it or not.

1. Bush Sr obviously surrenders the presidency to Clinton

2. Clinton pushes NAFTA

3. Continues to ignore border as did Bush Sr

4. Bush jr does everything possible to keep borders open. Secrectly signs orders for super hiway and NAU currency. Secrectly signs NAU deals with Canada and Mexico.

5. Hillary will socialize medicine into healthcare for all North America under one system. Mexico and Canada agree but the US resists but is overcome by the liberal government. Full NAU membership will eventually dissolve borders.
Hillary NAU Talking points - Only way to beat China; 1/3 of Mexico is already in the US - Make them pay taxes too.

If you are not convinced, just look at Hillarys contenders - All nonames with no experience. She sweep in to the top spot without a fight.
Debate moderators became spinless jellyfish after one started asking tough questions.
Several Rebulican congressmen and Senators are retiring early. Get out while you can still intact. Run back to their mansions and hide.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
The only corrupt part of our country is the people who tell other people to not vote because they won't count. Of course they count. Do you think they just come up with random numbers in the polls?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 03:13 PM
link   
well, to say the least there have been an underwhelming amount of explanations defending our democratic process.

I also have no faith in the voting system, and I'm amused at the responses in this thread stating "if you don't vote, you can't criticize"

Oh really? So what are we doing right now?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dan5647
The only corrupt part of our country is the people who tell other people to not vote because they won't count. Of course they count. Do you think they just come up with random numbers in the polls?


That is really ignorance in it's finest form. Do you think they don't know how many voters are in each county? Why do you think the exit polls have been so far off the last 12 years. The networks announced Gore the winner against Bush based on exit polls. That was egg in their faces, so they don't use them anymore. Sure they count them, but the results are skewed in by the handlers.

While Hillary continues to skate through primaries untouched, you will Bill become the first man (gigilo) and the second string take the White House. Can you imagine Pelosi in the big chair. The US will be a laughing stock and paralized and destined to become a third world country.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 05:06 PM
link   
imagine only 5 to 10 percent of the population voting. the media would have to cover it, the whole base of political power would be ridicoulus, the system would be obsolete..



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 05:25 PM
link   
"Plus, Ron Paul is a politician. I'm having trouble believing any career politician at the moment, even if his message is interesting. "

He may have been in congress for a while, but I don't really see him as a career politician. I see a career politician as someone who has almost always made their living off of politics. Ron Paul first made his living as a self employed doctor for what? 20 or so years?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by stompk
Since the elections are coming up, I thought it might be a good time to get a discussion going about the voting process.

I'll be the first to admit, I don't understand the electoral vote as well as I should.

Second, how did Florida suddenly get the largest amount of electoral votes.

I always thought Iowa had the most.

And if it's about population density, then why did Iowa have so many votes?

Is the electoral college just another tool to control who is in power?

[edit on 28-11-2007 by stompk]


So many posts to answer on this thread, but I'll just start with the first.

To the OP:

You start a thread on the election process but your lack of knowledge is almost shocking. The number of electoral votes for each state = number of members of congress for each state, which is decided by population. States gain or lose congressmen and electoral votes as people move about in the country. So, it should be clear to anyone that California has the most electoral votes, not Iowa or Florida. The reason those states and Ohio can play key roles in the election is because they are considered "swing states" that have gone either way in past elections. Now California has the most votes, but loses out in influence in sort of a strange way because it is assumed by both parties that it will vote democrat in every election. Therefore neither party spends much time there trying to influence anyone. And then after the election, CA kind of gets ignored, too. If dems are in office, why spend on pork projects there when you already have CA in the bag? Republicans give the same result to CA for opposite reasons, why worry about CA if you can never win there?

Regarding election fraud. How convenient for the dems to only concentrate on 2000 and 2004 basically because they lost. Check out some history, such as the 1960 election that kennedy won by having the mafia vote dead people in Chicago. This gave Illinois to the democrats and thus the election. And back to Ohio in recent elections, the actual reports of fraud and voter intimidation were mostly pointed at dems. Oh and what about the recent governors race in Washington state where dems won with more votes cast than there are registered voters? Dead people voting again? Concentrating on 2000 and 2004 is really not seeing the forest for the trees. Very selective indeed.


[edit on 11/28/2007 by centurion1211]



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   


On Sat., Nov. 11, Palm Beach County, Florida election officials ordered a hand recount of all votes cast in the county and stated that the manual vote count could take as long as 41 days. This, and other possible hand recounts throughout the state, would place a final certification of Florida's vote well beyond the Dec, 18, vote of the Electoral College.

Should the Florida vote remain uncertified on Dec. 18, the state would be unable to select its electors and their 25 votes would not be cast in the Electoral College.


Does this sound familiar? It should.


By the way, I saw on the news somewhere that Florida's electoral votes are up to 52. Can anyone help me verify this. I can't seem to find it, but I'm sure I found it. Was shocking to me.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by stompk
 


Where are you getting your information? Florida has 27 electoral votes - because they currently have 25 members of the house of representatives plus 2 senators. I explained how it all works in the post just above your last post. You might want to check that out.

Same regarding your excerpt on vote fraud. Hardly a new, or republican issue.


[edit on 11/28/2007 by centurion1211]



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Regarding election fraud. How convenient for the dems to only concentrate on 2000 and 2004 basically because they lost. Check out some history, such as the 1960 election that kennedy won by having the mafia vote dead people in Chicago. This gave Illinois to the democrats and thus the election.

Not that I am supporting what happened, but you do have to go back 40 years to find a similar example from the democrats, don't you? Just so you know, in Ohio we have to show proof of ID before voting, which I support, so there are no dead democrats in our state. Furthermore, I am registered Independent so I am not for democrats, but I am against neo-conservatives not all republicans. In 2000 I wanted John McCain to to win the primary, but I have since changed my opinion of him

And FYI, I'm glad Kennedy was in the Whitehouse during the Cuban Missile crisis. If Nixon was president then we would have invaded Cuba, and we would still be glowing in the dark.


Originally posted by centurion1211
And back to Ohio in recent elections, the actual reports of fraud and voter intimidation were mostly pointed at dems.

If you are referring to the election of 2004, you are wrong. In every case that was investigated, which includes voting machine distribution, poll locations and voter counts, every one favored the republicans. That is statistically impossible, and you can read about it yourself in the book What went wrong in Ohio?.


Originally posted by centurion1211
Oh and what about the recent governors race in Washington state where dems won with more votes cast than there are registered voters? Dead people voting again?

I wouldn't know about that. I was more concerned about what happened in my state that affected the rest of the country.


Originally posted by centurion1211
Concentrating on 2000 and 2004 is really not seeing the forest for the trees. Very selective indeed.

Please explain to me how that makes it alright? This statement sounds like you agree that there were problems with the last two presidential elections, but because your side won, it's ok. Or because 40 years ago, probably before you could vote, your side lost, and that makes it ok.

Sorry friend, any way you slice it, it is wrong.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
There is no such thing as a prefect election - never has been in the past and never will be in the future. There has been fraud in every single US election.

I'm a little confused by the original post. Florida does not have the most electoral votes and there is no way that Iowa has many either (Iowa has 7, Florida has 26, California has the most with 55). www.archives.gov...

If the presidential election were purely a popular vote, with no regard for the states, it would be dominated by a handful of big cities. The Electoral College is one way of ensuring that America’s rural and heartland voters — those who live on and cultivate most of the actual land in the U.S. — are not entirely ignored. Otherwise the only people who would need to vote are those who live in the most populated cities like LA and New York.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


Correct. Wrong if either side does it. Just tired of all the attempts to make it look like only republicans have done it.

Look up the Washington governors race.

For example, I recall news reports of the son of an Ohio democrat official being arrested in connected with sliced tires on vans that were to take older (more likely republican) voters to the polls.

And exactly which party is it now that supports illegal immigrants because they get them to vote?

Let's stop the one-sided bashing OK?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   
I'm 26 years old and have voted in the past 2 presidential elections. And from my experience it hasen't made a difference either way. It's kinda a downer, but I dont think that is a reason to give up. We can't give up, we have to put the presure on in times like this. If we keep voting for the lesser of two evils the hole we are in will get deeper.
One can always make difference. So get out and VOTE!!!!!



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Correct. Wrong if either side does it. Just tired of all the attempts to make it look like only republicans have done it.

That's right, and that's what I think this thread is really about. Many people are disgruntled because of the foul play, and have lost confidence in our system. All sides should work toward eliminating it.


Look up the Washington governors race.

Will do, but pointing fingers at other people doesn't make it right.


And exactly which party is it now that supports illegal immigrants because they get them to vote?

A quick search didn't yield anything. Have you got any links for this?


Let's stop the one-sided bashing OK?

Sure, but I would like to see folks such as yourself be just as perturbed as I am at the injustices that are happening. Then we would be on the same side.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join