3rd World view of our election(political)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Countryside : One Thread

Here's something that came across my screen, for us to chew on.

Subject: Third World View of Our Election Interesting observation!!! A Zimbabwe politician was quoted as saying that children should study the US election event closely because it shows that election fraud is not only a third world phenomena. To illustrate the point, he made the following comments; "Imagine that we read of an election occurring anywhere in the third world in which the self-declared winner was the son of the former prime minister and that former prime minister was himself the former head of that nation's secret police (the CIA). Imagine that the self-declared winner lost the popular vote but won based on some old colonial holdover from the nation's pre-democracy past (the electoral college). Imagine that the self-declared winner's 'victory' turned on disputed votes cast in a province governed by his brother! Imagine that the poorly drafted ballots of one district, a district heavily favoring the self-declared winner's opponent, led thousands of voters to vote for the wrong candidate. Imagine that members of that nation's most despised caste, fearing for their lives/livelihoods, turned out in record numbers to vote in near-universal opposition to the self-declared winner's candidacy. Imagine that hundreds of members of that most-despised caste were intercepted on their way to the polls by state police operating under the authority of the self-declared winner's brother.

Imagine that six million people voted in the disputed province and that the self-declared winner's 'lead' was only 327 votes. Fewer, certainly, than the vote counting machines' margin of error. Imagine that the self-declared winner and his political party opposed a more careful by-hand inspection and re-counting of the ballots in the disputed province or in its most hotly disputed district. Imagine that the self-declared winner, himself a governor of a major province, had the worst human rights record of any province in his nation and actually led the nation in executions. Imagine that a major campaign promise of the self-declared winner was to appoint like-minded human rights violators to lifetime positions on the high court of that nation. None of us would deem such an election to be representative of anything other than the self-declared winner's will-to-power. All of us, I imagine, would wearily turn the page thinking that it was another sad tale of pitiful pre- or anti-democracy peoples in some strange, faraway elsewhere."

-- sharon wt (wildflower@ekyol.com), December 07, 2000


Ahhhh but Sharon.He isn't "self declared".The state of Florida has declared him the winner.....twice

-- whiskers (gone2seed@hotmail.com), December 07, 2000.

Actually they wonder how one could have a 300,000 vote lead with popular vote and lose to someone with 380 vote lead in the state his brother controlls. Also they can see the repubs streching the time out so nothing can be done. They understand perfectly. They know who won even if we don't

-- Nick (wildheart@ekyol.com), December 07, 2000.

......and we still don't have democracy because we have a republic form of government. When we all grasp that fact, the rest of it makes sense.

-- Laura (gsend@hotmail.com), December 08, 2000.

Yeah, and like we really need Zimbabwe to give any opinions on our elections, by the way, are not holder overs from pre-democracy. We are a Republic, despite what so many in politics and the media want to say. And people going to the polls in fear of their lives if the other candidate wins? Oh, please, give us all a break.

-- Green (ratdogs10@yahoo.com), December 08, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ