What if Gore hadn't loved our democracy?

[Kuciwalker]

Yes.

Quite often, in fact.

[pchang]

A fair amount of dead people in the Chicago area and Texas voted for Kennedy. Enough, to swing the electoral votes for Illinois and Texas to Kennedy instead of Nixon (enough to make the margin of victory, in fact). Helps explain Nixon's paranoia in his later years.

[Kuciwalker]

Nixon loved our democracy far more than Gore

[Velociryx]

I don't know the non-voting percentage of the population in Mexico and I'd wager you don't either. So why would I bother using it as a basis for comparison in this instance?

I could come to a pretty fair approximation if I wished to, and so could you. Demographics ain't exactly rocket science, after all. The total population of the country is known.

The age group breakdowns are known.

The poll numbers are known.

From these, it should not be difficult to arrive at an answer that properly identifies "the country" (which were your words, DD), rather than the subset of those who participated in the most recent election.

So again, the point stands, but by all means, carry on!



-=Vel=-

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Che is a tool.

As are Obrador's supporters.

Yes, they should be content to be kept in poverty, ruled over by a corrupt, inept, non-responsive government, which only barely manages to succeed in preserving the status quo for the wealthy and privileged. After all, if the rich keep getting richer, and don't have any of their perks or privileges challenged, it will be inspirational for the masses to watch the unearned success of their betters.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by pchang
A fair amount of dead people in the Chicago area and Texas voted for Kennedy. Enough, to swing the electoral votes for Illinois and Texas to Kennedy instead of Nixon (enough to make the margin of victory, in fact). Helps explain Nixon's paranoia in his later years.

Given that Nixon showed his proclivity for fraud and illegal campaign activities from his first election in 1946, along with Ike, Bedell Smith & company's esteem and affection for him, I'd bet his paranoia started a lot earlier. Nixon simply assumed everyone was as self-serving, amoral and duplicitous as he was.

[Arrian]

Given that he was in politics, he might have been right.

-Arrian

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DanS
I don't know what Che thinks a couple of articles will prove. He's missing the point. I was looking for an elevated discussion about the fragility of democracy and what maintains it in the face of a close election.

Are you looking to discuss real, functional democracy, or democracy in name only? Let's see - Mexican democracy. One party so "popular" that they hold the presidency for 71 years and an absolute majority in Congress for 68? One of the ruling party "breaking ranks," not following the party line, and looking like he's going to win anyway? Funny how easy it is to find a lone, crazed assassin when you need one.

Then there was the grand tradition of triggering a currency crisis before leaving office, so you and all your cronies can cash in, and your sucessor can "save" the country, all for show, while millions lose a major portion of what little they may have accumulated?

No popular primary elections at all, just party caucuses appointing who the people will have the privilege of electing? And that only changed when the blatant heavy-handedness of assassinating your own candidate, picking your "boy" as successor, then rigging the election with a bogus computer failure is just too much for the people to take.

So you have an open primary, but only print 16 million ballots for an eligible electorate of over 65 million. Then you bus party loyalists and those bought with a free breakfast or token gifts to the polling places, so your "secured" voters use the primary ballots and millions of potential voters are turned away since there are no more ballots, while millions more realize all along it's a sham and don't bother?

The appointed successor to the assassinated "renegade" candidate has no significant experience, and was your appointee to a relatively minor ministry. Of course, he is widely perceived to be a lightweight, privileged son of the establishment, and he knows who is his political daddy. The people, of course, have no say in this. They're supposed to elect him anyway, because their betters know who to appoint to lead the political machinery. Gee, that isn't working - the people seem to be voting for this other idiot. Ay, carajo, the computers tallying all the votes nationwide are down, and we don't know for how long. Hey, we got the computers fixed - they weren't counting right, and now that we have the problem fixed, our guy is ahead, like he's supposed to be.

That's the background of Mexican "democracy" in the last century. Fox's so-called "opposition victory?" Things went from anti-PRIistas dancing in Mexico City and chanting "¡Arriba, Abajo, el PRI se va a carajo!" to realizing that Fox was essentially a do-nothing Presidente who wouldn't rock the boat for the elites.

You don't have democracy in Mexico - some areas are practically feudatories, where the people know who to elect, and the police and others act as enforcers for the PRIista rulers, not as agents of municipal government. Boss Tweed would be envious and embarassed, at the same time.

So what you're asking, in reference to Mexico, is how do you preserve the fragile illusion of democracy, when none really exists? To me, the more important question for the perpetually dispossessed is why would you do so?

[DinoDoc]

MtG: What's better for the health of democracy in Mexico? That Obrador and his supporters accept the results of a close and hard fought election or that they set up a paralel "People's government" which questions the legitimacy of the elected government? Especially given the lack of any evidence for the fraud he asserts.

[Arrian]

It sure sounds like MtG thinks our leetil brown brothers to the south need a revolution, Dino.

-Arrian

[DanS]

I think what MtG is proposing is revolution.

[Velociryx]

If the current Admin here is any indication, then we're long overdue for one too, Brother Arrian....

-=Vel=-

[Odin]

Originally posted by DanS
I think what MtG is proposing is revolution.

[Arrian]

Things have got to get pretty damn bad before the average joe is willing to pick up a gun and tussle with the gummint. We're not even close, Vel. Mexico may be.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

Mexico wouldn't surprise me a bit...but here...whether we will or not is quite different from whether we need to. We won't. At least not as long as the charade can be kept up and at least some appearances maintained.

-=Vel=-