English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

republicans in georgia (big bussiness donors) are donating thousands of dollars to cynthia mckinneys democrat primary opponent. now they are trying to pick our own candidates as well, lol. the right wing is definetly losing it, and they know the mid-term elections will be a huge democrat victory.
in pennsylvania they are donating money to green party candidates to try and split liberal voters.

2006-08-01 09:36:26 · 18 answers · asked by david c 4 in Politics & Government Politics

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060801/ap_on_el_ge/santorum_green_candidate;_ylt=AtUMJ9d8Oz3RikOhhyha5Kpp24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--

2006-08-01 09:37:33 · update #1

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/dekalb/stories/0731metdebate.html?imw=Y

2006-08-01 09:40:52 · update #2

18 answers

There are a lot of tactics in politics.

Look at the 2000 election. That was the most blatant form of tampering in any election history.

Deciding state is Florida. Jeb Bush hires George's own campaign manager to count the votes in Florida. 300,000 votes are disallowed because they are mostly black votes. 94% black votes go to Gore. She allows a recount and then when the votes are within 530 votes of overcoming Bush's, she stops the counting. Then ratifies the election is over in Florida. Then even funnier is 90,000 votes were disqualified because people had similar names to those of felons. Most of the names on the disqualified list were actually legal voters.

Games people play.

2006-08-01 09:45:06 · answer #1 · answered by Fantasy Girl 3 · 0 0

That sort of tactic is nothing new. AAMOF, I know, personally, people who register with the party that they DON'T like, just so that they can vote for the "least-objectionable" candidate in the primaries. At its best, it's a time-honored tactic to discourage political extremism. At its worst, it's a cynical ploy to reduce citizens' political choices.

Furthermore, many businesses have always made donations to BOTH parties' candidates, with the expectation that, no matter who wins, they've bought some influence. (Of course, this is why there's been such a push for campaign finance reforms!)

2006-08-01 09:45:31 · answer #2 · answered by Cyn 6 · 0 0

It's a better plan than Bubba accepting donations from the Communist China military in 1996. See link below.

No wonder the Coms were given access to US missile technology.

2006-08-01 09:44:39 · answer #3 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0 0

If liberals supposedly are so concerned about the environment, why wouldn't they be supporting the Green Party candidate?

Liberals can't stand the fact of that free speech thing, that allows people to spend money to support candidates for any reason...

2006-08-01 09:42:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Sure. The Republicans will NEVER win McKinny's seat, and they would LOVE to see Cynthia out of office. Of course, you have to remember that Cynthia McKinny is crazy (I'm from Georgia and consider myself more of a Democrat than a Republican), so it's difficult to blame them.

2006-08-01 09:44:39 · answer #5 · answered by Patrick 3 · 0 0

It's the usual thing, the deep-pockets types trying to buy election outcomes instead of leaving it up to the voters....what amazes and astounds me is why there's so many people waving all this money around. I wish people would put their wallets away on election day...vote with your wits, not your checkbook...

2006-08-01 09:44:41 · answer #6 · answered by gokart121 6 · 0 0

Don't sweat it. The republiTARDs are going to lose big time in November. A conservative Democrat is still better than any type of RepubliTARD.

2006-08-01 09:45:36 · answer #7 · answered by Pop D 5 · 0 0

The two parties have always been the same. They spout of different ideals but they both aim to divide Americans.

2006-08-01 09:45:29 · answer #8 · answered by DEP 3 · 0 0

Have you ever hear the name Ross Perot ?

Business have been given money to each side for years Bill got tons from very rich men and business they all have.

2006-08-01 09:43:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

i think of they are the two caught of their ideology and characteristic a matching "stubborness" while it incorporates their worldview. there became a learn released a little while in the past that of the individuals who had chosen to pass "television unfastened", a majority have been the two non secular neo-cons or non secular liberals. They the two mistrusted the medium as being a gadget of the different section. the international is frequently as you view it.

2016-10-01 08:50:39 · answer #10 · answered by Erika 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers