Sham Elections in the United States

As one ages, meaning, when one leaves youth behind and moves into midlife, attention to the basics becomes paramount. And what I mean by the basics are diet, exercise and rest. If you are attentive to these details of your life, you can successfully counteract some of the decreases in energy that result from the loss of youth.

Along with this wisdom regarding the basics, age also brings an appreciation of a central bias of U.S. reporting on foreign elections and election processes. The bias is that U.S. electoral democracy is cleaner, fairer, more open than other countries.

Putin's United Russia party swept Russia's elections on Sunday. David Herszenhorn reports in
"Russia: Putin’s Loyalists Dominate Vote" that "Candidates loyal to President Vladimir V. Putin won elections for governor in all 30 regions that held elections on Sunday, as balloting reflected the Kremlin’s total domination of political opponents and its iron grip on the country’s political system."

Neil MacFarquhar had a story yesterday that criticized these elections because of recent changes in ballot access requirements and the outsize influence of money in the process. This was said without sarcasm in the flagship newspaper of a nation that has the most complex, antiquated, money-dominated electoral system on the planet.

The same day as MacFarquhar penned his critique of Russian elections, Hillary Clinton made an appearance at the Harkin Steak Fry in Indianola, Iowa. There is now no doubt that the American electorate is going to be force fed a Hillary candidacy for president.

Presidential elections in the United States are based largely on the performance of candidates in two small, lily white non-urban states -- Iowa and New Hampshire -- that occur early in the primary season. Third parties don't figure in the process. Iowa and New Hampshire are classic Potemkin villages,

The system is rigged. Ballot access laws prevent any third-party candidate from reaching the people. 

I'll be dealing with this issue more in the future. I saw it up close as a member of the Green Party during the last decade, specifically as a Nader supporter. What the Democratic Party did to Nader in 2004 is very instructive. Democrats basically sued -- successfully -- the Nader campaign to keep it off the ballot in several key states. You won't find the Gray Lady inveighing about it in her editorial pages, but Nader 2004 proves beyond question that the United States does not have a fair election system.

And then there is role of money. After Citizens United there is no longer any question that elections are now a contest between who has the biggest pile of money. I don't think, post-Citizens United, that the sham can continue much longer.