Thursday, November 8, 2012

2012 US Elections - The People Have Spoken: No Confidence

Voter turnout expected to be lower than 2008, US President's mandate ranges between 25-35%.

Tony Cartalucci, Contributor
Activist Post

Here is some math the establishment hopes you never do. Take the popular vote the newly elected president received, and see what percent of voter turnout it actually makes up. You will find that out of all eligible voters, the president is put into power with only between 25-35%. This isn't just with President Obama in 2012, but is a common feature of most US elections, and many elections around the world.

2012_US_Elections_Graph_1
Image: This infographic was assembled using information from CNN's  "Election 2012: Results," USA Today's "This year's voter turnout may fall short of 2008," and George Mason University's "2012 General Election Turnout Rates." The numbers may still change, but the difference will be negligible.

In countries like Thailand, where violent mobs hold the nation hostage, representing a fraction of 1% of the population, it is claimed by the Western media that these are "the people." Come election time, the Western-backed party claiming to run on "people's power," garnered the support of a measly 32% of all eligible voters. Likewise in Syria, where "the people" are rising up, in a nation of 20 million - if even half rose up armed with only broom handles, the so-called revolution would have been over in a week.


This is the myth of democracy, representative governance, and manufactured dissent. It does not represent the vast majority of the people who are affected by the decisions these governments or movements then make with their self-proclaimed mandates. While numbers are still coming in, USA Today has reported that voter turnout in the 2012 US Elections most likely will fall short of 2008 elections. The article titled, "This year's voter turnout may fall short of 2008," quoted Michael McDonald of the George Mason University who stated:
It doesn't look like we had a 2008-level turnout. I'm certain about that. There was some waning of interest in voting. I don't see this election as some kind of wholesale collapse of turnout, either.
While polling experts claim the slump in voting is a result of "waning interest," it really isn't explained as to why interest in determining one's own destiny would ever wane. The most likely answer is that many people feel that voting accomplishes nothing. It is done after a grueling, repetitive campaign of lofty, vague promises that most mature adults know will never be kept, by special interests who have organized against them, and are merely telling us all what we want to hear as they proceed to exploit us and plunder our nation. 

The next question becomes, what do we do about it

Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at Land Destroyer Report.   Read other contributed articles by Tony Cartalucci here.

Non GMO Survival Food Storage

BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW



BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

first of all,in the popular vote romney had more votes than obama (not that it really matters). second of all, many of romney's votes were trashed or didn't arrive to be counted in time. many of those votes were our military. by trashing and discounting those votes, obama and romney are showing our military just how important the really are not! i've been trying to tell those around me we don't matter and neither do our votes. many believe in the "democracy" which is actually a constitutional republic, but oh well.....WTFUP!

Anonymous said...

you must not be a good "Counter". Obama got 3 million more votes than romney, about 10 percent of the country.

Anonymous said...

We all know elections are fixed. Election irregularities are a regular occurrence. Unfortunately, the justice system doesn't seem to care about election fraud. The winner of the election employs them. They can’t bite the hand that feeds them.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't vote. The problem is that the majority of the population thinks their votes do not count unless they vote for the likely winner or they are voting for the lesser of two evils.

If you don't vote for the candidate that best represents you, you've thrown away your vote. Why vote for a saboteur. Vote third party and be part of the solution, rather than voting mainstream and being part of the problem.

KenBrodeur said...

These percentage numbers are probably high, considering electronic vote fraud. How many dead people voted? How many third party and write-in votes were flipped to Obama? How many people unwittingly voted more than once?
Romans had a good system of voting for an issue such as California's 37 (labelling GMO foods).
All were given a white and black stone. In front of everyone people filed by the urn and dropped a stone either white for and black against. In the end the stones were counted in front of the public. Easy to verify, difficult to cheat.
Paper ballots, locked up by special government non partisan security, numbered and receipted to the voter beats electronic video touch screen scamming everytime.

Anonymous said...

i voted 3rd party for all the good it did. not 1 of my 3rd party votes made it.

Anonymous said...

The U.S. population is over 300 million, therefore three million votes represents one percent of the country - not a lot and not surprising given that the two "choices" were essentially clones or enantiomers (mirror images), more so than in any other presidential election. I suppose that means TPTB are getting close to their Hegelian dialectic synthesis in American politics.

Anonymous said...

When your only choice is between two lying criminals it sort of takes the incentive out taking the time and effort to vote.

Anonymous said...

How long before we see, "Don't blame me, I wrote in Ron Paul", bumper stickers?

Fabrice said...

Oh it's right, it is the same in others country. In France for exemple the last presidents won with only 25-30% as we don't count too the people refusing to vote.

Here we used to hear that USA is the biggest and greatest Democracy...

If USA or France had been real democracy, first these elections had been continued as most refused to vote, without the 2 candidates who made 1/2 of the voters staying home.

In fact these presidents are real loosers, but the people who will "pay" the result.

Anonymous said...

i have been saying some thing like this for years. when you have been 'elected' and 73% of the population didn't vote for you what does that say about majority rule? i'm just sayin' day's a comin

Post a Comment