Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Toddsterpatriot
Which distortion is larger, vote buying or running a fake candidate during the primaries?

False choice, but running a fake candidate could easily be the correct answer.

How else does one catch corruption of this nature?

By means that have less negative cost. A fake drug buyer sting is one thing, but a fake candidate for the legislature is another.

How about the FBI going up to a legitimate candidate and entrapping them into buying votes?

That would be a better method.

I'm from Texas, vote buying is widespread, common and well known in some areas. The problem here, and I imagine elsewhere, is not lack of evidence or witnesses, but lack of honest LE at the local and state level.I really don't think the Feds would have to run a fake candidate or entrap a real one. Surveilance and good basic investigation and evidence gathering would work.

thanks for your reply..

37 posted on 12/04/2005 2:29:26 AM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: D-fendr
How about the FBI going up to a legitimate candidate and entrapping them into buying votes?

That would be a better method.

The problem is you'd have to hit all the candidates. It wouldn't be fair otherwise. And wouldn't it be embarrassing to indict all the candidates before an election? Wouldn't that be a bigger distortion?

I'm from Texas, vote buying is widespread, common and well known in some areas.

I'm from Chicago where vote buying is cheaper because the dead don't charge much :^)

38 posted on 12/04/2005 9:51:21 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (The Federal Reserve did not kill JFK. Greenspan was not on the grassy knoll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson