Sunday, August 12, 2007

If my neighbor is inclined to love me, I should hope that ...

So, in a local election in a corrupt city, a "reform" candidate appears and syphons away 2.5% of the vote. By a smaller margin than the "reform" candidate's total, the primary (corrupt) candidate does not get a clear majority, and the election is forced into a run-off. To effectively compete in the run-off, the (corrupt) candidate raises another million dollars, and ends up owing even more (corrupt) favors to her backers. The net result of the reform candidate's campaign is a degradation of the quality of life for the community, as a new set of favors is called in from the (corrupt) candidate. Should the reform candidate have precipitated a sequence of events that everyone knew would make things worse? Debate, discuss.

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Barrow,
But there has to be a cry in the wilderness, you wouldn't disagree there, eh? And not all those cries are narcissitic nadar like spoilers.
THe real issue is how a spearhead/web of reform can peform a cyber re-gerrymandering of the polis. Much hinges on the undoing of bogus regional political identities. The ward boss is ubiquitous now. The soapbox is positioned differently. New facts, new Information are afloat. Take note, those with eyes and ears, ect...

7:46 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home