The candidates and the voter
April 25, 2007 12:39pm CST
Between these two people who do you think is the loser, the one that accepts money but not voting the candidate or the one that gives the money which is the candidate?
26 Apr 07
Well what if that candidates who buy votes won?then ultimately the people is the loser because the candidate will take back his money with such a big interest. It only shows how corrupted are the minds of Filipino people. No wonder we are the poorest nation in Asia maybe in the world.
26 Apr 07
The candidate is the perceived loser,but in truth it is the voter.Why? because the candidate only lose money and his candidacy.In the next election he will campaign for his election and by this time,he knows what to do to win his election bid.The voter will again accept the bribed money, and whether he vote for that candidate or not,he is still the loser,because that will be the prevailing system and the country as a whole is the loser.That is the reason why we are a corrupt nation,and that is the reason why we are a poor country.The system itself corrupts the politician and the people.To prevent this system,we must not allow the foreign media to interfere with our elections,because that is where the corruption starts.Although it is not possible,it will be possible if our leaders will change their hearts and opt for a genuine reform in the government and the customs of its people.Look whats happening in Argentina,they default their debt to the I.M.F.-World Bank,now they are self sufficient and have a gnp of more than 10 percent,because they don't allow the foreign investors to dictate what to do.
26 Apr 07
Both are losers, the one who accepted the money but not voting for the candidate who gave the money and the candidate who gave the money. The candidate spent to buy votes but failed to get the votes and so his money became useless for him. Whereas, the voter who did not vote for the candidate who gave money will ever have his conscience bothering him especially if the candidate won anyway.