With tongue in cheek, I used to tell my students how one-party dictatorships are more democratic than the United States. Not only do one-party dictatorships like Nazi Germany and Communist China have elections, they have 100% voter turnout and the One Party gets all the votes!
Case in point:
Did you know that Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany after his National Socialist Party won only one-third of the votes in the election of 1932? (In the election’s first round of voting, the Nazi Party received 30.1% of total votes; in the second round, its take was 36.8%.)
The election of 1932 turned out to be the last competitive election in Germany until after the Second World War.
Two years later, in 1934, Hitler’s main opponent Paul von Hindenburg died. Hindenburg had become Germany’s President in 1932 when his Independent Party won an absolute majority of votes of 53%. Upon Hinderburg’s death, So Hitler abolished the office of the presidency entirely, and replaced it with the new position of Führer und Reichskanzler (“Leader and Reich Chancellor”), thereby cementing his dictatorship.
But like all one-party dictatorships, Hitler went through the pretense of having a national plebiscite to let the German people approve or disapprove of his power consolidation.
On August 19, 1934, about 95% of registered voters in Germany went to the polls and gave Hitler 38 million votes of approval or 90% of the vote. Thus Adolf Hitler could claim he was Führer of the German nation by direct will of the people. Hitler now wielded absolute power in Germany, beyond that of any previous traditional head of state. He had become, in effect, the law unto himself. [Source]
The day after the national plebiscite, on August 20, 1934, mandatory loyalty oaths to Hitler were introduced throughout the Reich.
The point I was making to my students was to be suspicious of any politician (or party) who garners votes of incredibly high percentages, such as Hitler’s 90% in 1934.
Why?
Because human beings are naturally disagreeable and contentious and, thus, for 90-100% of us to agree on anything is the height of improbability, which suggests the vote’s been rigged.
Flash forward 78 years to the 2012 Election in the U.S.A.
Did you know that in 2008 Barry Soetoro Obama got a remarkable 85% of the vote in Philadelphia? But in 2012, he did even better! On November 6, 2012, B. S. Obama got – GASP! — 99% or more of the votes cast in 13 of Philadelphia’s wards!!!!!!!!
What an astonishing miraculous accomplishment! As Kris Zane of The Western Center for Journalism puts it, that accomplishment is especially amazing considering Philadelphia’s record unemployment, record homicide rate, and an Obama-induced economy that has literally bankrupted the city!
Zane points out that “The mainstream media tried to downplay the massive amount of voting machines problems, but there were reported problems from coast to coast.”
So did Obama do the same thing on a nationwide scale as the vote-rigging in Philadelphia?
See also FOTM’s other posts on the 2012 Democrat election fraud:
- “Mitt Romney Shellshocked by Election Loss,” Nov. 10, 2012.
- “Why We Lost the 2012 Election,” Nov. 9, 2012.
- “One More Glass Of Whine,” Nov. 9, 2012.
- “More election fraud and illegalities by Democrats,” Nov. 6, 2012.
- “Democrat voter fraud,” Nov. 2, 2012.
- “Long Distance Demon-Rat Voter Intimidation Underway in Florida,” Oct. 24, 2012.
- “Son of Demonrat Congressman caught on tape plotting voter fraud,” Oct. 24, 2012.
- “Obama gets illegal foreign campaign donations through China-based fundraiser,” Oct. 9, 2012.
- “How Real Is Voter Fraud?,” Aug. 28, 2012.
- “Who Needs The Military?,” (Democrats suppress military votes in Ohio), Aug. 2, 2012.
- “It’s a miracle! Dead people vote in America!,” June 13, 2012.
- “Will Mickey Mouse donate again to Obama’s election campaign?,” April 19, 2012.
- “Our votes will be counted by a central server in Spain!,” April 8, 2012.
- “O’Keefe exposes voter fraud in Vermont,” March 13, 2012.
- “Watch out for Democrat voter fraud in 2012,” Nov 30, 2011.
~Eowyn
