The Colossal Arrogance (Not My Word) To Call Itself A Democracy?

Dear Editor,

One of the things, among many, that annoy me (a term suggested by my computer rather than the one I wanted) about politics in general, but particularly right now about the American political system, is the control that money has in their elections.

If our political systems in general were to pretend to be democratic, it would mean that every eligible voter over a designated age would have an equal say in every election.

However, money has the final say, and in the United States it is the organizations funded by moneyed individuals that decide who the government representatives are. How else do you explain the election of aged individuals and fascist people like Biden and Trump? In the States, there are literally millions of people who would be more competent to fill the presidential position than these two. Millions more are better options to the people that fill the halls of Congress right now.

The alternative is to believe that Americans are incompetent (again the word I had in mind was corrected by my computer). When Trump won the election with 48% of the popular vote against that of Hillary Clinton it boggles the mind to think that so many people could be taken in by such an “incompetent,” “arrogant,” “idiot,” “egotistical,” “ignorant,” “racist,” “a------” and “narcissistic” person, to quote from Google.

It was the individual donor that probably turned the tide in the elections:

George Soros, of Soros Fund Management, gave $178,810,550 to the Democratic Party while Richard Uihlein of Uline Inc. gave the Republican Party $89,758, 039. (You might want to read about these two people in Wikipedia.)

You wonder how the United States has the colossal arrogance (not my word) to call itself a democracy?

Frank Martens

Summerland, BC