75% in U.S. See Widespread Government Corruption

[Dexter]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/185759/widespread-government-corruption.aspx

Three in four Americans (75%) last year perceived corruption as widespread in the country's government. This figure is up from two in three in 2007 (67%) and 2009 (66%).

[Scottftlc]

You've got to wonder what on Earth the 25% are thinking?

[truth_seeker]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/185759/widespread-government-corruption.aspx

Three in four Americans (75%) last year perceived corruption as widespread in the country's government. This figure is up from two in three in 2007 (67%) and 2009 (66%).

Strong parallel with choices of Sanders and Trump; e.g. people that they perceive as being outside "mainstream government."

My suburban town of 200,000 has a very active internet forum on Facebook (actually several, with one dominant). The result last November was the ouster of two council incumbents in favor of newcomers.

The main issue was: the incumbents felt they alone should decide controversial  issues, instead of citizen ballots. The newcomers vowed to let citizens vote on issues.

The next election in 14 month will be over a different controversial issue, but incumbents are likely to be removed again.

[Fishrrman]

I had a conversation today with an old friend about "corruption" in government.

In my state, several years back a Republican governor (John Rowland of Connecticut) went to prison for taking bribes.

I told my friend I was quite happy to have a corrupt bribe-taking official like Rowland be governor, rather than a "clean" democrat.

Let the governor take all the bribes he wants, so long as he doesn't raise my taxes, endorse new laws and regulations that restrict my freedoms, and interfere with the normal goings-on in the state and make life miserable for ordinary citizens.

I told him that character doesn't seem to matter much anymore.
What matters more than "character" is "performance".

I'm completely serious and this is not meant to be satire or disingenuous.

I'd rather be governed by totally corrupt men that leave me alone, than by upstanding "moral" men who are determined to enchain me.

Say whatever you wish in response.

[rangerrebew]

Take Chicago and the state of Illinois.  They are a city/state that are TOTALLY corrupt and now almost broke, raising taxes as fast as they can.  There have been a lot of nice things done for the people who live there but more nice things for the politicians and their cronies.  The major difference between an honest politician and a corrupt one is time, opportunity, and connections, something Washington warned of in his Farewell Address.  Neither can leave the public alone as they need the public money so they don't have to "tax" their brains on how to cut government and buy votes.

[Fishrrman]

rangerrebew wrote above:
[[ The major difference between an honest politician and a corrupt one is time, opportunity, and connections, something Washington warned of in his Farewell Address.  Neither can leave the public alone as they need the public money so they don't have to "tax" their brains on how to cut government and buy votes. ]]

I stand by my statement in post 3 above, based on the experience in my own state of Connecticut.

John Rowland may have taken bribes as governor, but he pretty much "left the people alone" and I don't recall him raising any taxes (at least those that might affect me).

Perhaps that's the difference between a corrupt Republican politician, and a corrupt democratic one.

Chances are, the Pubbie will take his bribes and leave you alone.
But the corrupt democratic politician isn't substantially different from a presumed "honest democrat" -- they are BOTH going to make your life miserable!