Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by baggachipz | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

baggachipz

Absolutely, I would. It just seems that the criminals tend to be from one end of the spectrum....

But crime is crime and justice should always be applied equally.

View on HN

> criminals tend to be from one end of the spectrum

At best, that trait is highly localized.

And compared to (say) "1900's standard" levels of corruption in Democrat-controlled big American cities - Le Pen's crimes were nickle-and-dime stuff.

It’s been 100 years. Can you find something that happened in this century? With people who are alive today?

How about Greece, where the corruption goes all the way to humanitarian and rehab organization?

https://borgenproject.org/10-facts-about-corruption-in-greec...

(BTW, it ain't been 100 years. Mayor Daly Sr. ran Chicago into the 1970's. Mayor Young ran Detroit into the 1990's. Etc.)

Rod Blagojevich? Bob Menendez? Eric Adams?

Not saying the left is particularly corrupt, there are examples on all sides.

> It just seems that the criminals tend to be from one end of the spectrum....

Why would you say so? Are there any studies on proportional crime distribution among politicians worldwide?

In the United States, you can compare the number of people in each president's administrations in recent years. There's a striking difference between Republican administrations and Democratic administrations.

If she's a clear cut fascist criminal and everyone on the other side is great then why wouldn't you want her to run? Should be easy to trounce her if she's as bad as you say.

You'd think so, but other elections have proven this to be false.

She committed crimes, and having the potential for a felon to achieve power over the government doesn't seem to be conducive for them to be punished under the law.

Allowing a populist criminal to run for office is not great for democracy.

So if someone is proven to be corrupt we should just let them run in elections and trust that they won’t use corruption or other immoral or illegal means to get elected? Or that they won’t do more of that if they do get elected. Maybe we should never convict any politician of any crime, what could go wrong

I mean why wouldn’t we just take anyone accused of a felony and just hold an election for some high office right there? Then if they win it’s because no crimes were committed, and if they lose obviously it’s because they were criminals. A simple majority should suffice and there’s no need to review any evidence of wrongdoing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com