Marshall
Member
Well, when you find what suits you let me know where your shopping, maybe they'll have my brand. Until then, I won't stick my head in the sand, I'll vote for whom I think will do this country the best job, not just me personally.
Why I don't vote
- Thread starter Ian
- Start date
- Status
Well, when you find what suits you let me know where your shopping, maybe they'll have my brand. Until then, I won't stick my head in the sand, I'll vote for whom I think will do this country the best job, not just me personally.
ksnecktieman
Member
dragongoddess. I agree with your point of view
tegemu, thank you for sharing that letter, with this fellow veteran. And thank you for your time in service, from a fellow citizen.
Ian? I think you have taken a useless position. I understand and agree that our votes do not mean very much. Most of the time when I vote, I am voting against someone, instead of for someone.
If you want to oppose this system, maybe you should demonstrate your displeasure at the polls. Go to your voting place, and vote against every incumbent on the ballot. Maybe just go and vote Libertarian, that is the party that says they want to reduce law and government. THAT is something the system will notice. Trust me, Big Brother Is Watching You.
As I recently posted in another thread, One single drop of water will not make a lake or a rainstorm, but you can not make a lake or a rainstorm without a single drop of water.
tegemu, thank you for sharing that letter, with this fellow veteran. And thank you for your time in service, from a fellow citizen.
Ian? I think you have taken a useless position. I understand and agree that our votes do not mean very much. Most of the time when I vote, I am voting against someone, instead of for someone.
If you want to oppose this system, maybe you should demonstrate your displeasure at the polls. Go to your voting place, and vote against every incumbent on the ballot. Maybe just go and vote Libertarian, that is the party that says they want to reduce law and government. THAT is something the system will notice. Trust me, Big Brother Is Watching You.
As I recently posted in another thread, One single drop of water will not make a lake or a rainstorm, but you can not make a lake or a rainstorm without a single drop of water.
michaelbane
Member
Afew thoughts...
I like it.
So what happens when everyone opts out of that pesky program for paying taxes? What's the government going to use to provide necessary services?
I like it.
So what happens when everyone opts out of that pesky program for paying taxes? What's the government going to use to provide necessary services?
ctdonath
Member
And then, incredibly in the same paragraph,
Your vote in WV is proportionally more significant than a vote in NY precisely because of the electoral college! The voting system is designed specifically to reduce the "tyrrany of the majority", giving the minority greater voice. Don't recall the details offhand, but...each state gets a minimum number of electoral votes (and two Senators) regardless of the population, giving less-populated states a disproportionatly large influence in the election & decision-making.
Take away the electoral college, and your WV vote DOES mean nothing at the national level. At least now your voice is amplified.
If not for the electoral college, Presidential candidates wouldn't even bother showing up anywhere other than NY, CA, and a few other biggies. As it is, WV, NH, et al actually do matter.
Yes it's not perfect. No system is.
dragongoddess - While American soldiers have certainly died for some noble causes, my voting rights simply aren't one of them. Neither Germany nor Japan had either the means or desire to occupy the US in WWII. World War One, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf Storm, Panama, and Grenada had nothing to do with voting, or any of the rights of US citizens. The current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan don't either. The Civil War was in part about voting rights, but not those of any of my ancestors. I have no antipathy towards soldiers; it just bugs me when people claim that the US military is responsible for things it really has played no part in.
Guyon - I really don't care how many (or more accurately, how few) people agree with my position. I started the thread simply because I kept seeing people asking why anyone would deliberately not vote, much less admit to it.
As for who gets elected, it doesn't matter what they're called, rulers or representatives or grand poobahs. The fact is that they make the law, that they are given the legal authority to tell everyone what can and can't be done under penalty of jail or other punishment.
Marshall - I live in the US.
Guyon - I really don't care how many (or more accurately, how few) people agree with my position. I started the thread simply because I kept seeing people asking why anyone would deliberately not vote, much less admit to it.
As for who gets elected, it doesn't matter what they're called, rulers or representatives or grand poobahs. The fact is that they make the law, that they are given the legal authority to tell everyone what can and can't be done under penalty of jail or other punishment.
Marshall - I live in the US.
dragongoddess
member
Well what was that little fracas back in the late 1700's. Do you really believe what you said. HAve you given even the smallest amout of thought to your statements. Tell us what would have happened if we had stayed home in WWI. In WWII. In Korea.
Last edited:
dragon , Right ON !!!
Ever since the day I was of age to VOTE , I do.
It is a PRIVILEGE to do so. I have NEVER had to serve for
this country because of the MANY who paid the ultimate price
for MY RIGHT and I feel I owe it to These Great Men and Woman.
THANK YOU FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HART
Ever since the day I was of age to VOTE , I do.
It is a PRIVILEGE to do so. I have NEVER had to serve for
this country because of the MANY who paid the ultimate price
for MY RIGHT and I feel I owe it to These Great Men and Woman.
THANK YOU FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HART
While I do not share Ian's views on voting, there are some pretty far-out criticisms of his position here. I take it women should not feel any gratitude towards American troops in the First World War as the 19th Amendment had not yet passed, and so, in a way, the AEF were in a de facto struggle to deny suffrage to women. 
Shootcraps
Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2004
- Messages
- 1,007
"The biggest political scandal in America, is that less than half of the people who can vote, do vote." G. Gordon Liddy
I would bet that if everyone who could vote, did vote, things would be substantially different. I would also bet that there'd be more than two parties.
"Give me" this, "give me" that. Your dad, uncle and grandfathers "gave" their lives. Wasn't that enough? You've been "given" quite a lot and you turn your nose up at it.
Major cop-out. Rather taking up the banner for these ideals you supposedly believe in and trying to better the system, you're sitting back and waiting for someone else to do it.
I would bet that if everyone who could vote, did vote, things would be substantially different. I would also bet that there'd be more than two parties.
"Give me" this, "give me" that. Your dad, uncle and grandfathers "gave" their lives. Wasn't that enough? You've been "given" quite a lot and you turn your nose up at it.
Major cop-out. Rather taking up the banner for these ideals you supposedly believe in and trying to better the system, you're sitting back and waiting for someone else to do it.
Old Dog
Member
Well, if this is what you truly believe ... who are we to attempt to educate you?
Evidently, a regrettably high percentage of forum members did not pay attention in their high school civics/government classes.
No, no, they are not. Some of your elected representatives are simply part of a legislative body that is authorized to modify or create law; these laws are not -- most of the time -- laws that criminalize activity or result in punishment of offenders. The vast majority of our elections concern ballot initiatives, funding for government activities, and electing persons to fill administrative positions with the various levels of government -- from coroner to treasurer to district attorney to school board member to utilities commissioner, etc., ad nauseum. Ian, if you believe that all our elections are about putting people in office to make law, perhaps you may want to actually check out a ballot for your next election. Then, study the issues, talk to the candidates, and hopefully -- you'll feel differently about whether or not one individual's ballot makes a difference.
Chris Rhines
Member
Did you even read my post before spouting off with this piece of wit? For heaven's sake, use a little critical thinking here - if everybody opts out of paying for a government program, said program is no longer provided. Hence, the program was de facto unnecessary.michaelbane said:
...
I'm sorry if I sound a bit snarky here, but I'm trying to make calm and reasoned argument in the face of strawman arguments, ad hominem attacks, mind-boggling non sequitors, and appeals to emotion. I'm more than happy to discuss political non-participation with anyone who has an interest, but wading through all the static is getting tiresome (to say nothing of all the unwarranted abuse that has gone Ian's way...)
- Chris
ksnecktieman
Member
Ian? I think you are suffering from an ID ten T error. We fought world War Two to stop hitler from conquering Europe. Do you REALLY think that if we had stayed at home, and let him take Europe, that he would have stayed there? As soon as he had amassed the men and material to attack the shores of the USA it would have been a fact of history. EVERY soldier in WW2 died to protect your right to vote, and to speak out, against the best political system ever built.
AND The part I like the best?????? This system allows me to form my opinion of your opinion, and ignore it. I am not even required to listen to you. You have the right to free speech. Each and every one of the United States Soldiers who have died in the service did so to protect your right to speak, and my right to ignore your stupid view point.
A minor trivial point for anyone interested??? Are you aware that more Americans died in the attack on the world Trade Center, than died in the "Day that will live in Infamy" When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor?
AND The part I like the best?????? This system allows me to form my opinion of your opinion, and ignore it. I am not even required to listen to you. You have the right to free speech. Each and every one of the United States Soldiers who have died in the service did so to protect your right to speak, and my right to ignore your stupid view point.
A minor trivial point for anyone interested??? Are you aware that more Americans died in the attack on the world Trade Center, than died in the "Day that will live in Infamy" When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor?
ksnecktieman
Member
Chris? who is going to find a financial reason to build and maintain a system of interstate highways?
Ian, I am sorry, I came off very harsh on your point of view,,, i would like for you to speak with my sister and try to convert her to your point of view. She does vote, in every election. She votes Democrat because her father did. I would be pleased if you could convert her,,, and every one else that votes a party line, to stay home. If they are not going to research and investigate the candidates, I WANT them, and you, to stay home.
If anyone here does not understand an ID TEN T error? Just replace the written ten with the numerals for it.
Ian, I am sorry, I came off very harsh on your point of view,,, i would like for you to speak with my sister and try to convert her to your point of view. She does vote, in every election. She votes Democrat because her father did. I would be pleased if you could convert her,,, and every one else that votes a party line, to stay home. If they are not going to research and investigate the candidates, I WANT them, and you, to stay home.
If anyone here does not understand an ID TEN T error? Just replace the written ten with the numerals for it.
Marshall
Member
Who would have thought you wouldn't?
In all honesty Ian, you are on a board with a lot people that have fought in wars for you to have the ability to vote in a free society and have a voice in what leaders are elected. If they haven't fought, many of their friends or family have. Many people here are true patriots, people that love and defend their country. They may not all agree on what or who is right and what or who is wrong, but they believe that voting is at the core of freedom. I think it is probably naive of you to think you would not get responses as you have.
SolaScriptura139
Member
And 3 electoral votes compared to 30 some is a balance of power?
Glock Glockler
Member
I'm going to wade in on the side of the non-voters in this case. The reality is that a non-vote...which is decided upon by the enfranchised constituent is in fact a vote
We must have worked on different campaigns, every time I worked on one the reps were concerned with undecided VOTERS and with swing VOTERS. You know, the people that actually care enough to show up, that's who decides what happens in the world.
I know for a fact that non-voters are counted....and courted by politicians and their campaigns
See above comment, and please show me where X number of votes is legally needed in order to legitimize an election, As far as I know, if 5% of the population shows up the election will be determined by that 5%. Politicians don't get worried when more and more people don't show up, it tells them that they don't care, and politicians love an apathetic public.
"checking out of the system" is the only remotely realistic way to solve the problem. When enough people simply ignore a government, it loses all its power
Please, Ian, are you going to open up a full-auto stand on your block selling full autos Stens and AKs? Actually, I would wager that there are a great many things you refrain from doing that you otherwise would do in absense of any govt because you want to avoid govt attention. You recognize the govt plenty.
Granted, ignoring them in certain instances can help but that ignoring them is also coupled with legislative action and/or other methods of conveying disapproval.
I wouldn't mind a "none of the above" option...but I don't see the varying party functionaries actively putting an option in place which would leave little doubt as to the public's support for their platforms
This election I used the write in option to vote for "None of the above". Scores of those will matter a lot more than scores staying home.
but I'm not out to turn the world into Freetopia
Yet you chose to voluntarily post on a public forum why you refuse to vote.... If govt coercion is, in fact, immoral why wouldnt you want to see less of it in the world?
so I don't spend a whole ton of time looking for such examples
I'll be more than happy to provide numerous examples of people's freedoms being stripped away due to the results of an election
"A more ethical approach might be to look at the situation..."
C'mon, Derek, that's like saying it would be wrong of me to try to verbally dissuade a mugger when physically threatened before I resort to using physical force on my own. If someone is infringing on my rights thats all I need to legitimately take action. I don't think anyone would try to use force because X person was elected but I do see people doing that because X person is doing some act which infringes on their rights. Voting is a means of peacefully changing things so one doesnt have to be violent, it seems the non-voting paradigm lends itself to a violent solution to a problem it assists in creating.
Who'dve thought I'd get such a hostile reaction for refusing to try to impose my views on anyone else?
Fine by me if you don't want to vote, that is your right and it causes no skin off my back, but please don't try to claim moral superiority for your position.
We must have worked on different campaigns, every time I worked on one the reps were concerned with undecided VOTERS and with swing VOTERS. You know, the people that actually care enough to show up, that's who decides what happens in the world.
I know for a fact that non-voters are counted....and courted by politicians and their campaigns
See above comment, and please show me where X number of votes is legally needed in order to legitimize an election, As far as I know, if 5% of the population shows up the election will be determined by that 5%. Politicians don't get worried when more and more people don't show up, it tells them that they don't care, and politicians love an apathetic public.
"checking out of the system" is the only remotely realistic way to solve the problem. When enough people simply ignore a government, it loses all its power
Please, Ian, are you going to open up a full-auto stand on your block selling full autos Stens and AKs? Actually, I would wager that there are a great many things you refrain from doing that you otherwise would do in absense of any govt because you want to avoid govt attention. You recognize the govt plenty.
Granted, ignoring them in certain instances can help but that ignoring them is also coupled with legislative action and/or other methods of conveying disapproval.
I wouldn't mind a "none of the above" option...but I don't see the varying party functionaries actively putting an option in place which would leave little doubt as to the public's support for their platforms
This election I used the write in option to vote for "None of the above". Scores of those will matter a lot more than scores staying home.
but I'm not out to turn the world into Freetopia
Yet you chose to voluntarily post on a public forum why you refuse to vote....
If govt coercion is, in fact, immoral why wouldnt you want to see less of it in the world?so I don't spend a whole ton of time looking for such examples
I'll be more than happy to provide numerous examples of people's freedoms being stripped away due to the results of an election
"A more ethical approach might be to look at the situation..."
C'mon, Derek, that's like saying it would be wrong of me to try to verbally dissuade a mugger when physically threatened before I resort to using physical force on my own. If someone is infringing on my rights thats all I need to legitimately take action. I don't think anyone would try to use force because X person was elected but I do see people doing that because X person is doing some act which infringes on their rights. Voting is a means of peacefully changing things so one doesnt have to be violent, it seems the non-voting paradigm lends itself to a violent solution to a problem it assists in creating.
Who'dve thought I'd get such a hostile reaction for refusing to try to impose my views on anyone else?
Fine by me if you don't want to vote, that is your right and it causes no skin off my back, but please don't try to claim moral superiority for your position.
TallPine
Member
Ah yes ... good old government funded indoctrination of children
I did pay attention, and it has taken almost 40 years for me to shake off some of the lies that I was fed.
dustind
Member
Someone who wants exclusive advertising rights on all those billboards they built at the same time, or to collect tolls.
You have to compare the electoral votes vs the number of votors to get the E-vote/voter ratio. If you want to maxamize your voting power move to a small swing state.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Calm reason shall prevail...
Or I will.
, Art
Or I will.
, Artctdonath
Member
Thanks to the electoral college, a presidential vote in WV is worth 5% more than one in NY.
Does that "balance" work for you?
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Simple, because you are obviously so willing to let someone else impose their views on you.
Me? I didn't vote to impose my views on my neighbors. I voted to keep my non-like minded neighbors from imposing their views on me.
And if you really want to point out an anti-democratic institution, look at the Senate, where half a million Wyomingites have the same say at 36 million Californians (and five million folks from DC, Puerto Rico, Guam, etc. have no say at all).
- Status
