Not Voting and Proud

Troubleshooter · 11-03-2004, 02:57 PM

http://www.reason.com/hod/bmd110204.shtml

Read the whole thing on the link.

Not Voting and Proud
Don't throw away your life; throw away your vote
Brian Doherty

Today, I'm joining a near majority of eligible voters in expressing our deepest values and thoughts regarding the choices presented us in our democracy: by not voting.

Since 1976, only once have more than 55 percent of eligible voters voted—and in 1996 fewer than 50 percent did. Although many, almost most, of us do it, there are always voices attempting to shame us about not voting. If we fail to exercise the franchise, the Statue of Liberty will shed one fat tear, or P. Diddy will kill us.

But the non-voting should not skulk in the shadows. We have solid, well-nigh unimpeachable reasons for the choice we refuse to make on election day.

Cyber Wolf · 11-03-2004, 03:14 PM

Yah, but the problem is you have to take what the ones who DO vote give you and you'll have to make do with a leader that's reflects what THEY want, whether you also want it or not.

iamthewalrus109 · 11-03-2004, 03:16 PM

So why bother doing anything then. Not participating without advocating anything less then the violent overthrow of this government is whisitling dixie. What does that say? Absoulutely nothing. You won't vote, but do you pay taxes? Do you like the freedoms you enjoy, or the plentiful goods and services? Don't partake in those either if you don't vote, really why bother being a part of American society, just to have the security and the riches it enjoys, but none of the responsiblity? I ask you.

-Walrus

Troubleshooter · 11-03-2004, 03:17 PM

There wasn't enough difference between the two viable candidates to merit voting for one or the other. Lose lose situation.

Troubleshooter · 11-03-2004, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamthewalrus109

So why bother doing anything then. Not participating without advocating anything less then the violent overthrow of this government is whisitling dixie. What does that say? Absoulutely nothing. You won't vote, but do you pay taxes? Do you like the freedoms you enjoy, or the plentiful goods and services? Don't partake in those either if you don't vote, really why bother being a part of American society, just to have the security and the riches it enjoys, but none of the responsiblity? I ask you.

-Walrus

I think that if you look at my other posts you'll see that I take my role as an american citizen seriously.

Giving my imprimatur to either Bush or Kerry would have been a lie on my part.

I pay my taxes, I've served in the military, and now I'm in school to become a teacher, researcher and writer.

I'm doing my part, never fear.

Bullitt · 11-03-2004, 04:05 PM

I personally thought it was hilarious that even though P-Diddy threatened to kills us, my age group (18-24) came out in the EXACT same percentage to vote as in 2000.

Maybe us youngins aren't as dumb as some would have you think....

11-03-2004, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullitt

I personally thought it was hilarious that even though P-Diddy threatened to kills us, my age group (18-24) came out in the EXACT same percentage to vote as in 2000.

Maybe us youngins aren't as dumb as some would have you think....

If you youngins think it's smart to not vote, you'll get the government you most deserve - a dictatorship.

breakingnews · 11-03-2004, 04:37 PM

I have been thinking long and hard about this issue for a couple days now. I was undecided about the two major candidates (and still am, regardless of Bush winning), and told friends that I contemplated withholding my vote for the lack of a compelling reason to cast a ballot for either. I offered voting for Nader as an alternative, but was rebutted by, "What's the point of that?"

I was told, "It's your duty as a citizen," and later that I should vote because I need to "exercise [my] right to vote." Is it not also my choice whether I want to add a share to Bush's or Kerry's tally? If I disapprove of both candidates, can you tell me a reason, as one friend suggested, why I should just vote for one of them on a whim?

If the voting proportion was much larger, like 99%, the abstention of votes would have a much greater impact - sends a strong indication of disapproval all around. Given the current circumstances, it wouldn't be such a big deal. Instead, a larger voter turn-out signals that more Americans - apparently - care about who will be president (though it's really a contest of getting someone *out* of office, IMO).

What I wonder is how many of those votes came from fair weather fans or voters who are riding on the bandwagon. I believe that as a citizen, I carry the obligation of gaining a detailed knowledge of current events and developing a stance on the issues at stake in the election. I'm sure there are lots of people who read up and understand what is going on, or naively take a stance based on strong interpersonal, family or moral choices. For the rest of America, though, it's all about reigning in voters with whatever you can: scare tactics, pandering to special interests, biased research. I am surprised that even among my friends, who are well educated and come from middle/upper-class families, there are quite a few who speak to one side of an issue but have NO effin' clue about what the other half thinks. That concerns me - while it's probably not true for the majority (or is it?), I have a feeling some of these voters are pulling levers because their friends say to do so.

Perhaps that's a reason our democracy is absurd. The Declaration and the Constitution were developed at a time when politics ruled the land down to the very seat of the pants the early Americans wore. These days, you could largely go about your ways without even the slightest thought of making political choices. Why does everything have to be political, anyway? The fundamentals of this country are a little ridiculous.

I did, in fact, cast a vote for Mr. Nader. I was torn between my smelly Republican uppercrust parents (I can discuss that later - very good issue) and my super-Democratic friends. Initially I leaned in W.'s favor, because I felt more of an allegiance to my family and their stance than that of my friend's. This way, I did my part as a citizen while essentially doing nothing. Saves me the trouble of explaining why I wouldn't vote. (Anyway, Kerry won both NJ and NY, the two places I had the choice of voting.)

Bullitt · 11-04-2004, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marichiko

If you youngins think it's smart to not vote, you'll get the government you most deserve - a dictatorship.

By not voting, I'm showing that I have no faith in the current president, or for that matter, in any of the candidates. Why should I show support for someone who isn't going to stop this country from going down the tubes? Why should I support someone who just uses rhetoric and half truths to get what he wants and doesn't clamp down and tackle the issues with the force needed to get changed what needs to be?

glatt · 11-04-2004, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullitt

By not voting, I'm showing that I have no faith in the current president, or for that matter, in any of the candidates. Why should I show support for someone who isn't going to stop this country from going down the tubes? Why should I support someone who just uses rhetoric and half truths to get what he wants and doesn't clamp down and tackle the issues with the force needed to get changed what needs to be?

You have the option of writing someone in. If you think you have a better idea of where the country should go, you should have voted for yourself, or someone like yourself if you aren't 35 yet. That would have sent an even better message than the one the candidates got, which was the sound of crickets chirping.

OnyxCougar · 11-04-2004, 09:56 AM

There were other options in many (if not all) states. You could have voted for them, and sent a signal that there ARE other options then Republican or Democrat. Maybe in 4 years other party candidates will be able to be in the debates. I blame the media for not presenting us with all the options. There were more than two choices!! If 20 million people voted for "other", that would say something.

Troubleshooter · 11-04-2004, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

There were other options in many (if not all) states. You could have voted for them, and sent a signal that there ARE other options then Republican or Democrat. Maybe in 4 years other party candidates will be able to be in the debates. I blame the media for not presenting us with all the options. There were more than two choices!! If 20 million people voted for "other", that would say something.

That would imply that any of them meet with approval as well.

There are no worthy candidates at that level.

Bullitt · 11-04-2004, 11:40 AM

I would have had to vote through an absentee ballot since I am currently attending college out of my home county. Thus, I had no such option to write someone in, and my only options on the ballot were Bush or Kerry.

wolf · 11-04-2004, 11:51 AM

You can also register to vote using your college campus address. You'll be a resident of that town for a total of four years, and you will be impacted by local (off campus) politics.

I did that in college, as did many of my friends who lived on campus, although my first ever presidential race vote was cast by absentee ballot.

11-03-2004, 02:57 PM	#1
Troubleshooter The urban Jane Goodall Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Florida Posts: 3,012	Not Voting and Proud http://www.reason.com/hod/bmd110204.shtml Read the whole thing on the link. Not Voting and Proud Don't throw away your life; throw away your vote Brian Doherty Today, I'm joining a near majority of eligible voters in expressing our deepest values and thoughts regarding the choices presented us in our democracy: by not voting. Since 1976, only once have more than 55 percent of eligible voters voted—and in 1996 fewer than 50 percent did. Although many, almost most, of us do it, there are always voices attempting to shame us about not voting. If we fail to exercise the franchise, the Statue of Liberty will shed one fat tear, or P. Diddy will kill us. But the non-voting should not skulk in the shadows. We have solid, well-nigh unimpeachable reasons for the choice we refuse to make on election day. __________________ I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law. - Aristotle

11-03-2004, 03:14 PM	#2
Cyber Wolf As stable as a ring of PU-239 Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: On a huge rock covered in water, highly advanced moss and 7 billion parasites Posts: 1,264	Yah, but the problem is you have to take what the ones who DO vote give you and you'll have to make do with a leader that's reflects what THEY want, whether you also want it or not. __________________ "I don't see what's so triffic about creating people as people and then getting' upset 'cos they act like people." ~Adam Young, Good Omens "I don't see why it matters what is written. Not when it's about people. It can always be crossed out." ~Adam Young, Good Omens

11-03-2004, 03:16 PM	#3
iamthewalrus109 High Propagandist Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 111	While your at it, stop blogging too So why bother doing anything then. Not participating without advocating anything less then the violent overthrow of this government is whisitling dixie. What does that say? Absoulutely nothing. You won't vote, but do you pay taxes? Do you like the freedoms you enjoy, or the plentiful goods and services? Don't partake in those either if you don't vote, really why bother being a part of American society, just to have the security and the riches it enjoys, but none of the responsiblity? I ask you. -Walrus

11-03-2004, 03:17 PM	#4
Troubleshooter The urban Jane Goodall Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Florida Posts: 3,012	There wasn't enough difference between the two viable candidates to merit voting for one or the other. Lose lose situation. __________________ I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law. - Aristotle

11-03-2004, 04:05 PM	#6
Bullitt This is a fully functional babe lair Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Akron, OH Posts: 2,324	I personally thought it was hilarious that even though P-Diddy threatened to kills us, my age group (18-24) came out in the EXACT same percentage to vote as in 2000. Maybe us youngins aren't as dumb as some would have you think.... __________________ Kiss my white Irish ass.

11-03-2004, 04:37 PM	#8
breakingnews Q_Q Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: somewhere in between Posts: 995	I have been thinking long and hard about this issue for a couple days now. I was undecided about the two major candidates (and still am, regardless of Bush winning), and told friends that I contemplated withholding my vote for the lack of a compelling reason to cast a ballot for either. I offered voting for Nader as an alternative, but was rebutted by, "What's the point of that?" I was told, "It's your duty as a citizen," and later that I should vote because I need to "exercise [my] right to vote." Is it not also my choice whether I want to add a share to Bush's or Kerry's tally? If I disapprove of both candidates, can you tell me a reason, as one friend suggested, why I should just vote for one of them on a whim? If the voting proportion was much larger, like 99%, the abstention of votes would have a much greater impact - sends a strong indication of disapproval all around. Given the current circumstances, it wouldn't be such a big deal. Instead, a larger voter turn-out signals that more Americans - apparently - care about who will be president (though it's really a contest of getting someone out of office, IMO). What I wonder is how many of those votes came from fair weather fans or voters who are riding on the bandwagon. I believe that as a citizen, I carry the obligation of gaining a detailed knowledge of current events and developing a stance on the issues at stake in the election. I'm sure there are lots of people who read up and understand what is going on, or naively take a stance based on strong interpersonal, family or moral choices. For the rest of America, though, it's all about reigning in voters with whatever you can: scare tactics, pandering to special interests, biased research. I am surprised that even among my friends, who are well educated and come from middle/upper-class families, there are quite a few who speak to one side of an issue but have NO effin' clue about what the other half thinks. That concerns me - while it's probably not true for the majority (or is it?), I have a feeling some of these voters are pulling levers because their friends say to do so. Perhaps that's a reason our democracy is absurd. The Declaration and the Constitution were developed at a time when politics ruled the land down to the very seat of the pants the early Americans wore. These days, you could largely go about your ways without even the slightest thought of making political choices. Why does everything have to be political, anyway? The fundamentals of this country are a little ridiculous. I did, in fact, cast a vote for Mr. Nader. I was torn between my smelly Republican uppercrust parents (I can discuss that later - very good issue) and my super-Democratic friends. Initially I leaned in W.'s favor, because I felt more of an allegiance to my family and their stance than that of my friend's. This way, I did my part as a citizen while essentially doing nothing. Saves me the trouble of explaining why I wouldn't vote. (Anyway, Kerry won both NJ and NY, the two places I had the choice of voting.)

11-04-2004, 09:56 AM	#11
OnyxCougar Junior Master Dwellar Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Kingdom of Atlantia Posts: 2,979	There were other options in many (if not all) states. You could have voted for them, and sent a signal that there ARE other options then Republican or Democrat. Maybe in 4 years other party candidates will be able to be in the debates. I blame the media for not presenting us with all the options. There were more than two choices!! If 20 million people voted for "other", that would say something. __________________ Impotentes defendere libertatem non possunt. "Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth." ~Franklin D. Roosevelt

11-04-2004, 11:40 AM	#13
Bullitt This is a fully functional babe lair Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Akron, OH Posts: 2,324	I would have had to vote through an absentee ballot since I am currently attending college out of my home county. Thus, I had no such option to write someone in, and my only options on the ballot were Bush or Kerry. __________________ Kiss my white Irish ass.

11-04-2004, 11:51 AM	#14
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	You can also register to vote using your college campus address. You'll be a resident of that town for a total of four years, and you will be impacted by local (off campus) politics. I did that in college, as did many of my friends who lived on campus, although my first ever presidential race vote was cast by absentee ballot. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)