Who did YOU vote for

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

I really hate that word, empowerment. People make it sound like talisman or shouting SHAZAM or something.

I'm of the opinion that by the time someone has reached the level where they can stand even the slightest chance of effectiveness in politics that they are beholden to so many other interests that they are no longer doing their job. Do you honestly believe that Bush was innocent of favoring the oil interests? Do you really think that Kerry would have been able to overcome Congress? Do you truly feel that a self-professed man of faith is going to cut any other truly divergent denominations any slack? Do you believe that anyone elected president in this day and age has much say in what that actually do?

Well, you are welcome to hate the word "empowerment" if you wish. It has gathered a rather touchy-feeling connotation of late, but it is my personal belief that the concept is still valid for all that.

I am no child. I understand all the stuff about wealth and power and national politics. Any candidate from either of the two mainstream parties who attains the presidential office will have sold most if not all of his soul long before. However, a Republican president is going to pull the nation toward one set of values while a Democratic president is going to be a force in the opposite direction on many questions. Look at the impact a minority group of voters - the religous right - has had upon the Republican party. Believe me, you are going to see more faith backed iniatives make headway in the coming four years than we ever have before. If you and your coherts had gone out and voted for the Greens or the Libertarians in the same way the religous right has gone out and voted, your voice would be heard on the national scene today just like theirs will be heard.

[warch]

One other thing, you sound only willing to act for change when you know its a sure thing, when there is critical mass. So you follow, eventually, rather than lead.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by warch

One other thing, you sound only willing to act for change when you know its a sure thing, when there is critical mass. So you follow, eventually, rather than lead.

It depends on what is being followed. Everyone follows someone or something eventually, but the higher the standard the shorter the list you follow and the longer the list behind.

[lookout123]

i voted for Bush for the POTUS slot. i voted for every L,I,D for the rest of the spots.

[flippant]

I knew someone that wrote in Abraham Lincoln. Don't forget to vote locally. Your vote does count.

[warch]

I believe in democracy. I also believe that our current system is broken. The people who are empowered to fix it at the moment are pretty easily convinced of what they should think.

You used the word empowered here- so those people are the voters? or the elected politicians? I argue that you cant clearly believe in democracy because the one precious thing that defines it, an individual's vote, you dont understand the value in casting for its own sake, not only if you can get what you want.

I'm also of the opinion that things won't get fixed until they break a little more.

So things need to get worse. Less people need to participate. And this passivity will serve to break the system...more, or to a certain level. That dysfunction will then signal enlightenment and the moment to strike. Particpation will then, at that moment, be ok? What if you still lose? Thats the risk with a vote.

Sorry, I aint got that kinda time or timing. And I am more of a realist. Yes its hard. Its never going to be perfect, but it will only get better if you actually decide do something and participate. Think Local. Its not just about candidates. You can help vote down that local tax levy you dont want to pay. You may lose, but you can try. You can vote for a city council that responds to your issues or let others pick em. Find a candidate, build one, become one. That is the mess of democracy. Youre in it or youre not.

But in a pinch, to vote none, you take a pen and write n-o-n-e. and if faced with a touchscreen I'm guessing there must be a way to handle write ins. And a little old lady from your neighborhood, probably from the league of women voters, will handle your ballot with the utmost care, like a precious gift, because she too believes in democracy. Your dissent or approval will be recorded, and someone with a name on the ballot that you did not vote for will win. But losing voter, you have believed in democracy enough, valued it enough, to be counted even as one.

Hey Trouble, dont mean to attack you so personally, I've read enough to know that youre frustrated and sincerely want candidates you value and desire reforms in the power structure. I totally understand and respect that. What I will never get is your rationale for passivity, strategic or otherwise.

Again, I am in agreement with Warch. This was not only a National election, but a local one, as well, and on the local level a single individual can make an impact. Just an example: Last year the city council of my town had voted to outsource the local police and fire dispatch center to the great metropolitan area which adjoins us to the east. Many people in my town were upset about this. I was one of them. I put out a flyer about this issue and distributed it all over town. At the next city council meeting, there was an overflow of citizen attendees, many waving my flyer. Some even came up to shake my hand when they found out that I was the author. The City Fathers ended up recinding their decision. So you see, even one person CAN make a difference if they care to try.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by marichiko

The City Fathers ended up recinding their decision. So you see, even one person CAN make a difference if they care to try.

On that level, and even the parish (that would be count for you foreigners) level I agree that there can be some impact by an individual vote.

[warch]

Its all connected, even if faintly.