posted
If you vote, you are agreeing to abide by the decision of the majority.
If you don't vote, you are agreeing to no such thing.
If 10 other people tell me, "We're going to vote on whether you give us all your stuff," I'm not going to participate. If I vote, and I lose, I am then bound to hand over my stuff.
If I don't vote, they are just stealing. I can hand over my stuff through threat of violence, or refuse, fight, possibly get beat up and robbed anyway, but either way at least I didn't agree to the process.
Posts: 454 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then choose to vote for whoever you want, you can always write in a candidate.
If you don't like who the major candidates are, then pick someone else, but that excuse strikes me as a cop-out.
Besides, you can vote for a major candidate and still reserve the right to protest. You aren't signing away your rights by voting, you're exercising them.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wish they would make Election Day- at least, the day of the presidential election- a holiday.
My ballot is mailed to me; I have very little excuse for not casting a ballot. If I had to give up my lunch hour, stand in a long line, and possibly get harrassed by police or by agitators for a candidate, I can certainly see wondering if it was worth the bother.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:You can call it lazy, I call it smart. Maybe it makes you feel an important part of the process to think your one vote counts. Until you can show me one vote counting, I simply don't believe it. May as well throw one grain of rice off your plate and pretend you've done something to lose weight.
What bothers me more than the laziness is the implication that your time is worth more than the time of those whom you try to get to vote.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sterling: I wish they would make Election Day- at least, the day of the presidential election- a holiday.
My ballot is mailed to me; I have very little excuse for not casting a ballot. If I had to give up my lunch hour, stand in a long line, and possibly get harrassed by police or by agitators for a candidate, I can certainly see wondering if it was worth the bother.
I agree about making it a holiday.
Where do you get harrassed like that? Are you voting from Jalalabad?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: You can call it lazy, I call it smart. Maybe it makes you feel an important part of the process to think your one vote counts. Until you can show me one vote counting, I simply don't believe it. May as well throw one grain of rice off your plate and pretend you've done something to lose weight.
It happens, but it is rare. From a Snopes article debunking many of the popular (and incorrect) one-vote claims:
quote: In 1839, Marcus "Landslide" Morton was indeed elected governor of Massachusetts by one vote. Of the 102,066 votes cast by the good people of that state, he received exactly 51,034. Had his count been 51,033, the election would have been thrown into the Legislature, where he probably would not have won.
"Landslide" also made the record books in 1842 when he won the same office again by one vote, this time in the Legislature. (In those days, Massachusetts governors were elected for terms of one year.)
posted
I always vote. The way things are set up here, campaign funding amounts are calculated based on the number of votes in the preceding election. So if I vote Tory, and the riding goes to the NDP, my vote will count the next time around. The Tories will receive that bit more of funding. It's not huge or dramatic, but it IS a measurable thing. My vote DOES make a difference.
Once or twice I have voted for a candidate I knew had no chance of winning. Why? Because it's MY vote, and MY voice, and I will darn well say what I want with it. Even though the candidate doesn't win, I've still spoken and been counted. And to me, that has value in itself.
Posts: 2849 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Eaquae Legit: Why? Because it's MY vote, and MY voice, and I will darn well say what I want with it. Even though the candidate doesn't win, I've still spoken and been counted. And to me, that has value in itself.
quote:Originally posted by Sterling: I wish they would make Election Day- at least, the day of the presidential election- a holiday.
My ballot is mailed to me; I have very little excuse for not casting a ballot. If I had to give up my lunch hour, stand in a long line, and possibly get harrassed by police or by agitators for a candidate, I can certainly see wondering if it was worth the bother.
I agree about making it a holiday.
Where do you get harrassed like that? Are you voting from Jalalabad?
I don't- because I don't have to go to a polling place to cast my ballot. I can mail it in.
But I've heard some pretty grim stories from other states (never mind other countries- the struggles some people have to cast a ballot in some other countries could easily fill several topics by themselves.)
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Once or twice I have voted for a candidate I knew had no chance of winning. Why? Because it's MY vote, and MY voice, and I will darn well say what I want with it.
Darn tootin. I voted Libertarian in the Governor's race since the big two seemed to be campaigning on a platform of how much or little they intended to be like Jeb. (Christ claimed he'd be like Jeb. Not seeing it so far.)
I figured my vote would be a reminder to the GOP that some of us still believe in the old school platform of the party: more local control, less interference. They might be taking that too far with the property tax cuts, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AvidReader: I figured my vote would be a reminder to the GOP that some of us still believe in the old school platform of the party: more local control, less interference.
A much bigger reminder would be to get involved. Start going to your local party meetings every week or month or whatever. If you really want to make difference, take Thomas Jefferson's advice: "show up early and bring a pen." That way you're always made secretary of the meeting, because nobody else wants to write stuff down. There you are--instant influence.
I feel your pain with the Republicans--they are forgetting their roots, lately. It's up to us to remind them, and to do so in an active manner.
Posts: 82 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:I figured my vote would be a reminder to the GOP that some of us still believe in the old school platform of the party: more local control, less interference.
It's worth pointing out that "old-school" here means "since about 1968."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: What bothers me more than the laziness is the implication that your time is worth more than the time of those whom you try to get to vote.
You seem to be of the opinion that voting is a good thing for people to do. If I'm encouraging others to vote, am I not doing them a favor? I don't imagine you would be upset if I had a voting drive in my neighborhood and put up fliers reminding people when voting day is and where the nearest polling place is located.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:If I'm encouraging others to vote, am I not doing them a favor?
You obviously don't think so, or else you'd take your own medicine.
Either you think your time is worth more that that of the people you try to get to vote, or you're trying to get them to do something that you think is not in their best interest. Neither option speaks well of you.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: You obviously don't think so, or else you'd take your own medicine.
Either you think your time is worth more that that of the people you try to get to vote, or you're trying to get them to do something that you think is not in their best interest. Neither option speaks well of you.
You're pretty dang judgmental about your interpretation of my motivations - how does that speak for you?
If I'm not willing to spend my time voting, and someone else is, then they obviously feel that their time voting is well spent, and I feel that my time voting is not well spent. If don't like eggplant, and someone else does, and I tell them about the all-you-can-eat eggplant buffet down the street, does that mean I'm a stuck up jerk?
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh:
quote:One vote is statistically worthless.
What a bunch of nonsense. A few hundred people in Florida a few years back disagree.
I guess in your math 1 = 100.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
If we're really going to examine this statistically, in a population of hundreds of millions, approximately five-hundred people is much, much LESS than 1%.
But it doesn't seem you're truly interested in examining this 'statistically', otherwise you would've noticed that already. <1% of the population of the United States was decisive in determing the President of the United States, less than ten years ago. Statistically, that's pretty compelling information that means that yes, in fact, even single votes count.
Single votes even count in so-called 'useless' elections, mostly because of people like yourself-how do you think that certain elections are deemed uncontested? Certainly a portion of that decision must result from people like you who give up before the election is even held, and don't vote.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're not getting the point of what I'm saying. I've already said that a few hundred people could make a difference. Unfortunately, when I go to the poling place I don't get 200 votes. I know exactly how much my vote is worth: 1 vote.
Tell me honestly. Do you think that any national, or statewide election in our lifetime is ever going to be decided by one vote? Because if not, my one vote will NEVER make a difference in any of those elections.
I honestly don't understand what's so hard about the concept. It's really quite simple math. Here are the election results from the 2006 California gubernatorial election (from Wikipedia):
Arnold Schwarzenegger 4,850,157 Phil Angelides 3,376,733 Peter Camejo 205,995 Art Olivier 114,329 Janice Jordan 69,934 Edward C. Noonan 61,901
Now help me out here, how should I have voted to change the outcome of that election?
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:If I'm not willing to spend my time voting, and someone else is, then they obviously feel that their time voting is well spent, and I feel that my time voting is not well spent.
But you said that you encourage people to go out and vote. You are trying to get people do to something which is in your best interest, but which you believe is against their best interest.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure why you think I believe voting is against anyone's best interest. One vote has no real power. A lot of votes can. I'm attempting to empower a group of people, by making their collective group of votes meaningful, where one would not be.
If any one person in the group doesn't want to vote, I'm fine with that. It makes sense, in fact! It's only as a group that they can make a difference. Heck, that's the entire point behind a party system. A whole group of people work together to put their candidate into office or get their measure passed.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:I honestly don't understand what's so hard about the concept. It's really quite simple math.
How can that possibly be, though? If everyone felt like you, where would we be? You're not an island, MightyCow. By the curious logic you're using, people shouldn't get an education and obtain better employment, because right now, this very instant, it's not going to make a difference and in fact cost time and money.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm not sure why you think I believe voting is against anyone's best interest. One vote has no real power. A lot of votes can. I'm attempting to empower a group of people, by making their collective group of votes meaningful, where one would not be.
It's like there's a disconnect here. Don't you see the absolutely critical link between 'a lot of votes' and 'one vote'? You literally cannot have one without the other.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obviously you can, because 'lots of people' voted in the last California gubernatorial election, and I didn't.
I have to share a secret with you though. If you look up the numbers on the post I made above with the vote count, I added one vote to the runner up. It's just as though I voted for him.
You didn't even notice, did you.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:So you agree with me. I need to convince more people to vote.
Which candidate should I have voted for there to change the election? You seem to have forgotten to answer.
Are you really equating my vote to an education? How is my one vote going to benefit me later?
Of course I don't agree with you. I didn't forget to answer, your question was specious. And becomes even more absurd when you examine state and local elections, wherein individual votes hold proportionally more power. Especially in local elections. Or are you suggesting that the elections you listed were the only elections?
Yes, I'm equating your lack of voting to an education. You ask, "Why should I vote? This little bit of input I have right now is infinitesimal, it makes no difference in and of itself in the grand scheme of things."
Well, then. Why get an education? On any one given school day (election), your hour's note-taking (vote) won't make any serious impact on achieving your degree (election victory) when compared to the scores and scores or even hundreds and hundreds of credit hours (total votes) you need to succeed.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Are you really equating my vote to an education? How is my one vote going to benefit me later?
It benefits you later in precisely the same way that one single vote benefits you later-by putting you incrementally closer to your goal, be it an 'A', or your candidate winning the election.
quote:I have to share a secret with you though. If you look up the numbers on the post I made above with the vote count, I added one vote to the runner up. It's just as though I voted for him.
You didn't even notice, did you.
Oh, very clever. So go to a guy who's just finished a doctorate, and have him just take a few pages out of the reams of notes he's written. You wouldn't even notice, would you? And if you can't notice, clearly it doesn't make any REAL difference!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your analogy is completely meaningless. I don't get to add up my lifetime votes and apply them all at once.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
*laugh* It's not completely meaningless at all. Each vote you make, it's putting your goal one step-no matter how small-closer to achievement.
This conversation is ridiculous. You can use whatever lazy justification you'd like for dodging your responsibilities as a citizen, but it simply doesn't wash. Just because something cannot be decisively affected by you personally doesn't mean it's not worth doing. Fortunately, not everyone feels like you do, otherwise we'd be in big trouble.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: I have to share a secret with you though. If you look up the numbers on the post I made above with the vote count, I added one vote to the runner up. It's just as though I voted for him.
posted
OK, you vote for a purpose, a goal, right rollainm? To get the candidate you desire into office govern and represent you.
Every time you make your voice heard directly-through the only utterly direct means we have in our system-you are affecting the outcome of that election, which in turn affects the outcome of future elections, and makes it more likely-even by a small amount-each time that your goal is attained, either in the present or in the future.
posted
I don't see how that follows Rakeesh. Are you suggesting that because 3.3 million people voted for Phil Angelides in 2006, he's one step closer to being Governor?
Besides, I might vote differently each time I vote, ending up in no net gain. Say I really liked the republican candidate one election, but the democratic candidate the next election. Does that mean those votes each furthered some sort of imaginary future event a tiny amount, but offset each other?
I really don't get the education analogy at all. It makes zero sense to me. Each election is an individual outcome. My vote always counts the same, no matter how many times I vote.
In fact, it sounds like you're suggesting that if I vote, it might encourage other people to vote in a similar manner in the future. That's the only way I can make sense of your "small amount increase" theory.
How is that fundamentally different from my explicitly encouraging others to vote?
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:In fact, it sounds like you're suggesting that if I vote, it might encourage other people to vote in a similar manner in the future. That's the only way I can make sense of your "small amount increase" theory.
Because talk is cheap, and you should practice what you preach. Otherwise, you're just being lazy. Why the hell should I (playing the role of the apathetic voter) waste my time voting if you're too busy to as well? It totally undermines the entire argument you're supposedly making.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Like I stated earlier in this thread, I vote out of principle, not necessarily for the purpose of making an impact. At least, this is my thinking as a Georgia resident. Perhaps I'd feel more like you do if I lived in a swing state, or even if the majority party here wasn't so overwhelming.
But here, I make no claims to the effectiveness of my vote. And I'm not convinced of the accuracy of your claim that my vote does in fact have a meaningful impact. It's a great optimistic approach that I'll grant would be effective on a larger scale. If an increasing amount of people casting similar votes felt this way, then sure, there would be change. But you can't say with certainty that my single vote will have any meaningful effect in one single election or in the next 50.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because when it comes right down to it, I can't practically justify WHY I vote. To be totally blunt, my reason for voting is purely selfish. It accomplishes nothing in the real world. I assume that's precisely why MC doesn't vote himself (correct me if I'm wrong).
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually do vote in local elections, because I believe that there is a tiny yet real chance that my vote could make a difference.
I make my voice heard by writing letters, discussing important issues with people, supporting causes I believe in.
How about this Rakeesh, I vote in my mind out of principle. It's like I voted, because I'm being principled, and it's also like I voted because my thinking about Phil Angeledes winning has exactly the same effect as me voting for him.
[edit to add] rollainm: I want a real say in the political process. I believe that's the goal of democracy, that's what our country is all about, that everyone gets a say.
That probably worked great when there were very few people, but with millions voting, one vote becomes statistically meaningless. If I still want to make my voice meaningful, I need to work harder. I need to do more than just push a button and pretend I made a real difference.
If you look at it that way, I'm the one being a responsible member of society. What I'm doing might actually change the outcome of an election. Making a couple scratches on an absentee ballot is really just making yourself feel better.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I'm not driving people to the voting place and putting them in line, but I don't want to physically force people to vote, I want to change their minds so that society changes, and so that perhaps they vote differently than they would have.
I do actually get together with groups of people before local elections, and we go over the issues, and I make my points about why I'm voting for specific issues, and why I think they should do so also.
I get further removed from the process by supporting groups who are for or against specific issues, and those groups try to convince people to vote as they (and I) believe. The further away from the individual process of voting, the more people you might influence.
I believe it's sometimes referred to as Grass Roots. I call it "I don't vote, but hopefully I can convince other people to." Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you look at it that way, I'm the one being a responsible member of society. What I'm doing might actually change the outcome of an election. Making a couple scratches on an absentee ballot is really just making yourself feel better.
For me to truly buy into your argument, you'd be doing both. The way to maximize your impact would be to try to convince large groups of people towards your ideals, and take the principled step of voting yourself-both for the tangible impact it has, and to help persuade others.
Grass Roots don't include not voting. But at least you vote SOMETIMES.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
It seems to me MC is far less "lazy" than the person who consistently votes against the majority in every election, but who never speaks up, discusses the issues, or even tells others why he voted for who or what. It's a different approach, for sure, but hardly lazy or even hypocritical in my opinion.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:...your hour's note-taking (vote) won't make any serious impact on achieving your degree (election victory)...
And that's why I skipped a lot of class. At some points though there's a good enough chance of an hour's work being the difference between honour roll or not that it makes sense to get out of bed. The same isn't true of voting. To make this fit to a national election, add in that you're only legally allowed to contribute about one second's worth of work and the rest has been assigned to millions of other people. I'd probably show up for the novelty or vague feeling that I'm Doing My Bit, but it's not like I'd be making a meaningful impact on the degree.
quote:If everyone felt like you, where would we be?
The value of votes would rise until he started occasionally voting, I'd guess.
Posts: 148 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
My confusion with MC's argument is that he seems to be defining "voting" and "speaking out" as mutually exclusive tasks... but they aren't. Voting is something that will take a few minutes, a couple of hours at most if turnout is extraordinarily good, out of one day every two years. Speaking out is something you can do every day, for as long as you want.
MC argues that his vote is irrelevant because its effect on the aggregate result is insignificant. But the amount of time spent waiting in line to vote, versus the amount of time available for "speaking out" outside of election day, is similarly insignificant. During the brief time you could have spent ensuring that one vote matches your exact preferences, do you really think you'll make a larger impact elsewhere? Are the other 729 days' worth of speaking out in that election cycle insufficient, so that you need just one more day to really make a difference?
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Voting is something that will take a few minutes, a couple of hours at most if turnout is extraordinarily good, out of one day every two years."
It took me nearly four hours in '04. Had I not had the day off, I wouldn't have had time.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
