Of course you can complain even if you don’t vote. Especially if you Don’t vote, after all it can’t be your fault whoever wins.
I vote FOR people, if I can’t find someone to vote FOR, I stay home.
It’s simple math- if you don’t vote, you helped create whatever situation we come up with as much as anyone else who did vote.
And if you’re educated enough to realize that both [sic] candidates are unelectable, then you’re also bright enough to figure out who, out of the 301,139,947 people in this country is worth your vote, and to do so accordingly.
Non-voting would be a statement if it were rare. But as it stands, there’s a lot of lazy-ass fucks in this country, and like it or not, they are who you stand with when you don’t vote.
If you don’t want to vote, fine, but don’t try to justify not doing your homework as some noble statement.
How about this…
If no one voted this broken system would have to change.
I think that if anyone saw the total BS that goes on behind the scenes of a campaign then they would be less likely to vote not more.
When your choices arre cardboard cut outs (I’m speaking of the recent Ontario election in which I did not participate) then I feel it is my right not to vote.
I hate candidates who whine about low voter turn outs. That’s the same as companies whining about people not buying their products.
Why don’t people vote? Look at the product. It’s not hard to figure out.
One man could have made sure Gore got in rather than Bush. That was none other than Ralph Nader.
My wife and I are supervoters. We vote in every local, state and federal election. We live in a state that is blood red; communist red; hemmorhoid red, if you will. Yet we vote. Our national vote is nearly meaningless in a state this far to the right, yet we continue to tilt against the windmill. Our state votes are nearly as hopeless, as our district is screamingly red, yet we continue to bang our heads against that wall.
The glimmer of hope are our local elections, and while they can be terribly frustrating, occasionally something good happens. And it happens by the slimmest of margins. Our present mayor ran against an entrenched Republican machine that had nearly destroyed this city over the previous 20 years. I very nearly didn’t vote, because I thought ‘what’s the use?’. But I dragged myself to the polling place and exercised my right once again. And he won. By a 17-vote plurality. That one instance of seeing that voting can make a difference re-affirmed the idea in my head that it’s vital to do so.
Vote, don’t vote. It’s up to you. But voting is a habit, a routine (like exercise), and once you stop, inertia settles in, and that’s what the worst elements of our politicians hope for: a disenfranchised public that doesn’t vote.
The funniest thing about this election is listening to the Wingnuts talk about how Obama is so far left he’s the American Hugo Chavez, and listening to Moonbats talk about how he’s not a real liberal.
I have two simple rules when it comes to politics:
-
If you voted for the guy in office, it’s your fault, so you have no right to complain UNLESS he is doing something contrary to what he promised.
-
If you didn’t vote, you made no effort to put someone else into the office who would do a better job, so all you’re doing is moaning and not doing anything to change it.
In both cases, you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.
So far this year, I’ve talked to SO many people who have said things like this: “Man, I’m more socially liberal than the Republicans, and more fiscally conservative than the Democrats but…” either “…I can’t stand the Republicans’ stance on [random social issue] so I HAVE to vote Democrat.” or “…I can’t stand the Democrats’ stance on [random fiscal issue] so I HAVE to vote Republican.” If I even elude at voting for a third party, people look at me like I’m some lunatic throwing my vote away.
I can’t vote for McCain, Obama, or Hillary because I just can’t agree with any of their political views enough to think any of them will do a particularly good job as president (and I won’t say why, since I don’t want to hijack the thread). So what are my options?
-
Don’t vote as a conscientious objector. BAD IDEA! You just show up as another random non-voter. Did you fail to vote because you’re too busy? Maybe you were too lazy? Maybe you forgot? Maybe you don’t like the candidates? Who knows? You’re doing nothing to help, and you’re perpetuating the two party system to be apathetic to your views.
-
Vote, but throw it away on a Mickey Mouse or such vote. Better, but still a bad idea. At least you made a statement that you’re unhappy with both parties. You didn’t say anything about WHY you’re upset, but maybe the parties would see if a large enough number of people voted like this and try to figure out why?
-
Vote for the third party that most closely reflects your concerns. This is what I do and will continue to do until one of the major parties puts up someone worth voting for. Not only do I make a point of stating I’m upset with the major parties, but by picking a particular third party, I’m making a point about which issues are important to me and WHY I’m not voting for a major party.
If enough people took the third approach, maybe we’d actually see some changes in the political system. Do I ever actually expect the third party to win? No. But if they gain enough votes, the major candidates will have to take a look at those issues and reevaluate their stances. Say the Libertarian party gets 5-6% of the vote (highly unlikely, of course); the Republicans and, to some extent, the Democrats would need to evaluate the stances of the party and see how they can attract people to their party based on the reasons they voted Libertarian. Same for another third party, like the Green Party; if they start to gain a number of votes, maybe it means the major parties need to reconsider some of their environmental stances to improve their voter turn out.
Bottom line, if you’re not voting, you’re part of the problem. Not voting isn’t a statement, it’s definitively a non-statement. If the candidates aren’t liberal enough, or aren’t conservative enough, or aren’t environmentally friendly enough, or aren’t religious enough, or aren’t socialist enough, or whatever, there’s a party out there that you CAN vote for and at least make SOME kind of statement, no matter how small it actually is.
So far, I don’t think anyone has taken that position.
If you interpret voting as a statement, I agree, not voting is an ineffective protest. But it’s not necessarily a protest.
Recently, I made noises about abandoning the Democratic Party, but I knew I was full of shite, and I stayed.
My town is predominantly Republican, but I vote every time. And I’ll continue todo so.
I think that’s precisely what makes it a shitty protest.
Back in the 1968 election, I felt that there was no choice between the two candidates (Humphrey and Nixon), that neither one represented my views, and so I basically threw away my vote. I, and many thousands of (at the time) young students. I was wrong, dead wrong. There was a difference between the two candidates. Just because we don’t have the candidate we want, doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t pick between those we have.
I think this is faulty reasoning, and especially so this year. If the polls show that one candidate is a sho-in for your region, and that candidates’ supporters don’t bother to show up, but all the opposition does show up… guess what? The polls will be wrong, and you’ll have an over-turn/upset of expectations. It’s happened before and it will happen again.
Frankly, when I vote, I have a brief feeling of euphoria, like I actually do have some say in government (especially local government)… of course, it’s gone within minutes when I’m out of the polling place and back in the real world, but still.
Fair enough, but based on the language and tone of the OP and the fact that he’s stating he won’t vote implies to me that it is a protest. If you’re too busy to vote, FOA, how would you know 8 1/2 months ahead of time and why would you use that language? If he forgot, well, then the thread makes no sense. If he doesn’t care, again, the thread makes no sense because of the language and the tone. I really can’t see any reason besides a protest. Am I incorrect in my analysis of the OP’s motivation?
You shouldn’t vote if you view it as a waste of time. The idea that some idiots want to shame you into doing it should be irrelevant to the decision making process. If you don’t want to vote for any of the candidates don’t vote.
Monstro is right though. You should definitely vote in local elections. The home seized by eminent domain, may be yours.
Right. And if it’s not a protest in the first place, the fact that it would be a bad protest doesn’t matter.
Excellent point. Even as recently as 2000, I remember hearing lots of outcries on the west coast that people didn’t bother to vote because it was clear that Gore had already won. Whether it potentially cost him or Bush votes, who knows. Even worse was Florida, where many of the news stations were calling the state for Gore when several districts in the pan handle (mostly Republican districts, IIRC) hadn’t closed yet. Is it possible that that some late voters got disenfranchised and didn’t show up making Florida much closer than it should have been?
Especially if you’re voting for a major party candidate, it’s almost always necessary to show up, even if you think your guy will win or lose anyway, because it won’t take a whole lot of people to think that to potentially change the election.
This is silly. If you’re not voting, you are not part of the problem; you are also not part of the solution. You’re a bystander.
Do the math. As most of us aren’t senators or whatever, positions we vote for do not have to get a specific number of votes to win, they have to get a certain percentage of votes to win. If you don’t vote, the calculations are adjusted to write you out of the equation entirely. You’re not part of the ‘solution’, you’re not part of the ‘problem’, you’re not part of anyone’s victory. Obviously.
To claim non-voters as part of the “problem” is to make stupid assumptions. The first stupid assumption is that the non-voters would have voted the way you wanted them to. The best argument I see here for a current disaffected voter to vote would have them voting for a third party candidate, which wouldn’t have done diddly to solve your “problem”, since votes for such candidates have no effect whatsoever on the outcome of the election in question.
The second stupid assumption is that everyone lives in a purple state. I live in a blood red state, and didn’t vote against Bush either time. What would have happened if I had? I certainly wouldn’t have tipped the balance in my state any; even if I had voted for the Democrat’s candidate each time, and gotten fifty other people to do the same, it would have made no difference whatsoever. It’s a waste of time. Ergo, it’s stupid to complain that I didn’t.
It’s also stupid to say that only by voting do I “earn” the right to complain. Non-voting has no different effect on the outcome than voting for a third party or voting for the winner. But is the statement “You only have a right to complain if you voted for the primary opposition”? No, it’s strictly about voting/nonvoting. That’s because the silly cliche is all about pretending that the mere act of voting is something inherently noble, and nothing to do with anything relating to the actual real world.
Based on the quality of candidates in some races I wish they would offer a None of the above type option.
The tricky part is what to do if None starts to win, time after time.
True.
You’re probably correct for the OP, but he can speak for himself when he gets back from China or Cuba. Since there were several comments about non-voters in general and not voting, I was looking at the topic in a more general way. My point is this: acting in accordance with your beliefs is not the same as protesting. The goal of a protest is to demonstrate your opinion to convince someone else to take your side. But conscientious non-voting doesn’t have to be a protest.
Ok, first time at trying to insert a quote so here goes.
Pick another slate and have a go at it again.
Or, let the dopers make the decision.