My vote doesn't matter?

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

@John_Mace

If you want to influence the election, voting is not a good way to do it. Better to go door to door advocating for your candidate of choice, or otherwise try in some way to influence others to vote.

So my vote doesn’t matter but the votes that other people cast after being influenced by me, do?

If my vote doesn’t matter, how does theirs?

[HelenGawn]

Does your contribution to charity matter? Recycling? Belonging to social or political groups? Marching for principles you cherish? What makes voting so different that you should be a major game-changer?

[Sherrerd]

@Zetetic_Skeptic

I really like this solution. Give the states more autonomy and shrink the federal government so that it only focuses on those responsibilities originally set out in the Constitution.

Cute, but you had to ignore what I actually said, when mislabeling my post as “this solution”:

@Sherrerd

….The US system accords states far too much power-to-determine-representation at the national level. Let each state run itself–its state and local governments–as it pleases. But there’s no good reason for taking letting the voters of Iowa or Wyoming have such disproportionate power in Washington. Each American voter’s vote should have the same weight, regardless of state of residence.

Amend that Constitution!

Clearly I was arguing for less power for a state to determine national policy, not for more.

The arguments for continuing the current system in which a Wyoming citizen’s vote counts 3.5 times the weight of a New Yorker’s vote, are all quite bad–simply logically fallacious or factually deficient.

And the ‘let’s shrink the federal government’ argument falls rather flat for many Americans right now, as they watch their fellow citizens’ homes being flooded or blown apart or worse.

[Sherrerd]

@HelenGawn

Does your contribution to charity matter? Recycling? Belonging to social or political groups? Marching for principles you cherish? What makes voting so different that you should be a major game-changer?

This is sense.

The ‘your vote doesn’t matter’ claim is nearly always made by people who hope to profit by it–whether it’s a paycheck from the troll-farm manager or a job from the anti-democratic faction of the particular political scene in which the claim is being pushed.

It’s a con. It works by appealing to narcissism and vanity: if I can’t determine the election, why should I participate? And since narcissism and vanity are always in plentiful supply, the con does often work.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Bone

psst - it’s a republic.

It’s also a democracy. Countries can be both.

[Hector_St_Clare]

@HelenGawn

Does your contribution to charity matter? Recycling? Belonging to social or political groups? Marching for principles you cherish? What makes voting so different that you should be a major game-changer?

Your contribution to charity absolutely does matter, since every marginal dollar donate to (say) building wells in Africa, has an additional impact. Same with recycling. Same with (for example) doing a bit to reduce greenhouse gas production. If I donate $300 to a particular charity, that might have a huge impact in a very poor country where the average annual income is only about $300.

Political activities are in a very different category, since democratic politics is a zero sum game where a gain for one party is a loss for their rivals.

[HelenGawn]

@Hector_St_Clare

Your contribution to charity absolutely does matter, since every marginal dollar donate to (say) building wells in Africa, has an additional impact. Same with recycling. Same with (for example) doing a bit to reduce greenhouse gas production. If I donate $300 to a particular charity, that might have a huge impact in a very poor country where the average annual income is only about $300.

Political activities are in a very different category, since democratic politics is a zero sum game where a gain for one party is a loss for their rivals.

I don’t understand. Many worthwhile efforts are a zero-sum game. Reducing greenhouse gas will be a loss for those who benefit from the status quo, even in the short run for donors.

A loss for the rival party is the point of voting, especially for Never-BadPerson voters. It still makes an incremental difference.

[Okrahoma]

@Sherrerd

Clearly I was arguing for less power for a state to determine national policy, not for more.

As long as there is a lot less power for the federal government to determine a state’s policies, I am fine with having less power for a state to determine national policy.

[Zetetic_Skeptic]

@Sherrerd

Cute, but you had to ignore what I actually said, when mislabeling my post as “this solution”:

I’m sorry you took my response as ignoring what you said. I didn’t think I was advocating giving the states more power to determine elections. I thought I was conveying that I agreed with you that states should have less power to determine national elections. My comment was more geared toward the idea that the federal government should stop with the bloat and overreach, shrink back down a bit, and leave the states to their own devices except in those matter laid out in the constitution. Wasn’t trying to be cute.