I’m not saying it’s worthless; I’m saying it’s infinitesimal. You have a non-zero chance of winning the lottery, too, but that doesn’t mean that playing is a productive use of your time.
Along these lines, if the government were serious about increasing voting rates, it would serve snacks at the polling place. Heck, that’s why I give blood.
Not if the party memberships of the abstentions are proportional to the overall electorate.
And lotteries are won every day. Still, buying a lottery ticket is not a rational decision.
But by voting, you might influence others to vote. That’s my motivation – that by voting, and encouraging people to vote, and talking about voting, and wearing the “I voted” button, I might influence others to vote if they wouldn’t have.
Don’t forget that Voting is irrational!
Dopers know that spending $1 on a lottery ticket with 1 chance in 50,000 to win is “irrational” unless the prize is more than $50,000. Yet simple mathematics demonstrates that voting is more irrational than buying a lottery ticket!
What is the cost of voting? Factoring in gasoline, waste of time, etc. the cost is probably much more than $1 but let’s call it $1 for simplicity. (We need to subtract from this any entertainment value, and the emotional value of fulfilling one’s “duty” but these can be considered “irrational” rewards.)
Now, what is the value of voting? If a close friend or relative is running for a local office in a close race, a vote might be worthwhile, but in a more typical case there will be just a single close race you care about, probably for Senate or House. Take Colorado 2014 for example. The race for Senate was “close” but the chance a given vote would have made a difference can be shown to be 1 in 50,000 or less. To justify spending the $1, the value to you of swinging the race would have to be at least $50,000.
How many Coloradans who wasted $1 of their time voting for Udall would have been willing to spend $50,000 if, in some hypothetical, that let them swing the election?
An unlikely assumption. This is one reason measures involving issues like gay rights find their way to the ballot – to affect turnout that will affect results on the issues that do matter to moneyed interests.
How exactly? No one other than my wife knows (or cares) if I vote or not.
I am glad people who don’t want to vote, or don’t care enough to vote don’t vote.
That’s your choice. It’s also possible to talk about voting, encourage others to vote, and even go in groups to the polls.
Again, I really don’t want to encourage people who now don’t vote to vote. Low-information voters are the problem, not a boon.
That’s your choice. I’m just disputing your “voting is irrational” statement – it can be entirely rational, even for things and candidates that may not be on the 50/50 line, because by voting (and other actions) one might get others to vote as well.
No, the voting itself is, in fact, irrational. “Other actions”, if they affect more votes, may be more rational - in close elections, if you affect 1,000 votes, that may decide the election. But YOUR act of voting itself is irrational.
Not if my act of voting includes gathering others to vote with me, as an example. Further, since I’m such a bad liar, I won’t be able to convince others to vote unless I actually vote. So my act of voting is entirely rational because without it, I will be less successful in encouraging others to vote.
Whatever gives you “warm fuzzies”.
Entirely rational “warm fuzzies”. 
I blame the grid lock.
Basically it has become clear over the last several years that unless the Democrats control that house and have a filibuster proof majority of the senate, the Republicans will prevent any legislation that Obama might accept from being passed.
Further unless the Democrats control that house and have a veto proof majority in the senate, Obama will veto any truly harmful Republican legislation.
Neither of these scenarios have any chance of occurring.
So not only does you vote not count much but the consequences of this election were largely moot, so you might as well stay at home and watch Netflix.
The only motivated group are those who have been led to believe that Obama is a destructive force that can only be contained (and hopefully impeached) by the forces of righteousness embodied by the likes of Ted Cruz. Those people came out to vote.