Just Don't Vote At All

from JoeUser Forums
I was going to try to expand the discussion begun by Matt07 Link, but I decided that my comments were separate enough from the original topic to create my own post.

For years I've subscribed to the ideology that everyone should vote. I'm going out on a limb here, (likely a dangerously weak one) but I've changed my mind. Though it was no one event or discussion that prompted my change of heart I can provide a few examples of why I feel this way.

Tonight I had the pleasure of accompanying a friend to a family gathering as is customary in our friendship, the idea here being that each of our families are so weird it's best to bring someone who is somewhat of an outsider to ensure that people behave themselves. Earlier in the week this friend informed me that her father said he was voting for Bush. When asked why, he responded that Bush looks like his now deceased friend Wayne and he really liked Wayne. I had my doubts as to whether this reasoning was really used until I heard those words actually escape his mouth earlier this evening as we had a beer and ate fried sunfish.

When I was in college I was a resident advisor for two years. You remember those assholes who wrote you up for drinking in your dorm room or blasting pink floyd at 3 am? Well that was me. Anyway, in the course of being an RA I was able to discuss with freshman what the voting process would be like for their first year of elgibility. While discussing senator choices a resident informed me that he would be voting for Republican Senator Norm Coleman because he was the current mayor of St. Paul at the time and his friends who lived in St. Paul had never said anything bad about him.

Who the hell ever has anything at all to say about a mayor? Maybe that 75 year old man who keeps calling city hall to get the pothole off the end of his driveway filled...but seriously! This doesn't even cover the tip of the iceberg in the idiotic reasons people choose, or don't choose to vote for a candidate.

So I've decided to come out and say it. If you're not going to inform yourself, if you're only going to focus on issues that don't matter anyway, if you're only going to the polls because someone made you then for Democrat's, Republican's, Green's, Independent's, Libertarian's, American's sake Exercise Your Right NOT TO VOTE! [
politics
11,702 views 24 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Good one Ted,
I have heard worse reasons, but Ican't remember any off the top of my head right now.
Hey! I've got the 12 gauge, where are the wolves? Got some raw meat to bait them with?

OOPS! They are protected, sorry old boy you are on your own.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yes, I agree as well, good article, and a good point, why should people who are apathetic to their selected out of hat candidate vote, there is simply no point.
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
It's a terribly depressing thing to discuss but I'm not sure telling everyone to vote is the thing that will solve our democratic problems. How about some honest dialogue about candidates, league of women voters perhaps...and why do we even vote for judges who we're not allowed to know anything about before hand?
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

Who the hell ever has anything at all to say about a mayor?


Obviously you haven't run into a bad Mayor, such as Detroits: http://www.freep.com/news/locway/kilp12e_20040812.htm


Or, what about a good Mayor, such as NY former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani?


You can learn a lot about anyone running for office by learning about their roots.

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
The only reason anyone knows who Rudolph Guiliani is is because of Sept. 11th.

I had a discussion with someone last night that was frustrated by how many people vote for incumbents just because they hadn't heard anything bad about them. I think this is a voting strategy too often used by the masses.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top

You missed the point. You said: "Who the hell ever has anything at all to say about a mayor?"


People in NY knew about Guiliani before that.  Just like people in Detroit (well, actually half of Michigan) know about Kilpatrick.   Trust me, people had things to say about these kind of mayors.

Reply #7 from PolMach Forums Top
The only reason anyone knows who Rudolph Guiliani is is because of Sept. 11th.


Sorry, I don't agree I knew about Gulliani when he was taking on the Five Crime Families, and was doing a good job doing it. Now your average backwoods or hippie tree-lover in the middle of nowhere, maybe they didn't know about Gulliani, but most of the American Voting Public knew about Gulliani way before 9/11 happened.

I had a discussion with someone last night that was frustrated by how many people vote for incumbents just because they hadn't heard anything bad about them. I think this is a voting strategy too often used by the masses.


Yeah I hate that, but both sides use it, Bill Clinton against Dole, Reagan, and the biggest offender in American Presidential History, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the man served 4 terms, because of using his incumbent tactics.

As for Judges, the election of Judges is supposed to be non-partisan, so if you know he is this party or that, you will vote based on party preference than a non-partisan vote. Plus if you knew the judge was conservative or liberal beforehand would that not also effect your voting preference, a preference that should not exist for Judges, it should be a knowledge of experience and intelligence.
Reply #8 from PolMach Forums Top
The good thing about a democracy is the same thing that can make it weak......everyone has a voice. By definition, 50% of the population has below average intelligence. In a true democracy the bottom 51% can over-rule the top 49%. I think thats crazy, so I would support limiting the vote to smart....or at least informed voters.

I've always thought that you should have to take a short, simple quiz before being allowed to vote. If you don't know the name of the vice-president, you shouldn't be voting.

In addition, I'm not sure lots of young people voting is such a good idea. Why should an inexperienced 18 year olds vote count just as much as a 70 year old veterans vote? Perhaps bumping the voting age to 25 would be a good idea.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
The only reason anyone knows who Rudolph Guiliani is is because of Sept. 11th.


not true, suspekted. He was notorious among advocates for the homeless for his attempt to force the homeless people who refused to go into the shelters to be taken to jail. This was long before 9/11, and, as much as I admire him for what he did following 9/11, it frustrates me that the former part of his legacy is forgotten.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Raising the voting age to 25 would cause a lot of people to be angry. Especially those 18-25 years olds who could be sent to war involuntarily if the draft was reinstated but who could not vote for who was given the power to do such a thing. That is the reason the voting age was lowered to 18 in the first place.
Reply #11 from PolMach Forums Top
could be sent to war involuntarily if the draft was


Never going to happen ever again, no single military head or soldier wants the draft to be reinstated, it just floods the military with belligerent, useless soldiers, sorry but it's much better for the military to pick and disqualify, etc. soldiers, than if they started drafting. Drafting would fill up numbers, but would ultimately only decrease the effectiveness of our military, plus I don't think you want someone who doesn't want to be there because he/she was drafted guarding your six.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
The good thing about a democracy is the same thing that can make it weak......everyone has a voice. By definition, 50% of the population has below average intelligence. In a true democracy the bottom 51% can over-rule the top 49%. I think thats crazy, so I would support limiting the vote to smart....or at least informed voters.

I've always thought that you should have to take a short, simple quiz before being allowed to vote. If you don't know the name of the vice-president, you shouldn't be voting.

In addition, I'm not sure lots of young people voting is such a good idea. Why should an inexperienced 18 year olds vote count just as much as a 70 year old veterans vote? Perhaps bumping the voting age to 25 would be a good idea.


Interesting proposals indeed.

As to limiting the vote to the smart, I disagree (informed is a better choice of words, although I still disagree, but I'll hit on it after this point): when I worked in the group homes for the developmentally disabled, we had a gentleman with Down's Syndrome (Iq of about 80, I believe). He was an advocate for the disabled, and he knew the voting positions of local candidates on issues relating to the disabled far better than I did. As to limiting it to the informed, while it sounds good in theory, it is likely that qualifications like this would be used for political purposes and the vote would be excluded from some through manipulation. Better to allow a few misinformed people to vote than to disallow even a single informed person from voting.

As to raising the age, here's a potential suggestion: voting age is raised to 25 except for those enrolled in national service programs (doesn't have to be military, can be peace corps, americorps, etc). I'm not advocating this position, but tossing it into the discussion.
Reply #13 from PolMach Forums Top
As to raising the age, here's a potential suggestion: voting age is raised to 25 except for those enrolled in national service programs (doesn't have to be military, can be peace corps, americorps, etc). I'm not advocating this position, but tossing it into the discussion.


That sounds more like a plausible idea than just raising it to 25 without some exceptions.
What about people who served with National Service Program, and have served, their out, but still under 25, are they allowed to vote as well?
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
What about people who served with National Service Program, and have served, their out, but still under 25, are they allowed to vote as well?


If I were to advocate such a program, absolutely. They've done their part to be considered full citizens.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Shozan, I never said the draft would be reinstated. It most likely won't be. The reason it was started was because there was a massive need for soldiers that volunteers could not hope to fill. Most likely that will never happen again. But it could. All 18 year old males are still required to register for the selective service.

I have serious issues with anyone claiming that an 18 year old in the military should be allowed to vote while I, an 18 year old college student would not be allowed to. Chances are, most college students would be better informed than those in the military. The statement by oligarchy that a 70 year old veteran's vote is more worthy of being counted than an 18 year olds is ridiculous. There are some people who take in interest in who they vote for, some who vote ignorantly, and some who don't vote. A 70 year old is just as likely to vote for uninformed reasons as the 18 year old. Experience has nothing to do with it. It is the inclination of a person to learn the positions for of the candidates and chose the one who fits their views closest. I believe our current system is the best. It allows all those people who are considered adults to chose who they wish to support. A program which encouraged and helped voters to recieve factual information of the candidates views would be helpful to our society, but in the end, you can't force people to take in information if they wish to remain ignorant.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #5 By: Suspeckted - 9/9/2004 9:42:26 AM
The only reason anyone knows who Rudolph Guiliani is is because of Sept. 11th.

I had a discussion with someone last night that was frustrated by how many people vote for incumbents just because they hadn't heard anything bad about them. I think this is a voting strategy too often used by the masses.


If you didn't know about Rudy Guilliani "before" Sept 11th then it's because your head was buried! Just where it was buried is in question.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
The only reason anyone knows who Rudolph Guiliani is is because of Sept. 11th.


I know it's weird to qoute one's self but, I would like to retract this. I never expected so many to actually visit my blog as this one post has generated more response than my last 5 or 6 posts combined, however, I realize that this is no excuse for careless comments and that it's difficult to detect hints of sarcasm without hearing the tone of my voice. It's good to know that the actions undertaken by the mayor of New York City are well known by many considering the weight of such a position vs. the mayor of one of the twin cities.

The good thing about a democracy is the same thing that can make it weak......everyone has a voice. By definition, 50% of the population has below average intelligence. In a true democracy the bottom 51% can over-rule the top 49%. I think thats crazy, so I would support limiting the vote to smart....or at least informed voters.I've always thought that you should have to take a short, simple quiz before being allowed to vote. If you don't know the name of the vice-president, you shouldn't be voting.In addition, I'm not sure lots of young people voting is such a good idea. Why should an inexperienced 18 year olds vote count just as much as a 70 year old veterans vote? Perhaps bumping the voting age to 25 would be a good idea.


I'm pretty sure the government actually tried to use voter testing when blacks were finally given a right to vote. This way, quizzes could be tailor made to ensure that blacks would never qualify to vote. I think it would be difficult to say what such a quiz today should cover. I wonder how many Americans would even pass the citizenship test today if they had to take it.

As for the age issue...I was pissed off enough when I was working as a 16 year old paying income taxes and couldn't vote. Isn't that taxation without representation? Granted I did earn so little that I got just about every penny back. However, I don't think raising the voting age is a solution in the least...too few 18 year olds vote anyway and there are plenty of uniformed voters across all spectrums.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wonder how many Americans would even pass the citizenship test today if they had to take it.


Given the current state of our education system AND INS policy, I VERY MUCH doubt many could pass it. Me, I'm just to dang old to remember all the stuff I learned in school.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
My American history teacher during my junior year of high school required everyone in our class to pass the citizenship test in order to pass the class. Almost everyone passed the first time. It's really not that hard; although I agree that most of the population would not pass.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wonder how many college seniors could label all 50 states correctly. But it really comes down to applicable intelligence. But I suppose the topic at hand is voting...

The difficulty in voting intelligence has many challenges. First off is sorting out what information is relevant about a candidate, the second, what information is even true? Will Bush's poor vocabulary reflect upon his ability to make good decisions? Will Kerry's supposed "flip-flopping" make him inable to make a decision at a critical time? I've often asked people that claim to vote for people who are similar to them if they think they themselves would make good candidates....probably unlikely. Why do we keep electing white men with nuclear families? Wouldn't it be better to have a robot like Nader who doesn't care about anything else than work, who would happily do our bidding rather than someone distracted by all the things the rest of us are?
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
Because no matter "who" they are, they ALL have their own agenda.
Reply #22 from PolMach Forums Top
My Agenda still is to get Gravedigger's Day on the books as a National Holiday.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
The only reason anyone knows who Rudolph Guiliani is is because of Sept. 11th.


No. They know him because he was the mayor of the largest city in the USA. Maybe thats the reason you know him, but I knew him before.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sandy, clearly you missed my recanting of this comment you quoted. I know it's weird to qoute one's self but, I would like to retract this. I never expected so many to actually visit my blog as this one post has generated more response than my last 5 or 6 posts combined, however, I realize that this is no excuse for careless comments and that it's difficult to detect hints of sarcasm without hearing the tone of my voice. It's good to know that the actions undertaken by the mayor of New York City are well known by many considering the weight of such a position vs. the mayor of one of the twin cities.