I actually like the message a lot. Your civic duty is way bigger than just showing up at the polls every four years, though we can't even seem to handle that.

 

While I get that, it's vote AND do this. Politicians don't look at voting numbers and thing, oh the voting population is lower than last year. They think "holy crap, I need to get another 3% of the people that actually vote!".

 

And I've found that many of the people that preach that bulls*** don't actually take part in the day to day anyways. They use the same excuse for everything. It's righteous bulls***.

 

It's amazing, democracy is. On this day a coal miner, a day trader and an electrician took part in the decisions of a country. That's still cool even today.

While I get that, it's vote AND do this. Politicians don't look at voting numbers and thing, oh the voting population is lower than last year. They think "holy crap, I need to get another 3% of the people that actually vote!".

 

And I've found that many of the people that preach that bulls*** don't actually take part in the day to day anyways. They use the same excuse for everything. It's righteous bulls***.

 

It's amazing, democracy is. On this day a coal miner, a day trader and an electrician took part in the decisions of a country. That's still cool even today.

 

Both sides of this argument take very complex, multifaceted issues and break them down into basic nothingness to make a profound point, and both sides always fail to convince anyone.

Are you seriously going to post retweets of everyone on Twitter that supports Obama?

 

I just might have to do that, now that you mentioned it..

Are you seriously going to post retweets of everyone on Twitter that supports Obama?

I know my vote counted on the endorsement of a nut puncher and non-American.

I just might have to do that, now that you mentioned it..

 

Please don't...Soxtalk probably doesn't have the storage space in it's database. And...it's pretty annoying. People who want to read twitters can go there and do that.

I said the same thing on Facebook, and I rarely make status posts.

 

My Status: "Seriously, take voting seriously or don't take part in the process just so you can say you did. If you don't know or understand the issues and you don't know what the candidates stand for, stay home."

 

And I mean that. Voting may be a right, but people need to treat that right as a privilege, regardless of which candidates they choose. I find it sad that people go vote just so they can say they voted, but have no clue what they voted for or why...other than someone told them to do so.

 

Yes, I realize I used seriously twice in that status...needed to be emphasized.

 

Ilya Somin has a post up today at Volokh relating to this:

http://www.volokh.com/2012/11/06/the-case-...u-are-ignorant/

 

Today, Americans will have an opportunity to vote on a wide range of candidates and ballot initiatives. In many cases, however, we will be voting on candidates and issues that we know very little about. It is rational for most voters to be ignorant about most issues, because the chance of casting a decisive ballot in an election is so extremely low. And the available evidence strongly suggests that much of the public is poorly informed about politics and public policy.

 

Even if you are an unusually well-informed voter, the enormous size, scope, and complexity of modern government ensure that there will be many issues and candidates about which you know very little.Perhaps you have a good handle on Romney and Obama. But you might not know much about your candidates for governor, senator, congressman, and various local offices, or about the various state and local referenda on the ballot in your state.

 

It’s unrealistic to expect that everyone will achieve a high level of knowledge about every race and every initiative. But if you find that you know little or nothing about a particular race or ballot question, you might want to consider simply not voting on it. As political philosopher Jason Brennan argues, voters have a moral duty to be at least reasonably well-informed about the issues they vote on, because the decisions they make affect not just themselves but all of society. John Stuart Mill put it well when he wrote that voting is not just an exercise of personal choice, but rather “the exercise of power over others.” If you can’t exercise that power in at least a minimally responsible manner, maybe you should not do so at all.

While I get that, it's vote AND do this. Politicians don't look at voting numbers and thing, oh the voting population is lower than last year. They think "holy crap, I need to get another 3% of the people that actually vote!".

 

And I've found that many of the people that preach that bulls*** don't actually take part in the day to day anyways. They use the same excuse for everything. It's righteous bulls***.

 

It's amazing, democracy is. On this day a coal miner, a day trader and an electrician took part in the decisions of a country. That's still cool even today.

Eh, they can kinda take part. If you live in a rock solid state for one of the two parties your vote means less than that of a swing state. Sad but true.

 

Now the local races and issues are much more important to the individual, unfortunately PAC's have ruined alot of that information as well.

Edited November 6, 201213 yr by RockRaines

Y2HH @Y2HH

Vote Obama! He passed OBAMACARE! #4moreyears #obamacare

Both sides of this argument take very complex, multifaceted issues and break them down into basic nothingness to make a profound point, and both sides always fail to convince anyone.

 

Well, fine, but unless that person can convince me that they do anything to try and break the system of corruptness, I'm going to assume they just post their righteousness on a social networking site and then turn on Halo.

I just might have to do that, now that you mentioned it..

 

 

@TedNugent

 

Dear God in heaven America vote Mitt Romney Paul Ryan Republican and save America

I agree with what you say in this post, but that's not the message I got from the fb quote. That seemed like a boiler-plate "don't vote" message designed to discourage people from voting because the system is 'corrupt.'

 

The idea that not-voting will actually somehow make the system less corrupt/dumb/whatever is pretty silly, unless you're actually advocating for revolution.

 

edit: I say this with the caveat that I'm probably not going to vote in the House race because while Biggert's been following silly Republican policy the past several years, she's probably the least-disagreeable Republican in the House for me. Somewhat surprisingly to me, my wife received a call the other day from the IEA endorsing Biggert. Foster's embrace of Simpson-Bowles and his vote against cap-and-trade is enough to cost him my vote. If he were running against someone like Joe Walsh, I'd be voting for him.

 

The first half is don't vote. The second half is get off of your ass and do something about it.

I just might have to do that, now that you mentioned it..

 

Yeah don't. Seems to me this should be more about the election itself. I'm sure there are other threads you can post pro-Obama tweets in.

Ilya Somin has a post up today at Volokh relating to this:

http://www.volokh.com/2012/11/06/the-case-...u-are-ignorant/

 

I in no way expect, or even believe it's possible for any voter to know everything about the candidates they support. I merely ask they know SOMEthing, even very basic things, versus nothing, or the opposite of what the person actually stands for.

Can any Romney supporter name me 5 major issues that Romney hasn't flip-flop on

Eh, they can kinda take part. If you live in a rock solid state for one of the two parties your vote means less than that of a swing state. Sad but true.

 

But there's always numerous local and state elections and referendums.

 

My father-in-law is the township commissioner where he lives, and he was just talking about how all of their programs focus very heavily on the seniors because that's who comes out and votes in off-year and spring elections. If more people from other demographics bothered to vote, local government would reflect their preferences more.

Y2HH @Y2HH

Vote Obama! He passed OBAMACARE! #4moreyears #obamacare

 

Check this out: I'd support Obama before I supported Romney.

But there's always numerous local and state elections and referendums.

 

My father-in-law is the township commissioner where he lives, and he was just talking about how all of their programs focus very heavily on the seniors because that's who comes out and votes in off-year and spring elections. If more people from other demographics bothered to vote, local government would reflect their preferences more.

 

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

The first half is don't vote. The second half is get off of your ass and do something about it.

 

But what positive effect does not-voting have? How does that actually change anything?

While I get that, it's vote AND do this. Politicians don't look at voting numbers and thing, oh the voting population is lower than last year. They think "holy crap, I need to get another 3% of the people that actually vote!".

 

And I've found that many of the people that preach that bulls*** don't actually take part in the day to day anyways. They use the same excuse for everything. It's righteous bulls***.

 

It's amazing, democracy is. On this day a coal miner, a day trader and an electrician took part in the decisions of a country. That's still cool even today.

 

As someone who has chaired campaigns and run for office, you are following the wrong people then.

But what positive effect does not-voting have? How does that actually change anything?

 

To play devils advocate, it shows a vote of no confidence, and if enough of said voters stop showing up, it allows an entry point into the political system for a viable 3rd party.

 

If 20% of the people vote, and 80% are no longer showing up...that's a pretty huge slice of pie another party can rise up and grab.

 

Versus voting for the garbage we have now...just because it's the thing to do.

Edited November 6, 201213 yr by Y2HH

I just might have to do that, now that you mentioned it..

 

Don't.

But there's always numerous local and state elections and referendums.

 

My father-in-law is the township commissioner where he lives, and he was just talking about how all of their programs focus very heavily on the seniors because that's who comes out and votes in off-year and spring elections. If more people from other demographics bothered to vote, local government would reflect their preferences more.

Check the second half of my post.

To play devils advocate, it shows a vote of no confidence, and if enough of said voters stop showing up, it allows an entry point into the political system for a viable 3rd party.

 

If 20% of the people vote, and 80% are no longer showing up...that's a pretty huge slice of pie another party can rise up and grab.

 

Versus voting for the garbage we have now.

 

But, I think it's fairly clear that people would just go after the 20% who aren't flakes. That's why every election is about medicare.

To play devils advocate, it shows a vote of no confidence, and if enough of said voters stop showing up, it allows an entry point into the political system for a viable 3rd party.

 

If 20% of the people vote, and 80% are no longer showing up...that's a pretty huge slice of pie another party can rise up and grab.

 

Versus voting for the garbage we have now...just because it's the thing to do.

 

Weren't you the one telling everyone that unless they were in a few states that their vote didn't count anyway? This would be the next logical step.

 

To play devils advocate, it shows a vote of no confidence, and if enough of said voters stop showing up, it allows an entry point into the political system for a viable 3rd party.

 

If 20% of the people vote, and 80% are no longer showing up...that's a pretty huge slice of pie another party can rise up and grab.

 

Then wouldn't it make sense to just go ahead and vote 3rd party?